|
|
 | | Heads Up, Non-Atheists
|
| (URL) are not to be trusted... Dave! (19 years ago, 23-Mar-06, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
| | | | | The Ultimate Discussion (was: Re: A Berkeley Study That Portrays Liberalism Positively?!!)
|
| (...) Now, now, settle down, Dave! I'm pretty sure that the word "ultimate" pre-existed some apocryphal, presidential playbook and no association with OFL whatsoever was intended. (...) Let's see. (...) See? You got it on the first try! :-) (...) (...) (19 years ago, 23-Mar-06, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
| | | | | Re: A Berkeley Study That Portrays Liberalism Positively?!!
|
| (...) All that "ultimate punishment" talk is, alas, straight from the George W. Bush buzzword lexicon. In typical Dubya fashion, it enables him to sound tough without actually taking a definitive stand. Since I know you to be a person of conviction (...) (19 years ago, 23-Mar-06, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
| | | | | Re: A Berkeley Study That Portrays Liberalism Positively?!!
|
| (...) Okay, Tom, let me take a stab at justifying a position such as this one. A pro-life stance would hold that a human life above all is sacred. So, the ultimate crime would be the taking of an innocent life. Therefore, the ultimate punishment (...) (19 years ago, 23-Mar-06, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
| | | | | Re: A Berkeley Study That Portrays Liberalism Positively?!!
|
| Honest question - which is more ridiculous? 1 - pro-life and pro-death-penalty 2 - pro-choice and anti-death-penalty I don't know, but I see far too many conservatives that fit #1, which makes little sense. And of course I see a decent amount of (...) (19 years ago, 22-Mar-06, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
|
