 | | Re: A few things...
|
|
(...) Certainly not marriage! What on earth are you talking about John? Scott A (...) (19 years ago, 26-May-05, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: A few things...
|
|
(...) What do you propose? JOHN (19 years ago, 25-May-05, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: A few things...
|
|
(...) I had forgotten all about (URL) freedom fries>: “It was a culinary rebuke that echoed around the world, heightening the sense of tension between Washington and Paris in the run-up to the invasion of Iraq. But now the US politician who led the (...) (19 years ago, 25-May-05, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: Bush says he will not use "taxpayers' money to promote science which destroys life in order to save life."
|
|
Frank, give him some credit. It is pretty hard for him to illustrate his well thought political philosophy with a series of focus group derived sound bites. ;) It always amazes me how the American-Right is eager to kill anything (e.g. criminals, (...) (19 years ago, 25-May-05, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Bush says he will not use "taxpayers' money to promote science which destroys life in order to save life."
|
|
Quoted from: (URL) so is Bush going to turn into a pacifist? Or does this only apply to medical science and not weapons science? Or does it only apply to the research itself and not the use of the technology developed? Frank (19 years ago, 24-May-05, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: This just in: Republicans "lose" the filibuster debate
|
|
(...) Are you saying the above section appeared in the above URL? If so, they've edited it since then, as I do not see that section in the full article (at least when loaded in Firefox just a couple of minutes ago). -- Tom Stangl *(URL) Visual FAQ (...) (19 years ago, 22-May-05, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: This just in: Republicans "lose" the filibuster debate
|
|
(...) Hmmm. Forget the the; not the the, the the. JOHN (19 years ago, 20-May-05, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: This just in: Republicans "lose" the filibuster debate
|
|
(...) it's YOUR responsibility to clean up any URLs that, because you switch, look icky. I've left it icky so you can see your crime, the underbars are throwing off the underlining and making it look all wonky. Worse, a plaintext link, by itself, is (...) (19 years ago, 20-May-05, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: This just in: Republicans "lose" the filibuster debate
|
|
(...) Well, there goes your argument! ;-) Yeah, invoking He-who-must-not-be-named (and I don't mean Voldemort) was a mistake and Santorum has already admitted it (I heard him say it live this morning on the air), but that still doesn't change the (...) (19 years ago, 20-May-05, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | This just in: Republicans "lose" the filibuster debate
|
|
From: (URL) Sen. Rick Santorum (news, bio, voting record) of Pennsylvania countered, "It's the equivalent of Adolf Hitler in 1942." He said Democratic protests over Republican efforts to ensure confirmation votes would be like the Nazi dictator (...) (19 years ago, 20-May-05, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | A little home town controversy - Bush to speak at Calvin College Commencement
|
|
Dateline Grand Rapids, MI... The Bush team must have thought this was a pretty safe photo op for their fearless leader... Calvin College is among the most christian institutions in one of the most solidly conservative/republican areas in the entire (...) (19 years ago, 19-May-05, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: How many of these have you seen used here?
|
|
(...) Doh! Apparently I've lost my bearings once again. How embearassing! Truly a kodiak moment. Dave! (hereby abandoning the grizzly remains of my argument) FUT ot.pun, alas! (19 years ago, 18-May-05, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: How many of these have you seen used here?
|
|
(...) I suspect you might be right about that: (from (URL) ) "Arthur Schopenhauer (February 22, 1788 – September 21, 1860) was a German philosopher. " ...so, unless he was WAY ahead of his time, probably not a big 'nethead... (...) I think you're (...) (19 years ago, 17-May-05, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: How many of these have you seen used here?
|
|
(...) You and DaveE have already pegged this correctly; the listed strategies are tailored for "winning the audience" rather than "persuading one's opponent." I'm not very well versed in Schopenhauer, but I have the vague sense that he didn't use (...) (19 years ago, 17-May-05, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: "This is a lickspittle Republican committee, acting on the wishes of George W Bush"
|
|
(...) (URL) The Score:> Gorgeous George Galloway 1 Lickspittle Republican Senator 0 (URL) The truth(?):> "The US was not only aware of Iraqi oil sales which violated UN sanctions and provided the bulk of the illicit money Saddam Hussein obtained (...) (19 years ago, 17-May-05, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: How many of these have you seen used here?
