 | | Re: Abortion, consistent with the LP stance? (Re: From Harry Browne
|
|
(...) *I* wouldn't know. ;-) Bruce (OOooooo, more cheap shots!) (24 years ago, 13-Nov-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Abortion, consistent with the LP stance? (Re: From Harry Browne
|
|
(...) I find this whole topic to be a big pain in the... never mind. 8^) Dave! (24 years ago, 13-Nov-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Abortion, consistent with the LP stance? (Re: From Harry Browne
|
|
(...) Well, I'd hate to think that you'd circumcise the poor guy again! I'm not sure where I come down on the whole snippage issue; the arguments about hygiene and "healthier in the long run" just don't seem that solid. I suppose it *is* mutilation, (...) (24 years ago, 13-Nov-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Abortion, consistent with the LP stance? (Re: From Harry Browne
|
|
"Bruce Schlickbernd" <corsair@schlickbernd.org> wrote in message news:G3zFwF.BMz@lugnet.com... (...) LOL!! (good thing this wasn't xposted to fun) ;-) -- Tim Courtney - tim@zacktron.com (URL) - Centralized LDraw Resources (URL) - Zacktron Alliance (...) (24 years ago, 13-Nov-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Abortion, consistent with the LP stance? (Re: From Harry Browne
|
|
(...) Reasonable limits have to be set somewhere. One can err by taking "what-if" scenarios too far when considering actions. The idea of killing wounded soldiers just because they *might* become able-bodied seems morally-repugnant. Better to take (...) (24 years ago, 13-Nov-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Abortion, consistent with the LP stance? (Re: From Harry Browne
|
|
(...) It fits in right....ummmmm....no further comment. (...) I must resist....I must resist... I can't resist. Wouldn't it be near the bottom? :-) Bruce (pushing the boundries of good taste) (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:G3zEJ9.74n@lugnet.com... (...) and (...) less (...) sure (...) aren't (...) Yep. (...) Personal and moral reasons. -- Tim Courtney - tim@zacktron.com (URL) - Centralized LDraw Resources (...) (24 years ago, 13-Nov-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Abortion, consistent with the LP stance? (Re: From Harry Browne
|
|
(...) Oh, I thought you meant a way that was sure to avoid conception. The pill and other female-based chemical methods are pretty reliable. The condom is less so, but still pretty good. From there it's down hill. I'm not actually sure where anal (...) (24 years ago, 13-Nov-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Abortion, consistent with the LP stance? (Re: From Harry Browne
|
|
(...) their (...) So what? I assume that most criminals in today's society are unrepentant. (...) needs (...) Well, that is clearly not what I advocated above, so I'm not sure why you're pointing this out to me. They should be employed in the (...) (24 years ago, 13-Nov-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Abortion, consistent with the LP stance? (Re: From Harry Browne
|
|
(...) protecting (...) soldiers, (...) What if you're protecting your homeland and you're sniping wounded soldiers? Those folks are going to get medical attention and come back with guns. And when they do, they're likely to be mad. So why not kill (...) (24 years ago, 13-Nov-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
