 | | Re: Family values?
|
|
(...) It's kind of like being convicted of manslaughter and given 18 in prison, and upon being found not guilty, still having to serve the term. The woman is not punished for fraud. The real father does not carry the burden of his actions. AND the (...) (24 years ago, 3-Jan-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Family values?
|
|
(...) At the same time, though, what if the alleged father has biological children of his own, and the financial burden of providing for someone else's child has an adverse impact on the man's own children? You refer to these men as "these fathers," (...) (24 years ago, 3-Jan-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | OT for OT - give blood!
|
|
Well, this is OT for .debate, but no other place to put it... GIVE BLOOD! Better yet, sign up for the Marrow program - (URL) your chance to save a life. -- | Tom Stangl, Technical Support Netscape Communications Corp | Please do not associate my (...) (24 years ago, 3-Jan-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Family values?
|
|
Note the one father did NOT want to disconnect from the child, he simply wanted the biological father to rightly shoulder the financial burden. That being said, I DO agree with something else in the article - if the "fathers" DO get out of support, (...) (24 years ago, 3-Jan-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Family values?
|
|
(...) Or blood boiling because these fathers find it so easy to suddenly detach themselves from children they've thought of as their own for years with little regard for their emotional and financial well-being? Maggie C. (...) (24 years ago, 3-Jan-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Family values?
|
|
Blood boiling because the "fathers" rightly think they owe nothing, or that the courts still force them to pay? (...) -- | Tom Stangl, Technical Support Netscape Communications Corp | Please do not associate my personal views with my employer (24 years ago, 3-Jan-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Family values?
|
|
Here's one that's sure to get the blood boiling. Any thoughts? (URL) Dave! (24 years ago, 3-Jan-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Uhh, back to tax again ;-) (Was Re: Is space property?)
|
|
(...) I agree that I am sort-of legally _not_ entitled to those portions of my personal property. There are some problems in the US with whether the income tax is actually legal, but I suppose that's an issue for an other time. My claims that (...) (24 years ago, 3-Jan-01, 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 :-)
|
|
(...) My mistake. I misunderstood your position. Out of interest, how could the police be funded outside the TAX system? Would one have to have insurance to ensure , say, ones own murderer is tracked down? Would one also have to have insurance to (...) (24 years ago, 3-Jan-01, 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 :-)
|
|
(...) Oh, all of those things should be privatized...oh wait, that's not the conversation we're having... Well, defense and foreign policy pretty clearly fall under "The assurance that our global neighbors are behaving" above and police and courts I (...) (24 years ago, 3-Jan-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Uhh, back to tax again ;-) (Was Re: Is space property?)
|
|
Christopher Weeks wrote in message ... (...) unfair, (...) You're right. I have made two mistakes in my argument: one was to invoke the ambiguous concept of "fairness", the other one was to rigidly stick to the dictionary definition of "stealing" (...) (24 years ago, 3-Jan-01, 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 :-)
|
|
<zapped> (...) <zapped> But what about police, "defence", courts, and some sort of governmental foreign policy office? Scott A (24 years ago, 3-Jan-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Is space property?
|
|
<picking kernel bits out of my teeth>Golly!</picking> (...) I don't see how this paragraph supports the idea that "fair" isn't an even distribution. I mean, I basically agree with what you're saying, but I don't see the connection to defining what (...) (24 years ago, 2-Jan-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Is space property?
|
|
(...) Bwaaaahahhahahahaha! I can't believe I did that! *Last* century. Last. d'oh, LFB (Now if only I could stop writing "19" on my cheques...) (24 years ago, 2-Jan-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Is space property?
|
|
(...) 8^) I make it a habit only to be burgled by people who accept Visa. I might be unknowingly straddling two issues here; I'm comparing taxation with burglary in terms of the "taxation is theft" principle I've read, but perhaps that's not (...) (24 years ago, 2-Jan-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Is space property?
|
|
Warning: Long, long rant by the resident imperial historian follows. Grab a donut (or an ear of corn, if you're a Middle American like myself). ;) (...) It doesn't. The lifestyle we enjoy in the US, UK, Europe (as a whole), Japan, Oceania, Canada, (...) (24 years ago, 2-Jan-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: No "year zero", but if there was, we STILL just started new millenia!
|
|
(...) If that's the case, my computer that reads 2001 is wrong. If there was no year 1, then how is there a year 2001? Any numbering system for years starts at an arbitrary date - you are correct that there wasn't a year 1 in the sense that the (...) (24 years ago, 2-Jan-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Is space property?
|
|
(...) Hi Dave, I get your point, but... The payment of taxes is (normally considered) a proper and right thing. So it feels different (even to me) than being burgled. (How often do you write a check to your burgler?) And, I do know that the (...) (24 years ago, 2-Jan-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: there ain't no such thing as "year zero"...
|
|
(*Sound of dead horse being savagely beaten*) That's all right, it deserves it. Keeps our minds off of more important but far more depressing matters [1]. (...) I'm in full agreement with Franklin, but my evidence is in the term "Anno Domini" (...) (24 years ago, 2-Jan-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: there ain't no such thing as "year zero"...
|
|
(...) You're missing my point. There wasn't a year 1 AD either. There is a year which we now call 1 AD. My point is that the relevance of when the bleep the calendar started is about zero. Therefore I find more relevance in the last digits turning (...) (24 years ago, 2-Jan-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
