 | | Re: Reagan... not exactly libertarian, but close
|
|
Chris, ( I am jumping in this a day or late, oh well!) (...) sort (...) is (...) same (...) Well, telling which schools to send your kids too is very limiting to parents, and schools do teach a morality of their own, regardless if it is Christian or (...) (25 years ago, 3-Apr-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Reagan... not exactly libertarian, but close
|
|
Chris, (...) on (...) just (...) I wonder what you are truly saying here, Chris. Zealots are on both sides of the abortion issue, both for and against. I don't think murdering people for most reasons is acceptable (outside of capitol punishment or (...) (25 years ago, 3-Apr-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Reagan... not exactly libertarian, but close
|
|
(...) on (...) current (...) so (...) Well, it really depends on what you would consider personal freedom. Should the government be involved in things? No. Look at the census, for example. What time do you go to work and what time d you come back. (...) (25 years ago, 3-Apr-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Reagan... not exactly libertarian, but close
|
|
(...) They (...) these (...) Classic liberalism, yes. Current liberalism, no. The current definition is reflected in the LP quiz, where liberal is on the left, not the right. When I say liberal, it is on the left. When I say classical liberal, I (...) (25 years ago, 3-Apr-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Reagan... not exactly libertarian, but close
|
|
(...) Well I clearly think that a 2d is better than a 1d whether closed form or open... whether more than 2 dimensions are needed is unclear. But libertarians introduced more dimensions precisely because we don't FIT on a 1D... we're not modern (...) (25 years ago, 2-Apr-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Reagan... not exactly libertarian, but close
|
|
(...) Haha! I like that one! There is an essential truth to it. But once again, you are ascribing to Clinton what in truth many politicians are guilty of. Bush / \ Liberal Conservative That's the picture GWB gave at the start of the campaign. When (...) (25 years ago, 2-Apr-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Key West, one of the best places in the world...
|
|
(...) there (...) Key West is one of my favorite places on the planet. And that distinction is due to the Conchs of Key West, who admittedly, have stayed in a permanent 60s frame of mind. Key West also has one of the lowest crime rates in the world. (...) (25 years ago, 2-Apr-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Key West, one of the best places in the world...
|
|
(...) Ya, that's it. And, while I'm not ashamed of my choices, perhaps proud is a bit over-reaching of a statement when applied to them. Since when, however, have I been known to be modest? ++Lar (25 years ago, 2-Apr-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Reagan... not exactly libertarian, but close
|
|
I hope you guys don't mind me butting in... (...) That's true. But, when you look at these limitations of freedom there's sort of a first glance and then deeper impacts. If you tell parents what school their child must/may go to, it is first a (...) (25 years ago, 2-Apr-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Key West, one of the best places in the world...
|
|
(...) Right, I meant beyond that. ;-) (...) Glad, I'd buy, but proud just seems a bit off (not that you're not allowed). (...) I guess I can see all that, but it sounds like you're proud of being well-adjusted rather than proud of being (...) (25 years ago, 2-Apr-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Key West, one of the best places in the world...
|
|
(...) I go there at least once a month, and I love it there, too (...) Wasn't intended to be. You might consider it a poor choice of words, but I was simply saying that it is a place where homosexuals choose to party. I was typing fast (for me (...) (25 years ago, 2-Apr-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Reagan... not exactly libertarian, but close
|
|
(...) I defy you to separate the two - one impacts the other. (...) Ask yourself the question, where would the human race be if we were all homosexual? We would be extinct. Besides, there is more that is self destructive in that lifestyle than just (...) (25 years ago, 2-Apr-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Key West, one of the best places in the world...
|
|
(...) I'm of course proud of just about everything to do with myself(1), and in this case I'm happy that my preferences seem clear cut to me, and therefore I'm proud of the fact that I did't waste a lot of emotional energy on the issue. There's no (...) (25 years ago, 2-Apr-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Reagan... not exactly libertarian, but close
|
|
(...) Unsurprisingly, I agree with Larry. Liberals are trying to limit different freedoms than conservatives. I think that any time a citizen is coerced into some action by a body of governance (or by an individual, it amounts to the same thing) (...) (25 years ago, 2-Apr-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Key West, one of the best places in the world...
