To LUGNET HomepageTo LUGNET News HomepageTo LUGNET Guide Homepage
 Help on Searching
 
Post new message to lugnet.off-topic.debateOpen lugnet.off-topic.debate in your NNTP NewsreaderTo LUGNET News Traffic PageSign In (Members)
 Off-Topic / Debate / 2979
  Re: Merry Christmas from the Libertarian Party
 
Underlying assumption of the article given are taken over by me, overstated ridiculousness ignored. (...) How do you expect the economy to cope with an unlimited influx of immigrants? (...) Anyone who doesn't want airplanes to be certified safe and (...) (25 years ago, 26-Dec-99, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Merry Christmas from the Libertarian Party
 
(...) Most of the time, especially when the government messes with the private sector, in the ridiculous ruling against Microsoft. Especially considering the anti-trust laws are from the 1920's or 30's, which has no bearing in the marketplace today. (...) (25 years ago, 27-Dec-99, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Merry Christmas from the Libertarian Party
 
(...) Irrelevant to a court case. The law is the law, and if it is being broken, it must be prosecuted. Not just ignorerd because some politicians feel the law is unjust. How would you feel if the second was effectively repealed in the way you're (...) (25 years ago, 28-Dec-99, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Merry Christmas from the Libertarian Party
 
Jasper, (...) Well, considering the law in this case is something crafted against monopolies, which IMHO, Microsoft did not do. When you lower prices on items, and produce a product, instead of raising prices, it is bad law. I think this whole case (...) (25 years ago, 28-Dec-99, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Merry Christmas from the Libertarian Party
 
(...) You used this as your SIG at one point, and I commented on it elsewhere, but since you bring it up here I thought I'd throw in an observation from a Moderate's viewpoint. Obviously Al is alluding to the nuclear "red button" of the Cold War (...) (25 years ago, 28-Dec-99, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Merry Christmas from the Libertarian Party
 
Dave, (...) Moderate? Boy, I can't wait (I being a proud partisan, BTW!) (...) No, not obviously. (...) Reagan and Bush had a million times more qualifications to man the nuclear arsenal than Al Gore or Bill, IMHO. Badly, as always. It isn't just a (...) (25 years ago, 28-Dec-99, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Merry Christmas from the Libertarian Party
 
(...) IIRC (and I am pretty darn sure I am), he had them demonstrate how a computer could function/not function with out IE installed. Again, IIRC, the Microsoft attorneys couldn't demonstrate conclusively that removing IE had any adverse effects. (...) (25 years ago, 28-Dec-99, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Merry Christmas from the Libertarian Party
 
(...) Really? I hadn't guessed! (...) Well, it seems apparent enough to me. If you disagree, that's fine, of course; we just see Al's analogy in two different ways. (...) I can see where a former actor, skilled in portraying himself in a number of (...) (25 years ago, 28-Dec-99, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Merry Christmas from the Libertarian Party
 
(...) Microsoft has 80%+ market share in the consumer OS market. It is _by_bloody_definition_ a monopoly. (...) Amendment, BTW. (...) Kenn Starr should have been fired a long time before all the trouble started. If I didn't know better, I'd think he (...) (25 years ago, 28-Dec-99, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Merry Christmas from the Libertarian Party
 
(...) Just a quickie here: This definition isn't "bloody": (URL) but I didn't see 80% mentioned in it. Rather, I saw the use of "exclusive" pretty much exclusively. 80% isn't exclusive, it isn't even close. So 80% share is NOT a monopoly. It's (...) (25 years ago, 28-Dec-99, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Merry Christmas from the Libertarian Party
 
(...) Agreed. One cannot ignore a law because one feels it is unjust if one is a politician. One must stand up and say "I think this law is wrong and I will work to get it changed" and take the lumps, not secretly disobey it. If one cannot support (...) (25 years ago, 28-Dec-99, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Merry Christmas from the Libertarian Party
 
(...) That one is actually beyond the statute of limitations and thus irrelevant. (...) That one is not proved and not provable, AFAIK. (...) And here you're agreeing with me. I don't however think Clinton is any worse than the alternative. Jasper (25 years ago, 29-Dec-99, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Merry Christmas from the Libertarian Party
 
(...) Why? Is it OK to break the law if it was long enough ago and you didn't get caught? That seems to be George W's perspective. Hogwash. It is either wrong and the law should be changed, or it isn't. (...) What do you mean? Quayle came right out (...) (25 years ago, 29-Dec-99, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Merry Christmas from the Libertarian Party
 
Since Larry is the most eloquent than I can ever be, I will just agree with him and be done with this. Scott Larry Pieniazek wrote: < Snipped the Larry & Jasper commentary > ___...___ Scott E. Sanburn -> ssanburn@cleanweb.net Work Email -> (...) (25 years ago, 29-Dec-99, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Merry Christmas from the Libertarian Party
 
(...) Can you honestly tell me that you have never ever in your youth swiped a candybar or something similar from a store? Taken a pen home with you from school? etc.? The point isn't that it wasn't _wrong_, it's that after <mumble> years, there is (...) (25 years ago, 30-Dec-99, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Merry Christmas from the Libertarian Party
 
(...) I'm not running for office. <crowd sounds of huge sigh of relief> Not the same standards of behaviour. However, I can honestly say that I never swiped anything. And as for drugs, which you didn't ask, I freely admit that I've used them. The (...) (25 years ago, 30-Dec-99, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Merry Christmas from the Libertarian Party
 
(...) Which I didn't ask because I don't think they're relevant. I agree with you. I wouldn't mind too much, personally, if there were at least legal ways to get the stuff under medical prescription. AT least that would be a step in the right (...) (25 years ago, 30-Dec-99, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Merry Christmas from the Libertarian Party
 
(...) If they are not involved in any control of drugs (for example not a politician, cop, or parent), and they aren't still doing drugs, nothing other than perhaps acknowledge that yes, they did do drugs . If they are a parent trying to keep their (...) (25 years ago, 30-Dec-99, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Merry Christmas from the Libertarian Party
 
(...) " 'Dubya " is a nickname I've heard used for George W. Bush. Say his middle initial slowly, and put a little Texas drawl into it and "double U" mutates into "dubya". I think it may actually have been Gary Trudeau (Doonsbury author) that coined (...) (25 years ago, 30-Dec-99, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Merry Christmas from the Libertarian Party
 
(...) Molly Ivins (the columnist, based in Dallas, I think) has been using "Dubya" to refer to GWBush for some time now, well before Trudeau. Y'know, much as I like living in Austin, it depresses me that my presidential vote won't count (I usually (...) (25 years ago, 30-Dec-99, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Merry Christmas from the Libertarian Party
 
(...) Molly Ivins should go to China, Cuba, or some other Communist country where she belongs. What a pugnacious malcontent! Scott S. (25 years ago, 30-Dec-99, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Who coined "dubya" (Re: Merry Christmas from the Libertarian Party
 
