 | | Re: For some Lego is a religous experience. (Was: Re: Quantifying and Classifying the LEGO Community) —Stefan Garcia
|
| | | First off, I'm joining in here because I agree with part of Terry's opinion. I'm not speaking for him, I just hate it when this kinda thing happens. I don't know him and am speaking only in regards to this particular topic. Now then... (...) I think (...) (21 years ago, 21-Apr-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| | | |
| | | | | Re: For some Lego is a religous experience. (Was: Re: Quantifying and Classifying the LEGO Community) —Matt Hein
|
| | | | (...) Of course kids need an education or society would be generally uncultured, but I really don't think someone...oh say, ten years in age, should possess the legal right to deny to go to church, or for that fact, any legitimate social situation. (...) (21 years ago, 21-Apr-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| | | | |
| | | | | | Re: For some Lego is a religous experience. (Was: Re: Quantifying and Classifying the LEGO Community) —Larry Pieniazek
|
| | | | | (...) After they've been brainwashed since they first could understand words, you mean, by being forced to attend church up til then? We chose not to do that to our children. They can decide for themselves once they're old enough but for now we are (...) (21 years ago, 21-Apr-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| | | | | |
| | | | | | | Re: For some Lego is a religous experience. (Was: Re: Quantifying and Classifying the LEGO Community) —Terry Prosper
|
| | | | | | | (...) Well, thank you, Lar, in the name of all Québécois, all BL shop owners, etc etc, to not judge them because you don't agree with me. Although this time, I do agree with your moral choice not to force religion onto your children. That was very (...) (21 years ago, 21-Apr-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | Re: For some Lego is a religous experience. (Was: Re: Quantifying and Classifying the LEGO Community) —David Koudys
|
| | | | | | | | In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Terry Prosper writes: <snip> (...) I can take much, I can ignore many things, But Terry, You *are* Canadian. You said you have a Canadian passport. Why? Becaouse You *are* Canadian. Your hatred against anything you don't (...) (21 years ago, 22-Apr-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | Re: For some Lego is a religous experience. (Was: Re: Quantifying and Classifying the LEGO Community) —Terry Prosper
|
| | | | | | | | In lugnet.off-topic.debate, David Koudys writes: I don't hate canadians. I am just not one. I don't have any prejudices against them, I am just not one. I'm not black either. Call me a racist because I say so. If you define identity, I mean the one (...) (21 years ago, 22-Apr-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | Re: For some Lego is a religous experience. (Was: Re: Quantifying and Classifying the LEGO Community) —David Koudys
|
| | | | | | | | (...) Trivia as to Quebec history aside (I bet I know more about Winona history than you do by the simple fact that I live there), the facts haven't been refuted--every single time your little separatist movement starts talking, your, and the ROC, (...) (21 years ago, 22-Apr-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | Re: For some Lego is a religous experience. (Was: Re: Quantifying and Classifying the LEGO Community) —Terry Prosper
|
| | | | | | | | In lugnet.off-topic.debate, David Koudys writes: ROFLMAO!!! You don't know squat about my province, your whole post was a big confused mess. First, we were forced in the Constitution in 1867. I presume your Anglo-Canadian don't tell you these facts (...) (21 years ago, 23-Apr-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | La belle province —Larry Pieniazek
|
| | | | | | | | | In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Terry Prosper writes: <snip> I dunno, Quebec doesn't seem all that oppressed to me, but I only have an outside view. Consider yourself lucky you're "stuck" with a country that would probably at least let you secede (...) (21 years ago, 23-Apr-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | Re: La belle province —Pedro Silva
|
| | | | | | | | | | | (...) I noticed the examples you gave were from nations where democracy was inexistent at the time of the breakup. So I ask: is a democratic nation immune to separatism? I mean, not the sociological phenomena in itself, rather the effective (...) (21 years ago, 23-Apr-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | Re: La belle province —David Koudys
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | (...) <snip> (...) Doesn't Texas every once in a while talk about being 'separate' or is that just a figment of my imagination... Just wondering... Dave K (21 years ago, 23-Apr-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | Re: La belle province —Larry Pieniazek
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | (...) Nope. They're the only (?? (1) ) state that joined by treaty after being an independent republic rather than being an original founder (that ratified the constitution as the means of joining) or a state formed from unorganised territory that (...) (21 years ago, 23-Apr-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | Re: La belle province —David Koudys