|
|
(...) If you're rich because gas runs about 1.5 times the price of the rest of the country. (...) If you're rich, because hotel rooms cost about four times the price in the rest of the country. (...) Oh wait, you are. ;-) I'm only bitter because (...) (25 years ago, 1-Apr-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Key West, one of the best places in the world...
|
|
Oh, and by the way, Key West has got to be one of the most wonderful places on the entire face of the planet, because people there (at least while they are there, anyway) are so very very open, friendly and tolerant. I love going there and I wish I (...) (25 years ago, 1-Apr-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Reagan... not exactly libertarian, but close
|
|
(...) You're not clearly distinguishing betweeen personal and economic freedom, so you fall into the one dimensional trap. (...) No I'm not. Take the quiz. (...) 2 points. a) no they're not I vehemently dispute that homosexuality is in and of itself (...) (25 years ago, 1-Apr-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Reagan... not exactly libertarian, but close
|
|
In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Larry Pieniazek writes: "Ka-snip" (...) (freedom). (...) I profoundly disagree. It is liberals who are anti-freedom. Liberals are the ones trying to tax and regulate anything that moves. You are confusing freedom and (...) (25 years ago, 1-Apr-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Reagan... not exactly libertarian, but close
|
|
(...) ?? freedom, victimless crimes, markets as levelers and wealth creators? these are all classical liberal ideas. Again, the point of that spectrum is that current left liberals are OK on personal freedom (factoring out minor PCness) but lousy on (...) (25 years ago, 1-Apr-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Reagan... not exactly libertarian, but close
|
|
(...) need (...) I have taken the quiz before, interesting diamond shape. However, (no offense to Libertarians or to Larry) it reminds me of triangulation, in which Clinton seemed to try to position himself. He was above either the right or left: (...) (25 years ago, 1-Apr-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Reagan... not exactly libertarian, but close
|
|
(...) Not by libertarians, it's not. We reject the one dimensional spectrum. You need at least two. See the quiz at www.lp.org, for example. (...) Again, not enough dimensions in use to be accurate. ++Lar (25 years ago, 1-Apr-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Reagan... not exactly libertarian, but close
|
|
Hi, (...) It's not really a matter of right/left seeing it that way, but of "old-school/new-school" and how polarized a particular speaker is. Of course, a lot of the "new school" people are deconstructionists and think that trying to diagram (...) (25 years ago, 1-Apr-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Reagan... not exactly libertarian, but close
|
|
(...) history (...) Both the far right and left merge under totalitarianism. I came to this conclusion independently many years ago, so it seems to be fairly self-evident once you get into it. My experience is that conservatives are the ones who see (...) (25 years ago, 31-Mar-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Reagan... not exactly libertarian, but close
|
|
Lindsay, (...) time. (...) I went (...) council in (...) shot by (...) that (...) with (...) like (...) Hmm... well, I guess my political philosophy is definately right / conservative (Which, in actuality, classic liberal) / Budding Libertarian. My (...) (25 years ago, 31-Mar-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Reagan... not exactly libertarian, but close
|
|
(...) Everyone has different reasons for embracing a given philosophy--a fellow I went to college with (actually, he was a Lib candidate for Ypsilanti city council in the early 1990s) apparently switched from Dem to Lib to Rep (after being shot by a (...) (25 years ago, 31-Mar-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Reagan... not exactly libertarian, but close
|
|
Steve, (...) True in facts, but facts rarely enter in political debates most of the time. (...) Wow, this is the first time I heard someone mention this, I always thought the same. Fascism / Marxism / Communism is not too fr off in my book. I think (...) (25 years ago, 31-Mar-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Reagan... not exactly libertarian, but close
|
|
(...) Libertarianism is generally considered to be strongly toward the right of the political spectrum. Not at the end, of course: there is no end. The 'political spectrum' is not a line, but a circle, with the far left colliding with the far right. (...) (25 years ago, 31-Mar-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Reagan... not exactly libertarian, but close
|
|
(...) The amusing thing being that Ronny took a paper loss that year and didn't pay income tax (which the papers had a field day with in California and why it sticks in my mind). Bruce (25 years ago, 31-Mar-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Reagan... not exactly libertarian, but close
|
|
Larry, Very interesting, conservatism is close to Libertarian views? Hmm... sounds familiar. : ) ( Outside of all that Christian Right rubbish, which, for the most part, I do not agree with ) Seriously, though, very interesting interview. I keep (...) (25 years ago, 31-Mar-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Reagan... not exactly libertarian, but close
|
|
(...) I recall that quote, actually, and I agree with it, by the way. ++Lar (25 years ago, 31-Mar-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Reagan... not exactly libertarian, but close
|
|
(...) ideas (...) his (...) "Taxes should hurt" -Ronald Reagan (quote while he was governor of California) (25 years ago, 30-Mar-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Reagan... not exactly libertarian, but close
|
|
This is from a 1975 interview I dug up. It's eerie, how fresh some of the ideas still sound to me. This was from when he was governor of California, before his 1976 run against Gerald R. Ford. (URL) (25 years ago, 30-Mar-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Insider Trading (Was: Re: Lego Direct (was Re: Georgia LEGO Outlet is Cool!))