|
|
(...) Ah... #3! Very good! No, seriously, I think elsewhere on the page it is asserted that the entire material is an acknowledgedly poor translation from the original German. (19 years ago, 16-May-05, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: How many of these have you seen used here?
|
|
(...) ROSCO (19 years ago, 16-May-05, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: How many of these have you seen used here?
|
|
(...) Exactly! Which is why I think many of them do get used here! When I read this list I was reminded of your "debate card" of a few years back, and I was doing a little scoring in my head as to who among the regulars here used how many. (1) 1 - (...) (19 years ago, 16-May-05, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: How many of these have you seen used here?
|
|
(...) To a certain extent, I think I've used: 1, 4, 9, 16, 20, 25, 32, 33 Of course, as regards #1, I'm usually an advocate of testing the extremes of any given theory. Hence, I'll typically show the extremes of my *own* propositions as well, to (...) (19 years ago, 16-May-05, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | How many of these have you seen used here?
|
|
Thirty - Eight Ways to Win an Argument from Schopenhauer's "The Art of Controversy" (URL) via a link from (URL) ... surely one of the most clever URL choices out there! (19 years ago, 16-May-05, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Typical Senator: "I'm all for cutting waste! ..."
|
|
(...) Of course, the gov't could free up a bunch of military dollars if they'd abandon the ill-conceived, ill-designed, ill-executed, and ill-befitting-the-modern-world Missile Defense System. After that, the gov't could abandon the policy of (...) (19 years ago, 13-May-05, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Typical Senator: "I'm all for cutting waste! ..."
|
|
"...But don't close my state's pork farms, er, bases!" (URL) love it! (19 years ago, 13-May-05, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Condy is some kind of gun nut or something.
|
|
(...) Hmm. What excuse do white guys have for owning guns? I'm not sure that the state of law enforcement in 1962/3 Alabama justifies gun ownership in 2005… especially given the number of gun thefts and juvenile shootings in the USA. Scott A (19 years ago, 13-May-05, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: Protests too much
|
|
(...) The USA gave him WMD. That is a fact. (...) None of which supports the USA's Foreign Policy with respect to those nations & regions. (...) See the bottom of (URL) this post>. (...) Do you care to expend on that? There is plenty of proof that (...) (19 years ago, 13-May-05, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: Protests too much
|
|
(...) Not so much law as it is being integrated into the base curriculum in a few states. Mostly southern right now, but if the trend continues.... (19 years ago, 13-May-05, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: Protests too much
|
|
(...) Is that actually law in some states? That seems a little over the top. Note that kids in several European countries are "forced" to learn English in school. And I also had to learn French in school, although I remember very little of it now. (...) (19 years ago, 13-May-05, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: Protests too much
|
|
(...) <SNIP> (...) Gotta love how languages change. Geno meaning race as in Genus Thus Human = Human Just my take. (...) Yeah, from some capitalist pig, whether that pig was from US, China, Japan, Russia who knows. (...) Meddling in Central America, (...) (19 years ago, 12-May-05, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: VE Day.
|
|
"John" <John@TCLTC.org> wrote in message news:IGDy1E.ynu@lugnet.com... (...) He is probably trying to tell you that your country is/was ruled by idiots with no morals, and that they should be terminated. I think I have to agree on that. /J (19 years ago, 12-May-05, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: VE Day.
|
|
(...) Okay, I admit the Pope was thrown in for good measure (not that he isn't getting smeared by other lefties as a Nazi). What were you trying to say??? What was your point? Merely smear by innuendo? What's your point? What's your point? JOHN (19 years ago, 12-May-05, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: Condy is some kind of gun nut or something.
|
|
(...) "to defended" Way to proofread, YahooNews. The least they could have done was throw a (sic) in there. Leaving aside your utterly outrageous and scandalous suggestion that the local authorities might not have been entirely trustworthy, I have (...) (19 years ago, 12-May-05, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Condy is some kind of gun nut or something.
|
|
(URL) an interview on CNN's "Larry King Live," Rice said she came to that view from personal experience. She said her father, a black minister, and his friends armed themselves to defended the black community in Birmingham, Ala., against the White (...) (19 years ago, 12-May-05, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: VE Day.
