 | | Re: NELUG Castle Display at TCS Brainstorm...
|
|
(...) I'm pretty sure Al's long lost ancestor was a blacksmith (in the 2-part episode where they go to England and two towns try to kill them to alleviate an ancient curse). Wasn't he? eric (25 years ago, 4-Jan-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Swearing?
|
|
(...) Yikes! Well, I won't flame you because I expect that neither of us is qualified to define "art." However, you've mounted some ad hominem attacks against prospective artists, and, in the end, these can weaken your own credibility and do nothing (...) (25 years ago, 4-Jan-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Swearing?
|
|
(...) Ah, one of my favorite debate topics - what is art, or more specifically, where is the line between pornography and art? Your examples of "art" IMHO aren't really art, but are (very intentionally) vulgar, obscene attempts to offend particular (...) (25 years ago, 4-Jan-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Goodness of Man? (was: Re: Merry Christmas from the Libertarian Party
|
|
In lugnet.off-topic.debate, John Neal and others write: (...) One thing that's always bothered me about the dying-on-the-cross thing is the question of how could He have done otherwise? I mean, if He knew, as I suspect He must have known, that His (...) (25 years ago, 4-Jan-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Lucky Americans
|
|
Larry Pieniazek <lar@voyager.net> wrote in message news:3870F1E0.8D1B0D...ger.net... (...) Peh..:-) Slightly less then 1000$ (after tax) per month is just my income, and yes I'm not a blue collar, actually a relatively well earning white..:-) (...) (25 years ago, 4-Jan-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Goodness of Man? (was: Re: Merry Christmas from the Libertarian Party
|
|
(...) Um, correct me if I'm wrong, but any history account from those times isn't error free. Historians back then were not objective reporters like the press is today.........Okay, I'm back, I just laughed myself silly;-) (...) The Bible is not a (...) (25 years ago, 4-Jan-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Goodness of Man? (was: Re: Merry Christmas from the Libertarian Party
|
|
(...) Two words: Turkey Baster. No, seriously, you're right - what might be known as Extremely Heavy Petting has resulted in the occasional (but rather rare) virgin pregnancy. -- jthompson@esker.com "Float on a river, forever and ever, Emily" (25 years ago, 4-Jan-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Goodness of Man? (was: Re: Merry Christmas from the Libertarian Party
|
|
(...) A post of yours chastised me for my line lengths, I believe. I chose to respond to one and only one of your chastisements, and it was whim that made me respond to this one rather than that one. (25 years ago, 4-Jan-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Goodness of Man? (was: Re: Merry Christmas from the Libertarian Party
|
|
(...) Reading for comprehension isn't your best subject, I see? Neither is proper snipping when replying, apparently. (...) Nice try. I will not be baited this time. Jasper (25 years ago, 4-Jan-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Goodness of Man? (was: Re: Merry Christmas from the Libertarian Party
|
|
(...) Larry's hasn't been wrong yet, but the post I was responding to, John Neal's (URL) , apeared for example the following lines: (...) Which are 90 characters long, slightly over 80. This is as I mentioned a known bug with Communicator -- (...) (25 years ago, 4-Jan-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Lucky Americans
|
|
No, it's bloody IMPOSSIBLE to get by on $400/week POST-tax in my area, unless you have multiple earners in a household. With rents at $1200+ for any area short of slums around here, $400/wk barely pays the rent. Don't get me started on that :-/ (...) (25 years ago, 3-Jan-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Goodness of Man? (was: Re: Merry Christmas from the Libertarian Party
|
|
(...) Medical virgin birth is quite easy, but I won't go into the details here ;-) -- | Tom Stangl, Technical Support Netscape Communications Corp | Please do not associate my personal views with my employer (25 years ago, 3-Jan-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Welcome to the Ohs
|
|
(...) See I equate the '90s with the 200th decade. (the 199th decade was the '80s) Every history book I have seen follows this concept of dates. 2001 is the begining of the 3rd millenium, the 21st centruy and the 201st decade. (25 years ago, 3-Jan-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: millenium debate(look at Richard's site!)
|
|
(...) I do feel a little bad about that. I probably should have changed the subject sooner. Chris (25 years ago, 3-Jan-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: CLSOTW - Thanks
|
|
(...) Poor Richard. He finally wins the Cool Lego Site of the Week, and it turns into a debate about what constitutes the "millennium". Go to his site and check it out: it is very cool. Heck, it's kewl! Bruce (25 years ago, 3-Jan-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: CLSOTW - Thanks
|
|
(...) I just thought of another fix, while still accepting the current dating system. All we have to do is redefine what a millenium is. here's the new definition that will make 2000 be the "new millenium" millenium- 1000 years, except for the first (...) (25 years ago, 3-Jan-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: CLSOTW - Thanks
|
|
(...) of (...) first (...) Well, in order for there to be a "new millenium" to argue about I think that we should accept as a given the current (albeit quite probably inaccurate) dating system. In this system there is indeed a year 1 and 5(although (...) (25 years ago, 3-Jan-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: CLSOTW - Thanks
|
|
(...) You're right. Nor is there a year 1 or 5 or 30 either. The current calendar was made not too long ago as a device to easily keep track of all the meaningless crap we run around doing our whole lives. The actual birthdate of Christ is not (...) (25 years ago, 3-Jan-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Swearing?
|
|
(...) I'm assuming your asking about the discomfort with the word God. The reason: atheism/humanism. Many (most) Unitarian Universalists (my religion) are humanist. Some take that all the way to atheism. It has caused much difficulty in many of our (...) (25 years ago, 3-Jan-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Swearing?
|
|
(...) I am surprised and intrigued by this notion. Why would this be? -John (...) (25 years ago, 3-Jan-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
