Debate : 25190


Off-Topic / Debate / 25190

Re: Preaching to the Choir —John Neal

(...) Well, I doubt I'm in the choir to which you are referring in your subject line; you probably have me in mind when speaking about the "small conservative fringe on the right" (BTW, what does that mean, exactly?). So let me tell you about my (...) (20 years ago, 8-Aug-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)

Re: Preaching to the Choir —Larry Pieniazek

(...) The good word I've always tried to share is that of freedom. Free minds, free markets. The problem is that neither "side"(1) gets it. The Right (that's you, John, and your ilk) wants to take away my personal *rights*. They are busily impinging (...) (20 years ago, 8-Aug-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)

Re: Preaching to the Choir —Chris Phillips

(...) Good point, Lar. American politics is not a one-dimensional field, and I did not intend to belittle the parties/movements/ideologies that do not fit neatly into nice little red & blue boxes. As for your head-in-the-sand approach, well, best of (...) (20 years ago, 8-Aug-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)

Re: Preaching to the Choir —Larry Pieniazek

(...) It's not that I am doing nothing. I think Bush is going to lose(1), when all is said and done. It's just that the other alternative doesn't excite me much. 1 - if he keeps saying things like this, maybe people will realise he IS saying the (...) (20 years ago, 8-Aug-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: Preaching to the Choir —Bruce Schlickbernd

(...) Mispoke? I'd call it a Freudian slip. :-) -->Bruce<-- (20 years ago, 8-Aug-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: Preaching to the Choir —Chris Phillips

(...) Well I hope you're right that he's going to lose. I would have hoped to see some movement in the polls (for whatever they're worth) but I suppose the real test will be when the fur starts flying at the debates. (...) not even news anymore when (...) (20 years ago, 8-Aug-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: Preaching to the Choir —Ross Crawford

(...) Meanwhile, our political race is neck and neck (so say the "polls") and our election is due to be announced Any Time Now. I really can't get excited about either major party here either. Of course voting is compulsory here. I could vote (...) (20 years ago, 8-Aug-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: Preaching to the Choir —David Laswell

(...) I'd love to see a return to the tradition of Scandinavian Moots, where before each meeting of the governing body, they had to recite every law from memory. Can't remember them all? Just don't feel like repeating them all before you can move on (...) (20 years ago, 8-Aug-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)

Re: Preaching to the Choir —Scott Arthur

(...) Me Me Me. Typical libertarian! I have never said or implied that I want to "tax and regulate till there's nothing left". I do believe that society has a responsibility to provide basic services such as healthcare and education. Does that make (...) (20 years ago, 9-Aug-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)

Re: Preaching to the Choir —Bruce Schlickbernd

(...) Yes. You make it sound like a bad thing. :-) I'm not sure that society has any such "responsiblity", I just think it makes for a better society. (...) "Ask not what your country can do for you; ask what you can do for your country." And just (...) (20 years ago, 9-Aug-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)

Re: Preaching to the Choir —John Neal

(...) IANAEM, butt you are correct;-) JOHN (20 years ago, 9-Aug-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)

Re: Preaching to the Choir —Bruce Schlickbernd

(...) (Getting out red pencil) Incorrect! Wrong pun! Your reply was half-assed (correct pun for a semi-colon). -->Bruce<-- (20 years ago, 9-Aug-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)

Re: Preaching to the Choir —John Neal

(...) That pun, however, doesn't serve as a conjunction, so cut the crap and stopping being so anal. I made some good ones and you wrecked'em. JOHN (20 years ago, 9-Aug-04, to lugnet.off-topic.pun, FTX)

Re: Preaching to the Choir —Larry Pieniazek

(...) That makes no sense whatever. My wife and I have a difference of opinion about the importance of voting for Kerry, and about how much different Kerry is than the incumbent but choosing to vote one way rather than the other doesn't make it "me (...) (20 years ago, 9-Aug-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)