|
|
Hello Richard: There is more to this than just manipulating stock prices. Existing and new shareholders have to have some comfort that they are been treated equitably and have confidence in the stock market. Capital stock markets are one of the ways (...) (25 years ago, 30-Mar-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Scans of jan. British LEGO magazine , About the Lego Logo!!!
|
|
(...) That is a good point, i will have to ask the legal dept about this, i will let everybody know the results And i hope i will be able to do it -- Michael - - - Please reply on medwards@ukonline.co.uk - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - (...) (25 years ago, 30-Mar-00, to lugnet.general, lugnet.loc.uk, lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Scans of jan. British LEGO magazine , About the Lego Logo!!!
|
|
Michael Edwards <medwards@ukonline.co.uk> wrote in message news:Fs8EnD.IDE@lugnet.com... (...) lot (...) Yes, but the Adventurers mag is not published by LEGO so copyright will be held by someone else. Huw (25 years ago, 30-Mar-00, to lugnet.general, lugnet.loc.uk, lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Scans of jan. British LEGO magazine , About the Lego Logo!!!
|
|
I have the fax from Lego which gives me permission to display any images from Lego, which includeds Magazines, Adverts, Comic strips, Manuals the lot really. -- Michael - - - Please reply on medwards@ukonline.co.uk - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - (...) (25 years ago, 30-Mar-00, to lugnet.general, lugnet.loc.uk, lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Scans of jan. British LEGO magazine , About the Lego Logo!!!
|
|
<agreed> (...) the (...) Agreed, it is one thing to post a individual page from a mag, it is another to start scanning a whole series of magazines - especially ones which are quite recent. Scott A (25 years ago, 30-Mar-00, to lugnet.general, lugnet.loc.uk, lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Lego Direct (was Re: Georgia LEGO Outlet is Cool!)
|
|
(...) "Geeting the irrits" roughly translates to "my fingers are getting numb from too much typing and couldn't keep up with my brain, and my brain failed to register the typo". "Getting the irrits", well, I hope that clears it up. Pete Callaway (25 years ago, 30-Mar-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: This new subject doesn't reset the thread (Re: Lego Direct (was Re: Georgia LEGO Outlet is Cool!)
|
|
I'm redirecting this discussion to lugnet.off-topic.debate where I should have set follow-ups in the first place... (I think my original note was perhaps appropriate for admin, but the discussion is going to most likely be of the debate kind of (...) (25 years ago, 30-Mar-00, to lugnet.admin.general, lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | FUT OTD {Was: Re: This new subject doesn't reset the thread)
|
|
(...) (25 years ago, 29-Mar-00, to lugnet.admin.general, lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Lego Direct (was Re: Georgia LEGO Outlet is Cool!)
|
|
(...) I would argue (we're x-posted to .debate now), that if anything TV should not be held as a standard for what should and shouldn't be done on LUGNET. By nature, TV is ratings hungry.. and if they think they can grab a few more seconds of (...) (25 years ago, 29-Mar-00, to lugnet.admin.general, lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Lego Direct (was Re: Georgia LEGO Outlet is Cool!)
|
|
(...) Purely a question of curiosity, what does "geeting the irrits" mean? Is it a OZism? I can guess from context and I ask because it seems a neat phrase. ++Lar (25 years ago, 29-Mar-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Scans of jan. British LEGO magazine , About the Lego Logo!!!
|
|
Michael Edwards <medwards@ukonline.co.uk> wrote in message news:Fs6DAB.5xx@lugnet.com... (...) may (...) I'd be more worried about obtaining permission to host complete scans of the magazine rather than whether to blue-out the logo or not. Huw (25 years ago, 29-Mar-00, to lugnet.general, lugnet.loc.uk, lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Lego Direct (was Re: Georgia LEGO Outlet is Cool!)
