 | | Re: Schpiffkraft Hakenkreuz
|
|
(...) Thanks, man. Curse the lack of the edit button. A (19 years ago, 10-Aug-05, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: Schpiffkraft Hakenkreuz
|
|
(...) WTF man... you forgot the footnote: (1) Pastiche skillz used on JLUG, should stay on JLUG. Legoswami (19 years ago, 10-Aug-05, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: Schpiffkraft Hakenkreuz
|
|
(...) This post, however, is pure comedy gold. Spotlighted. ROSCO (19 years ago, 10-Aug-05, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: Schpiffkraft Hakenkreuz
|
|
(...) I don’t think this is funny. The photohopping is amatuerish and non-humorous. The background isn’t very striking, nor is it funny either. The description is pretty plain, and not funny. The only thing at all amusing is the shock factor, but (...) (19 years ago, 10-Aug-05, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX) !
|
| |
| | Re: Schpiffkraft Hakenkreuz
|
|
(...) I'd rate your skill at searching for phrases above lar's at searching for contests. ROSCO (19 years ago, 10-Aug-05, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Schpiffkraft Hakenkreuz
|
|
In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Larry Pieniazek wrote: . (...) I don't know about any nysterious contest, figurative or otherwise, that is being referred to here, but perhaps this will help. (URL) (19 years ago, 10-Aug-05, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Schpiffkraft Hakenkreuz
|
|
(...) Thanks for that. I was including the term 'entry' in my search IIRC. (...) If that's what you meant, then that's what you should have said. Thanks for the feedback though. Perhaps you could provide some constructive criticism of it's (...) (19 years ago, 10-Aug-05, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: Schpiffkraft Hakenkreuz
|
|
(...) (URL) going to win any prizes) 813 hits. (URL) going to win the contest) 57 hits. Note that some (but not all) actually do refer to actual contests though... Something along those lines is what I had in mind. I'll happily admit I didn't type (...) (19 years ago, 10-Aug-05, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Schpiffkraft Hakenkreuz
|
|
(...) Is it? It's certainly not a common one. Googling the phrase yields nothing, but that might just be reflecting my lack of googling skills. Perhaps you could point some uses of that 'turn of phrase' prior to your using it in this thread? Perhaps (...) (19 years ago, 10-Aug-05, to lugnet.space, lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Schpiffkraft Hakenkreuz
|
|
(...) Ha! A likely story, especially considering this picture, recently declassified by NASA! (URL) What say you to this? ~Kevoh (19 years ago, 10-Aug-05, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX) !
|
| |
| | Re: Schpiffkraft Hakenkreuz
|
|
(...) OK, then i guess: Miss Scarlet commited the crime in the Library with the Candlestick? no WAIT.... ummmm i mean Colonel Mustard in the Conservatory with the Revolver? Chris (19 years ago, 10-Aug-05, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: Schpiffkraft Hakenkreuz
|
|
(...) LOL Lenny, have you stopped beating children senseless?????? ROSCO (19 years ago, 10-Aug-05, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Schpiffkraft Hakenkreuz
|
|
(...) Let me clear this up then (and I will post a fuller explanation/exposition of my position later): I am not a space nazi. I am not a neo-nazi. I am not any other sort of nazi. And just to avoid any confusion: I am not a french sailor from the (...) (19 years ago, 9-Aug-05, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: Schpiffkraft Hakenkreuz
|
|
(...) My bad, I should have said murdered. Soviet murder vs. Nazi murder I don't se as much different. (...) And I disagree - it's raised a nice discussion, for one thing. This isn't obsenity. Offensive to some, sure, but that is what life is all (...) (19 years ago, 9-Aug-05, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: Schpiffkraft Hakenkreuz
|
|
(...) You're confusing speech with action. Wearing a swastika= speech. Murdering millions = action. Advocating slavery = speech, enslaving people = action. HUGE difference. (...) Again, a symbol is speech, not an action. And I'm using a few extreme (...) (19 years ago, 9-Aug-05, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: Schpiffkraft Hakenkreuz
|
|
(...) I agree with that. Better the devil you know than the devil you don't. But that's not the same as saying "it's ok". (19 years ago, 9-Aug-05, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: Schpiffkraft Hakenkreuz
|
|
(...) Samuel Morrison wrote: (...) Lenny wrote: (...) I would actually disagree. Sorry to go off on a theological tangent here, but I believe that no human does evil for the sake of evil (does Satan? hmm, still not sure), but rather for the sake of (...) (19 years ago, 9-Aug-05, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: Schpiffkraft Hakenkreuz
|
|
