To LUGNET HomepageTo LUGNET News HomepageTo LUGNET Guide Homepage
 Help on Searching
 
Post new message to lugnet.off-topic.debateOpen lugnet.off-topic.debate in your NNTP NewsreaderTo LUGNET News Traffic PageSign In (Members)
 Off-Topic / Debate / *311 (-100)
  Re: Geez, its hard to stomach all of this
 
(...) That's really a pity. I think that if somebody has an affair, they should be punished, according to the oath they took at the altar. (or wherever) But if you enjoy living in a country where one's word means nothing, I guess that's your (...) (26 years ago, 28-Dec-98, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Geez, its hard to stomach all of this
 
Also sprach Mike Stanley: : So you either can accept that he's breaking his vows to his wife and : she doesn't mind, which makes sense, because if she doesn't mind why : should you? Or you're saying that you condone the violating of one : person's (...) (26 years ago, 28-Dec-98, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Geez, its hard to stomach all of this
 
Matt Marshall wrote in message ... (...) oops heres the footnotes (1) Absolutely no offense to any Chinese person out there, just communism in general(4) (2)Diplomacy is best backed by a large arsenal of weapons (3)Yes even Jesus has lied (...) (26 years ago, 27-Dec-98, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Geez, its hard to stomach all of this
 
Mike Stanley wrote in message ... <snip> (...) Lying is probaly the most important part of leading a country I mean, you have to look the Chinese whatever in the eyes and say "No the American People want to trade with you, we don't think your a (...) (26 years ago, 27-Dec-98, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Geez, its hard to stomach all of this
 
(...) You know, if Bill & Hillary have an understanding that it is "ok" for each of them them to sleep around, then I could understand what you're saying. If, however, they have the kind of marriage that the vast majority of people enter into, one (...) (26 years ago, 27-Dec-98, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Geez, its hard to stomach all of this
 
Also sprach Matt Hanson: : You have more articulately described what I was hoping that I would not : have to. I don't think there was a single word I disagreed with, other : than the part about your seemingly condoning discreet extramarital : (...) (26 years ago, 27-Dec-98, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Clinton: Amoral?
 
Also sprach Larry Pieniazek: : Wow. Great job. <blush> ... thanks:) / _ _ / _ _ It's lonely at the top, but you eat better. ()(-(//((-/ ===...=== Jim Baker -- Weather Weasel Extraordinaire ===...=== (26 years ago, 25-Dec-98, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Geez, its hard to stomach all of this
 
(...) There was a brilliant advertising campaign here in the UK shortly after all of this became known. It was by Sketchley's, a big dry-cleaning company. It was a full page ad, with a picture of a dejected looking Clinton in the centre. Text (...) (26 years ago, 24-Dec-98, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Christian == Catholic? (Was Geez...
 
(...) Religion. (...) I do believe there are also slight similarities to Zoroastrianism, which I believe was the first monotheistic religion from that region... (26 years ago, 24-Dec-98, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Christian == Catholic? (Was Geez...
 
(...) The Islamic faith recognises Christ as a prophet, though not a saviour. Not quite as highly revered as Mohammed, but quite high up there....... (26 years ago, 24-Dec-98, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Clinton: Amoral?
 
Beaker wrote: <masterful essay, clearly delineating the key points about rule of law> Wow. Great job. Some key points I think need more amplification: - Jim feels, as I do, that the current sexual harassement laws are flawed, but that the president (...) (26 years ago, 24-Dec-98, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Geez, its hard to stomach all of this
 
Beaker wrote: <alot of stuff cut out for obvious reasons> (...) You have more articulately described what I was hoping that I would not have to. I don't think there was a single word I disagreed with, other than the part about your seemingly (...) (26 years ago, 24-Dec-98, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Geez, its hard to stomach all of this
 
A lot of people have been debating the impeachment issue here. I have an opinion, but because I am lazy, I am going to re-post something that I wrote for another discussion group. There are a couple of references to people who are members of that (...) (26 years ago, 24-Dec-98, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Geez, its hard to stomach all of this
 
