Subject:
|
Around we go again...
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.off-topic.debate
|
Date:
|
Wed, 11 Jul 2001 15:38:41 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
808 times
|
| |
|
|
In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Duane Hess writes:
> Court order?
>
> http://news.excite.com/news/r/010711/08/odd-children-dc
From the article:
'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 previous debate!
1 - hahaha, like any debate here ever settles. It just goes dormant.
++Lar
|
|
Message has 1 Reply:
 | | Re: Around we go again...
|
| (...) 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)
|
Message is in Reply To:
189 Messages in This Thread:
(Inline display suppressed due to large size. Click Dots below to view.)
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
This Message and its Replies on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