Re: Preaching to the Choir —Dave Schuler

(...) Just for clarity, could we have a solid definition of "Libertarian" here, leaving a minimum of wiggle room? My impression is that the Libertarian tent admits as many variants as does the Democratic or Republican tent. What's the clear (...) (20 years ago, 9-Aug-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)

Re: Preaching to the Choir —Christopher L. Weeks

(...) Why is income tax better than either of: a wealth tax or setting a common earnings per hour rate across the nation and acting as a public work clearinghouse? Chris (20 years ago, 9-Aug-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)

Re: Preaching to the Choir —Dave Schuler

(...) I need to plead ignorance and ask for clarification: By "wealth tax" do you mean a tax on acquisitions/already-held holdings separate from income? And does "common earnings per hour rate" mean that everyone would get the same hourly wage (...) (20 years ago, 9-Aug-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)

Re: Preaching to the Choir —Christopher L. Weeks

(...) Oh, I was just making the terms up, for all I know. I guess I should have explicated. (...) Yes. I see it as a sure-fire loop-hole avoidance scheme. If all property is taxed, regardless of who owns it, then the rich -- even when trying to (...) (20 years ago, 9-Aug-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)

Re: Preaching to the Choir —Larry Pieniazek

(...) But wouldn't that play havoc with comparative advantage? One hour of Bill Gates's time is worth more than one hour of Paul Krugman's time and forcing them to be the same seems to miss any information the market can transmit to improve (...) (20 years ago, 9-Aug-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)

Re: Preaching to the Choir —Dave Schuler

(...) In principle I think this would work for me, as long as we can set up a guarantee against certain individuals legally declaring themselves the tax-free stewards (rather than tax-liable owners) of a multi-billion dollar estate, or something (...) (20 years ago, 9-Aug-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)

Re: Preaching to the Choir —Christopher L. Weeks

(...) That's how I meant it all along. Sorry for being unclear. You don't have to have people as stewards, though that might foster a philosophic advantage for society, so long as what's taxed is the wealth, regardless of who owns it. For the rest (...) (20 years ago, 9-Aug-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)

Re: Preaching to the Choir —Bruce Schlickbernd

(...) Communism. Essentially denies supply and demand. Interesting idea but it didn't seem to work, at least at some levels. (...) "Workhours" unless you are still in the dark ages. :-) -->Bruce<-- (20 years ago, 9-Aug-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)

Re: Preaching to the Choir —Christopher L. Weeks

(...) To the best of my knowledge -- limited as it is, no system of equitable socialism has been tried on this planet for 500 years since the peak of Hopi civilization. All of the modern communisims that I have read about (and talked to (...) (20 years ago, 10-Aug-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)

Re: Preaching to the Choir —Bruce Schlickbernd

(...) The "some animals are more equal than others" perversion. But that still is minor in relation to trying to enforce a taxi driver and brain surgeon making the same amount (and of course, with tips, the taxt driver won out over years of (...) (20 years ago, 10-Aug-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)

Re: Preaching to the Choir —Christopher L. Weeks

(...) This is a fairly typically cited flaw with communism. It presumes some stuff that don't jibe with my observations of the real world and I'd be interested to see how you explain them. (Perhaps as annecdotes that don't mean anything, but if so, (...) (20 years ago, 11-Aug-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)

Re: Preaching to the Choir —John Neal

(...) Well, Chris, that's life. Life is unfair. And no amount of social engineering is going to change that. The best we can do is assist our fellow men and they us, and together we will muddle through life the best we can. But what I don't (...) (20 years ago, 9-Aug-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)

Re: Preaching to the Choir —Scott Arthur

(...) ...and the cute animal and children's charities win every time. (URL) An example>. Scott A (...) (20 years ago, 10-Aug-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)

Re: Preaching to the Choir —John Neal

(...) Not every time. But the alternative is for me to give $100 for charity to a government, and the government takes $93 of it to sustain its own bureaucracy and $7 gets to the people who will benefit from it. Not very efficient. JOHN (20 years ago, 11-Aug-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)