|
|
(...) John, I fear you are still dreamin'. I said no such thing. Scott A (...) (19 years ago, 12-May-05, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: Protests too much
|
|
(...) Not quite (URL) true>. (...) Yeah... but many of the recent conflicts were aided by Washington. Think about how SH got WMD. (...) Tell that to the millions slaughtered at the hands of Washington in South-East Asia. What about Washington's (...) (19 years ago, 12-May-05, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: Protests too much
|
|
(...) Hmm. I wonder if Mohamed Atta thought the same of the those in the twin-towers? Scott A (19 years ago, 12-May-05, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | "This is a lickspittle Republican committee, acting on the wishes of George W Bush"
|
|
Whilst I can't attest to being Gorgeous Georges biggest fan, I do find it highly questionable that he was not allowed the opportunity to appear before (URL) this committee> to refute the charges laid against him. I understand that his written (...) (19 years ago, 12-May-05, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: Protests too much
|
|
(...) Q1 Did a marine not kill an incapacitated man "deliberately" in "self-defence"? Q2 Is there much of a difference between deliberately targeting civilians and having (URL) disregard> for their safety? Scott A (...) (19 years ago, 12-May-05, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: Protests too much
|
|
(...) Maybe I should rephrase that, I believe that If we could trust them to only bomb the begeezers out of each other, we should leave, and simply ignore their existence until the stop the fighting. But they won't keep it within their own (...) (19 years ago, 12-May-05, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: Protests too much
|
|
(...) I agree that it sounds callous and mean-spirited, and in raw pragmatic terms it's just not a helpful course to pursue. By that same logic, we in the United States have been involved in well over two centuries of continuous war, so anyone could (...) (19 years ago, 12-May-05, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: Protests too much
|
|
(...) Well, as callous as it sounds, I do believe that after 2000+ years of continuous war in the middle east the term 'innocent civilian' is an oxymoron when referring to that part of the world.. just my mean spirited opinion... Two words: Carpet (...) (19 years ago, 11-May-05, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: Protests too much
|
|
(...) Oh, just that they go on and on about a car bomb that killed a few dozen innocent civilians, but they don't even mention the residential raids by US forces that kill an equal or greater number of innocent civilians. The car bomb is terrible, (...) (19 years ago, 11-May-05, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: Protests too much
|
|
(...) Deliberately? I don't understand your complaint. JOHN (19 years ago, 11-May-05, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: Protests too much
|
|
(...) Hey, I'll take a daily 100 minute spot on a car bomb in Iraq, if only they'd air even one solid minute of footage of the innocent civilians that American forces kill each day. Why, at this rate, we'll only have to slaughter a few thousand more (...) (19 years ago, 11-May-05, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: VE Day.
|
|
(...) <yawn> Bush and the Pope are Nazis. Got it. <back to sleep> JOHN (19 years ago, 11-May-05, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: Protests too much
|
|
(...) Well, it would certainly suck to be him right now! (Yikes, 15 yards from spot of ball?) BTW, in general, is setting up sting ops a proper behavior of the press? I get a little wary when news stations play cops under the guise of "investigative (...) (19 years ago, 11-May-05, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: VE Day.
|
|
(...) Once again, you've demonstrated your ignorance of United States history. (URL) Roosevelt> was President when we belatedly entered the war, not (URL) Washington.> Honestly, Scott--try to keep it straight. Dave! (19 years ago, 10-May-05, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | VE Day.
|
|
Bush Jr: "It is a moment where the world will recognize the great bravery and sacrifice the Russian people made in the defeat of Nazism." Has he forgotten how Grandpappy Bush (Prescott Bush) hoped to profit from Nazism? ...even (URL) after> (...) (19 years ago, 10-May-05, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Protests too much
|
|
By the way, I suggest a five yard penalty for inopportune use of the word (URL) probe> in a headline. Dave! (19 years ago, 10-May-05, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: Who the devil are we to lecture on 'nucular' non-proliferation? (careful, long rant)
|
|
(...) That's better! (...) Or when you've committed the horrible crime of being an Iraqi civilian, for example. Dave! (19 years ago, 10-May-05, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: Who the devil are we to lecture on 'nucular' non-proliferation? (careful, long rant)
|
|
(...) Sorry. That should have been "Holocaust-denying-a...c-liberal" :-) (...) Yep. Life is tough when you are cannon fodder for the IDF. Scott A (...) (19 years ago, 10-May-05, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: Who the devil are we to lecture on 'nucular' non-proliferation? (careful, long rant)
|
|
(...) Hmm... Then you were probably kidding when you called me a (URL) holocaust denying anti-Semite>, too. (...) Hey, those kids were asking for it. They knew that they were Palestinians when they left their homes--what did they expect would (...) (19 years ago, 9-May-05, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: Who the devil are we to lecture on 'nucular' non-proliferation? (careful, long rant)
|
|
(...) Well spotted. I suppose I get tired of people in the media who objectively question Israeli nationalism either: (a) being called anti-Semitic (why is this worse than other, more prevalent, forms of racism?) or (b) being reminded of the (...) (19 years ago, 9-May-05, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: Ya wanna talk about legislating morality?