(...) Thanks for the info. I actively dislike that woman, though. I usually have trouble getting all the way through one of her columns without swearing at her under my breath. It IS a good coinage as it sort of rhymes with "bubba". (25 years ago, 30-Dec-99, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Who coined "dubya" (Re: Merry Christmas from the Libertarian Party
 
(...) Not that this impacts her views any, but she was recently diagnosed with breast cancer, and has been (as one would expect) encouraging women to "Get. The. D*mn. Mammogram." (Actual quote, with apologies to LUGNET ToU.) (...) As in "Mumble (...) (25 years ago, 30-Dec-99, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Merry Christmas from the Libertarian Party
 
(...) Pugnacious. What a great word. I'm going to find a way to work that into conversation tomorrow night at the little party we're throwing. Thanks. :) (25 years ago, 30-Dec-99, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Merry Christmas from the Libertarian Party
 
Mike, (...) You're welcome. I can't take credit for that word, however. I heard that on Rush, and looked it up. It describes most flaming leftists, IMHO. It is fun to see people balk when they hear it, though! "Man, that movie was bad." "Yes, it was (...) (25 years ago, 30-Dec-99, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Merry Christmas from the Libertarian Party
 
(...) Have you read Al Franken's "Rush Limbaugh is a Big Fat Idiot"? Regardless of your political views, it's a riotous read! Dave! (25 years ago, 30-Dec-99, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Merry Christmas from the Libertarian Party
 
(...) Oh yeah, I know what the word means. Probably derives originally from pugno, pugnare, the Latin verb meaning "to fight, punch, etc". I just don't hear it used much. :) (25 years ago, 30-Dec-99, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Merry Christmas from the Libertarian Party
 
Al Franken is a stupid little idiot, but funny as Steve Martin or Chevy Chase. I liked that book too, despite its erroneous and pugnacious (1) title. 1 - I remember learning that English word in Latin class. -- Have fun! John The Legos you've been (...) (25 years ago, 30-Dec-99, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Merry Christmas from the Libertarian Party
 
Is that why they call those little dogs "Pugs"? the one that look like thier faces were "punched in"? : ) John (...) (25 years ago, 31-Dec-99, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Merry Christmas from the Libertarian Party
 
(...) I've never heard of _anyone_ dying from bad weed. Heroin, cocain, crack, XTC, yes, but not weed. (...) What's the difference between the politician and the parent? (...) Absolutely. And sleeping pills, caffeine,... (...) Hah. As if he could. (...) (25 years ago, 31-Dec-99, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Merry Christmas from the Libertarian Party
 
(...) Ah.. this explains all. G Dubya Bush. (...) "and I was wrong AND HERE'S WHAT I AM GOING TO DO ABOUT IT:"[emphasis mine]? Neither did Frank answer that one, BTW. Although I inferred that to Frank, "here's what I am going to do about it" would (...) (25 years ago, 31-Dec-99, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Goodness of Man? (was: Re: Merry Christmas from the Libertarian Party
 
(...) Let me say this again (I'll type slowly so you can get it easier;) only God is good. Yeah, I know, some people *seem* good and some more than others, but when you get right down to it, all people are motivated by fear, selfishness, pride, (...) (25 years ago, 31-Dec-99, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Goodness of Man? (was: Re: Merry Christmas from the Libertarian Party
 
(...) Wow. You have a fairly radical definition of good, it seems. I tend to think of good as 'not meaning harm', but that's a very loose and general definition - don't try to pin me to specifics, please. "Good" in my books is almost entirely (...) (25 years ago, 31-Dec-99, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Merry Christmas from the Libertarian Party
 
(...) Do you have any back-up for that ad hominem assessment, or are you just angry? In fact, he's quite insightful and an acknowledged political satirist. For one example of his punditry, I refer you to chapter 30 of his book. Further, if you want (...) (25 years ago, 31-Dec-99, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Merry Christmas from the Libertarian Party
 
Jasper Janssen wrote in message <38728079.753103163@...et.com>... (...) Wish I could say that! Well, I've paid for my previous misteaks, and its a whole new millenium, almost. (...) Me too. (...) Well, there are legal ways, and it seems like a step (...) (25 years ago, 31-Dec-99, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Merry Christmas from the Libertarian Party
 
Dave Schuler wrote in message ... (...) satirist. (...) Any (...) I just moved and don't know the book's current whereabouts. So, despite my desire to do so, I can't see those chapters now. Refresh me (titles should be adequate). IMHO, it was a (...) (25 years ago, 31-Dec-99, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Merry Christmas from the Libertarian Party
 
(...) I heard of a friend of a friend of a friend that got very very sick from doing weed that the federales had sprayed with herbicide, in their foolish and failed drug war, but it probably was an urban legend. I had a friend who passed out in a (...) (25 years ago, 31-Dec-99, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Who coined "dubya" (Re: Merry Christmas from the Libertarian Party
 
(...) No, as in "The pundits were predicting that Bubba's successor would either be wood-boy or Dubya, but a miracle happened and we inaugurated our first Libertarian president in 2001"... :-) (25 years ago, 31-Dec-99, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Goodness of Man? (was: Re: Merry Christmas from the Libertarian Party
 
(...) I like a more objective definition because I hate the trend towards relativism I think we are experiencing these days. If a sociopath considers killing others good, is it? But if good is objective, from who's perspective? God, who is by (...) (25 years ago, 31-Dec-99, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Goodness of Man? (was: Re: Merry Christmas from the Libertarian Party
 
(...) Stuff and Nonsense to the both of you, lazy thinkers!... I have 3 points to make: 1. People aren't as lazy(1) as you think. Most people are industrious and hard working, even in this screwed up society of today. It's only in Legoland where the (...) (25 years ago, 31-Dec-99, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Goodness of Man? (was: Re: Merry Christmas from the Libertarian Party
 
I am going to ~try~ to make a sensible post... John Neal wrote in message <386C54F9.20331CB5@u...st.net>... (...) think (...) definition - (...) relativism I (...) others (...) is by (...) Discerning (...) good (...) In a huge thread where I (...) (25 years ago, 31-Dec-99, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Goodness of Man? (was: Re: Merry Christmas from the Libertarian Party
 
(...) Basically good ===[by The Jasper Janssen English Dictionary] at least trying hard. So that about corresponds ;) Jasper (25 years ago, 31-Dec-99, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Goodness of Man? (was: Re: Merry Christmas from the Libertarian Party
 
(...) Industrious in the area of work is something completely different from lazy in other areas. You know that. [move stuff around a bit] (...) Exactly. Now replace "feel" with "under their analysis", _or_ replace "under our analysis" with "we (...) (25 years ago, 31-Dec-99, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Merry Christmas from the Libertarian Party
 
(...) Yeah, I didn't do the best job of citing references--sorry about that. I'm at work now, so I can't give you the titles at the moment, but I didn't want you to think I was ignoring you, either! Next time I log on from home I'll follow this (...) (25 years ago, 31-Dec-99, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Goodness of Man? (was: Re: Merry Christmas from the Libertarian Party
 