(...) Well, I'm not sure I agree. I have read of gods that were the "cause" of the particular set of laws that apply in this universe(1), and the "cause" of their consequences. Under that analysis, (whether these gods could subsequently work (...) (26 years ago, 24-Dec-98, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Geez, its hard to stomach all of this
 
(...) Ken Starr's job was to dig up dirt on Clinton. In doing so, he may have changed the focus from the matter at hand to the present matter. No problem with me, I want the truth, whole truth, and nothing but the truth. If the guy is a sleaze (...) (26 years ago, 24-Dec-98, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Geez, its hard to stomach all of this
 
Matt Hanson <"mth8358"@NO SPAMwichita.infi.net> > wrote in message ... (...) there (...) Starr (...) until (...) No, any american who listned to the press, which had already tried and convicted him, already new he did the dirty with lewinsky, and (...) (26 years ago, 24-Dec-98, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Geez, its hard to stomach all of this
 
(...) Thanks, I guess we feel the same on this subject. Stange, how such a small remark can be interpreted in a totally wrong way ;-) ____ |oooo| Cheers, |oooo| Wouter van Wageningen ¯¯¯¯ (26 years ago, 23-Dec-98, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Christian == Catholic? (Was Geez...
 
(...) Religion. (...) While the first statement is true, the last is garbage.... (26 years ago, 24-Dec-98, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  (canceled)
 
 
  Re: Geez, its hard to stomach all of this
 
Also sprach Barry McFarland: : Part of the understanding of evolution is that it does not require an "outside : force. Thus the two are not only irreconcilable, but also irrelavent in : association. Choices are: (1) either one is true and the other (...) (26 years ago, 23-Dec-98, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Geez, its hard to stomach all of this
 
(...) Part of the understanding of evolution is that it does not require an "outside" force. Thus the two are not only irreconcilable, but also irrelavent in association. Choices are: (1) either one is true and the other in not. or (2) niether is (...) (26 years ago, 23-Dec-98, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Christian == Catholic? (Was Geez...
 
(...) On a historical note, Christianity and (I believe) Islam are offshoots of Judaism, which itself is an offshoot of the Polytheistic Babylonian Religion. Jeff (26 years ago, 23-Dec-98, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Geez, its hard to stomach all of this
 
(...) Plus, IXOYE (or I<CH><TH>US) is Greek for fish, right? Steve (26 years ago, 23-Dec-98, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Geez, its hard to stomach all of this
 
(...) Ken Starr is a good man... I never used to believe this, but because of him, the eyes of the American people have been opened *WIDE*... This is not a conspiracy, the conspiracy was committed by the opposite side. And quite frankly, I'm sick (...) (26 years ago, 23-Dec-98, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Geez, its hard to stomach all of this
 
Also sprach Tim Courtney: : They have the same basic history, the same God and hence the same Jesus, but : believe other things like worship of Mary, the Pope, etc. I am an Evangelical : Christian (Pentacostal/Charismatic to be precise) who does not (...) (26 years ago, 23-Dec-98, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Geez, its hard to stomach all of this
 
Also sprach Tom McDonald: : If you believe the bible _and_ that God used evolution, you had better know : your bible and your Darwin to verify their agreement. Many people find them : irreconcilable. This is te point I get hung up on .... I don't (...) (26 years ago, 23-Dec-98, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Christian == Catholic? (Was Geez...
 
Larry Pieniazek wrote in message <367EE16C.C3BE1B7E@c...AM.com>... ...<snip>... (...) It is partially true. Islam accepts both Jesus (Isa) and Moses (Musa) as prophets, but believes that the Islam is much more completed, and fills the gaps that (...) (26 years ago, 23-Dec-98, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Christian == Catholic? (Was Geez...
 