(...) Who decides what is appropriate? You? (...) Right, so let's force them all into extermination camps. Not the same issue. (...) If in the course of being a jerk, you earmark a minority group of humans for death, we should restrict it. Should we (...) (19 years ago, 9-Aug-05, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: Schpiffkraft Hakenkreuz
|
|
(...) I prefer it when extremist hate groups say really stupid things in public. It shows the rest of society what they really believe. Forcing groups like this undgerground is just ignoring the issue. Jeff (19 years ago, 9-Aug-05, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: Schpiffkraft Hakenkreuz
|
|
(...) I'm not arguing that Nazism is only hate - but that is based on hate. And yes, it does matter, to me. The people who killed thousands fighting the Nazis do not bear the same responcibility as the those who killed innocents for no reason except (...) (19 years ago, 9-Aug-05, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Freedom of Protest, was Re: Schpiffkraft Hakenkreuz
|
|
(...) Nick's point is that there is a difference between "restrict someone's right to act like a jerk" AND "restrict someone's right to act like a jerk anywhere they please. The Supreme Court has held up "free speach zones" - especially on college (...) (19 years ago, 9-Aug-05, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: Schpiffkraft Hakenkreuz
|
|
(...) I have to disagree - horrible though it was, there was more to Nazism than just hate... Adn does it really matter WHY millions were killed? I like your EB MOCs, Lenny, and I think that this one may have crossed the line in polite society, but (...) (19 years ago, 9-Aug-05, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: Schpiffkraft Hakenkreuz
|
|
(...) (19 years ago, 9-Aug-05, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: Schpiffkraft Hakenkreuz
|
|
(...) And what is "inappropriate"? Who decides? You? Some would argue it is inappropriate that women are permitted out in public unveiled. Sure, Nazism is a horrible, evil thing, but should we restrict someone's right to act like a jerk if they want (...) (19 years ago, 9-Aug-05, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: Schpiffkraft Hakenkreuz
|
|
(...) The general theory of Nazism is based on hate, whereas the general theory of communism is based on peace. It was one madman (Stalin) who transformed the USSR into a machine that killed 30 million Russians. And again, don't forget that ALL (...) (19 years ago, 9-Aug-05, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: Schpiffkraft Hakenkreuz
|
|
(...) Snide comments can have premises? I thought they were just mean. Rosco, are your snide comments generally based on true premises? (19 years ago, 9-Aug-05, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Schpiffkraft Hakenkreuz
|
|
(...) I don't believe that speech was included at the time of the BoR for society-at-large censorship, but rather protection from vengeful governing bodies like royalty or Congress. As I stated earlier, there were no neo-nazis in the late 18th (...) (19 years ago, 9-Aug-05, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: Schpiffkraft Hakenkreuz
|
|
(...) Uh, isn't that pretty much what I wrote? Dave! (19 years ago, 9-Aug-05, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: Schpiffkraft Hakenkreuz
|
|
(...) "requires protection" All speech is protected, but only some speech needs to be protected. -Lenny (19 years ago, 9-Aug-05, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: Schpiffkraft Hakenkreuz
|
|
(...) Once again, you have crystallized my thoughts exactly, Paul..er Dave! [1] (...) Exactly. "polite", "civil", "responsible", "respectful". They are all qualities of a good citizen; a good person for that matter. (...) Yes, tactics are certainly (...) (19 years ago, 9-Aug-05, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: Schpiffkraft Hakenkreuz
|
|
(...) Yes (19 years ago, 9-Aug-05, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: Schpiffkraft Hakenkreuz
|
|
(...) On the contrary--the only speech that requires protection is that which society-at-large finds suitable for censorship. (...) Unless you're equating "offensive" artistic expression with slander, this point is irrelevant. Likewise, arguments (...) (19 years ago, 9-Aug-05, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: Schpiffkraft Hakenkreuz
|
|
(...) Just because one should be free to speak their mind, doesn't mean that should be able to at the expense of other's pursuit of Life, Liberty, and Pursuit of Happiness, which is the basic premise of the Constitution. We "bother with it" because (...) (19 years ago, 9-Aug-05, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: Schpiffkraft Hakenkreuz
|
|
(...) I'd like to clarify this, if I may. John, from our long history of debate, I sense that you'd agree that people have the right to air their views publicly, no matter how ignorant or hateful those views are, but according to the nature of our (...) (19 years ago, 9-Aug-05, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: Schpiffkraft Hakenkreuz
