 | | Re: Swift was Right! (He just named the wrong people...) —Pedro Silva
|
| | | (...) I don't have a chip in my brain telling me I must stop. Ergo, I run my life. Then again, and very conveniently, I don't have a problem with the concepts of Law nor Law making: my perception is that the society I'm part of writes a code of (...) (21 years ago, 16-Jun-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| | | |
| | | | | Re: Swift was Right! (He just named the wrong people...) —Richard Marchetti
|
| | | | (...) I guess when it gets to the details, there's the rub: "socially acceptable." There's a lot of stuff that gets wrap up with that that itself has nothing to do with whether one obeys the laws or not. In the U.S., it used to be thought that one (...) (21 years ago, 17-Jun-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| | | | |
| | | | | | Re: Swift was Right! (He just named the wrong people...) —Pedro Silva
|
| | | | (...) Could you clarify what "common law" is? Especially if it is a deliberately vague concept or not. (...) Well, it could be the case that the government is actually regulating with the intent of saving your money. They can argue that you'll (...) (21 years ago, 17-Jun-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| | | | |
| | | | | | Re: Swift was Right! (He just named the wrong people...) —Richard Marchetti
|
| | | | | (...) The term is perhaps a little "overloaded" with history, but in a criminal law context it basically means laws against theft, rape, and murder (and all of the usual lesser versions of those kinds of crimes). (...) True, but that has nothing to (...) (21 years ago, 17-Jun-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| | | | | |
| | | | | | | Re: Swift was Right! (He just named the wrong people...) —Richard Marchetti
|
| | | | | | | Just adding in this reference for new(er)comers to debate (yup, it's me referencing me, again): Re: Legal Education? (was: real conspiracies?) (URL) -- Hop-Frog (21 years ago, 17-Jun-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | Re: Swift was Right! (He just named the wrong people...) —Pedro Silva
|
| | | | | | | (...) I see. Well... Taking on Larry's sentence some while ago, if all rights are property rights, can't you reduce common law to law against theft, and then extend it to all conflicts of interests where one party gets harmed? (I'm not saying it is (...) (21 years ago, 17-Jun-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | Re: Swift was Right! (He just named the wrong people...) —John Neal
|
| | | | | | | (...) Assuming that you don't infringe on other's rights (as I gather from your last comment). (...) Do you assert the right to have society pay to put you back together again, humpty dumpty? Just wondering. JOHN (...) (21 years ago, 17-Jun-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | Re: Swift was Right! (He just named the wrong people...) —Richard Marchetti
|
| | | | | | | | (...) For what we are paying for government, yes. In a more perfect world, no. Reality v. Wishful Thinking. -- Hop-Frog (21 years ago, 17-Jun-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | Re: Swift was Right! (He just named the wrong people...) —Bruce Schlickbernd
|
| | | | | | | (...) Just sign here that you waive all rights to any public health aid, and agree to reimburse the state for scrapping your remains off the road. Of course, this also points out the "parental government role" you complain about. :-) (...) As long (...) (21 years ago, 17-Jun-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | Re: Swift was Right! (He just named the wrong people...) —Richard Marchetti
|
| | | | | | | | (...) Probably because "'An it harm none, do what thou will" is too pagan for y'all. Besides, the former is part of French jurisprudence. -- Hop-Frog (21 years ago, 17-Jun-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | Re: Swift was Right! (He just named the wrong people...) —Mike Petrucelli
|
| | | | | | | | | (...) OK, I have to ask because I really don't get this reply at all: (URL) do you apply that principle to the issue of Abortion. Obviously my opinion is that the freedom of choice is whether or not to have sex and that abortion is a euphemism for (...) (21 years ago, 17-Jun-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | Re: Swift was Right! (He just named the wrong people...) —Richard Marchetti
|
| | | | | | | | | | (...) I'm okay with idea of abortion as the killing of a living thing, but not as murder. Murder can be defined as "the unlawful killing of another person." I deny that a foetus is a person with rights under the law. The foetus is not independent, (...) (21 years ago, 17-Jun-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | Re: Swift was Right! (He just named the wrong people...) —Mike Petrucelli
|
| | | | | | | | | | (...) Interesting, personally I figure after the first month when the cell mass has a discernable heartbeat and human form it should be protected as a baby. (...) It was regarding gun ownership and freedom going hand in hand. It was along the lines (...) (21 years ago, 17-Jun-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | Re: Swift was Right! (He just named the wrong people...) —Bruce Schlickbernd
|
| | | | | | | | (...) Here I am a closet animist and you think I don't know the source of that quote and you think that it is too pagan for me? :-) In any case, it's not the harm, but the immediate impending action that will cause harm that is so specific one can't (...) (21 years ago, 17-Jun-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | Re: Swift was Right! (He just named the wrong people...) —Thomas Stangl
|
| | | | | | (...) That would be all fine and good if we had laws that forced you to take responsibility. Our justice system seems to do the opposite. Even if you didn't sue after cracking your head open, your family might. And they'd probably sue everyone in (...) (21 years ago, 18-Jun-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | Re: Swift was Right! (He just named the wrong people...) —Frank Filz
|
| | | | | | (...) I'm inclined to say "at least until proper laws are put in place to keep anyone at all from suing over your injuries" should be replaced with "at least until proper laws are put in place to appropriately distribute liability" Why? Well, by (...) (21 years ago, 18-Jun-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | Re: Swift was Right! (He just named the wrong people...) —Richard Marchetti
|
| | | | | | This is a kind of digression, I think...this thread seems to be going all over the place. =) (...) Which provides support for the idea of socialized medicine, because if the health services needed to recover from an injury are free they cannot be (...) (21 years ago, 19-Jun-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| | | | | | |
| | | | | | Re: Swift was Right! (He just named the wrong people...) —Richard Marchetti
|
| | | | (...) More on defining the term "common law," see: (URL) Hours of reading would result from following the various links. Probably worth it too! -- Hop-Frog (21 years ago, 20-Jun-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| | | | |
| | | | | | Re: Swift was Right! (He just named the wrong people...) —Pedro Silva
|
| | | | (...) A very interesting link - thank you, Richard. I shall use it for future reference. After some really superficial reading, I can now at least pretend to know why the term "common law" is so... uncommon to me: according to one of the earlier (...) (21 years ago, 20-Jun-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| | | | |
