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 / *8321 (-20)
  Re: It IS about Taxation
 
(...) Yes it can be so argued... (and yes, it's a bit plowed but worth reexamination) A few points to consider: - While the constitution speaks of coinage, it does not reserve coinage as a (federal OR state) government monopoly. - Coinage (...) (24 years ago, 22-Dec-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Arguing about nature, Nature, and ethics
 
In my last post, news:G5xxB1.3tv@lugnet.com..., I wrote the following: (...) This is also the bridge connecting parents to their children - another aspect of "social relationships". Why do parents raise their children rather than the state? Or, why (...) (24 years ago, 22-Dec-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Problems with Christianity
 
(...) Exactly. Which is one thing I'm looking for. Supportable flaws in my reasoning using reasoning, not emotion. I don't care if it's from a Christian or not. My initial post served a few functions. A. To test whether or not the Christian debate (...) (24 years ago, 22-Dec-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Change? Somewhat verbose...
 
(...) Same hear. I know that I have left some folk's questions unanswered specifically directed at me and I apologize for not responding but lack of time is the reason. Ideally, I would like to get F2F with some of y'all over a beer and have at (...) (24 years ago, 22-Dec-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: It IS about Taxation
 
(...) Can it not be argued that by participating in the monetary system deployed by a government (in accordance, in the US, with the Constitution) a tax is simply a "service charge" for using goverment property (money)? That is, if you don't want to (...) (24 years ago, 22-Dec-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: It IS about Taxation ;-) (Was Re: (Sub|Ob)jectivity and related case studies on .debate (...or is it just about taxation :-)
 
Larry handled the first step well, but I do have a couple questions. (...) Hi Paul, In reverse order: Why refer to the Old Testament? And substituting words, you ask "Why does organization-x need permission to steal from you?" In any instance of (...) (24 years ago, 22-Dec-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Uselessness of ".debate" between Scott and Larry
 
(...) This brings back a memory of a movie which I forget the title but it involves a family relocating across the country and all the mis-adventures of the move and the new house, and then I think they wound up moving back. In any case, in this (...) (24 years ago, 22-Dec-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Nature of man (was Re: Problems with Christianity)
 
(...) Not to mention Zeppo and Gummo. Dave! (24 years ago, 22-Dec-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Nature of man (was Re: Problems with Christianity)
 
Finally. Something I can contribute. (I have extracted only the relevant sentences.) The SI prefix femto with symbol f is ten to the minus fifteen. To be on the cutting edge of small, there is the atto with symbol a (10^-18), zepto with symbol z (...) (24 years ago, 22-Dec-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Problems with Christianity
 
In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Frank Filz writes: <snip> (...) Note the distinction Frank is making... he is asserting that the *debate* is worthless. Not that christianity, in and of itself, is worthless, per se. If something cannot be proven or (...) (24 years ago, 22-Dec-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: It IS about Taxation ;-) (Was Re: (Sub|Ob)jectivity and related case studies on .debate (...or is it just about taxation :-)
 
In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Paul Baulch writes: Yes, this *is* old ground. It's a fundamental difference in premise about what the proper form of society is, actually. (...) This is the root of the question indeed. The conventional answer is that (...) (24 years ago, 22-Dec-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Uselessness of ".debate" between Scott and Larry
 
(...) No, I think they should remain public. But for the next fourteen days, any snide comment (as judged by at least four of we who have posted >100 notes to .debate) should be assessed a fine of $10 paid to LUGNET. Chris :-) (24 years ago, 22-Dec-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Debate's current problem (was Re: Uselessness of .debate)
 
(...) I read your other post, and you made some groovy assertions. I suppose I'm as guilty of "point-scoring" as anyone else, but I wasn't consciously doing it to amass points. Sometimes it seems to me simply polite to address each point in turn, (...) (24 years ago, 22-Dec-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, lugnet.admin.general)
 
  Re: Problems with Christianity
 
David Eaton wrote: <...snip interesting set of propositions...> (...) This is closest to the general Unitarian Universalist Christian theology (I say "general" because UU theology doesn't require a single answer). However there are some possible (...) (24 years ago, 22-Dec-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  It IS about Taxation ;-) (Was Re: (Sub|Ob)jectivity and related case studies on .debate (...or is it just about taxation :-)
 
(...) [...] (...) whose (...) education (...) heads (...) don't (...) Apologies if I'm plowing old ground here, I spent a while looking for the original source of this discussion but couldn't find it (possibly due to the fact that I'm using an NNTP (...) (24 years ago, 21-Dec-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: (Sub|Ob)jectivity and related case studies on .debate (...or is it just about taxation :-)
 
<topped> (...) <tailed> I think you have a good point Paul. However, I think there is also value in replying point by point as one can quickly see where the main arguments lie. I enjoy ready through long, well reasoned, text - but without printing (...) (24 years ago, 22-Dec-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: (Sub|Ob)jectivity and related case studies on .debate (...or is it just about taxation :-)
 
(...) If one were subject to theft, one normally calls the police or involves the civil courts. If one objects to taxation, one protests against it. (...) I think calling it "theft" detracts from you argument. However, it is not all that big a deal (...) (24 years ago, 22-Dec-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Uselessness of ".debate" between Scott and Larry
 
(...) Thirded "The partisan, when he is engaged in a dispute, cares nothing about the rights of the question, but is anxious only to convince his hearers of his own assertions." Scott A (24 years ago, 22-Dec-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Uselessness of ".debate" between Scott and Larry
 
(...) For the record, I made my mind up to leave Larry alone a while ago - unless he made a snide comment directed at me. I'm sticking to it the best I can. Scott A (...) (24 years ago, 22-Dec-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Uselessness of .debate
 
(...) Sure, you gave an answer. It is not reasoned though. Despite that, I do see a contradiction in your response - not a big one. I'd still be interested in Chris's reply. (...) It was my reply to the question _you_ quoted. Did you even read my (...) (24 years ago, 22-Dec-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