|
|
(...) Ya. I'll give your post an 80, it's got a good beat and you can dance to it. Seriously, on the main issue, is there anyone who doesn't already know what everyone's position is? The side issues(1) are somewhat interesting if we can get to (...) (25 years ago, 29-Mar-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Lego Direct (was Re: Georgia LEGO Outlet is Cool!)
|
|
(...) This would be perfectly on-topic for .market.theory, BTW, as long as it's about TLC and how it affects the market and vice-versa. If it gets into more screaming and name-calling and away from LEGO then it's probably better in (...) (25 years ago, 29-Mar-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, lugnet.market.theory)
|
| |
| | Re: Lego Direct (was Re: Georgia LEGO Outlet is Cool!)
|
|
"Richard Franks" <spontificus@yahoo.com> wrote in message news:Fs6x33.FyG@lugnet.com... (...) I think this should just end. The whole thing is going nowhere fast. I think everyone made some valid points when this all started, now all that is (...) (25 years ago, 29-Mar-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Lego Direct (was Re: Georgia LEGO Outlet is Cool!)
|
|
(...) Somewhere in the deep dark dank depths of .debate... hopefully :) Richard (25 years ago, 29-Mar-00, to lugnet.admin.general, lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Scans of jan. British LEGO magazine , About the Lego Logo!!!
|
|
(...) Well I'll try to be more constructive this time :) I think Huw is right - cropping the LEGO logo and using it arbitarily on your page is a bit like designing your own car, and putting Rolls Royce badges on it? Scanning published content is (...) (25 years ago, 29-Mar-00, to lugnet.general, lugnet.loc.uk, lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Scans of jan. British LEGO magazine , About the Lego Logo!!!
|
|
Hi Great a blue block I am starting to get a bit worried now, the Legofair page on Lego says the logo's must not be shown, Now Huw suggest it may applies to standalone logo's but not pictures with the logo on it, say like a manual Would it be ok if (...) (25 years ago, 29-Mar-00, to lugnet.general, lugnet.loc.uk, lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Lego Direct (was Re: Georgia LEGO Outlet is Cool!)
|
|
(...) Richard raises an interesting point, one which I hope the advent of LEGO Direct will adequately address. I've been geeting the irrits reading this particular debate (why hasn't it moved to .off-topic.debate yet?) with you guys complaining (...) (25 years ago, 29-Mar-00, to lugnet.dear-lego, lugnet.off-topic.debate) !
|
| |
| | Re: Lego Direct (was Re: Georgia LEGO Outlet is Cool!)
|
|
(...) You have GOT to be the #1 jerk of Lugnet for the above comment. I bought ZERO of them. But you know what? I could have bought them all, and you'd have ZERO reason to whine. Why? Because you could have called in, just like me. I live in CA, (...) (25 years ago, 28-Mar-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Lego Direct (was Re: Georgia LEGO Outlet is Cool!)
|
|
(...) Yes. I sometimes (ok, often) find myself across the fence from Larry, because we have some differences of opinion at very fundemental levels. However, he rarely blows his top, is invariably fair (if opinionated), and cannot be remotely accused (...) (25 years ago, 28-Mar-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Lego Direct (was Re: Georgia LEGO Outlet is Cool!)
|
|
(...) Agreed. Granted, Larry is -- by his admission -- selfish, profit-driven, and a big spender. But he is most certainly not obnoxious. He is easily amongst the most polite, professional, and generous (1) people I have ever had business with. His (...) (25 years ago, 28-Mar-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Lego Direct (was Re: Georgia LEGO Outlet is Cool!)
|
|
I know this is yesterday's squabble, but I'm just now reading it, and moving my reply to .o-t.d. (...) I don't know Larry, have never met him, but this is not the impression I'm getting of him. The only impression I'm getting from reading this (...) (25 years ago, 28-Mar-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Perspective (Was:Re: Lego Direct (was Re: Georgia LEGO Outlet is Cool!))
|
|
(...) Second that. This is not appropriate for LUGNET. Arguements of this nature belong in other places. This is an abuse of freedom of speech and not what most of us pay membership dues for. Play well, and respect your peers please. Aaron (...) (25 years ago, 28-Mar-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Perspective (Was:Re: Lego Direct (was Re: Georgia LEGO Outlet is Cool!))
