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 / *7231 (-20)
  Re: What am I missing here?
 
(...) All right, what's the deal? Lar made a general call for forbearance on The Abortion Debate (a good call, since no one is going to be swayed one way or the other) and there have subsequently been more posts than before Lar's request. Even I, (...) (24 years ago, 13-Nov-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: From Harry Browne
 
Maggie Cambron wrote: Thank you Maggie..:-) (...) (24 years ago, 13-Nov-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: From Harry Browne
 
Thanks James, You kinda scare me when you start off with the word Simple... none of this has seemed simple yet, and if it's so simple to someone else, I question whether they have given it enough thought. However, thats a pretty good point that I (...) (24 years ago, 13-Nov-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: What am I missing here?
 
(...) You are right, but I was the one laughing again at that times of history...:-) Selçuk (24 years ago, 13-Nov-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: From Harry Browne
 
(...) There are some interesting things to explore here. I agree that a "viability" test is certainly part of the rights based calculus which should be used to evaluate these things. One way to examine the issue is that the unborn baby only has the (...) (24 years ago, 13-Nov-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Abortion, consistent with the LP stance? (Re: From Harry Browne
 
(...) How about thinking about how many child do you want for your entire life, and just compare it with the number of times you supposed to make sex with your partner..:-) Selçuk (24 years ago, 13-Nov-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: From Harry Browne
 
(...) That should be self-evident, and if it is not, then no amount of rational discourse will aid your understanding. (...) My "wisecrack," as you call it, was an appropriately glib response to the original glib post. Dave! (24 years ago, 13-Nov-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Spot Pole - Is Gore Just a Bad Loser?
 
(...) Not quite yet no. Actually I think Bush is out of bounds at the moment in going to court to seek an injunction to stop the manual recounts. I think he would be better off picking 4 predominantly Republican county's in Florida and asking for a (...) (24 years ago, 13-Nov-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Abortion, consistent with the LP stance? (Re: From Harry Browne
 
(...) So, knowing that there is no 100% sure method other than vastectomy (sp?) or its equivalent for women, then either lay down on operation table, or "if you don't want to have child, do not make sex ever" right? sorry Tim but: Hehehehehehehehe. (...) (24 years ago, 13-Nov-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Rights, Who needs them? (was Re: Abortion...
 
(...) ROFL. This guy came runner-up in the LP man of the century! You using him for justification, is like Lenin using Marx (Not Groucho) to justify communism. You really are a critical thinker Larry, I am in awe. Argue your point with me Larry, be (...) (24 years ago, 13-Nov-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Parental strategies? (was: Re: Abortion, consistent with the LP stance? (Re: From Harry Browne)
 
(...) Six (and three months). (...) Are you asking why he would put it in those words? He wouldn't. Or are you asking where he would get the idea that when dad says "go to your room" he must? If the latter, most children get that idea based on the (...) (24 years ago, 13-Nov-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: From Harry Browne
 
(...) I'll take you up on this one John D. Simple. If the child is born at 16 weeks (4 months), it will NOT be viable. Therefore, I see no problem with it. I think that up until around that point (consider premie babies, they die mostly at under 24 (...) (24 years ago, 13-Nov-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Rights, Who needs them? (was Re: Abortion...
 
(...) Ah. A libertarian economist. Just what is your level of "satisfaction"? (...) If this is so, how can a collective of parents do any better? (...) Hardly objective Larry, you can do better than this. Answer all my points. Scott A (...) (24 years ago, 13-Nov-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Rights, Who needs them? (was Re: Abortion...
 
So you accept all the other points I rasied then? And what about all those you snipped in you last reply to me? You are squirming Larry. Scott A (...) (24 years ago, 13-Nov-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Spot Pole - Is Gore Just a Bad Loser?
 
(...) I like it. I've seen the version you get in the US (BBC World?), and it is pretty poor as it copies the repetitive CNN world service. Because of the way BBC is it just reports the news. It does not really hype up non-news when there is no news (...) (24 years ago, 13-Nov-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Rights, Who needs them? (was Re: Abortion...
 
(...) You're a scholar (who won't say what his PhD is in, which is what I was asking) or so you claim... read some Hayek. (URL) demonstrates to my satisfaction, that no planning board can outplan the market. No planning board can predict needs, (...) (24 years ago, 13-Nov-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Spot Pole - Is Gore Just a Bad Loser?
 
you must be watching BBC (big buncha crap). Vice-Presidents who run for President of the USA and fail don't get a second chance, so if Gore loses he won't be back. But I don't blame him at all for using whatever resources he has available to him to (...) (24 years ago, 13-Nov-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: From Harry Browne
 
Maggie, I don't want to be harsh or insulting, but this basically sounds like what I have been hearing for years from the pro-choice people, and it hasn't put a dent in my way of thinking in all those years. I can empathize with you not wanting (...) (24 years ago, 13-Nov-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Spot Pole - Is Gore Just a Bad Loser?
 
Spot Pole - Is Gore Just a Bad Loser? I can't decide. To a certain extend, I can see his point. But if I were cynical, I would say that he is just going to go on wanting re-counts until he gets the results he wants. Perhaps there really are (...) (24 years ago, 13-Nov-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Abortion, consistent with the LP stance? (Re: From Harry Browne
 
"Christopher Weeks" <clweeks@eclipse.net> wrote in message news:G3x13L.8HB@lugnet.com... (...) father. (...) the (...) to. We (...) decent (...) it (...) right (...) the (...) exist (...) that (...) I wonder if the human rights abuses of women in (...) (24 years ago, 13-Nov-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)


Next Page:  5 more | 10 more | 20 more

Redisplay Messages:  All | Compact

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