|
| | Re: Family values?
|
| (...) Granted, but i'd be suprised if anything is ever solved in debate. Personally, I prow around here because I enjoy a gentlemanly clash of arms and because I think that it's fundamentally important to speak up about certain things. For instance, (...) (24 years ago, 4-Jan-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
| | | | Re: Presidential Succession?
|
| (...) If the Pres-Elect dies the VP-Elect becomes the Pres-Elect. US Constitution, Article XX, Section 3. It is not clear to me what happens if the VP-Elect dies before inauguration. The same Article XX might apply; if so, Congress would decide the (...) (24 years ago, 4-Jan-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
| | | | Re: Family values?
|
| (...) Actually Bill, I agree with you to a greater extent than you might imagine. Which is why I made the flippant (hence the "no, really", meaning, "seriously") statement in the first place. I agree wholeheartedly that "intimacy should be shared by (...) (24 years ago, 4-Jan-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
| | | | Re: Family values?
|
| (...) The fact that you suggest the self-evidence of marriage indicates that you and I have two fundamentally divergent worldviews. That's fine, of course, but we need to recognize that certain issues are therefore insoluble between us, and this may (...) (24 years ago, 4-Jan-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
| | | | Re: Family values?
|
| "Steve Thomas" <steve_thomas_2000_n...tmail.com> wrote in message news:G6nK8M.5ny@lugnet.com... (...) for (...) daughter (...) I'll add that if the consequence and the initial action are teleologically related (as are sex and procreation), then the (...) (24 years ago, 4-Jan-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
| |