 | | Re: Rights to free goods? (was Re: What happened? —Frank Filz
|
| | | (...) No. (...) Yes and no. (...) No. There is no right to charity. A charity may feel a moral obligation to help, but that moral obligation is something between them and their benefactors. A charity will set conditions under which it provides goods (...) (25 years ago, 30-Jun-99, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| | | |
| | | | | Re: Rights to free goods? (was Re: What happened? —John DiRienzo
|
| | | | Frank Filz wrote in message <377A8667.334E@minds...ng.com>... (...) need. (...) No, he did not say that. Its funny how people who like to take other people's property also like to take other people's words and misuse them. (...) Frank is catching on (...) (25 years ago, 2-Jul-99, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| | | | |
| | | | | | Re: Rights to free goods? (was Re: What happened? —Frank Filz
|
| | | | John DiRienzo wrote in message ... (...) Are you commenting on my words or Ed's here? (...) My "yes and no" was that in one sense, charity is the giving of goods without expecting something in return (shorthand "free goods"), but it is also a "no" (...) (25 years ago, 3-Jul-99, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| | | | |