|
|
(...) Do you mean if everyone is perfect, why bother with laws? I guess you wouldn't need them. Then again, everyone isn't perfect, so I have no idea what your point is. (...) And I'm saying that responsible, considerate people who hate Jews (...) (19 years ago, 9-Aug-05, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: Schpiffkraft Hakenkreuz
|
|
(...) Whoa - if everyone is always responsible, civil, and unoffensive, why even bother with freedom of speech? Freedom of speech is there specifically to protect behavior people might find offensive, like neo-Nazi marches through Jewish (...) (19 years ago, 9-Aug-05, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: Schpiffkraft Hakenkreuz
|
|
(...) The issue to me is two fold: 1. This MOC is potentially deeply offensive, and 2. It isn't funny. When I saw it the first thing I thought up was Kevoh's comic - but the difference between Kevoh and Richie is that Kevoh is funny. It is obvious (...) (19 years ago, 9-Aug-05, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: Schpiffkraft Hakenkreuz
|
|
(...) Nathan has a good point. The issue isn't depicting a terrible scene or time in LEGO, its making light of a terrible scene or time in LEGO. Although, maybe I shouldn't (URL). :) (19 years ago, 9-Aug-05, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: Schpiffkraft Hakenkreuz
|
|
(...) This MOC tries to be funny on a subject that is certainly less than funny. And no, I don't find other Brickshelf finds such as suicide bombers and (URL) this> funny at all. I find those grossly inappropiate. Depictions of genocides in the (...) (19 years ago, 9-Aug-05, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: Schpiffkraft Hakenkreuz
|
|
(...) Hey all, (Note the FUT-off-topic-debate). I'm a bit nervous about jumping into this because there are already strong opinions expressed on both sides by people I respect, but here goes. I have to admit confusion: A MOC based on a fictional (...) (19 years ago, 8-Aug-05, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX) !
|
| |
| | Re: Schpiffkraft Hakenkreuz
|
|
(...) Try telling that to the (URL). Marc Nelson Jr. (URL) Marc's Creations>> (19 years ago, 8-Aug-05, to lugnet.space, lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: Schpiffkraft Hakenkreuz
|
|
(...) In this case: yup. -- Nathan Wells (19 years ago, 8-Aug-05, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: ...just one more form of anti-Semitism
|
|
Much of this article is filled with fallacy and nonsense arguments. The guy is upset but isn't doing a very good job of convincing me that his side is actually right. (...) How exactly does taking a stronger role in this issue de-legitimize the (...) (19 years ago, 1-Aug-05, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: ...just one more form of anti-Semitism
|
|
(...) Posted on October 7, 2004 10:01 PM EST Email this Commentary By BRUCE S. TICKER Location: Philadelphia Those Presbyterians and Episcopalians might as well have kicked and beaten their mutual victim to a pulp while they were at it. No, not (...) (19 years ago, 1-Aug-05, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: ...just one more form of anti-Semitism
|
|
Strange. It works for me.... but only sometimes. Same story, but a different angle: (URL) A (...) (19 years ago, 1-Aug-05, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: ...just one more form of anti-Semitism
|
|
(...) "Article Not Found" (19 years ago, 1-Aug-05, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | ...just one more form of anti-Semitism
|
|
(URL) Anti-Semitic Christians see the light> Ho-hum Scott A (19 years ago, 1-Aug-05, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | One Nation Under... What was it again?
|
|
(URL) God Bless America!> (19 years ago, 28-Jul-05, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: Here's a scary one
|
|
(...) Teachers are usually assumed to have the benefit of in loco parentis, which grants them some immunity from this kind of thing (though I don't know of a good test-case that defines the boundaries). Barnaby's attorney said it exactly right: "If (...) (19 years ago, 5-Jul-05, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Here's a scary one
|
|
(...) Ok, now here's one that's even scarier: (URL) really scary though is the debate over on Sean K. Reynold's boards where one guy is saying that the guy deserved the punnishment because he broke the particular law. No reasoning that perhaps when (...) (19 years ago, 5-Jul-05, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Souter Farm target of hotel proposal?
|
|
(URL) case this link goes stale, apparently someone has made a proposal that Justice David Souter's(1) farm in NH be condemned under eminent domain and used to site a hotel. It's pretty clear the proposal is a protest but I found it interesting (...) (19 years ago, 29-Jun-05, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: I think I'm going to puke....