(...) No, you are pretty much right on target. Larry, thank you for that. You have no idea how much that snippet of understanding means to me. It is because of misunderatndings on this premise that I quit debating general religion with anyone. I (...) (26 years ago, 23-Dec-98, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Geez, its hard to stomach all of this
 
Larry Pieniazek wrote in message <367D3775.E8CC6DCC@c...AM.com>... (...) True very true, ecspeccialy in California (...) Lewinksy I thought happened at the smae time he testified (...) Clinton has moral courage, I mean who could stand up to 250 (...) (26 years ago, 23-Dec-98, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Geez, its hard to stomach all of this
 
(...) Um... "I haven't converted?" :-) (26 years ago, 22-Dec-98, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Christian == Catholic? (Was Geez...
 
(...) I apologise for not being sufficiently precise. Catholicism is a kind of Christianity. But there are offshoots that feel that they are christian that most christians would not feel actually are. The one that springs to mind the quickest is the (...) (26 years ago, 22-Dec-98, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Geez, its hard to stomach all of this
 
(...) No. I go to church too, believe it or not. Let me explain. Tom was close. I am prone to throwaway lines that don't explain in detail what I meant, and it's a consistent problem I have. Everyone should feel free to call me on it, too. What I (...) (26 years ago, 21-Dec-98, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Geez, its hard to stomach all of this (ain't it though? :)
 
(...) I consider myself to be a Christian, but I have a hard time believing that anybody who does not believe just as I do is bound for hell... I don't think that a God, knowing the confused nature of mankind, would allow this to happen... The idea (...) (26 years ago, 23-Dec-98, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Geez, its hard to stomach all of this
 
(...) I don't feel a need for a God of anysort in my life. But I do plan to go to church this christmas. Partly because there are a lot of things that do appeal to me, and partly because my friends like to celebrate christmas with me. And yes, those (...) (26 years ago, 22-Dec-98, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Geez, its hard to stomach all of this
 
(...) Evangelical (...) Good point. I was pointing out that it was lumped, and it is confusing to some non-believers. And I agree, I will un-involve myself now. -Tim <>< (URL) - Coming Soon! (URL) (26 years ago, 22-Dec-98, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Geez, its hard to stomach all of this (ain't it though? :)
 
(...) I would say that's true. IMO, I need to believe "this" _and_ disbelieve "that" to have a better defined path. Perhaps analogous: Lego bricks only fit in certain ways, though we must explore and use all the ways they do and don't fit and why. I (...) (26 years ago, 22-Dec-98, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Geez, its hard to stomach all of this
 
(...) People lump them together because Catholicism is a branch of Christianity. If you believe that Christ is the son of god (and the rest of the Bible), you are a Christian. Most Branches of Christianity formed after the Reformation. Jeff P.S. I (...) (26 years ago, 22-Dec-98, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Geez, its hard to stomach all of this
 
(...) together. (...) but (...) Evangelical (...) the (...) Hey friends, do you ever think about this?..All of the religions has their own types of ceromonies (I can't find a better word) and beliefs, which are not respected (generally) by the (...) (26 years ago, 22-Dec-98, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Geez, its hard to stomach all of this
 
(...) True, but using a variable font is easier for me to read. I should have just done a quick copy/paste into a simple text editor. Instead I sit there scratching my head trying to figure it out. -- Terry K -- (26 years ago, 22-Dec-98, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Geez, its hard to stomach all of this
 
(...) Yes, that's clearer. But not as pithy. Could you distill it down into something more succinct? :-) -- Terry K -- (26 years ago, 22-Dec-98, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Geez, its hard to stomach all of this
 
(...) Presumably, I don't think that's what he meant. I think he means people who go just because "it's a nice place to be" without really taking into account (at least) the real purpose of church attendance. To directly answer your question, I (...) (26 years ago, 22-Dec-98, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Geez, its hard to stomach all of this
 
(...) <snip> (...) I can appreciate Tim's feelings on the subject. Anyone, right or not, who thinks he is right can get angry when someone refuses to see "the truth". Even those folks who don't believe in God behave this way at times. I am a (...) (26 years ago, 22-Dec-98, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Geez, its hard to stomach all of this
 
(...) I don't get that one. Is someone who believes in the bible, but attends a biology class regarding Darwin, also a hypocrite? ____ |oooo| Cheers, |oooo| Wouter van Wageningen ¯¯¯¯ (26 years ago, 22-Dec-98, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: lugnet.religion.flame
 