|
|
(...) Please don't feel sorry for me - *I* am perfectly capable of making myself understood without resorting to certain words. Also, please understand that my disappointment is not in the words used (fairly trivial for everyday conversation), but (...) (25 years ago, 28-Mar-00, to lugnet.dear-lego, lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Insider Trading (Was: Re: Lego Direct (was Re: Georgia LEGO Outlet is Cool!))
|
|
(...) I admittedly know very little about stock market stuff, so this is mean in the spirit of innocence - my flame proof suit is at the dry-cleaners.. I've just become curious about this "insider trading" law thingy - has the market ever operated (...) (25 years ago, 28-Mar-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate) !
|
| |
| | Re: Ad hominem attacks
|
|
(...) Can't (...) Oh alright. You can probably find some politicians untainted by the process somewhere. You were supposed to laugh, not argue! :-) Again I'd point to the LP track record (if I just could dig it (...) And you'll kindly notice that I (...) (25 years ago, 27-Mar-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Ad hominem attacks
|
|
In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Larry Pieniazek writes: Liberal, conservative, democrat, republican: They are all politicians. Can't (...) Hmm... *L*ibertarian *P*arty... *L*arry *P*ieniazek... Interesting... 8^) Dave! (25 years ago, 27-Mar-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Wench as a word
|
|
(...) You are correct, sir! ++Lar (25 years ago, 26-Mar-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Wench as a word
|
|
(...) I believe Larry was using sarcasm to illustrate that very point. Bill (25 years ago, 26-Mar-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Wench as a word
|
|
(...) right? (...) I know about the unrest between Korean storeowners and African-Americans. What I was trying to get at is that if one uses slang like "whitey" and states that only whites can be racist (not true) then one does need some sensitvity (...) (25 years ago, 26-Mar-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Wench as a word
|
|
Gloria, (...) I think what Larry was saying here is when Al Sharpton called lynching on a Korean run grocery store in New York. I don't think anyone here is advocating lynching anyone, except for the types like Al Sharpton and perhaps James (...) (25 years ago, 26-Mar-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Wench as a word
|
|
(...) Not true, even *in* academia. Certainly not among any of the African Studies people I know, and I'm in just such a supposed "bastion of orthodoxy." The people who deny racism can exist among minorities make an easy foil, but they're far rarer (...) (25 years ago, 26-Mar-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Why the Net doesn't belong to America
|
|
(...) Sure. Executive summary: The author's all wet. Ignore him. More: Libertarian viewpoint (and the author clearly is trying to use Libertarian as a denigrating comment, too bad for him he doesn't get it) or not, the net as a whole doesn't (...) (25 years ago, 25-Mar-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate) !
|
| |
| | Re: Wench as a word
|
|
(...) Sel (...) part (...) Not true even among liberal thinkers. Anyone of any race can be racist. He/She only has to believe one race to be superior to the others. (...) racism, (...) deserve (...) word (...) I think you all are hoping there are no (...) (25 years ago, 25-Mar-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Why the Net doesn't belong to America
|
|
(URL) care to comment on this? (25 years ago, 25-Mar-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Is Heaven recursive? and other perplexing questions
|
|
(...) I think you left a smiley out. I've never killed anyone, you know. Except perhaps bored them to death... (25 years ago, 25-Mar-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Gay Marriages/Domestic Partnerships and the IRS
|
|
Well, Ed posted a good question and we've heard from a pretty wide spectrum of viewpoints. Self selected, more geeky than the population as a whole (as well as nicer, cooler, and generally better looking, but I digress) I'd sum up everyone by saying (...) (25 years ago, 25-Mar-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Ad hominem attacks
|
|
(...) Disagree. Again I'd point to the LP track record (if I just could dig it up in 90 secs, it's out there somewhere) in the limited situations where we have had elected officials, we've hewn to our word and done what we could do to dismantle the (...) (25 years ago, 25-Mar-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Wench as a word
|
|
(...) Outside of academia. See, most of the people you and I know are fairly reasonable, fairly rational (not perfect, mind you)... we both presumably know mostly normal mainstream people. But in the bastions of orthodoxy where this stuff emanates, (...) (25 years ago, 25-Mar-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Gay Marriages/Domestic Partnerships and the IRS
|
|
