 | | Re: Santorum Fails In His Effort To Pervert The Constitution —Allister McLaren
|
| | | (...) Well, you seem to have a problem with the term 'marraige' being redefined. The point is that marraige has been redefined many times in the past and has many different definitions today. The point is that marraige is defined by whatever the (...) (20 years ago, 22-Jul-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| | | |
| | | | | Re: Santorum Fails In His Effort To Pervert The Constitution —John Neal
|
| | | | (...) EUREKA! Really, is it that obscure what I'm arguing? (...) I don't know what you mean. Provide examples, if you please. (...) I don't think marriage, until rather recently, has ever been defined as anything other than the union of 1 man and 1 (...) (20 years ago, 22-Jul-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| | | | |
| | | | | | Re: Santorum Fails In His Effort To Pervert The Constitution —Allister McLaren
|
| | | | | (...) No. The obscurity is why you are so fixated on wishing for the permanence of that definition. (...) I understand they use a slightly different definition in Utah. (...) Whether or not you or I like the definition is irrelevant. Things change, (...) (20 years ago, 22-Jul-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| | | | | |
| | | | | | | Re: Santorum Fails In His Effort To Pervert The Constitution —David Laswell
|
| | | | | | | (...) Used. They changed it a while back, but they really only enforce it if you make a big stink about it (in other words, you have to make your crime seem that much more important to enforce than someone else's murder before they're going to come (...) (20 years ago, 22-Jul-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | Re: Santorum Fails In His Effort To Pervert The Constitution —Larry Pieniazek
|
| | | | | | | | (...) Sorry, why should he shut up about it? If it's against the law and the law is worth enforceing, enforce it. If it's not worth enforcing, get rid of the law. The law against polygamy is such a law. Not worth enforcing. (20 years ago, 22-Jul-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | Re: Santorum Fails In His Effort To Pervert The Constitution —David Laswell
|
| | | | | | | | (...) Not getting arrested seems like a good start. Also, breaking the law as a means of trying to have it repealed tends to turn people against you on the grounds that you're one of "those" criminals instead of "us" law-abiding citizens). Protest (...) (20 years ago, 22-Jul-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | Re: Santorum Fails In His Effort To Pervert The Constitution —Larry Pieniazek
|
| | | | | | | | (...) So, "don't ask, don't tell"? "Ya I smoked pot but I didn't inhale"? That sort of thing? Is that the moral creed you espouse? Further, was Rosa Parks right or wrong? How do you feel about civil disobedience as an instrument of change? How about (...) (20 years ago, 23-Jul-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | Re: Santorum Fails In His Effort To Pervert The Constitution —David Laswell
|
| | | | | | | | (...) No, I just think it's brainlessly stupid to walk around crowing about how you're committing some crime. There's a difference between being willing to be arrested and actively campaigning for it. (...) From what she's said, she was just tired. (...) (20 years ago, 23-Jul-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | Re: Santorum Fails In His Effort To Pervert The Constitution —Thomas Stangl
|
| | | | | | | Ah, see, but John wants to lock the entire world into {his} version of morality for eternity, and the rest of us can just go to hell if we don't like it. Attitudes like John's truly sicken me. (...) -- Tom Stangl *(URL) Visual FAQ home *(URL) Visual (...) (20 years ago, 22-Jul-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | Re: Santorum Fails In His Effort To Pervert The Constitution —John Neal
|
| | | | | | | | (...) Uh, I never said that. (...) Uh, I never said that. (...) A straw man if I ever saw one. If my attitudes sicken you, at least be sickened by the ones to which I actually adhere. JOHN (20 years ago, 22-Jul-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | Re: Santorum Fails In His Effort To Pervert The Constitution —Thomas Stangl
|
| | | | | | | | You've never said it in those exact words, and you have several times tried to profess that you're an open-minded person, but just about every post you make in this group is tight-a@@ed Moral Majority pap where everything is fine as long as it goes (...) (20 years ago, 22-Jul-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | Re: Santorum Fails In His Effort To Pervert The Constitution —John Neal