Re: Preaching to the Choir —Scott Arthur

(...) It is if there is no other way to get help to those who need it. Scott A PS Is there really so much bureaucracy in the USA? Bush has a lot to answer for. ;) PSS I'm sure I've heard of chartities with just as much bureaucracy? (...) (20 years ago, 11-Aug-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)

Re: Preaching to the Choir —Christopher L. Weeks

(...) Sure, but the obvious counter to that is that with charities, you can research them and only give to the ones that aren't so bloated. Chris (20 years ago, 11-Aug-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)

Re: Preaching to the Choir —John Neal

(...) But there is. (...) Yes, there is, and I agree! (...) Yes. Ever heard of (URL) the United Way>? There are good charities and bad ones, like everything else. JOHN (20 years ago, 11-Aug-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)

Re: Preaching to the Choir —Dave Schuler

(...) And of that $93, $47 goes to big-corporate welfare, $45 goes to big-corporate military (and of that $45, $44 goes to the Friends-Of-Cheney corporate group), and $1 maintains the bureaucracy. Dave! (20 years ago, 11-Aug-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)

Re: Preaching to the Choir —Larry Pieniazek

(...) If ONLY we could get a 1:7 ratio between bureaucracy and benefits delivered, I'd put up with the siphoning. But it's hardly ever that good. Sometimes it's 1:7 the other way. Which was the point J was making with his silly made up numbers. Once (...) (20 years ago, 11-Aug-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)

Re: Preaching to the Choir —Dave Schuler

(...) Sure, but that's not the entirety of what I've outlined. My example is still a 93:7 ratio of government machinery:benefits delivered. (...) What happens when Badnarik gets in(1)? Will all taxes be wiped away with a stroke of his pen? Obviously (...) (20 years ago, 11-Aug-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)

Life is unfair (was Re: Preaching to the Choir) —Richard Parsons

(...) Mmmmmm. Nary a truer word spoken, or written, or whatever. But that life is unfair is not the nub of it. The issue is 'am I fair?' Am I one who promotes fairness or unfairness? Do I, by action or inaction, seek to reduce the unfairness of life (...) (20 years ago, 11-Aug-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: Preaching to the Choir —Larry Pieniazek

(...) Seriously? Have you read "The Road to Serfdom"? I'm just curious. (...) OK, can I run a thought experiment here for a sec? Suppose I'm a brain surgeon and a darn good one. Save lots of lives every day I go in to work. But one day I decide my (...) (20 years ago, 9-Aug-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)

Re: Preaching to the Choir —Christopher L. Weeks

(...) I haven't. If I was going to take the time to read this or Machinery of Freedom (which I've meant to read forever) which would you suggest? (...) But of course! (...) Digging holes (useful ones, that is) is perfectly honorable work and should (...) (20 years ago, 10-Aug-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)

Re: Preaching to the Choir —Larry Pieniazek

(...) Do you want a more thorough and scholarly treatment of one particular aspect of this overall question (how best to organize societies), or a broader but less thorough treatment of many aspects? Road to Serfdom focuses on fewer aspects. (...) (20 years ago, 10-Aug-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)

Re: Preaching to the Choir —Dave Schuler

(...) This sounds to me like a strong statement in support of Chris' thesis that one person's workhour is not inherently worth more than another's. If my brain is working just fine (let's say that it is), and the brains of my friends and family (...) (20 years ago, 10-Aug-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)

Re: Preaching to the Choir —Larry Pieniazek

(...) But suppose you're not? What I'm driving at here is that it is difficult to take worth as stated by the person doing the task... and that further, some activities are indeed worth less. It rather seems to me that even in Chris's scheme he's (...) (20 years ago, 10-Aug-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)

Re: Preaching to the Choir —Dave Schuler

(...) In a market-ruled society the same would be true of any essential task that no one wanted to perform. (...) Knowing your preference for "outcome" versus "intent," I would speculate that the years of training are, in the end, irrelevant to your (...) (20 years ago, 10-Aug-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)