(...) Good isn't objective. What we, society as a whole, consider to be "good" is both up for debate in certain areas (I'm specifically _not_ going to mention ab*rti*n here), and it is no more valid than the ideas of other societies, other than (...) (25 years ago, 31-Dec-99, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Goodness of Man? (was: Re: Merry Christmas from the Libertarian Party
 
(...) Do tell. (...) That was a joke, son. (24 years ago, 31-Dec-99, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Merry Christmas from the Libertarian Party
 
(...) Opiates and Coca-derivatives _are_ generally harmful for human use, unless done under guidance. Most humans tend to not be able to provide that guidance to themselves, as seen in all the addicts. AFAIK, various opiates are legally available on (...) (25 years ago, 31-Dec-99, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Who coined "dubya" (Re: Merry Christmas from the Libertarian Party
 
(...) LOL! We'll see, Larry. Scott S. (24 years ago, 31-Dec-99, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Goodness of Man? (was: Re: Merry Christmas from the Libertarian Party
 
(...) Anything based on morals (which "good" typically is) IS subjective, and can never be anything else, at least until God (in whatever guise you like, assuming you believe in Him) provides us with an absolute morality.(1) Neither you nor I can (...) (24 years ago, 31-Dec-99, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Goodness of Man? (was: Re: Merry Christmas from the Libertarian Party
 
(...) I disagree here, but I'm a cynical little punk. :) I think people in general are only as industrious as they have to be. I don't think the mean is quite as low as "lazy" tends to imply, but I do think the mean is too low for a system that (...) (24 years ago, 31-Dec-99, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Goodness of Man? (was: Re: Merry Christmas from the Libertarian Party
 
(...) Whoops! Forgot the footnote: 1:Which, assuming He exists, IMHO He hasn't(2). When the proverbial omnipotent being wants to provide us with an absolute morality, we will all KNOW, beyond a shadow of a doubt, what it is. 2:What He has provided (...) (24 years ago, 31-Dec-99, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Goodness of Man? (was: Re: Merry Christmas from the Libertarian Party
 
(...) OK, change that to ANYwhere in America or Canada. But yes, it's biased. That's the point! That's the society I want to see us return toward, a society in which everyone knows that if they work hard and are clever, they've got just as much (...) (24 years ago, 31-Dec-99, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Goodness of Man? (was: Re: Merry Christmas from the Libertarian Party
 
(...) Yowza! When did this society exist? I'd also love to return to it! It must be millennia since everyone had an equal chance of getting rich, and certainly never in the US! Dave! (24 years ago, 31-Dec-99, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Goodness of Man? (was: Re: Merry Christmas from the Libertarian Party
 
(...) We've been around this particular mulberry bush before and I continue to hold with the stance that "good" and "morals" can be objective, correct ones are based on life affirmation. Further, I hold that I can very well label a particular (...) (24 years ago, 31-Dec-99, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Merry Christmas from the Libertarian Party
 
(...) Yes, you crossed categories - "crack" is a form of cocaine, obviously a coca-derived drug and not an opiate. -- jthompson@esker.com "Float on a river, forever and ever, Emily" (24 years ago, 31-Dec-99, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Goodness of Man? (was: Re: Merry Christmas from the Libertarian Party
 
(...) Well, that's my point. I'm saying that good is beyond what the particular fancy of a given society says it is. We are not the author of good, we are the seekers of it (hopefully). (...) We'll soon see about that;-) (...) All of these (...) (24 years ago, 31-Dec-99, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Goodness of Man? (was: Re: Merry Christmas from the Libertarian Party
 
(...) Hmm. Opportunity was closer to equal then than it is now, but it still wasn't entirely equal. But I'll conceed the point. ;) (...) Then we're of the same mind here. I'll try and remember that next time I flare up at some LMF. :) James (URL) (24 years ago, 31-Dec-99, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Goodness of Man? (was: Re: Merry Christmas from the Libertarian Party
 
John DiRienzo wrote: <snippage> (...) Ahh, I think Libertarianism would be an excellent system; I just shared James pessimism that it would have a hard time working given today's entitlement mentality. Lazy people want things given to them rather (...) (24 years ago, 31-Dec-99, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Goodness of Man? (was: Re: Merry Christmas from the Libertarian Party
 
(...) Multiple times, I think, although it hasn't always been you on my dance card. (...) I highly suspect that we are of similar minds on this issue, and just keep insisting on different definitions. My position in a nutshell, morals=subjective, (...) (24 years ago, 31-Dec-99, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Goodness of Man? (was: Re: Merry Christmas from the Libertarian Party
 
(...) So the american frontier is what you want to return to? I've got news for you: That also requires returning to the technological and productivity levels of then. The reason those two are so much higher now than they were then is (...) (24 years ago, 1-Jan-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Goodness of Man? (was: Re: Merry Christmas from the Libertarian Party
 
(...) Either you're nuts, or you havent read your history books. Remember what Europe was like when anarchy ruled? Think medieval times in between Charlemagne, William the Conqueror, etc.. It was _not_ fun. Even less so than with great dictators. A (...) (24 years ago, 1-Jan-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Goodness of Man? (was: Re: Merry Christmas from the Libertarian Party
 
(...) If you can't see the contradiction, I'm not going to be able to point it out to you. (...) Yes.... and? I'm not quite as inept as you seem to think I am, you know. Jasper (24 years ago, 1-Jan-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Goodness of Man? (was: Re: Merry Christmas from the Libertarian Party
 
(...) Which means that there is no meaningful definition of good at all. That's not very useful either. (...) <antagonist>Drat. It was a dud. Well, I'll try again in 100 years. </antagonist> (...) If God is good, why has he never deigned to touch (...) (24 years ago, 1-Jan-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Merry Christmas from the Libertarian Party
 
(...) Darn. I always forget _which_ hallucinogenics to mix with which stuff to make crack. I guess I'll never be a dealer or a chemist now. Jasper (24 years ago, 1-Jan-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Goodness of Man? (was: Re: Merry Christmas from the Libertarian Party
 
Jasper Janssen wrote in message <38830931.919200318@...et.com>... (...) evolution) (...) I had to think about what John said for a day or two to know what he meant. I am still not sure if I took it the right way, but I don't think he is nuts. I (...) (24 years ago, 1-Jan-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Goodness of Man? (was: Re: Merry Christmas from the Libertarian Party
 
Jasper Janssen wrote in message <387ab92e.833168838@...et.com>... (...) relativism I (...) others (...) is by (...) Discerning (...) good (...) I think you are just plain wrong. Some societies flourish while others perish because they have a better (...) (24 years ago, 1-Jan-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Goodness of Man? (was: Re: Merry Christmas from the Libertarian Party
 
Jasper Janssen wrote in message <38850a4f.919486838@...et.com>... (...) fancy of a (...) seekers of it (...) I take back what I said. I think Larry could tell you his objective definition of good, which I agree with. I will try myself. (...) (24 years ago, 1-Jan-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Goodness of Man? (was: Re: Merry Christmas from the Libertarian Party
 