|
|
(...) Since I've already ceded that point, I think we can move on. Also, I don't know what I was smoking that led me to fail to distinguish between fetal and embryonic, which really is central in this context. My apologies. (...) We need to define (...) (19 years ago, 27-Jun-05, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: I think I'm going to puke....
|
|
(...) All politicians are most interested in the unthinking flock. Both sides have a flock like this that will beleive and regurgitate what ever they are told, expecially when it is what they want to hear. Niether party is any better than the other (...) (19 years ago, 24-Jun-05, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: I think I'm going to puke....
|
|
(...) As you have noted elsewhere, this consensus most certainly doesn't exist and scientific progress can most likely procede without the use of fetal stem cells. (...) This is actually a good point. I know that numerous eggs are used purely for (...) (19 years ago, 24-Jun-05, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: The Supremes sing another sour note
|
|
(...) The "liberal" side is always sour:-D JOHN (19 years ago, 24-Jun-05, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: The Supremes sing another sour note
|
|
(...) Well isn't it the "liberals" who are supposed to be "down" on "big bad corps"?? from the article: "The court's decision drew a scathing dissent from Justice Sandra Day O'Connor, who argued the decision favors rich corporations." Hence the (...) (19 years ago, 24-Jun-05, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: The Supremes sing another sour note
|
|
(...) What's so strange about that? :-) You are correct; brutal decision! JOHN (19 years ago, 24-Jun-05, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | The Supremes sing another sour note
|
|
The state can favour one (presumably well connected) private individual over another, to the point of using eminent domain to take what rightfully belongs to one person and give it to another: (URL) enough, this time it was the "liberal" side that (...) (19 years ago, 24-Jun-05, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: I think I'm going to puke....
|
|
(...) Or maybe (URL) not.> Well, how about that! And right in my own backyard. Heck, I don't have any let's-kill-as-many-e...s-possible agenda; I just want the science to proceed. This is very encouraging, though of course we'll need to see more (...) (19 years ago, 24-Jun-05, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: I think I'm going to puke....
|
|
(...) Well, yeah, until they've wrecked'em. JOHN FUT.pun (19 years ago, 23-Jun-05, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: I think I'm going to puke....
|
|
(...) There is no need for women to be placed on pedestals, once you realise they can create their own stools. pete.w (19 years ago, 23-Jun-05, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: I think I'm going to puke....
|
|
(...) Sorry for the ambiguity--it wasn't an attept to trap you. I was referring to fetal stem cells, which scientific consensus identifies as likely the most fruitful source of therapeutic treatments. The silliness of the Right's objection is (...) (19 years ago, 22-Jun-05, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: I think I'm going to puke....
|
|
(...) I don't see why, honestly. Or, if it is a big problem, then why not have two separate gender-neutral bathrooms? (...) It sounds as though you're respecting the distinctiveness of the 2 sexes more than you are respecting a person of either of (...) (19 years ago, 22-Jun-05, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: I think I'm going to puke....
|
|
(...) Every person has the right to choose one person of the opposite sex for marriage and have that union recognized by the government. The exact same right for everyone. If one choses a same-sex partner, or 3 partners, or any variety of farm (...) (19 years ago, 22-Jun-05, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: I think I'm going to puke....
|
|
(...) Many places actually have those-- they are called "family bathrooms", and are a good idea for that reason. (...) In theory that's fine, but in practical terms a nightmare. (...) Again, efficiency is WAY more important than being "PC". (my new (...) (19 years ago, 22-Jun-05, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: I think I'm going to puke....
|
|
(...) The Right's objection to stem cell research revolves around the use of fetal stem cells. It is their fear that unborn fetuses will become stem cell gardens for research. I know of no objections to the usage of other types of stem cells such as (...) (19 years ago, 22-Jun-05, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: Is this the new europe? or the old?
|
|
Neither. It's a RC pressure group in Spain. However, as they agree with Bush's outlook, I expect you (as a yank), would define them as "New Europe". Scott A (...) (19 years ago, 22-Jun-05, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Coolest Brickshelf account
|
|
(...) He was proven wealthy. ;) Scott A (...) (19 years ago, 22-Jun-05, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Mocking (was: Coolest Brickshelf account)
|
|
(...) I would be surprised if there are not - it takes all kinds. (...) Depends on the beholder, so my denial or otherwise is irrelevant. (...) Certainly. (...) I don't recall doing so, but if I have, I'm sure you'll point me to it. Have you? (...) (...) (19 years ago, 22-Jun-05, to lugnet.people, lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Is this the new europe? or the old?
