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 / *8406 (-20)
  Happy holidays (was: Uselessness of .debate)
 
(...) Uh oh. Now I need more info. Uh, basically, Newton was born on the 25th of December in 1642 and when I was deeply extropian in the early 90s, people on the list were celebrating Newtonmass instead of Xmas. It stuck with me. I just found this (...) (24 years ago, 25-Dec-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, lugnet.off-topic.fun)
 
  Re: Uselessness of .debate
 
(...) the 24th is our big day, lesser activity today. That's because that's when the holidays fall on the calendar (similar to Washington's birthday being on a monday, but not really)... on the 21st I was still on the road. It's also because we have (...) (24 years ago, 25-Dec-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, lugnet.admin.general)
 
  Re: Uselessness of .debate
 
(...) I agree, but on the other hand, calling today the solstice is incorrect. Why not celibrate the solstice on the 21st? Out of curiosity, Larry, do you celibrate the WS today, or on 21 December? Why not Newtonmass? Chris (24 years ago, 25-Dec-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, lugnet.admin.general)
 
  Re: Uselessness of .debate
 
(...) Indeed. Pardon me for neglecting those who stand on their heads on a regular basis... (funny, I didn't see any signs of that when I was in Oz earlier this year, but perhaps it was because I was standing on my head myself!) I'd say throw a (...) (24 years ago, 25-Dec-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Uselessness of .debate
 
(...) Well, I'm writing this on December 25th in a hotel room before we go spend the day with family and I don't take what Larry said as a snipe on Christianity. The celebration of the Winter Solstice predates the celebration of Christmas by a good (...) (24 years ago, 25-Dec-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, lugnet.admin.general)
 
  Re: It IS about Taxation ;-) (Was Re: (Sub|Ob)jectivity and related case studies on .debate (...or is it just about taxation :-)
 
(...) I'm not sure what manner yout think I mean. I don't think you are the guy holding the gun, if that's what you mean. That would be too messy. Instead, you pay someone else to hold the gun on your fellows while their resources are collected. (...) (24 years ago, 24-Dec-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Uselessness of .debate
 
(...) ...and a happy Summer Solstice to those in the Southern Hemisphere. pete.w (24 years ago, 24-Dec-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: What Would It Take? (was:Re: Problems with Christianity)
 
(...) There's merit in that argument. Certainly we are "part of the universe" since we reside in it, observe it, are affected by it, and effect things within it. The problem is that "creation" carries a connotation of it being an act of volition. (...) (24 years ago, 24-Dec-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Uselessness of .debate
 
(...) You are 100% correct. That is why Jehovah’s Witness still do not celebrate it. Scott A (...) (24 years ago, 24-Dec-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Uselessness of .debate
 
(...) Why is it a snipe to call this "holiday season" Winter Solstice festival? Are you so arrogant as to believe that ONLY Christians own the celebrations this time of year? Hanukah, Kwanza (double a?), Winter Solstice, and MANY other celebrations (...) (24 years ago, 24-Dec-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: What Would It Take? (was:Re: Problems with Christianity)
 
(...) I think science/society seeks to understand "creation". I don't think being united with creation is really a global aim. That said, could it not be argued that we are part of creation? Scott A (24 years ago, 24-Dec-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: What Would It Take? (was:Re: Problems with Christianity)
 
(...) Do we? What makes you think this? (...) Skepticism is GOOD. However, I don't think cynicism is good ;-) -- | Tom Stangl, Technical Support Netscape Communications Corp | Please do not associate my personal views with my employer (24 years ago, 24-Dec-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Uselessness of .debate
 
(...) Another day. Another contradictorily ironic post from Larry. Another conceitedly snide remark from Larry. What will tomorrow bring? Christmas!! (...) I really am trying: (URL) A (...) (24 years ago, 24-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 :-)
 
(...) I do not "take" anything from my fellow man in the manner you mean. I have no problem paying tax within the UK/EU system... as long as it is managed democratically. I vote for governments who tax and spend in the way I find acceptable... I am (...) (24 years ago, 24-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 :-)
 
(...) Would it be your claim that it is impossible for the government to steal from a citizen? (...) I have not. (...) Nowhere to go. (...) Pressured with the threat of death is not just a little pressure. So yes. I am saying that anytime someone (...) (24 years ago, 24-Dec-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Uselessness of .debate
 
(...) What Larry said. Just that the two of you opt to keep .debate around. Chris (24 years ago, 24-Dec-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, lugnet.admin.general)
 
  Re: It IS about Taxation ;-) (Was Re: (Sub|Ob)jectivity and related case studies on .debate (...or is it just about taxation :-)
 
(...) Yes, I agree, taxation of those who consent to be taxed is not theft. Where we differ is on how one gives consent and how one goes about withholding it. Stick with my example here... (...) So in a country of millions of people, as long as one (...) (24 years ago, 24-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 :-)
 
Christopher Weeks wrote in message ... (...) Aren't they a good example of law coming from a higher power than government? (...) given (...) That is an entirely inappropriate substitution - I'm not asking why the government needs permission to (...) (24 years ago, 24-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 Pieniazek wrote in message ... (...) And a fine answer it is too. It follows that consenting to be governed by a government which demands tax is giving permission to be taxed by that government - ergo, taxation is not theft. (...) governed? (...) (24 years ago, 23-Dec-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Problems with Christianity
 
(...) I think Todd would be smart enough to figure out that somebody changed the newsgroup in the reply thread and that I simply didn't realize it. So yes, he'd probably find that funny - I mean, the laugh's on me! Which is something you didn't seem (...) (24 years ago, 24-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