(...) I found that out by accident aswel. Apperently, Free Agent emails when I reply to the newsgroup. Some option I played with, I'm sure. But which one.... (...) <snip> (...) I won't argue with you about that, for they sum up my feelings pretty (...) (26 years ago, 21-Dec-98, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Geez, its hard to stomach all of this
 
(...) Republicans, (...) It is said that Larry Flint did not specify party affilation when making the offers, he got what he got (14 republicans, 1 democrat). It may mean that those that would accuse the democrates have nothing to gain because no (...) (26 years ago, 21-Dec-98, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Geez, its hard to stomach all of this
 
(...) For anyone interested, the Ichthus was a symbol of a fish with the Geek acronym inside it that meant, I=Jesus - in greek his first name starts with iota; latin has it as "Iesu"), X=Christ - last name starts with chi for the hard sound in (...) (26 years ago, 21-Dec-98, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Geez, its hard to stomach all of this
 
(...) Gee, thanks. that makes me feel this big --> . For some reason I'm coming fast to the end of being able to calmly discuss this without preaching to people. The only thing is for some reason you guys all read books so you can argue against (...) (26 years ago, 21-Dec-98, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Geez, its hard to stomach all of this
 
(...) Sounds dumb, but that escaped my mind when I wrote that. (...) In Catholicism. People generally lump Catholicism and Christianity together. They have the same basic history, the same God and hence the same Jesus, but believe other things like (...) (26 years ago, 21-Dec-98, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: More Clinton (was Re: Geez, its hard to stomach all of this)
 
(...) You agree with me later, I think. But I want to ensure this point is clear. You're using the wrong sense of belief here. The sense I meant is "believe == think it's a good thing and support as just" not "believe == be aware of, and accept, the (...) (26 years ago, 21-Dec-98, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Geez, its hard to stomach all of this
 
(...) Well I don't find either of them funny. I see both of them as serious attempts by people to let others know where they stand. I won't ridicule people for using either, as I think it's good to know who I'm dealing with. Someone who is an out (...) (26 years ago, 21-Dec-98, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Geez, its hard to stomach all of this
 
(...) Right as far as it goes, but the reason WHY is that Jesus is often referred to as the fisher of men's souls, and he instructed his apostles to continue his work. (0) One of my all time favorite movies, and my ultimate favorite when chosen from (...) (26 years ago, 21-Dec-98, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Geez, its hard to stomach all of this
 
(...) Caught me being insufficiently precise. :-)... I should have said "I haven't decided to reject reason yet, and I haven't decided to take things that don't make sense or follow the rules of causality on faith yet, and I don't intend to." (...) (26 years ago, 21-Dec-98, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Geez, its hard to stomach all of this
 
(...) On a side note, check out the Darwin Awards Official web site ((URL) A friend of mine e-mails them to me about once a year with the new winners. Some of them are quite honestly very funny -- they hear me laughing 3 or 4 cubes away. :) --Mike. (26 years ago, 21-Dec-98, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Geez, its hard to stomach all of this
 
Also sprach Tim Courtney: : And I'm a Christian and don't know who Ralph Reed is. See my other recent : post on my opinion of the Darwin fish...I don't find it funny at all. Ralph Reed is the founder of the Christian Coalition, and he was still in (...) (26 years ago, 21-Dec-98, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  'Twas the night before Impeachment
 
As posted on the Internet (1) and quoted in this morning's Salt Lake Tribune: 'Twas the night before impeachment and all through the House All the Congress was stirring, even Conyers, the louse. The Articles were hung on the Capitol with care In (...) (26 years ago, 21-Dec-98, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Geez, its hard to stomach all of this
 
(...) the (...) And I'm a Christian and don't know who Ralph Reed is. See my other recent post on my opinion of the Darwin fish...I don't find it funny at all. -Tim <>< (URL) - Coming Soon! (URL) (26 years ago, 21-Dec-98, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  More Clinton (was Re: Geez, its hard to stomach all of this)
 