|
|
(URL) .5M people, which is a lot, relatively speaking. (19 years ago, 21-Jun-05, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Here's a scary one
|
|
(...) That's legitimate, IMO. Heck, if the sentence included some kind of "you may not withhold this information from prospective employers," then there's no problem with due process, either. It's analogous to the financial industry, many portions (...) (19 years ago, 17-Jun-05, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Here's a scary one
|
|
(...) Agree with the above, and further I don't support name-and-shame as a punishment mechanism unless it's imposed at the time of sentencing, but I do support the notion of being able to inquire "is this potential employee already convicted of (...) (19 years ago, 17-Jun-05, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Here's a scary one
|
|
(...) This is a tough conversation to have because, to some people, even suggesting that child molesters might not actually be the devil incarnate is tantamount to molesting children yourself. I've been in online forums with a decidedly left-leaning (...) (19 years ago, 17-Jun-05, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Here's a scary one
|
|
In the UK, we do not name-and-shame as it is recognised that it can force individuals underground instead of bringing them back into society. Scott A (...) (19 years ago, 17-Jun-05, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Here's a scary one
|
|
(...) I'm down with publishing convictions but accusations? Not so much. As it turns out maybe I'm biased, we had a recent situation where having the convictions published was a good thing as it got someone outed that really didn't need to be around (...) (19 years ago, 17-Jun-05, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Here's a scary one
|
|
In this article: (URL) is proposed that the government keep and publish a list of all accusations of child molestation. While the intent to make it easier to discover molesters is good, it has serious consequences for someone wrongly accused. (...) (19 years ago, 17-Jun-05, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Thoughts?
|
|
(...) It looks pretty darn real (although I'm not an EE so I can't tell). It smells legit as a page... although there are a couple of mysterious things. One, it's on a German domain (.de) and second, there are no other pages on the site. In fact, (...) (19 years ago, 16-Jun-05, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Thoughts?
|
|
What do we make of (URL) this?> Is this for real? I notice "LOL" in the address line, of course... Dave! Should this be FUT'ed to ot.geek? (19 years ago, 16-Jun-05, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: I think I'm going to puke....
|
|
(...) Some segments of society feel that, but it has nothing to do with what I just said (though I suppose if you feel that I didn't qualify "romance" as only applying to females with me, I can understand the mistake). ;-) -->Bruce<-- (19 years ago, 14-Jun-05, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: I think I'm going to puke....
|
|
(...) I visited an MIT dorm once that had a unixex bathroom, with showers... You bring up an interesting and quaint "difference" between males and females. Culture hides the fact that females can have digestive outbursts just as males do, while (...) (19 years ago, 14-Jun-05, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: I think I'm going to puke....
|
|
(...) ...and speaking of fearing the left, when I visited a friend at his dorm at UC Berekeley, the bathrooms on his floor where unisex. I tell you, it ruins romance to have a girl into the stall next to you and...well, there is a point where too (...) (19 years ago, 14-Jun-05, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: I think I'm going to puke....
|
|
(...) This is why I fear the right - they will claim anything that offends their sensiblities is the "left", and it's all usually a smokescreen for saying, "I hate anything that is different from me." Blowing up bad taste into a cultural litmus test (...) (19 years ago, 14-Jun-05, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: I think I'm going to puke....
|
|
(...) This may be an unintentional misstatement of the facts. My impression is that an all-out ban on stem-cell research would receive massive support from the Right, but the Right realizes that it's a game of inches. First, ban government funding (...) (19 years ago, 13-Jun-05, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: I think I'm going to puke....
|
|
(...) Frank has already given a (URL) discussion> of this objection, so I'll defer to him on this point. If the constraints of cost and space were somehow eliminated, would you object to the mandatory inclusion of a gender-neutral bathroom facility (...) (19 years ago, 13-Jun-05, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: I think I'm going to puke....
|
|
(...) Not to steer it in a totally different direction, but I still just don't get that. It's not the act redefining that you object to (or, it SHOULDN'T be). Redefining "who's allowed to vote" or "which race can use this bathroom" I'll hope you'll (...) (19 years ago, 13-Jun-05, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: I think I'm going to puke....