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | (...) K, my misremembery--I thought I read somewhere about a decade ago that there were some Texans talking about forming a 'separatist' movement... (...) That is, until, as some Canadians talk about, Canada becomes the 51st state. Is Puerto Rico (...) (21 years ago, 23-Apr-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | Re: La belle province —Larry Pieniazek
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | (...) Whoops! I meant "nope" as in "nope, you're not misremembering", sorry about that. Texans talk about separatism more often than most, for sure. (...) More like 51st through 64th or whatever, one state for each province/territory I would (...) (21 years ago, 23-Apr-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | Re: La belle province —John Riley
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | (...) Puerto Rico occasionally holds referendums to decide whether to remain a territory (technically a commonwealth) or become a state. I found this on the web as an example: (URL) fairly sure PR would benefit greatly from becoming a state. In the (...) (21 years ago, 23-Apr-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | Re: La belle province —Larry Pieniazek
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | (...) Not sure what you mean by immune in this context. Some democratic nations have resisted mightily. The US Civil War was at least partly about separatism. Other democratic nations have not resisted (Czechoslovakia seems to have peacefully (...) (21 years ago, 23-Apr-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | Re: La belle province —Dave Schuler
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | (...) True, but the US was hardly even partly democratic at the time (except on paper)! Dave! (21 years ago, 23-Apr-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | Re: La belle province —Larry Pieniazek
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | (...) Less democratic, yes. Less free (at least in the free states anyway)? Arguable. (Free society == democratic society) == false (21 years ago, 23-Apr-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | Re: La belle province —Dave Schuler
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | (...) Sure the free states were more free, if you were a white male (and a landowner, IIRC). But in terms of restrictive laws, I suppose you're correct. Dave! (21 years ago, 23-Apr-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | Re: La belle province —Dave Schuler
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Dave Schuler writes: Whoops! That's the one I meant to delete. Dave! (21 years ago, 23-Apr-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | Re: La belle province —Dave Schuler
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | (...) Sure the free states were more free, if you were a white male (and a landowner, IIRC). But in terms of personally restrictive laws, I suppose you're correct. Dave! (21 years ago, 23-Apr-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | Re: La belle province —Pedro Silva
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | (...) Well, in a democracy the people get to self-determine already - so one can argue about the use of having two states in similar circumstances taking similar decisions, when this only works to double institutions. The more states there are, the (...) (21 years ago, 23-Apr-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | Re: La belle province —Terry Prosper
|
| | | | | | | | | | (...) No oppressed socially, but politically. Our rights as humans are well respected, if that's what you mean. No problem there. (...) Yep, that's 100% true. We don't consider ourselves as martyrs. We are pretty happy about our situation, even if (...) (21 years ago, 24-Apr-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | Re: La belle province —David Koudys
|
| | | | | | | | | | Where to begin... (...) K, let's start here--Every elected PM in my lifetime (and most PM's before that) came from *one* province--guess which one. Political oppression? Where? (...) You consider yourselves 'speaking for Quebec' and at the same time (...) (21 years ago, 25-Apr-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | Re: La belle province —Larry Pieniazek
|
| | | | | | | | | | (...) Ya, I was wondering about that myself. Why is it that in all the other provinces, signs are in two languages but in (at least in some parts of) Quebec, they're only in one (french). I'm not talking about shop signs and suchlike, I'm talking (...) (21 years ago, 25-Apr-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | Re: La belle province —David Koudys
|
| | | | | | | | | | (...) Actually I've never seen an English road sign in Quebec, but then again, I haven't been looking for one. (...) Like a woman, we're a mystery. (...) It means that, for most, you think a little harder before you hop in a car and drive to (...) (21 years ago, 25-Apr-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | Re: For some Lego is a religous experience. (Was: Re: Quantifying and Classifying the LEGO Community) —David Koudys
|