(...) Ok, I see now. (...) How is the sexual harassment law written? Why would Clinton's not 'believing' in that law make a difference? I can say I don't believe a wall is there and run in its direction and fall down and get a concussion. Just (...) (26 years ago, 21-Dec-98, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Geez, its hard to stomach all of this
 
Also sprach Tim Courtney: : Its an electronic symbol of the Ischtus (I think?) Fish, Christians put them : on their cars (at least in the US). It was a symbol the apostles used in the : early church, etc. You see then plain, with Jesus in the (...) (26 years ago, 21-Dec-98, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Geez, its hard to stomach all of this
 
Also sprach Terry K: : Oh! I get it! I hate when ascii art is offset. Makes it hard to : see what the heck is represented. : Thanks Larry, for lighting that bulb. If it was offset, it probably means you are using a variable width font. Try switching (...) (26 years ago, 21-Dec-98, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Geez, its hard to stomach all of this
 
(...) Went over my head. It doesn't bother me if a non-Christian uses 'amen.' Oh well, its late, and I'm dead tired. Why am I still up? -Tim <>< (URL) - Coming Soon! (URL) (26 years ago, 21-Dec-98, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Oops, I think I double posted
 
Sorry guys, I didn't see my browser doing anything and think I posted the same message twice :( -Tim <>< (URL) - Coming Soon! (URL) (26 years ago, 21-Dec-98, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Geez, its hard to stomach all of this
 
(...) ...<snip>... (...) Its an electronic symbol of the Ischtus (I think?) Fish, Christians put them on their cars (at least in the US). It was a symbol the apostles used in the early church, etc. You see then plain, with Jesus in the middle, and (...) (26 years ago, 21-Dec-98, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Geez, its hard to stomach all of this
 
(...) ...<snip>... (...) Its an electronic symbol of the Ischtus (I think?) Fish, Christians put them on their cars (at least in the US). It was a symbol the apostles used in the early church, etc. You see then plain, with Jesus in the middle, and (...) (26 years ago, 21-Dec-98, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Geez, its hard to stomach all of this
 
(...) Oh! I get it! I hate when ascii art is offset. Makes it hard to see what the heck is represented. Thanks Larry, for lighting that bulb. -- Terry K -- (26 years ago, 21-Dec-98, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Geez, its hard to stomach all of this
 
(...) Just a question, Larry. You say you haven't converted, but how can that be? To say that implies you have something to convert _from_. Does that make any sense? Just struck me oddly. -- Terry K -- (26 years ago, 21-Dec-98, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Geez, its hard to stomach all of this
 
(...) But sometimes, I just _have_ to make a modification. :-) I have twice. Once on a 4x4 turntable - separated it and ground a small amount from the joint on the top half. I needed it to make the radome for my Apache. And I reamed out the axle (...) (26 years ago, 21-Dec-98, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Geez, its hard to stomach all of this
 
(...) ...<snip>... (...) ...<snip>... (...) What's this thing?..I mean " <>< " Selçuk (26 years ago, 20-Dec-98, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Geez, its hard to stomach all of this
 
Also sprach Larry Pieniazek: : 1 - IT'S JUST AN EXPRESSION. I haven't converted or anything. :-) Trollin', trollin', trollin', keep them flame wars rollin' ... / _ _ / _ _ In a New York restaurant: ()(-(//((-/ "Customers who consider our waitresses (...) (26 years ago, 20-Dec-98, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Geez, its hard to stomach all of this
 
(...) Amen(1). Is there anyone here at this point who wonders why I advocate the Libertarians? Power corrupts. Less power == Less corruption. When Libertarians say they want less government, they're talking orders of magnitude, not a small trimming (...) (26 years ago, 20-Dec-98, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Geez, its hard to stomach all of this
 
(...) Didn't say he didn't. But you missed the point too. Clinton (slimeball that he is) decided to hide his behaviour because if he hadn't he would have lost the Jones lawsuit. I have no doubt he harassed her, none whatever. My point, and I'll (...) (26 years ago, 20-Dec-98, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Geez, its hard to stomach all of this
 