Re: Preaching to the Choir —Larry Pieniazek

(...) Sure, sure... that's the free rider problem. The pat answer solution is to figure out how to price the task into the costs borne by those to whom it is essential. (note: government is the most common, but not only, mechanism for doing that (...) (20 years ago, 10-Aug-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)

Re: Preaching to the Choir —Scott Arthur

(...) …and I predict that in 20 years time the technology will be obligatory as it will be used for road pricing! Scott A PS Ubiquitous perhaps. I doubt GPS will ever be a "necessity" as long has humans still drive; I don't even normally carry a map (...) (20 years ago, 11-Aug-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)

Re: Preaching to the Choir —Christopher L. Weeks

I actually agree with an awful lot of what Larry says in this thread. But not all of it. And I think he's misread me in a couple of places. I'm not talking about eliminating market mechanisms from the determination of what work can be rewarded. Only (...) (20 years ago, 11-Aug-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)

Re: Preaching to the Choir —Larry Pieniazek

(...) Well, I tend to remember "shirtsleeves to shirtsleeves in 3 generations" and "a fool and his money are soon parted" and not worry about that. That's a pat answer but ... (...) So there's a unit of currency and it's a manhour, then? All else (...) (20 years ago, 11-Aug-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)

Re: Preaching to the Choir —Christopher L. Weeks

(...) You can give gifts of your time. You can not institute and exchange that values your time more highly than another's. Chris (20 years ago, 11-Aug-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)

Re: Preaching to the Choir —Larry Pieniazek

(...) OK. So if I know that it takes the average hole digging person an hour to dig a hole of a certain size, and that's an accepted market value, can I charge 50 minutes to dig it instead of an hour (giving a discount or a gift if you like)? Is (...) (20 years ago, 11-Aug-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)

Re: Preaching to the Choir —Christopher L. Weeks

(...) There isn't exactly an accepted market value. I'm thinking about this. (...) My first reaction is yes, yes, no. But maybe it really does need to be no, yes, no or it falls apart due to a breach in internal consistency. (...) I think people do (...) (20 years ago, 11-Aug-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)

Re: Preaching to the Choir —Frank Filz

"Christopher Weeks" <clweeks@eclipse.net> wrote in message news:I2AH9I.13p2@lugnet.com... (...) not (...) of (...) Tercells (...) Lexus (...) almost (...) never (...) or (...) enough for (...) should (...) to pay (...) a (...) hour (...) Hmm, how (...) (20 years ago, 11-Aug-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: Preaching to the Choir —Christopher L. Weeks

(...) I guess your main point is that _some_ services will have greater demand than supply and the free market provides a method of allocation. Off hand (though I'll continue to think about this) I would leave it to the individual suppliers to (...) (20 years ago, 11-Aug-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: Preaching to the Choir —Frank Filz

"Christopher Weeks" <clweeks@eclipse.net> wrote in message news:I2ALon.22wt@lugnet.com... (...) needs a (...) some (...) hour." (...) wants (...) True, that's a lot of it, but not all. He wants to hire the most efficient excavator, because he knows (...) (20 years ago, 11-Aug-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: Preaching to the Choir —Christopher L. Weeks

(...) But, standing around flailing with a shovel _is_ useful, otherwise he wouldn't want it done. And in any case, it takes just as much time out of that person's life to perform those diggerly theatrics as it takes for a real excavator to dig for (...) (20 years ago, 11-Aug-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: Preaching to the Choir —Scott Arthur

(...) I agree. Even if "the rich" rent their home, the owner will pass on the tax cost. Taxing the relative value of property also allows more for local markets than a nationwide income tax. Scott A (20 years ago, 9-Aug-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)

Re: Preaching to the Choir —John Neal

In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Dave Schuler wrote: (snip) (...) (snip) Off topic, but since proposed legislation is being introduced, I'm wondering how all of the usual suspects here view a consumption tax for the US, as proposed (URL) HERE> No more (...) (20 years ago, 9-Aug-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)