|
|
(...) There you go, making bad impressions again. (...) Mine, too, to be honest. But my point was that notions of fashion-based gender differences have been mutable for at least centuries, and I intended the fops of old as examples of this. (...) (...) (19 years ago, 13-Jun-05, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: I think I'm going to puke....
|
|
(...) I am looking at this as a vision for the future that some influential people have, and I don't like it. (...) There doesn't have to be. (...) Hmm. I don't know. The vision of "hybrid-man" sounds narcissistic and selfish-- not generally known (...) (19 years ago, 11-Jun-05, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: More from REASON - A Nation of Liars (was Re: Supreme Court Rules Agains State Rights
|
|
(...) Nothing. It's not a complicated point at all... we're governed by liars (Clinton "didn't inhale" and Bush "never did it"... right!... I beleive that!), surrounded by liars, are liars ourselves, and it's due to this stupid prohibition, just (...) (19 years ago, 11-Jun-05, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: More from REASON - A Nation of Liars (was Re: Supreme Court Rules Agains State Rights
|
|
(...) If you lie about marijuana use, yeah, you are a liar. What's complicated about that? The libertarian in me says legalize marijuana, prostitution, drugs etc, but then I have to look at what kind of society would be the result. From where I'm (...) (19 years ago, 10-Jun-05, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: I think I'm going to puke....
|
|
(...) It's all how you look at it. The Right is against the Left redefining marriage. (...) Mainly the Right is against government funding for such research. Same with abortion. But yes, there is a moral component to it as well. (...) Prostitution, (...) (19 years ago, 10-Jun-05, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: I think I'm going to puke....
|
|
(...) What if I took 2 polls and asking men and then women whether or not they'd like to see unisex restrooms-- how do you suppose the results would differ? You as a male may think it's pointless, but I seriously doubt that women would feel the same (...) (19 years ago, 10-Jun-05, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: I think I'm going to puke....
|
|
(...) No, you are correct Sir! Yesss! (my best imitation of Phil Hartman doing Ed McMahon:-) (...) Like the people who are wearing them are in a MP skit-- too silly for my taste. (...) I only wanted to see an example to which we could perhaps make (...) (19 years ago, 10-Jun-05, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: I think I'm going to puke....
|
|
(...) Time flies;-) Let's say 45 years. (...) That's one way to look at it. Another way is that it saved 10,000s of lives as well. (...) Yes, but that was in an effort to defend our country. Yeah, war is hell-- so don't start one (speaking to (...) (19 years ago, 10-Jun-05, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: I think I'm going to puke....
|
|
(...) Then you obviously give more credence to the influence a few fashion designers have than I do. (...) But what kind of father? What kind of husband? As much as you'd like to think otherwise, there's no one single blueprint for fulfilling either (...) (19 years ago, 9-Jun-05, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: I think I'm going to puke....
|
|
(...) Ah, fair enough. I read a kind of "what happened to you staying out of OTD and staying there" tone which apparently wasn't intended. Bad read. Actually, I enjoy the stimulating exchange of ideas here, but back then, the subject matter got too (...) (19 years ago, 9-Jun-05, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | More from REASON - A Nation of Liars (was Re: Supreme Court Rules Agains State Rights
|
|
(URL) for you, John: " Those who fret about morality in America, take note: Raich v. Gonzales codifies our status as a Nation of Liars." (19 years ago, 9-Jun-05, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | What Were Those Justices Smoking? (was Re: Supreme Court Rules Agains State Rights
|
|
(URL) via Reason) COMMENTARY June 7 2005 What Were Those Justices Smoking? - The medical marijuana ruling is legally and morally flawed. By Nick Gillespie, Nick Gillespie is editor in chief of Reason magazine. The most important quote, IMHO: - start (...) (19 years ago, 9-Jun-05, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: I think I'm going to puke....
|
|
(...) Well, not necessarily you per se, but it's one of those things that the Right is generally against. Gay marriage being the big ticket item at the moment. Things like that, restrictions on stem cell research, and even things like gambling & (...) (19 years ago, 9-Jun-05, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: I think I'm going to puke....
|
|
(...) Please, don't remind me. Steve Bliss, feeling a little old (or maybe the recent string of long work days is wearing me down) (19 years ago, 9-Jun-05, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: I think I'm going to puke....
|
|
(...) I'm in the "I'm not sure we need to separate mens and womens restrooms" camp also. There is a minor point about the non-privacy of urinals, but then we could either put a urinal in each stall, or we could put the urinals in their own room, or (...) (19 years ago, 9-Jun-05, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