(...) Yes, thanks for showing a good way to do the feet. (26 years ago, 20-Dec-98, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Geez, its hard to stomach all of this
 
(...) I'd put big money on him getting off. BIG money. Sad, but it will happen. (...) Didn't say he tried to resign. I said he tried to make himself a martyr, which he did. I have no more respect for him than I do Clinton, because, for me, the core (...) (26 years ago, 20-Dec-98, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  A Letter to the President
 
Please note that I did NOT write this, nor know the person who did. There is reference at the bottom to the author. ---...--- Dear Mr.. President: It's not about sex. If it were about sex, you would be long gone. Just like a doctor, attorney or (...) (26 years ago, 20-Dec-98, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Geez, its hard to stomach all of this
 
(...) The biggest problem with the whole impeachment investigation, and the eventual impeachment of the President, is that it was related to sex. IF it was JUST about sex, he'd still be in office ... possibly with another intern :P Though as the (...) (26 years ago, 20-Dec-98, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Geez, its hard to stomach all of this
 
(...) I almost rolled out of my chair today when I saw a replay of some democrat talking about sexual McCarthyism (sp). It's amazing how many people want to focus in on the sex involved in this to the extent that they want to ignore the rest or say (...) (26 years ago, 20-Dec-98, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Geez, its hard to stomach all of this
 
(...) At least the house didn't allow censure. Its not their constitutional right to vote on it. The Senate can, but its strictly forbidden to the house. (...) They are definitely impeachable offenses. Perjurs who aren't the president get put behind (...) (26 years ago, 20-Dec-98, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Geez, its hard to stomach all of this
 
Also sprach Larry Pieniazek: : My prediction: He won't be convicted because there is no way 67 Senators : will go along. I agree ... even assuming that the 'defectors' even out as they did in the house, that still leaves only 60 'sure-thing' votes (...) (26 years ago, 20-Dec-98, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Geez, its hard to stomach all of this
 
(...) That's my prediction as well. However, you missed the point above. Starr found things like perjury and tampering with witnesses, not sex. I wish he found more of the stuff that is mentioned in Unlimited Access - a book by a former FBI security (...) (26 years ago, 20-Dec-98, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: lugnet.religion.flame
 
It is unfortunate, but from time to time one meets the occassional, ultra-right wing religeous nut, who is comparable to Hitler. I have met one or two in my time, and call them god-Nazis. There. Hope that kills it off for good. Too much bad feeling (...) (26 years ago, 19-Dec-98, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Geez, its hard to stomach all of this
 
(...) Wish that Starr had found the real dirt instead of this stuff. Who cares who he slept with? The law (1) that compelled him to testify is flawed and should be repealed, but since it wasn't he has to uphold it. My prediction: He won't be (...) (26 years ago, 19-Dec-98, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Geez, its hard to stomach all of this
 
(...) The history was made today, the impeachment. It'll be in history books' calendars from this point on... (...) Thanks. At least this thread/my post has confirmed that I have grown up. Heck, I was only 14 then, and fresh to the internet. :) (...) (26 years ago, 19-Dec-98, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Geez, its hard to stomach all of this
 
(...) I am racking my brain, but I don't get it. What is the significance of this day? There is nothing on my calender, either. (...) <Snipped well reasoned and prudent text> (...) I agree with your sentiment that this whole thread is ultimately (...) (26 years ago, 19-Dec-98, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Geez, its hard to stomach all of this
 
Greetings- Today (one of the most historic days in US history), I decided to casually search for my last name in the Lugnet archive. I didn't know what I was getting myself into.... :| I ran into a post by Steve Berry about why he stood up for his (...) (26 years ago, 19-Dec-98, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: lugnet.religion.flame
 
how about talking the hitler or nazizm some?.. (anybody remeber the great rule saying all usenet threads has an end virtually..:-D) Selçuk (...) (26 years ago, 19-Dec-98, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: lugnet.religion.flame
 
(...) Unfortunately it is a tenant of many religions to convert the non-believers. (26 years ago, 19-Dec-98, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: lugnet.religion.flame
 