James Brown wrote in message ... (...) relation (...) In what guise would you expect Him? Could it not happen that someone could formulate their (and His) idea of good, put it into practice, and then people see that it works?! I think that is much (...) (24 years ago, 1-Jan-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Goodness of Man? (was: Re: Merry Christmas from the Libertarian Party
 
(...) You are correct, John. (...) Never say never(;), but I'm with you in thinking that we as a race aren't anywhere near that state. (...) I believe that existence after death will be on a higher plane, although I know not how or even care (...) (24 years ago, 1-Jan-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Goodness of Man? (was: Re: Merry Christmas from the Libertarian Party
 
(...) That's an old misconception. Having just helped teach a course called "The Emergence of Medieval Europe" (c.300-1000), I can tell you that it wasn't anarchy--things were in flux, but it only appeared anarchic because the meaning of fealty and (...) (24 years ago, 1-Jan-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Goodness of Man? (was: Re: Merry Christmas from the Libertarian Party
 
Sorry for so many posts, again! Jasper Janssen wrote in message <388409e2.919377893@...et.com>... (...) Jasper, I think you saw a contradiction where there was none. Point 4 that you refered too said (basically, what I read) that "constructively (...) (24 years ago, 1-Jan-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Goodness of Man? (was: Re: Merry Christmas from the Libertarian Party
 
(...) Well, at least an all encompassing definition of good. It is not something that can be comprehended in its entirety-- it is a continuous learning process. (...) Sorry if some things aren't easily understood-- that's just the way it is, baby. (...) (24 years ago, 1-Jan-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Goodness of Man? (was: Re: Merry Christmas from the Libertarian Party
 
Here I go again! James Brown wrote in message ... (...) general (...) quite (...) to (...) You cynic! :-) You are right - many peope are only as industrious as they have to be. Does this mean I am a cynic, too? No. I think the purpose of (...) (24 years ago, 1-Jan-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Goodness of Man? (was: Re: Merry Christmas from the Libertarian Party
 
(...) Don't be so lazy. Go ahead, try to point out the contradiction. Remember, I was talking about different kinds of lazy there. You, as not having come out against free goods, should have no issue with a simple request that you do some of my work (...) (24 years ago, 1-Jan-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Goodness of Man? (was: Re: Merry Christmas from the Libertarian Party
 
(...) Nothing of the sort. I want to return to the frontier mentality, the notion that we can, if we want, be very successful at any number of different things. (...) Again, hardly. The most frontierlike part of america right now is the e-space. (...) (24 years ago, 1-Jan-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Goodness of Man? (was: Re: Merry Christmas from the Libertarian Party
 
(...) See, where Libertopia differs from other -topias is fundamental. First, we are not claiming that it's perfect. Instead, we claim there IS no perfection in society. There always will be situations where things turn out unfairly (is a freak (...) (24 years ago, 1-Jan-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Goodness of Man? (was: Re: Merry Christmas from the Libertarian Party
 
Larry Pieniazek wrote in message <386E8B8E.EF62ED6C@v...er.net>... (...) statically stable, (...) to Owenite (...) Larry), and (...) process, before (...) Right, its not a utopia, not a mere fantasy. It is workable. People would need to adapt to a (...) (24 years ago, 2-Jan-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Goodness of Man? (was: Re: Merry Christmas from the Libertarian Party
 
John Neal wrote in message <386E6426.576F7583@u...st.net>... (...) he (...) in (...) anyway) (...) no (...) know (...) this (...) I don't pretend to know anything about any here after. Perhaps there is one, but it makes about as much difference to (...) (24 years ago, 2-Jan-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Goodness of Man? (was: Re: Merry Christmas from the Libertarian Party
 
(...) Actually, I believe most inventors (the ones who I've seen documentaries telling about themselves, which is really all that can really tell you what they feel) are in it not so much to make life easier for themselves, but to make big bucks, or (...) (24 years ago, 2-Jan-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Goodness of Man? (was: Re: Merry Christmas from the Libertarian Party
 
(...) And if that isn't an argument against electroshock therapy I don't know what is! The above explains a lot <GD&R>. (24 years ago, 2-Jan-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Goodness of Man? (was: Re: Merry Christmas from the Libertarian Party
 
(...) I have no problem at all with such a request. My answer is "do it yourself, ya lazy B'stard", of course. I'm not entirely sure what you mean by 'free goods', though. BTW, I've been meaning to ask you, how do you feel about intellectual (...) (24 years ago, 2-Jan-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Goodness of Man? (was: Re: Merry Christmas from the Libertarian Party
 
(...) "E-space" (Now _there's_ a horrible term if I ever heard one. Almost as bad as "Information Superhighway"), however, is hardly frontier-like. (...) Gimme some search terms or general dates to work with. You're too prolific a poster (even when (...) (24 years ago, 2-Jan-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Goodness of Man? (was: Re: Merry Christmas from the Libertarian Party
 
(...) Hmmmm. If that _is_ what he is saying, I would tend to agree. But I personally would tend to place strict libertarianism as quite close to anarchy on that scale (strict libertarianism, after all, is just anarchy with "something" (not the (...) (24 years ago, 2-Jan-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Goodness of Man? (was: Re: Merry Christmas from the Libertarian Party
 
(...) There you go again. Another incorrect assertion, presented without proof. Examine the aspects of something that make it frontier-like, and you'll find that the internet is indeed a frontier. What are your criteria for a frontier? (...) Look it (...) (24 years ago, 2-Jan-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Goodness of Man? (was: Re: Merry Christmas from the Libertarian Party
 
On Sat, 1 Jan 2000 23:19:43 GMT, Larry Pieniazek <lar@voyager.net> wrote: By the way, larry, your line lengths are too long. (...) My response to that would be "nothing is fair - but some things are more fair than others". And I personally believe (...) (24 years ago, 2-Jan-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Goodness of Man? (was: Re: Merry Christmas from the Libertarian Party
 
In lugnet.off-topic.debate, John DiRienzo writes: <snipped lots> Took me a bit to read through that and have it sink in, but I think I understand what you're getting at. And I (cynically) disagree. I don't think society is sufficiently evolved for a (...) (24 years ago, 2-Jan-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Goodness of Man? (was: Re: Merry Christmas from the Libertarian Party
 
On Sat, 1 Jan 2000 21:09:41 GMT, John Neal <johnneal@uswest.net> wrote: BTW, Neal, your line lengths could use some work. 72-75 is a good value. (...) Oh, I don't really care about how easy it is. I have my own morality, and it mostly coincides with (...) (24 years ago, 2-Jan-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Goodness of Man? (was: Re: Merry Christmas from the Libertarian Party
 
(...) You need some qualifiers, or you'd better drop dead now in order to avoid your immune system killing any bacteria, yourself from swallowing one-celled creatures and eating and drinking, and to provide a fertile bredding ground for maggots and (...) (24 years ago, 2-Jan-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Goodness of Man? (was: Re: Merry Christmas from the Libertarian Party
 