|
| | | | | | | | (...) Thank you. (...) I believe I am. (...) No, no, Tom. The MM would have a hard time with my beliefs-- I am hardly a schill for them! Merely because I am a Christian does not mean for a NY minute that I agree, especially politically with other (...) (20 years ago, 22-Jul-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | Re: Santorum Fails In His Effort To Pervert The Constitution —Dave Schuler
|
| | | | | | | | (...) Shame on you for following Dubya's lead. It is a mistake to pretend, because you have not made a statement using a specific phrase, that you therefore have not made an equivalent statement using other words. Dubya does this all the time: "If (...) (20 years ago, 22-Jul-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | Re: Santorum Fails In His Effort To Pervert The Constitution —John Neal
|
| | | | | | (...) And in California and Massachusetts, but it's still illegal. (...) Change comes when the majority decide it should change, not a tiny minority. JOHN (20 years ago, 22-Jul-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | Re: Santorum Fails In His Effort To Pervert The Constitution —Dave Schuler
|
| | | | | | | (...) Let's see--by this logic, 5 therefore people count as the majority in a pool of some 100+ million voters. Hmm... Dave! (20 years ago, 22-Jul-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | Re: Santorum Fails In His Effort To Pervert The Constitution —David Laswell
|
| | | | | | | (...) That's only true because the state law supercedes the local law. California also ruled that it's legal to prescribe medicinal marijuana, but it's still a federal offense to do so. (...) Change rarely requires a true majority in the US legal (...) (20 years ago, 22-Jul-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | Re: Santorum Fails In His Effort To Pervert The Constitution —Allister McLaren
|
| | | | | | (...) I thought we were considering the definition of marraige, not the legality or otherwise of that definition. Even so, there is a world outside the USA. Muslim countries all over the world permit polygamy. One woman + one man = marraige isn't a (...) (20 years ago, 23-Jul-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| | | | | | |
| | | | | | Re: Santorum Fails In His Effort To Pervert The Constitution —Christopher L. Weeks
|
| | | | (...) John, we all understand what you're arguing. We just disagree with you. Chris (20 years ago, 22-Jul-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| | | | |
| | | | | | Re: Santorum Fails In His Effort To Pervert The Constitution —John Neal
|
| | | | | (...) (20 years ago, 22-Jul-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| | | | | |
| | | | | | | Re: Santorum Fails In His Effort To Pervert The Constitution —John Neal
|
| | | | | | ????? JOHN (20 years ago, 22-Jul-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | Re: Santorum Fails In His Effort To Pervert The Constitution —Larry Pieniazek
|
| | | | | | (...) Write Frank, Tim, Todd or myself if you need a cancel. Else, what are you talking about? (20 years ago, 22-Jul-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| | | | | | |
| | | | | | Re: Santorum Fails In His Effort To Pervert The Constitution —John Neal
|
| | | | | (...) Good. I guess I didn't catch the irony in his statement (with no winky to guide me:-) JOHN (20 years ago, 22-Jul-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| | | | | |
| | | | | | Re: Santorum Fails In His Effort To Pervert The Constitution —Larry Pieniazek
|
| | | | (...) You know what, in my crazier moments I'd be happy to leave the definition of "marriage" to whatever non governmental sanctioning bodies wanted to sanction it, and they can define it however they like. As part of that leaving I'd then go (...) (20 years ago, 22-Jul-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| | | | |
| | | | | | Re: Santorum Fails In His Effort To Pervert The Constitution —David Koudys
|
| | | | (...) <snip> (...) I agree with everything Larry stated. Oh if wished made it so... I think Larry should change his name to Dave and become part of the Davish 5 Though there is a Larry David in teh world--mayhaps Larry's middle name is Dave... Dave (...) (20 years ago, 22-Jul-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| | | | |
