 | | Re: Lets keep politics out of Lego
|
|
1. 1st I had to state my arguments - you refused to answer them. 2. Then you asked me to raise one point at a time - you refused to answer it. 3. Now I have to raise a single point at a time, and start a new thread for each. You _really_ are (...) (24 years ago, 27-Nov-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Abortion, consistent with the LP stance? (Re: From Harry Browne
|
|
(...) Not sure I understand the question-- are you asking me why I would still make it a crime to drive a vehicle under the influence of drugs? Because if you are, then you are more obtuse than I thought. -John (24 years ago, 27-Nov-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Lets keep politics out of Lego
|
|
(...) Every catholic - perhaps. Scott A (...) (24 years ago, 27-Nov-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Lets keep politics out of Lego
|
|
(...) I (mostly) disagree. Of course part of my agreement is that in a way you are right, very few arguments are ever "won". But this group can and has been the catalyst for changes in opinion. I have certainly changed my opinions (and you can go (...) (24 years ago, 27-Nov-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Parental strategies? (was: Re: Abortion, consistent with the LP stance? (Re: From Harry Browne)
|
|
(...) Uh, we don't know that... (...) And you do? Please enlighten, but first please cite your source of this understanding. (...) I think he's shown how to get your kid to call you by your first name, that's about all. (...) Uh, we don't know (...) (24 years ago, 27-Nov-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Lets keep politics out of Lego
|
|
(...) According to my understanding of Catholic doctrine yes, or effectively yes. If a Catholic wishes to refute this, I'd welcome a response. My understanding of Catholicism includes the following points: 1. The pope is the leader of the Catholic (...) (24 years ago, 27-Nov-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Lets keep politics out of Lego
|
|
(...) Web interface doesn't support it so I have to manually ignore... :-) Dunno what Scott's reasoning is. (...) This is an excellent summation. He won't do research, I won't do it for him, he won't stop sniping, and I will not answer every snipe. (...) (24 years ago, 27-Nov-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: From Harry Browne
|
|
(...) By which I you mean, I imagine, a dictionary that agrees with your definition. Fair enough, but I think you haven't found such a dictionary yet. Even that "not screwed up" dictionary identifies the verb form of "to blame" as: 2 a : to hold (...) (24 years ago, 27-Nov-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Lets keep politics out of Lego
|
|
(...) It way well be obvious to you. But many economists accept that there is no reason to think that the market will always work. From what I read of Larry's friend, Hayek, on Friday I know he was one of them. I understand Larry has an (...) (24 years ago, 27-Nov-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: From Harry Browne
|
|
If you look at www.m-w.com for the verb form of "blame", you will find a dictionary that is not screwed up. "John Neal" <johnneal@uswest.net> wrote in message news:3A11ED4A.689B2C...est.net... (...) designation of (...) can be (...) population." (...) (24 years ago, 27-Nov-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