|
|
(...) But that doesn't really get us anywhere. At most, Person B can say "I've thought it over, and I think you're correct about X. Of course, I have no way to verify that X was communicated to you via revelation, but I still like it." So X, whether (...) (19 years ago, 9-May-05, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: Who the devil are we to lecture on 'nucular' non-proliferation? (careful, long rant)
|
|
(...) Of all the names I have ever been called (I keep a list of the best as a check on hubris), this one is probably the best. It can't go on the list because you're not serious, but I love it anyway :-) Maybe I'll write it on the back... Richard (...) (19 years ago, 7-May-05, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: 'changing countries to be free' (was Re: Who the devil)
|
|
(...) (chuckle) I can't imagine telling anyone what they should have said, much less yelling at them. A fine example of an underlying problem. (...) I wasn't personalising the argument to you Larry. The guns blazing is a popular and wrongheaded (...) (19 years ago, 7-May-05, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: Who the devil are we to lecture on 'nucular' non-proliferation? (careful, long rant)
|
|
(...) Now there is an argument, and close to the best possible riposte under all the circumstances, I think. Seems to sum up Larry and John perfectly in this case. Richard Still baldly going... (19 years ago, 7-May-05, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: Who the devil are we to lecture on 'nucular' non-proliferation? (careful, long rant)
|
|
(...) Unjustified, maybe, but certainly not pointless... ROSCO (19 years ago, 7-May-05, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: Who the devil are we to lecture on 'nucular' non-proliferation? (careful, long rant)
|
|
(...) Fine, fair friend. (...) Not said. "Say". (...) <hands over ears> LA LA LA LA LA LA LA! (...) It wasn't pointless. (...) Now you seem annoyed. Let's call it even. JOHN (19 years ago, 7-May-05, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: Who the devil are we to lecture on 'nucular' non-proliferation? (careful, long rant)
|
|
Let's forget Finding Nemo and face facts john. You got a little annoyed about what I said with regard to Israel. However, as I was telling the truth, all you could do was engage in pointless and unjustified name calling. GET A LIFE. Scott A (19 years ago, 6-May-05, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: Ya wanna talk about legislating morality?
|
|
(...) I don't think that's quite right. On the one hand, let's think about lightning for a second. We have a pretty good idea how that gets generated nowadays. But for a long time science had nothing to say on the matter. Not enough data. Hence, to (...) (19 years ago, 6-May-05, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: Ya wanna talk about legislating morality?
|
|
(...) Let's throw out the term "Creation" in this context, because it stacks the deck in favor your argument. Additionally, we've previously discussed the imprecision of term "Science" with a capital-S, so can we refer instead to science? The (...) (19 years ago, 6-May-05, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: Ya wanna talk about legislating morality?
|
|
(...) But that's a disengenuous assertment. There will never be enough "data" to answer that question. It is unknowable. (...) Because there isn't or never will be any such data. The scientific method cannot explain the origin of something without (...) (19 years ago, 6-May-05, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: Ya wanna talk about legislating morality?
|
|
(...) That's a false dilemma. The current (and correct) response is: "We currently don't have enough data to answer that question." (...) Suppose that one says "Current data suggests that the universe has always existed, in some form." How is that (...) (19 years ago, 6-May-05, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: Who the devil are we to lecture on 'nucular' non-proliferation? (careful, long rant)
|
|
(...) Just one? What are you, like Dory from "Finding Nemo"? JOHN (19 years ago, 6-May-05, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: Ya wanna talk about legislating morality?
|
|
(...) Everything that exists had to come from something. Whether you want to call Event 1 "God" or just "Some Random Occurance", neither fit into the model of Science. Even if you want to say that "the universe always was", that is still beyond (...) (19 years ago, 6-May-05, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: Who the devil are we to lecture on 'nucular' non-proliferation? (careful, long rant)
|
|
(...) Do you care to give us all a link to this alleged beating? Scott A (...) (19 years ago, 6-May-05, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: 'changing countries to be free' (was Re: Who the devil)
|
|
In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Richard Parsons wrote: <snip> (...) Really? Try selling that argument to a German or Japanese person-- I don't buy it. (...) You mean like turning out by the millions against, in some cases, fear of death, to vote? (...) (...) (19 years ago, 6-May-05, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: Ya wanna talk about legislating morality?