Fair Tax (was: Preaching to the Choir) —Christopher L. Weeks

(...) I read the thumbnail but stopped there. Are services taxed? What about people taking their cash out of the country to spend it? Wouldn't the wealthy merely sock all their extra cash into "used" real estate and further enslave renters? just (...) (20 years ago, 9-Aug-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)

Re: Preaching to the Choir —Scott Arthur

(...) Lighten up. I was making a joke around the common (mis?)conception that libertarians tend to be a tad selfish. I'm not accusing you specifically of anything. But if the shoe fits... (...) It is a small point on which I did not expect a reply. (...) (20 years ago, 9-Aug-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)

Re: Preaching to the Choir —Chris Phillips

(...) Anyone who has read my LUGNET posts has seen countless occasions where I have retracted my own statements and/or evolved my opinion about one topic or another. And unlike George Bush, I try to never make a statement without backing it up with (...) (20 years ago, 8-Aug-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)

Re: Preaching to the Choir —John Neal

In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Chris Phillips wrote: (snip) (...) This only indicates that you hadn't considered all of the ramifications of a particular issue. Most of the issues I argue I have examined to the Nth degree; my only hope here is to (...) (20 years ago, 8-Aug-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)

Re: Preaching to the Choir —Ross Crawford

(...) I bet the cave men once said that about community law too. Never is a LONG time. ROSCO (20 years ago, 9-Aug-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)

Re: Preaching to the Choir —Chris Phillips

(...) ...Or that I maintain an open mind, even when I am already fairly convinced of my viewpoint. Are you so arrogant that you believe it is possible for a human being to achieve total, certain understanding of these issues? (...) Listen to (...) (20 years ago, 9-Aug-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)

Re: Preaching to the Choir —John Neal

(...) You make it sound as if there is something wrong with coming to a conclusion about anything. Is it so hard to accept that I can consider a POV and finally reject it? It is as if your definition of "close-minded" is anyone who doesn't see the (...) (20 years ago, 9-Aug-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)

Re: Preaching to the Choir —Chris Phillips

(...) We may have to. My definition of close-minded is to be so entrenched in your own point of view that you do not consider the possibility that any other point of view could have merit. Your endless circuitous logic, well demonstrated in this (...) (20 years ago, 9-Aug-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)

Re: Preaching to the Choir —John Neal

(...) Okay, I accept that definition and gladly state that in a lot of areas, I am close-minded. Here is one example: on the topic of adultery, I am close-minded and reject that behavior. Do you have a problem with that? (...) More generalities. You (...) (20 years ago, 9-Aug-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)

Re: Preaching to the Choir —Dave Schuler

(...) One aspect of open-mindedness that should perhaps be cleared up is the fact that an open mind need not admit all possibilities. An open mind refrains generally from speaking in non-verifiable absolutes (in the knowledge that nothing can be (...) (20 years ago, 9-Aug-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)

Re: Preaching to the Choir —Chris Phillips

(...) This is hardly new ground, but alright, here are the specific cites: From George Bush's State of the Union Address, January 28, 2003: Lie #1: "The United Nations concluded in 1999 that Saddam Hussein had biological weapons sufficient to (...) (20 years ago, 10-Aug-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)

Re: Preaching to the Choir —John Neal

(...) (snip) (...) What's wrong with that? In theory he was correct. (...) So did he lie, or did he present a feasible worst-case scenario? (...) Again, in theory it could have been the case. We are talking about WMDs here. Would you want your (...) (20 years ago, 11-Aug-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)

Re: Preaching to the Choir —Chris Phillips

(...) Theory is not fact. To extrapolate the worst possible scenario from a report and then state that "the UN has concluded ..." is a lie. (...) Bush is terrorizing the American public to further his personal political agenda. Sounds like (...) (20 years ago, 11-Aug-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)