(...) Will you stop? Where do you get that idea? What "higher power"? That's not it at all. My goodness what a stew of misconceptions. Do you listen to anything I say or are you just so sure you know what it is that it all blows past you? One more (...) (24 years ago, 2-Jan-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Goodness of Man? (was: Re: Merry Christmas from the Libertarian Party
 
(...) Sure it isn't you? I'm set to "wrap at 72" for new posts. But it could be my NS Comm is damaged. (24 years ago, 2-Jan-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Goodness of Man? (was: Re: Merry Christmas from the Libertarian Party
 
(...) So 'good' is "what works"? That's cultural Darwinism. It's also moral relativism, whether you like it or not. Because "what works" is a very large range of things - and it changes over time. In Sparta, what worked best was to leave unwanted (...) (24 years ago, 2-Jan-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Goodness of Man? (was: Re: Merry Christmas from the Libertarian Party
 
(...) <snipped derivation of 'all rights are property rights'> Larry, bookmark that post - you'll need it again. ;-) James (URL) (24 years ago, 2-Jan-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Goodness of Man? (was: Re: Merry Christmas from the Libertarian Party
 
(...) Indeed. I knew I was leaving myself wide open to exactly that response, but I wondered who was going to make it. Shoulda known. ;) BTW, you realise that EST is quite different from a mild 220/50 shock? I've also heard at various times that (...) (24 years ago, 2-Jan-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Goodness of Man? (was: Re: Merry Christmas from the Libertarian Party
 
(...) New, virgin territory, actual land, would be one. The internet may be vaguely analogous to the real world, but it just doesn't apply. The internet simply isn't space. It is a communications medium only. It provides a way of reaching new (...) (24 years ago, 2-Jan-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Goodness of Man? (was: Re: Merry Christmas from the Libertarian Party
 
(...) Agreed. I am and have always been set to wrap at 72. Now, if I could rap at 72 I'd be a happy camper;-) -John (...) (24 years ago, 2-Jan-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Goodness of Man? (was: Re: Merry Christmas from the Libertarian Party
 
(...) That, dear Larry, is what one would call "sarcasm". To restate more clearly: Pure libertarians (or so I've been led to believe)(which you obviously don't come under by this definition) want to do without government altogether. I've talked with (...) (24 years ago, 2-Jan-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Goodness of Man? (was: Re: Merry Christmas from the Libertarian Party
 
Jasper Janssen wrote in message <38a2c49d.967187668@...et.com>... (...) Look it up. (...) And where did those mineral seekers live? Who built their houses? Why were there towns, banks, saloons, stores? How did they get to those far off places? Who (...) (24 years ago, 2-Jan-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Goodness of Man? (was: Re: Merry Christmas from the Libertarian Party
 
<386E8B8E.EF62ED6C@voyager.net> <FnorLK.8q2@lugnet.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit (...) By John's definition, the socialist/anarchist Utopian projects *are* in the same category as "libertopias". I (...) (24 years ago, 2-Jan-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Goodness of Man? (was: Re: Merry Christmas from the Libertarian Party
 
(...) Until we have a planetary wide homogeneous society, Good Societies will ALMOST NEVER flourish longterm over bad, as history has proven. They may last a while, but sooner or later a "bad" society (more warlike) stomps on them. -- | Tom Stangl, (...) (24 years ago, 2-Jan-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Goodness of Man? (was: Re: Merry Christmas from the Libertarian Party
 
No, you wrap fine from what I can see. (...) -- | Tom Stangl, Technical Support Netscape Communications Corp | Please do not associate my personal views with my employer (24 years ago, 2-Jan-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Goodness of Man? (was: Re: Merry Christmas from the Libertarian Party
 
(...) Yes, in fact, very few MINERS got rich, but many of the support network DID. -- | Tom Stangl, Technical Support Netscape Communications Corp | Please do not associate my personal views with my employer (24 years ago, 2-Jan-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Goodness of Man? (was: Re: Merry Christmas from the Libertarian Party
 
(...) Actually, that was a derivation _from_ all rights are property rights. Very big difference. Jasper (24 years ago, 2-Jan-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Goodness of Man? (was: Re: Merry Christmas from the Libertarian Party
 
(...) Netscape Communicator has a whole host af well-known "issues" in this regard. Bottom line is, unfortunately, that it's impossible to _always_ get it to do things the right way. Jasper (24 years ago, 2-Jan-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Goodness of Man? (was: Re: Merry Christmas from the Libertarian Party
 
All's well here as well. I think the blame lies with an incompatible reader ;-) Mine are set at 76, is that OK with everybody? Tom Stangl wrote in message <386F0784.8CF5B770@n...pe.com>... (...) -- Have fun! John The Legos you've been dreaming of... (...) (24 years ago, 2-Jan-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Goodness of Man? (was: Re: Merry Christmas from the Libertarian Party
 
Tom Stangl wrote in message <386EFFA9.A7755EDC@n...pe.com>... (...) who (...) for (...) others (...) I (...) ALMOST (...) while, (...) I remember a country named Germany that did that, and stomp they did, but didn't good prevail? Maybe I am wrong, (...) (24 years ago, 2-Jan-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Goodness of Man? (was: Re: Merry Christmas from the Libertarian Party
 
Jasper Janssen wrote in message <3898af73.961769278@...et.com>... (...) Jasper, never give up. (...) Larry, I had not thought this through until today, so it may be wrong. As compared to a perfect God, I would think man is evil, because he is far (...) (24 years ago, 2-Jan-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Goodness of Man? (was: Re: Merry Christmas from the Libertarian Party
 
Mr L F Braun wrote in message <386EFD98.7B4CFC41@p...su.edu>... (...) same (...) would (...) I've (...) still (...) optimal (...) than (...) In 1907 the Federal government in the US imposed income tax. People adapted to that. Whats the problem? Its (...) (24 years ago, 2-Jan-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Goodness of Man? (was: Re: Merry Christmas from the Libertarian Party
 
So, you hate Thomas Edison because you've been shocked before? That makes sense. You hate him because he bent the rules to fit his needs. Your anger seems misplaced. Perhaps the wrong person got the reward and the fame, but perhaps you shot JFK (...) (24 years ago, 2-Jan-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Goodness of Man? (was: Re: Merry Christmas from the Libertarian Party
 
Jasper Janssen wrote in message <3897ae4f.961476863@...et.com>... (...) he (...) in (...) anyway) (...) no (...) perfection - (...) OK, Jasper, just for fun, I will acknowledge this. Lets say the ideas of Libertarianism are only one step from (...) (24 years ago, 2-Jan-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Goodness of Man? (was: Re: Merry Christmas from the Libertarian Party
 
Jasper Janssen wrote in message <38aee357.975055273@...et.com>... (...) I haven't researched Libertarianism, but I think I will check the links at about.com within the next day or two. I have never heard of a brand of Libertarianism that struck me (...) (24 years ago, 2-Jan-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Goodness of Man? (was: Re: Merry Christmas from the Libertarian Party
 