(...) sort of (...) Not always true. Saddam was not democratically elected. He has ruthlessly oppressed the people and opposition has been crushed. Those films we see of people fervently supporting Saddam have long been discounted, as they have been (...) (26 years ago, 19-Dec-98, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: lugnet.religion.flame
 
(...) Oh goody, I thought you only e-mailed this to me. Saddam is an evil tyrant who poses a threat not only to his own people but to those of neighboring countries. He and seemingly his entire regime are a bunch of lying maniacal bastards and I (...) (26 years ago, 19-Dec-98, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: lugnet.religion.flame
 
(...) Now I don't think that he's a great guy or anything, but who are you to pass judgement on him. People living in Bagdad will probably say the same about Clinton. We cannot say that he is a good or bad leader, the people in his country are the (...) (26 years ago, 18-Dec-98, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: lugnet.religion.flame
 
(...) Collateral damage is unfortunate, admittedly. I've always felt that a country's people have at least some responsibility for their leadership, though. (26 years ago, 18-Dec-98, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: lugnet.religion.flame
 
(...) Maybe it's just that there are a lot of hypocritical loudmouths who like to hide their intolerance and hate in the cloak of respectable Christianity. This is not meant to make generalizations about Christians, loudmouths or Hypocrates. Steve (26 years ago, 18-Dec-98, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: lugnet.religion.flame
 
Also sprach Mike Stanley: : Makes no difference to me what everyone else believes. Not my : business unless they try to tell me what to believe. ... and notably, you and I have never gotten into an argument about religion and faith. That's my point. (...) (26 years ago, 18-Dec-98, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: lugnet.religion.flame
 
(...) Well....probably. (...) Depends if you wish to take everything on faith regarding "weopans of mass destruction" from just *one* inspector. Sure there is a lot of stalling and attempts to block their legitimate work.... The timing is the only (...) (26 years ago, 18-Dec-98, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: lugnet.religion.flame
 
(...) Those are real missiles, and could hurt many innocent as well, not some sort of "cigars" which causes only one person (the woman) crying [with pleasure] Selçuk (26 years ago, 18-Dec-98, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: lugnet.religion.flame
 
Mike Stanley wrote in message ... (...) Actually, the terrorist leader should have been tortured to death long ago. Moz (26 years ago, 18-Dec-98, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: lugnet.religion.flame
 
(...) I agree - sort of. My experience has also been that there are more 'believers'(1) who start these flame wars, however, I've noticed that once they start, the majority of the participents (and the bulk of the volume) are from 'non-believers' (...) (26 years ago, 18-Dec-98, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: lugnet.religion.flame
 
(...) Saddam should have been assasinated a long time ago, whether by us directly or some group we put on the job. Clinton should have bombed Iraq long before now. Amazingly convenient how he timed it, though. (26 years ago, 18-Dec-98, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: lugnet.religion.flame
 
(...) I've always been in the minority in one way or another. :) With this as with other things it is usually something to be proud of, or at least something to not be ashamed of. (...) I don't think I'm very obvious about a lot of confrontational (...) (26 years ago, 18-Dec-98, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: lugnet.religion.flame
 
(...) Which is a much more revealing debate anyway. (G, D & R) (26 years ago, 17-Dec-98, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: lugnet.religion.flame
 
(...) You're in the minority, or so it would seem. Either that or the people that are obviously believers are a bit less tolerant of non believers but the quiet faith types (who I appreciate more anyway) are a bit more and aren't obviously beleivers (...) (26 years ago, 17-Dec-98, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: lugnet.religion.flame
 
(...) Unlikely now.... Whenever the going gets tough, he bombs someone to take attention away. :o) And of course, our Foreign Office continues to phallate (sp?) American foreign policy. (deliberate pun) Though I do believe Saddam should be stopped, (...) (26 years ago, 17-Dec-98, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)


Next Page:  5 more | 10 more | 20 more | 100 more

Redisplay Messages:  All | Compact

©2005 LUGNET. All rights reserved. - hosted by steinbruch.info GbR