Re: Preaching to the Choir —Christopher L. Weeks

(...) What I wouldn't pay to be watching the news when that happened... Chris (20 years ago, 11-Aug-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)

Re: Preaching to the Choir —Chris Phillips

(...) Where did he go? I guess John's brain must have self-destructed when faced with the undeniable truth. So what I want to know now is, if nobody can step up to the plate and defend Bush, who exactly are all these people who answer polls stating (...) (20 years ago, 15-Aug-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: Preaching to the Choir —Scott Arthur

(...) Perhaps it is like onanism; a lot of people do it, but very few admit to it in public. ;) Scott A (...) (20 years ago, 16-Aug-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: Preaching to the Choir —Dave Schuler

(...) Except that a vote for onanism is unlikely to start any more wars. Dave! (20 years ago, 17-Aug-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: Preaching to the Choir —Don Heyse

(...) Well, since you used me as example last week, I suppose I should confirm that yes, I'm still planning to vote for Bush. However, I'm not going to defend my choice here. Others far more articulate than I are doing a much better job of that (...) (20 years ago, 16-Aug-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: Preaching to the Choir —Scott Arthur

(...) You have (URL) already>: "...so I can't really put into words why he's got my vote so far. Probably it's the war thing. I'd rather see someone decisive than a panderer as president right now." Being “decisive” is only good if one is making the (...) (20 years ago, 16-Aug-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)

Re: Preaching to the Choir —Bruce Schlickbernd

(...) This isn't aimed at you, Don, but if anyone has an answer as to where these "articulate" voices are, let me know because I have a question: The latest "I've approved this commercial" from Dubya is the "in 1970 there were 40 democracies" and (...) (20 years ago, 16-Aug-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: Preaching to the Choir —Scott Arthur

(...) Afghana-where? (...) Perish the thought! (...) …not to mention Bush’s support for non-democratic nations such as Uzbekistan. (...) It also illustrates why I'm glad we essentially don't have "political ads" in the UK. We restrict our parties to (...) (20 years ago, 16-Aug-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)

Re: Preaching to the Choir —Chris Phillips

(...) Don, thanks for responding! As I mentioned before, I really didn't intend to single you out. I have found that very few Bush supporters are willing to discuss their reasons for supporting the man, though most are quite willing to attack John (...) (20 years ago, 16-Aug-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: Preaching to the Choir —Bruce Schlickbernd

(...) I think we'll have to let the arguments settle to the bottom and accumulate a bit before we sift through your sediments. We don't want to precipitate anything new at this point. -->Bruce<-- Miner in Geology (written as intended) :-) (20 years ago, 9-Aug-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)

Re: Preaching to the Choir —John Neal

(...) Thank you for acknowledging one of my favorite malapropisms:-) (...) You rock! JOHN (20 years ago, 9-Aug-04, to lugnet.off-topic.pun, FTX)

Re: Preaching to the Choir —Christopher L. Weeks

(...) Pardon? I recall alternative definitions being presented to you here. What exactly do you mean by "nobody will?" I also recall reading explanations to you of why such redefinition would be a "good thing" and you merely dismissed them. Can you (...) (20 years ago, 9-Aug-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)

Re: Preaching to the Choir —David Eaton

(...) Well... If presently: "marriage is defined as the union of one consenting adult male and one consenting adult female" And proposed: "marriage is defined as the union of two consenting adults" (Assuming they're human, US citizens [is that (...) (20 years ago, 10-Aug-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: Preaching to the Choir —David Laswell

(...) No, marriage is often used as a way to avoid deportation, which would be a non-issue if only citizens could get married. I don't believe either party has to be a citizen/national, so that a Canadian and a Mexican could meet up in Vegas on (...) (20 years ago, 11-Aug-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: Preaching to the Choir —Christopher L. Weeks

(...) I'm wondering how commonly held this view is. It doesn't strike me as true but I don't have any specific information with which to refute it. I guess there was a big study based on a survey in which sixty-some percent of married men admitted (...) (20 years ago, 11-Aug-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: Preaching to the Choir —Larry Pieniazek