Jasper Janssen wrote in message <3899b16b.962273428@...et.com>... (...) Don't we all. (...) Wrong. You can learn from arguing, I have. (...) I am not a Bible-beater, I am not a Christian, but the Bible was written by men for men. There is much good (...) (24 years ago, 3-Jan-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Goodness of Man? (was: Re: Merry Christmas from the Libertarian Party
 
Jasper Janssen wrote in message <389ab7c6.963900110@...et.com>... (...) Life-affirming (...) Search this group for 22/7 - read some of my earliest posts, then follow the thread if you wish. (...) and (...) OK, what if you were a dinosaur? I don't (...) (24 years ago, 3-Jan-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Goodness of Man? (was: Re: Merry Christmas from the Libertarian Party
 
<386EFD98.7B4CFC41@p...t.msu.edu> <FnqIsM.4Lo@lugnet.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit (...) There are a lot of Europeans who would disagree with you that "slow" socialism has failed. It's alive and (...) (24 years ago, 3-Jan-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Goodness of Man? (was: Re: Merry Christmas from the Libertarian Party
 
(...) Shouldn't the airspace above your property be yours, subject to deeded covenants? Obviously if we were to switch over to Liberatopia, air rights would have to be negotiated with everyone. I would expect a few airports to be forced to close (...) (24 years ago, 3-Jan-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Goodness of Man? (was: Re: Merry Christmas from the Libertarian Party
 
(...) I think we would still have some public space. There would also be plenty of property owners willing to grant broad priviledge to their tenants. I know my church would offer almost complete priviledge of speech on its property. The only real (...) (24 years ago, 3-Jan-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Goodness of Man? (was: Re: Merry Christmas from the Libertarian Party
 
(...) Medical virgin birth is quite easy, but I won't go into the details here ;-) -- | Tom Stangl, Technical Support Netscape Communications Corp | Please do not associate my personal views with my employer (24 years ago, 3-Jan-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Goodness of Man? (was: Re: Merry Christmas from the Libertarian Party
 
(...) Larry's hasn't been wrong yet, but the post I was responding to, John Neal's (URL) , apeared for example the following lines: (...) Which are 90 characters long, slightly over 80. This is as I mentioned a known bug with Communicator -- (...) (24 years ago, 4-Jan-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Goodness of Man? (was: Re: Merry Christmas from the Libertarian Party
 
(...) Reading for comprehension isn't your best subject, I see? Neither is proper snipping when replying, apparently. (...) Nice try. I will not be baited this time. Jasper (24 years ago, 4-Jan-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Goodness of Man? (was: Re: Merry Christmas from the Libertarian Party
 
(...) A post of yours chastised me for my line lengths, I believe. I chose to respond to one and only one of your chastisements, and it was whim that made me respond to this one rather than that one. (24 years ago, 4-Jan-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Goodness of Man? (was: Re: Merry Christmas from the Libertarian Party
 
(...) Two words: Turkey Baster. No, seriously, you're right - what might be known as Extremely Heavy Petting has resulted in the occasional (but rather rare) virgin pregnancy. -- jthompson@esker.com "Float on a river, forever and ever, Emily" (24 years ago, 4-Jan-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Goodness of Man? (was: Re: Merry Christmas from the Libertarian Party
 
(...) Um, correct me if I'm wrong, but any history account from those times isn't error free. Historians back then were not objective reporters like the press is today.........Okay, I'm back, I just laughed myself silly;-) (...) The Bible is not a (...) (24 years ago, 4-Jan-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Goodness of Man? (was: Re: Merry Christmas from the Libertarian Party
 
In lugnet.off-topic.debate, John Neal and others write: (...) One thing that's always bothered me about the dying-on-the-cross thing is the question of how could He have done otherwise? I mean, if He knew, as I suspect He must have known, that His (...) (24 years ago, 4-Jan-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Goodness of Man? (was: Re: Merry Christmas from the Libertarian Party
 
My capitalist running dog lackey Frank Filz answered most of this append faster and better than I could. However a few points remain... (...) You can do that if you wish. Coke did, seems to work for them. However if someone else susses it out, (...) (24 years ago, 5-Jan-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Goodness of Man? (was: Re: Merry Christmas from the Libertarian Party
 
Random paranthetical aside: (...) Coke's formula really wasn't a secret. Pepsi long had the knowledge and ability to replicate Coke's formula. They just never bother to duplicate the formula, because they thought their own formula tasted better. (...) (24 years ago, 5-Jan-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Goodness of Man? (was: Re: Merry Christmas from the Libertarian Party
 
(...) Oh my, I have not seen this in awhile. Horrid. As an example: Article 25. (1) Everyone has the right to a standard of living adequate for the health and well-being of himself and of his Family, including food, clothing, housing and medical (...) (24 years ago, 5-Jan-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Goodness of Man? (was: Re: Merry Christmas from the Libertarian Party
 
(...) I don't see how you can support ideas as property at all. Remember that this means that if a person happens to have the exact same idea, independently of the other guy (and this has happened before - see Gutenberg and the others as a canonical (...) (24 years ago, 5-Jan-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Goodness of Man? (was: Re: Merry Christmas from the Libertarian Party
 
(...) Many rights are things we as a society make up. (As opposed to being somehow natural or god-given.) That doesn't mean that they're not good ideas! Why isn't it good to say that all people deserve be taken care of when they're sick? (...) Oh (...) (24 years ago, 6-Jan-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Goodness of Man? (was: Re: Merry Christmas from the Libertarian Party
 
(...) The US Constitution and Bill of Rights, coined by the founding fathers, all rights are God given. As in the "rights" of health care, etc., in theory, all are good ideas, in utopia. In reality, there is a difference. What does the market do? (...) (24 years ago, 6-Jan-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Goodness of Man? (was: Re: Merry Christmas from the Libertarian Party
 
(...) This sentence doesn't seem to make any sense to me. Can you rephrase/explain what you're saying? (...) Ok. So if they're good ideas in a perfect world, is there a problem with saying that those are things we want to strive for as a (...) (24 years ago, 6-Jan-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Goodness of Man? (was: Re: Merry Christmas from the Libertarian Party
 
<38741109.CEDCCCFC@c...anweb.net> <slrn87862s.nkk.matt...ia.bu.edu> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit (...) Insert an "under" in front and you should be able to parse it, although it may still be on shaky (...) (24 years ago, 6-Jan-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Goodness of Man? (was: Re: Merry Christmas from the Libertarian Party
 
(...) OK, I just got back from Meijer, as I was pushing carts for five hours in the frozen tundra of Michigan (I could use those Arctic Minifig hoods! :) ), and I am tired. My apologies. Alright, The founding fathers concluded, when they wrote the (...) (24 years ago, 6-Jan-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Goodness of Man? (was: Re: Merry Christmas from the Libertarian Party
 