(...) I'm not sure it should. I know that my church wass lobbying for the anti-gay marriage measure in California, and I'm not sure it was the best thing to do. In this country, a church should have the right to tell its members what they should and (...) (25 years ago, 24-Mar-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Is Heaven recursive? and other perplexing questions
|
|
(...) Sounds kinda circular. Where is it said that no one made God? The Alpha and Omega (beginning and end) statement might've been directed towards us mortals; He created and will destroy each and every one of us, as we understand our current (...) (25 years ago, 24-Mar-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Is Heaven recursive? and other perplexing questions
|
|
(...) Isn't reading Slashdot before trying to sleep kinda like watching _Titanic_ before going on a cruise? ;-) (...) Todd, are you sure you're not a Mormon? :-O :-, You're touching upon some very basic beliefs from my church. (...) Pardonez-moi (...) (25 years ago, 24-Mar-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Purimish fun
|
|
(...) Depends on what you mean by 'devil'. Do you mean the guy in a red suit with horns and a pointy tail, carrying a trident? Yeah, that probably is non- Jewish. Non-Christian, too, although it's a bit of mythology made up *by* Christians (I (...) (25 years ago, 24-Mar-00, to lugnet.people, lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Is Heaven recursive? and other perplexing questions
|
|
(...) Isn't that pretty much the same as the idea of Nirvana? Being one with God, and all that? Steve (25 years ago, 24-Mar-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Is Heaven recursive? and other perplexing questions
|
|
(...) Why is that strange? At what point did it cross from "similar" to "too similar"? (...) They studied the object of the preposition "about" in the previous sentence. The pronoun "it" was intended to refer to that phrase without having to type it (...) (25 years ago, 24-Mar-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Is Heaven recursive? and other perplexing questions
|
|
Adam Hoekwater wrote: <snip> (...) <snip> (...) Strange, but those interpretations are just too similar with the "tasavvuf" interpretations of islam. <snip> (...) They studied what? I don't think there are much material around to "study" these (...) (25 years ago, 24-Mar-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Is Heaven recursive? and other perplexing questions
|
|
(...) <snip the rest> You've answered an interesting thought experiment with "revealed truth" which we already knew, and further, since it's presented as factual, doesn't do anything to move the "what if" forward. Thanks anyway. Todd's thinking out (...) (25 years ago, 24-Mar-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Is Heaven recursive? and other perplexing questions
|
|
(...) God invented time, space and physics as a way for us to live. Nobody made God, He's been around forever, in as much as forever can exist without time as a reference. (...) Heaven with God is an idea from the Bible, if you think that's (...) (25 years ago, 24-Mar-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Is Heaven recursive? and other perplexing questions
|
|
Oops, he doth spoken already! :) All hail the almighty Larry! Scott S. ___...___ Scott E. Sanburn-> ssanburn@cleanweb.net Systems Administrator-Affiliated Engineers -> (URL) Page -> (URL) Page -> (URL) (25 years ago, 24-Mar-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Is Heaven recursive? and other perplexing questions
|
|
Todd, Man, Todd, maybe you should ask God, er... Larry himself, he will tell you all you need to know! :) Scott S. ___...___ Scott E. Sanburn-> ssanburn@cleanweb.net Systems Administrator-Affiliated Engineers -> (URL) Page -> (URL) Page -> (URL) (25 years ago, 24-Mar-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Gay Marriages/Domestic Partnerships and the IRS
|
|
(...) I think you can get away with that because they're a blood relation. I don't suppose you could do anything crafty like get legal guardianship of him somehow? Ok, on second thought, that would be just creepy. :P eric (25 years ago, 24-Mar-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Gay Marriages/Domestic Partnerships and the IRS
|
|
I don't usually like to talk politics with anything but a voting booth, but: (...) S'funny you should ask. We watch CNN all day at work, and recently California (? I think it was CA) voted down a referendum to recognise same-sex marriages. I was (...) (25 years ago, 24-Mar-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Is Heaven recursive? and other perplexing questions
|
|
(...) I saw a double feature at the Brattle last night (for those not familiar with Boston, the Brattle is a historic theatre in Harvard Square that shows arthouse movies and has cool things like author readings)- _American Movie_ and _Coven_. (...) (25 years ago, 24-Mar-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Is Heaven recursive? and other perplexing questions
|
|