(...) Or wishful thinking about it turned into inflated claims of actuality? People DO brag... (sorry, couldn't resist) (...) (20 years ago, 11-Aug-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: Preaching to the Choir —Christopher L. Weeks

(...) No, that's a perfectly valid concern to bear in mind. All routes for corrupt data should be considered even if only to recognize the potential flaws when the study is published. Chris (20 years ago, 11-Aug-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: Preaching to the Choir —Frank Filz

"Christopher Weeks" <clweeks@eclipse.net> wrote in message news:I2AHnn.17AB@lugnet.com... (...) true but (...) there (...) men (...) even on (...) Well, one could still argue it promotes monogamy, even if not very successfully. Frank (20 years ago, 11-Aug-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: Preaching to the Choir —Christopher L. Weeks

(...) Sure, but the root point was that it helps society somehow. I wonder. And, people in other parts of the world actually do support female genital mutilation for the same reasons...and more convincingly, I think. Chris (20 years ago, 11-Aug-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: Preaching to the Choir —John Neal

(...) Can I assume that the main knock on defining marriage as the union of 1 woman 1 man is that it discriminates (against gays). But doesn't your proposed definition discriminate against polyspousewanters? Why is your discriminating definition any (...) (20 years ago, 11-Aug-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)

Re: Preaching to the Choir —Ross Crawford

(...) The right? I don't think children have any such right. (...) That may possibly be so, but I have seen no evidence to support it. (...) I for one would like to see your evidence to back up that claim. I'm not saying I disagree with you, I (...) (20 years ago, 11-Aug-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)

Re: Preaching to the Choir —John Neal

(...) "Deserve" a better word? What rights would you ascribe to children? (...) I'm not even sure by what criteria one could use to support or reject such a claim. I go by this: men and women are very different by nature; vastly more different than (...) (20 years ago, 11-Aug-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)

Re: Preaching to the Choir —Ross Crawford

(...) Yes, maybe deserve is better, although I really don't really know if that is right either. I'll have to think about that some more. (...) Well I would say that many men are very feminine and many women are very masculine, so specifying 1 man (...) (20 years ago, 11-Aug-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)

Re: Preaching to the Choir —David Koudys

(...) I can't believe this conversation is staying on a 'well gee, wouldn't it be nice if...' level. In todays age, where there are pregnant teens, single moms, and 80 year old males getting married to 30 year old women and having kids, and all of (...) (20 years ago, 11-Aug-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: Preaching to the Choir —Larry Pieniazek

(...) I can't believe that the originalral thread (about who to vote for and getting involved in politics in an effective way) seems to have spun off into some of the standard old directions. (the gay marriage direction, the "socialism works/no it (...) (20 years ago, 11-Aug-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: Preaching to the Choir —David Koudys

(...) ;) I will concur that the possibility of a bad parent exists if he or she's been married numerous times. Who knows how good a parent Larry King is, for example. That said, unless there are specific documented instances against a person, he or (...) (20 years ago, 11-Aug-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: Preaching to the Choir —Ross Crawford

(...) Yeah me too. Well I spose all the IMPORTANT stuff is already packed. And I do still have 16 hours till the plane leaves.... (20 years ago, 12-Aug-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: Preaching to the Choir —Chris Phillips

(...) Actually, you do not digress here, Lar. The original point with which I started this thread was that o-t.d had become a quagmire where meaninful debate gets dragged down into the muck by the same old circular logic. The fact that this has (...) (20 years ago, 12-Aug-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: Preaching to the Choir —Christopher L. Weeks

(...) I'd start by correllating success in life as measured by the normal societal values: level of education, income, marital stability, etc. as well as psychological problems (including substance abuse, depression, etc), medical problems, (...) (20 years ago, 11-Aug-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: Preaching to the Choir —Ross Crawford