| | | | | | | | (...) I was hopeing that you'd catch me on the Upper and Lower Canada in 1867--then I could go into why I love Winona's history. So the simple idea that you missed the historical fact that Upper and Lower Canada ceased to exist at the beginning of (...) (21 years ago, 23-Apr-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | Re: For some Lego is a religous experience. (Was: Re: Quantifying and Classifying the LEGO Community) —Matt Hein
|
| | | | | | | (...) Then what would these children do, should they not be forced into church? Hang around at home with a babysitter? Sounds kind of anti-social to me. I wouldn't throw it to brainwashing, since constant preaching 'you will believe' would just (...) (21 years ago, 22-Apr-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | Re: For some Lego is a religous experience. (Was: Re: Quantifying and Classifying the LEGO Community) —Terry Prosper
|
| | | | | | | | | (...) Sports? Playing with friends? Name the social activity you want, it's there for your kids to do during church time for you. (...) Matt, do you really think that if you were born in India form Hinouist parents, you'd be a christian today? Oh, (...) (21 years ago, 22-Apr-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | Re: For some Lego is a religous experience. (Was: Re: Quantifying and Classifying the LEGO Community) —Matt Hein
|
| | | | | | | | | | (...) Dang, you're burning the midnight oil, Terry. (...) POVwise, I think it's a noble prospect to hold belief in such a religion. In fact, I have nothing against hinduists, buddhists or whatever the religion may be, so long as it involves (...) (21 years ago, 22-Apr-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | Re: For some Lego is a religous experience. (Was: Re: Quantifying and Classifying the LEGO Community) —Terry Prosper
|
| | | | | | | | | | (...) I don't care. I just didn't like your first reply. As an atheist, I too often feel that the general attitude of people is to allow people to talk about god, but if someone says God doesn't exist, then he's accused of every sin. It's unfair. We (...) (21 years ago, 23-Apr-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | Re: For some Lego is a religous experience. (Was: Re: Quantifying and Classifying the LEGO Community) —David Koudys
|
| | | | | | | | | | (...) I have no problem whatsoever with *anyone* saying what they believe, except... God is a --how did you put it? Oh right... admonished for bad language. If we can have a confluence of ideas without one being asserted as 'Upper' and others (...) (21 years ago, 23-Apr-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | Re: For some Lego is a religous experience. (Was: Re: Quantifying and Classifying the LEGO Community) —Stefan Garcia
|
| | | | | | | | (...) What is it with you and being social? :^P (...) There is plenty of stuff to prove the bible wrong. They're called fossils and really old rocks. -Stefan- (21 years ago, 23-Apr-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | Re: For some Lego is a religous experience. (Was: Re: Quantifying and Classifying the LEGO Community) —Rick Clark
|
| | | | | | (...) <snip> Have you spoken to other adults who were given that option as children? My understanding is that the problem with this approach is that the child then has no foundation from which to base his decision. I don't have a source, but (...) (21 years ago, 1-May-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | Re: For some Lego is a religous experience. (Was: Re: Quantifying and Classifying the LEGO Community) —Larry Pieniazek
|
| | | | | | (...) I think you'd have a hard time demonstrating that's actually true. After all, the best "brainwashing" is one in which the victim thinks there was no undue influence whatever. (...) I suspect there are no such people anywhere on the earth, (...) (21 years ago, 2-May-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| | | | | | |
| | | | | | Re: For some Lego is a religous experience. (Was: Re: Quantifying and Classifying the LEGO Community) —Stefan Garcia
|
| | | | (...) Why is going to church a legal issue? That's about doing what your parents make you do (Yes, I know about emancipation age and so forth). (...) Glad to see you agree here with having a reason to eschew church. And most people we're talking (...) (21 years ago, 23-Apr-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| | | | |
| | | | | | Re: For some Lego is a religous experience. (Was: Re: Quantifying and Classifying the LEGO Community) —Terry Prosper
|
| | | | (...) Here Stefan, judge by yourself if I was intolerant of simply trying to keep religion out of BL since, IMHO and many others' too, it's not the place for that : (URL) you can read the whole thread and see that many others felt like me, while (...) (21 years ago, 23-Apr-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| | | | |
| | | | | | Re: For some Lego is a religous experience. (Was: Re: Quantifying and Classifying the LEGO Community) —Stefan Garcia
|
| | | | (...) I can see that other's did feel that way, though I suppose that if it was their store, they have the right to do that unless management says otherwise. Just don't give them your business if you feel that way. -Stefan- (21 years ago, 24-Apr-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| | | | |