See _To Your Scattered Bodies Go_ (and the rest of the volumes) which I think has an interesting take on this. Farmer is a bit of a hack and tends to take about 2 books more than needed to get to the point, but this is some of his better stuff. (25 years ago, 24-Mar-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Is Heaven recursive? and other perplexing questions
|
|
I'm on my way to bed, but I just saw something on Slashdot which got me wondering a few things about Creation again... OK, ever since I was a child, I always wondered: If God made the universe, then who made God? (That's the classic question.) What (...) (25 years ago, 24-Mar-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Ad hominem attacks
|
|
(...) Now *there's* a political philosophy I can identify with. Steve (25 years ago, 24-Mar-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Gay Marriages/Domestic Partnerships and the IRS
|
|
(...) Hmm. Yeah! Like, what if someone supports an elderly parent or grandparent? --Todd (25 years ago, 24-Mar-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Gay Marriages/Domestic Partnerships and the IRS
|
|
Ed & All, (...) Oh, I think this is wrong as well, and you should be able to deduct that expense. Anyone you take care of, partner, relative, etc. Scott S. ___...___ Scott E. Sanburn-> ssanburn@cleanweb.net Systems Administrator-Affiliated Engineers (...) (25 years ago, 24-Mar-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Gay Marriages/Domestic Partnerships and the IRS
|
|
(...) defenitly not! (...) Can't think of any reason why not... (...) That's just wrong. :/ Dan (25 years ago, 24-Mar-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Gay Marriages/Domestic Partnerships and the IRS
|
|
Ed and all, (...) I don't really have much of an opinion per say on this. Do what you want in the bedroom, I don't go in yours, don't go in mine. (...) Should the governmnet have any say in it? I think the federal tax code is a total sham, and it (...) (25 years ago, 24-Mar-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Gay Marriages/Domestic Partnerships and the IRS
|
|
(...) No. At least not from a civil perspective. And it is only a civil perspective that should have standing in the eyes of the law. Marriage is a contract like any other Unless the parties CHOOSE to bring a third party in (the church) it has (...) (25 years ago, 24-Mar-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Gay Marriages/Domestic Partnerships and the IRS
|
|
(...) Heck no! (Then again, neither should the government, either.) (...) Absolutely! (IMHO) (...) Is there any way you could contract him to do any work for you, for some sort of salary or rate, whereby he could technically be self-employed and pay (...) (25 years ago, 24-Mar-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Gay Marriages/Domestic Partnerships and the IRS
|
|
I'd like to hear your opinions on gay marriage/Domestic Partnerships. In America, where we have freedom of religion, should the church have any say in what constitutes a marriage? Should those in gay marriages/domestic partnerships be allowed the (...) (25 years ago, 24-Mar-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: What is Scott saying now? Was: (Re: Wench as a word)
|
|
(...) Larry, I read them. While interesting reading, they suffer from everything that Scott has accused me of: name calling, lack of evidence, etc. The Mastery of the Big Lie was interesting in that it is an idea developed by Roger Ailes for the (...) (25 years ago, 23-Mar-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: An idea set ...
|
|
[ FUT lugnet.general ] Gary: (...) I would definitely go for mixed colours. (...) Not a bad choice. For a different building challenge take <set:6580> minus the two tail fins (and two more pieces to reach 100). I can say many evil things about that (...) (25 years ago, 23-Mar-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, lugnet.general)
|
| |
| | Re: What is Scott saying now? Was: (Re: Wench as a word)
|
|
(...) They're in this thread tree somewhere but I'll repeat them. (URL) shows a general view of agenda-ism... (nice coinage James) (URL) shows what poltroons the Clintonistas are. (URL) shows the mastery of the Big Lie. ++Lar (25 years ago, 23-Mar-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: What is Scott saying now? Was: (Re: Wench as a word)
|
|
(...) Larry, The only links you gave in the "Wench" discussion were for the "Nazi" law and the campus orientation. I read the Godwin? Law re: the longer the thread the probablity of Nazi/Hilter =1. The campus orientation article didn't bother me (...) (25 years ago, 23-Mar-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: What is Scott saying now? Was: (Re: Wench as a word)
|
|
Larry, (...) Wel, I am honored, but I am hardly a poster child of the Christian RIght. I get into it too much with my pastor's wife for that! :) Scott S. P.S. Rudy did do some wrong things, from what I read (The juvenille record is pretty stupid), (...) (25 years ago, 23-Mar-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
