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 / 11595
    Re: More LP S P A M : (was Re: Scary Survey results about the US First Amendment) —Duane Hess
   (...) Court order? (URL) Yes contraceptives are effective, just not 100% effective. If you (...) (23 years ago, 11-Jul-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
   
        Re: More LP S P A M : (was Re: Scary Survey results about the US First Amendment) —Dave Schuler
     (...) heh. Vasectomy and castration (chemical or otherwise) are generally quite effective, as is tubal ligation or hysterectomy. In addition, homosexual intercourse traditionally has a low occurrence of pregnancy. Dave! (23 years ago, 11-Jul-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
   
        Around we go again... —Larry Pieniazek
   (...) 'Dissenting Judge Ann Bradley said the sentence violated the "basic human right" to have children.' Wasn't aware of such a right. Who's got her email address, maybe she could present her reasons for that viewpoint here and settle (1) a (...) (23 years ago, 11-Jul-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
   
        Re: Around we go again... —Scott Arthur
   (...) I am, if we share an understanding of what "basic" means. Even if we do not, there is this : Universal Declaration of Human Rights - Article 16. (I expect Duane will contest both. ;/) However, the paranoid in me tells me that this is the (...) (23 years ago, 11-Jul-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
   
        Re: Around we go again... —Duane Hess
     (...) For the benifit of other readers: (URL) 16. (1) Men and women of full age, without any limitation due to race, nationality or religion, have the right to marry and to found a family. They are entitled to equal rights as to marriage, during (...) (23 years ago, 11-Jul-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
    
         Re: Around we go again... —Scott Arthur
     (...) When one read this again it looks rather quaint: "have the right to marry and to found a family". Although I am sure/hope it is not intended today, but it implies that marriage should come before having children. Scott A (...) (23 years ago, 11-Jul-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
    
         Re: Around we go again... —Duane Hess
     (...) I had typed out a whole paragraph arguing exactly that point, but thought it was vague enough that I let it be. Besides, I didn't want to prove your statement about me above to be true. :-) (...) -Duane (...) (23 years ago, 11-Jul-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
   
        Re: Around we go again... —Scott Arthur
    (...) Well? Is there a contrary view? Scott A (23 years ago, 12-Jul-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 

©2005 LUGNET. All rights reserved. - hosted by steinbruch.info GbR