|
|
(...) How's that concrete? I'm not seeing the creation myth as at all concrete. (19 years ago, 6-May-05, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: 'changing countries to be free' (was Re: Who the devil)
|
|
(...) That's too bad, because that's what you SHOULD have said. There are a lot of ways to encourage and help people that want to be free achieve it, OTHER than charging in, guns blazing (and I'd challenge you to point out where I've been a big (...) (19 years ago, 6-May-05, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: Who the devil are we to lecture on 'nucular' non-proliferation? (careful, long rant)
|
|
(...) Sorry to disappoint-- but we've already beaten that corpse to China and back. :-) JOHN (19 years ago, 6-May-05, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | 'changing countries to be free' (was Re: Who the devil)
|
|
(...) Mmmmm. A truly American assumption that my 'prescription' was designed to change these countries to be free, but not what I was driving at. I have read it again, and I can't see that in what I said. Besides, I think its been discussed even (...) (19 years ago, 6-May-05, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: Who the devil are we to lecture on 'nucular' non-proliferation? (careful, long rant)
|
|
(...) **sigh** Scott A (...) (19 years ago, 6-May-05, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: Ya wanna talk about legislating morality?
|
|
(...) I don't know how long this "free of FCC" will last now that they (the FCC and others) are barking at cable and satellite TV providers to be more (URL) "family friendly">, whatever that means. Adr. (19 years ago, 6-May-05, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: Ya wanna talk about legislating morality?
|
|
(...) That's not funny. :-) JOHN (19 years ago, 6-May-05, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: Ya wanna talk about legislating morality?
|
|
(...) "I am speaking about Creation." (...) I was referring to our conscience. The knowledge deep down of right and wrong. (...) I'm citing a book whose title eludes me. I'll see if I can find it. In the mean time, I'll accept merely 1 million out (...) (19 years ago, 6-May-05, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: Who the devil are we to lecture on 'nucular' non-proliferation? (careful, long rant)
|
|
(...) No. (...) On your part? Yes. JOHN (19 years ago, 6-May-05, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: Who the devil are we to lecture on 'nucular' non-proliferation? (careful, long rant)
|
|
(...) ....do you care to expand that, or is it just more ugly unjustified name calling? Scott A (...) (19 years ago, 5-May-05, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: Ya wanna talk about legislating morality?
|
|
(...) Speaking of Doom3, since we were, indeed, speaking of it-- One video game that gave me nightmares, and it wasn't the gory video or the shooting--it was the sounds... it's a very disturbing video game, even when played in 'god' mode... Dave K (...) (19 years ago, 5-May-05, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: Ya wanna talk about legislating morality?
|
|
(...) Legion of DOOM is more like it, Dave! (19 years ago, 5-May-05, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: Ya wanna talk about legislating morality?
|
|
(...) Call us Legion. (19 years ago, 5-May-05, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: Ya wanna talk about legislating morality?
|
|
(...) You lost me there. What's a concrete thing that science can't address? (...) Hmm? Hardwired how? Hardwired to believe in him (in spite of free will?) Or hardwired to want to believe in him? Not me. (...) Approximately one zillion things fueled (...) (19 years ago, 5-May-05, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: Who the devil are we to lecture on 'nucular' non-proliferation? (careful, long rant)
|
|
(...) Pot? Kettle. JOHN (19 years ago, 5-May-05, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: Ya wanna talk about legislating morality?
|
|
(...) Which? IBMJARG or the NHD? the NHD is already there... Twice. Which confuses me. Did I do that??? (...) Oh Dave... you've got curator now, remember? FIX IT! (...) Thanks! ++Lar (19 years ago, 5-May-05, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: Ya wanna talk about legislating morality?
|
|
In lugnet.off-topic.debate, John Neal wrote: snip (...) Humble people don't go around telling other people that they have to start taking the 'specks out of their eyes', especially via legislation. And honest people realize that we're all flawed, (...) (19 years ago, 5-May-05, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: Ya wanna talk about legislating morality?