(...) Very shaky ground, my eyes certainly are! (...) Yes sir. Larry has the unique ability to clean up what rambling I have, and make it a clear and concise point. All hail Larry! Scott "losing the ability to type" S. ___...___ Scott E. Sanburn-> (...) (24 years ago, 6-Jan-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Goodness of Man? (was: Re: Merry Christmas from the Libertarian Party
 
(...) OK, what's your proposal, then? If they're not property, what are they? and how do the people that come up with them get incented? I ain't gonna invent stuff for you for free, you know... and neither is anyone else. Those 20,000 failed light (...) (24 years ago, 6-Jan-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Goodness of Man? (was: Re: Merry Christmas from the Libertarian Party
 
(...) Not to mention on shaky accuracy ground! The Constitution doesn't speak of either god or rights. And the first ten amendments don't attribute the rights they speak of to any specific external source. The Declaration of Independence mentions (...) (24 years ago, 6-Jan-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Goodness of Man? (was: Re: Merry Christmas from the Libertarian Party
 
<38741A57.AE0161C3@voyager.net> <slrn8787ug.nkk.matt...ia.bu.edu> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit (...) Well, if you don't know the difference, or don't know that some of us feel there is a difference, and (...) (24 years ago, 6-Jan-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Goodness of Man? (was: Re: Merry Christmas from the Libertarian Party
 
(...) Yeah. But I disagree. The founding fathers may have had this belief, but they very carefully didn't write it into the constitution. (...) So if the government does something good, it's still evil? I guess I'm concerned with making things work. (...) (24 years ago, 6-Jan-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Goodness of Man? (was: Re: Merry Christmas from the Libertarian Party
 
(...) Fair enough -- I admit to joining the debate in progress. There's several thousand posts in this newsgroup; discussing them all becomes an ever-increasing burden to entry. Could you point me to several in particular that you'd like me to (...) (24 years ago, 6-Jan-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Goodness of Man? (was: Re: Merry Christmas from the Libertarian Party
 
(...) Well, it speaks (Looking at my CATO supplied Constitution & Bill of Rights) , "the separate and equal Station to which the Laws of Nature and of Nature's God...." for one (In the Declaration of Independence). The concept of natural law, in (...) (24 years ago, 6-Jan-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Goodness of Man? (was: Re: Merry Christmas from the Libertarian Party
 
<38741B0A.4F62FC4B@c...anweb.net> <slrn879752.341.matt...ia.bu.edu> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit (...) Yes. Unless you're a big fan of "the ends justify the means". Good outcomes do not justify (...) (24 years ago, 6-Jan-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Goodness of Man? (was: Re: Merry Christmas from the Libertarian Party
 
<387424BA.8AA8A11@voyager.net> <slrn8797ta.341.matt...ia.bu.edu> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit (...) Well, this doesn't narrow it down a lot, because the entire thread is still 400+ posts, but if you (...) (24 years ago, 6-Jan-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Goodness of Man? (was: Re: Merry Christmas from the Libertarian Party
 
(...) I'm not saying anything about justifying anything. "Ends justify the means" implies some sort of need for justificiation, and as I said, I'm assuming neither a totally evil government nor totally evil capitalists. (...) Not true. They may not (...) (24 years ago, 6-Jan-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Goodness of Man? (was: Re: Merry Christmas from the Libertarian Party
 
(...) ___...___ Scott E. Sanburn-> ssanburn@cleanweb.net Systems Administrator/CAD Operator-Affiliated Engineers -> (URL) Page -> (URL) Page -> (URL) (24 years ago, 6-Jan-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Goodness of Man? (was: Re: Merry Christmas from the Libertarian Party
 
(...) Yes. The Declaration of Independence is very much not the Constitution. In fact, interesting to consider that this language, so obvious in the declaration, is so conspicuously not in the constitution. (...) Yes. Foundationalism is nice, when (...) (24 years ago, 6-Jan-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Goodness of Man? (was: Re: Merry Christmas from the Libertarian Party
 
(...) He also spoke against slavery, but didn't even free his slaves in his will. (24 years ago, 6-Jan-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Goodness of Man? (was: Re: Merry Christmas from the Libertarian Party
 
(...) They don't get incented. (...) Noone. Except possibly, oh, I don't know, how about those people who could actually benefit from the invention? You know, just like roads should be financed by the users. And please don't come shouting about how (...) (24 years ago, 6-Jan-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Goodness of Man? (was: Re: Merry Christmas from the Libertarian Party
 
(...) You discredit yourself completely in the first sentence. Nice going. "coined by the founding fathers" == "god-given". Whatever. (...) So now it's a bad idea to strive for utopia? Jasper (24 years ago, 6-Jan-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Goodness of Man? (was: Re: Merry Christmas from the Libertarian Party
 
(...) "utilitarian" == "ends justify the means", no? Jasper (24 years ago, 6-Jan-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Goodness of Man? (was: Re: Merry Christmas from the Libertarian Party
 
Matt, (...) Yes, but without the Declaration, we would have no Constitution, or Bill of Rights. Clearly the intent of the Founding Fathers is here.. but this isn't what I was talking about. (...) I think that the Constitution outlined the concept of (...) (24 years ago, 6-Jan-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Goodness of Man? (was: Re: Merry Christmas from the Libertarian Party
 
(...) Yes. And I proceeded to tersly show that even if you buy ends justify the means you still fail, because you get bad ends. all government programs produce bad results is my utilitarian thesis. So I have him both ways. (24 years ago, 6-Jan-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Matthew jumps in (was Re: Goodness of Man?, etc.)
 
(...) I don't understand the basis for the assertion that property rights are the basis for all other rights. Where do property rights come from? What makes that a privledged right above any other I can imagine? Arguments for this I've seen that I (...) (24 years ago, 6-Jan-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Goodness of Man? (was: Re: Merry Christmas from the Libertarian Party
 
(...) You're against health care, housing, and education? My goodness, in that case I'm certainly proud to be a leftist. (24 years ago, 6-Jan-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Goodness of Man? (was: Re: Merry Christmas from the Libertarian Party
 
(...) OK, go ahead and invent away. I don't invent for free. (...) So let me see here, what you're proposing is that I go out and invent something, someone else steals my idea, gets it to market first, and makes a pile from the users, and I don't (...) (24 years ago, 6-Jan-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Goodness of Man? (was: Re: Merry Christmas from the Libertarian Party
 
(...) From a rights basis (the utilitarian basis is clear) does it follow that the inventor has the right to prevent other people from coming up with the exact same idea on their own? (24 years ago, 6-Jan-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Goodness of Man? (was: Re: Merry Christmas from the Libertarian Party
 
<3874CFB7.C78E8E40@voyager.net> <slrn879jtn.95s.matt...ia.bu.edu> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit (...) I'm not sure. I haven't carried out an exhaustive analysis of the rights involved. I would tend to (...) (24 years ago, 6-Jan-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Matthew jumps in (was Re: Goodness of Man?, etc.)
 