(...) OK, 40 hours on planes gives one a little time to mull things over, so here's my take on this. I think parents/guardians have the responsibility to bring up their children the best they can. Many fall way short, but many also do a pretty good (...) (20 years ago, 21-Aug-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)

Re: Preaching to the Choir —John Neal

(...) Hear is the $64,000 question for me: All things being equal, is it more desirable for a child to have both a mother and a father to raise them, and if so, why? I happen to believe it is better, though articulating that belief is difficult to (...) (20 years ago, 21-Aug-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)

Re: Preaching to the Choir —Ross Crawford

(...) Well that's a different question, and I gave my (also difficult to logically justify) view (URL) elsewhere>. Do you believe every child deserves a mother and father? ROSCO (20 years ago, 21-Aug-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)

Re: Preaching to the Choir —Dave Schuler

(...) Although you disclaim honestly that your position is difficult to justify logically, your subsequent statement is still argument by assertion. Let me ask for a little clarification: What do you mean by "all things being equal" in this context? (...) (20 years ago, 23-Aug-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)

Re: Preaching to the Choir —Terry Prosper

(...) I think that either combinations are evenly good if the parents are loving and caring. Their sex/color/origin/color of hair/toothpaste they use is irrelevant and not important IMO. I'll grant you that diversity is better, but since we are all (...) (20 years ago, 24-Aug-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)

Re: Preaching to the Choir —Dave Schuler

(...) One issue at a time, John! If would-be polyandrists wish to marry in groups, let them plead their case. At present the issue pertains to two-party contracts. In any case, I have yet to hear a convincing argument as to why multi-party marriages (...) (20 years ago, 11-Aug-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)

Re: Preaching to the Choir —David Eaton

(...) That's sorta irrelevant-- As I stated elsewhere, yes, I'm all for allowing polygamy, etc (provided some probably some other changes), and all for letting consenting aliens get married if we find any, but that's not the point. The proposed (...) (20 years ago, 11-Aug-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)

Re: Preaching to the Choir —Christopher L. Weeks

(...) Maybe you mean only as a result of 911, but if not, you both seem to have an odd stance here. My second amendment liberties have been eroded by both sides of the spectrum. Each side has an agenda and neither of them are my freedom. Chris (20 years ago, 9-Aug-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)

Re: Preaching to the Choir —Dave Schuler

(...) Hey, you're missing the big picture. You're certainly free to marry one person of the opposite sex, free to own a registered firearm that meets certain specifications (as long as you also meet certain specifications), free to speak English as (...) (20 years ago, 9-Aug-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)

Re: Preaching to the Choir —Larry Pieniazek

(...) Exactly the point I was making upthread as to why I reject both sides and plan to (probably) vote Libertarian. Kerry voted for the Patriot Act, after all, if I am not mistaken, and has no plans to repudiate it, or the War on Drugs or any of (...) (20 years ago, 9-Aug-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)

Re: Preaching to the Choir —Dave Schuler

(...) Well, nobody's perfect. Me, I'd vote for the candidate who'll deliver a half gallon of premium ice cream to my door each morning. Lacking that candidate I can either vote for her as a write-in, or I can vote for the candidate who gets closest (...) (20 years ago, 9-Aug-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)

Re: Preaching to the Choir —Larry Pieniazek

(...) Escape the situation if possible, or enumerate the differences if escape wasn't possible, with the proviso that I was being coerced into doing so, and you didn't have the sanction of the victim to do that to me... (...) No. I think the claim (...) (20 years ago, 9-Aug-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)

Re: Preaching to the Choir —Scott Arthur

(...) Iraq, Saudi Arabia and possibly Israel may well be major foreign policy challenges over the next 4-8 years. Who do you trust most to deal with them without involving corporate handouts and religious ideology? Scott A (20 years ago, 10-Aug-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)

Re: Preaching to the Choir —Christopher L. Weeks

(...) I don't think there's any reason to expect members of either party to deal with them in without those kinds of baggage. Why do you? Chris (20 years ago, 11-Aug-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)