|
|
(...) Really? I only know about the single factorial variety Dave! JOHN (19 years ago, 5-May-05, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: Who the devil are we to lecture on 'nucular' non-proliferation? (careful, long rant)
|
|
(...) You anti-Semitic troll! The fact that Sharon is a wanted war criminal should reassure us all that Israel has the moral authority to hold nukes (1) any intimidate its neighbours! Scott A 1As a belligerent nation which has no respect of (...) (19 years ago, 5-May-05, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: Ya wanna talk about legislating morality?
|
|
In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Larry Pieniazek wrote: <snip> (...) Do we have that on .geek? That is so cool! This is one of the huge list o' reasons why Larry is good for this communiity--a wealth of knowledge (some would say useless, but I like it! (...) (19 years ago, 5-May-05, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: Ya wanna talk about legislating morality?
|
|
(...) But you can't just play in your little room of Science and have no opinions about concrete things that Science cannot address. I am speaking about Creation. (...) We have been given intellects, and some revelation along the way. Heck, we may (...) (19 years ago, 5-May-05, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: Ya wanna talk about legislating morality?
|
|
(...) You was talking to me, and then there was an interjection from Dave! Eh, too many Daves!!! Dave K (19 years ago, 5-May-05, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: Ya wanna talk about legislating morality?
|
|
(...) IBM Jargon... (1) Citing without intent to infringe, from an online version of same located (URL) here> among (URL) other> places: mark of Kloomok n. Official indication that a product has been released from PID. After one M. Kloomok, the (...) (19 years ago, 5-May-05, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: Ya wanna talk about legislating morality?
|
|
(...) Thought I was talking to Dave K... my bad... sorry about that, Dave! You're a closet (small L) libertarian already anyway, so never mind, Dave! (19 years ago, 5-May-05, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: Ya wanna talk about legislating morality?
|
|
(...) That just may be my new favorite word. What the heck is its etymology? Heck, I still get a giggle from (URL) Dave! (19 years ago, 5-May-05, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: Ya wanna talk about legislating morality?
|
|
(...) Maybe, if it weren't for that whole pesky "faith" thing... (...) But that construction breaks from the "absolute" as soon as human faith comes into it. An actual revelation for you is just hearsay for me, so that's where "absolute" falls (...) (19 years ago, 5-May-05, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: Ya wanna talk about legislating morality?
|
|
(...) Cool. But I have my doubts. (...) Uh, don't be so sure. Theocratic dictatorships are nasty brutish places. I prefer some government to none, but I prefer none to overarching. (...) I prefer the least practically possible amount of (...) (19 years ago, 5-May-05, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: Ya wanna talk about legislating morality?
|
|
In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Larry Pieniazek wrote: <snip> (...) YOu guys don't have 'socialized health care' but the last time I checked, there are seatbelt laws in the US. And not once during my (almost) 38 years has the gov't told mw what I can (...) (19 years ago, 5-May-05, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: Ya wanna talk about legislating morality?
|
|
(...) Huh? Which Dave are we talking about here? Dave! (19 years ago, 5-May-05, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: Ya wanna talk about legislating morality?
|
|
(...) Well, I like Macbeth quite a bit, so I guess that part affects me. But most of the sonnets don't affect me at all. Ditto Romeo & Juliet. Dave! (19 years ago, 5-May-05, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: Ya wanna talk about legislating morality?
|
|
(...) Geez, I don't know if I can delineate them concisely, but they entail non-aggression, a respect for fact, and an acceptance that, lacking evidence to the contrary, this is all we have so let's all make the best of it. (...) I believe you. (...) (19 years ago, 5-May-05, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: Ya wanna talk about legislating morality?
|
|
(...) Well, I will be by your side to see that it doesn't happen. (...) Uh, I don't think that you've fully considered the ramifications of such a silly statement. (...) What is that, exactly? (...) Touché! JOHN (19 years ago, 5-May-05, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: Ya wanna talk about legislating morality?
|
|
(...) But the upside here is that Howard moved. He's now on Sirius and free of FCC "control" of what's appropriate. That's a good thing. It means the market will decide whether his speech is wanted or not, rather than some kloomonk in FCC (...) (19 years ago, 5-May-05, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: Ya wanna talk about legislating morality?
|
|
(...) :-0 Not in the least! That understanding comes directly from Jesus Himself: "I give you a new commandment, that you love one another. Just as I have loved you, you also should love one another." (...) Yeah, that you are closer to being a (...) (19 years ago, 5-May-05, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