<3874A8CA.59FCB9A3@voyager.net> <slrn879jb5.6vn.matt...ia.bu.edu> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit (...) Fair enough. I'll try to root out the cogent thread but if you want to dig, use "life affirming" as (...) (24 years ago, 6-Jan-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Goodness of Man? (was: Re: Merry Christmas from the Libertarian Party
 
(...) I am not for the leftist view of government taxing us to death for everyone's ability to have health care, education, etc. I work two jobs, I am starting my own business, and I think the left's view of these being rights is both absurd and (...) (24 years ago, 6-Jan-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Goodness of Man? (was: Re: Merry Christmas from the Libertarian Party
 
Scott: In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Scott Edward Sanburn writes: **snip** (...) Maybe part of the dilemma is coming from confusion between the "right to health care" and the "right not to be prevented from obtaining health care." Certainly there's (...) (24 years ago, 6-Jan-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Goodness of Man? (was: Re: Merry Christmas from the Libertarian Party
 
Dave, (...) Well, whatever form it may be, it is still the same. My point is that whether you talk about providing health care, being prevented from having health care, etc., someone still has to pay for it. Whether that be the government, or (...) (24 years ago, 6-Jan-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Goodness of Man? (was: Re: Merry Christmas from the Libertarian Party
 
(...) Drat, I should have said Communist flag. Sorry, I was typing faster than I was thinking! Does this mean I get to stop now? ;) Scott ___...___ Scott E. Sanburn-> ssanburn@cleanweb.net Systems Administrator/CAD Operator-Affiliated Engineers -> (...) (24 years ago, 6-Jan-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Matthew jumps in (was Re: Goodness of Man?, etc.)
 
(...) [snip] (...) Found this: (URL) I don't think you say a single word about property, let alone property rights as a foundation, though. For what it's worth: in fact, I agree strongly with your conclusion in that case. The weak link you point out (...) (24 years ago, 6-Jan-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Goodness of Man? (was: Re: Merry Christmas from the Libertarian Party
 
(...) Bzzt. Scott "loses" the debate, he mentioned Nazis first. Darn, he was doing so well, too. <grin> (24 years ago, 6-Jan-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Goodness of Man? (was: Re: Merry Christmas from the Libertarian Party
 
<3874A730.471E9696@voyager.net> <slrn879ac2.3ti.matt...ia.bu.edu> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; x-mac-type="54455854"; x-mac-creator="4D4F5353" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit (...) What Larry is saying is that the guv steals its (...) (24 years ago, 6-Jan-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Goodness of Man? (was: Re: Merry Christmas from the Libertarian Party
 
(...) Wouldn't you then have legal recourse to sue (or whatever) that person for stealing? After all, it's your goods he's profiting from, without your permission, neh? <snippage> (...) Under a Libertarian system (which is one of the premises to (...) (24 years ago, 6-Jan-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Patents and IP and stuff (was Re: Goodness of Man? etc)
 
(...) What happens in the case of "obvious" developments? "Obvious" is of course difficult to judge (which is why it merits quotation marks) but take this theoretical example: I live in a very primitive society. We've just started developing ideas. (...) (24 years ago, 6-Jan-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Goodness of Man? (was: Re: Merry Christmas from the Libertarian Party
 
Scott: (...) D'oh! I forgot to address that! With "not being prevented from obtaining health care" I was trying to avoid implying that "the people" should pick up the bill. My oversight! (...) Well, the easiest criticism against this is that (...) (24 years ago, 6-Jan-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Goodness of Man? (was: Re: Merry Christmas from the Libertarian Party
 
(...) I think ideas are not identical to physical items, and therefore not identical to physical property. But it is very useful to extend our concepts for dealing with physical property to the realm of ideas. Tangent: this is something to be (...) (24 years ago, 6-Jan-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Goodness of Man? (was: Re: Merry Christmas from the Libertarian Party
 
<3874CFB7.C78E8E40@voyager.net> <FnxHxs.MKz@lugnet.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Perhaps a workable patent system could be constructed which would recognize parallel development. I don't even see (...) (24 years ago, 6-Jan-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Goodness of Man? (was: Re: Merry Christmas from the Libertarian Party
 
(...) The amazing thing is that they were foresighted enough to understand this, and left the constitution as a relatively small framework, and even gave the ability to modify that. The government we have today, for better or worse, is a result of (...) (24 years ago, 6-Jan-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Goodness of Man? (was: Re: Merry Christmas from the Libertarian Party
 
(...) People are being fed. That means the system is working. Amount it costs or number of people left unfed are merely degrees to which it is working. After careful numerical analysis, one might conclude that it is working at 10% efficiency. It's (...) (24 years ago, 6-Jan-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Merry Christmas from the Libertarian Party
 
In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Tim Rueger writes: Now that we have better (...) Better communications technolgy exists, but that does not mean that everyone has sufficient access to it. I am writing this from work. I do not own a computer. Why? Because (...) (24 years ago, 6-Jan-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Merry Christmas from the Libertarian Party
 
(...) Hmm? You don't need computers in the home for popular votes across large areas, you need computers (and other communications technology) to transport the numbers of votes from each constituency to the central administration. Nowadays, there's (...) (24 years ago, 7-Jan-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Goodness of Man? (was: Re: Merry Christmas from the Libertarian Party
 
(...) Your point being? (...) You get your R&D costs covered before you start inventing, or you don't. Simple. (...) They come from each individual mind. Any system where people can _independently_ think of the same things, and only one of them to (...) (24 years ago, 7-Jan-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Goodness of Man? (was: Re: Merry Christmas from the Libertarian Party
 
(...) So if you don't buy utilitarianism, why the hell do you keep using it in your arguments? Jasper (24 years ago, 7-Jan-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Goodness of Man? (was: Re: Merry Christmas from the Libertarian Party
 
(...) You still haven't shown that they are still completely relevant. Past successes do not equal future successes. See stockmarket. Jasper (24 years ago, 7-Jan-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Goodness of Man? (was: Re: Merry Christmas from the Libertarian Party
 
(...) No he didn't. Godwin specifically refers to calling contributors in the thread nazis/nazilike, not to just mentioning them. Jasper (24 years ago, 7-Jan-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Goodness of Man? (was: Re: Merry Christmas from the Libertarian Party
 
(...) "I don't know how much it is but it should have been enough"? Luisten to yourself for a moment there, man. (...) Changes meant to be for the good usually turn out to be for the worst. Jasper (24 years ago, 7-Jan-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Goodness of Man? (was: Re: Merry Christmas from the Libertarian Party
 
(...) Oh, but it's long been extended beyond that. I'd agree with larry; any mention of nazis is grounds for losing. Check out the jargon file entry: Godwin's Law -- [Usenet] "As a Usenet discussion grows longer, the probability of a comparison (...) (24 years ago, 7-Jan-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Goodness of Man? (was: Re: Merry Christmas from the Libertarian Party
 
(...) Works for me. Except that you're currently apparently ignoring everyone. :-) Mail sent to you is bouncing. My mail and the mail of several other people. So you might want to look into that. I'd have mailed you but of course that wouldn't work, (...) (24 years ago, 7-Jan-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Goodness of Man? (was: Re: Merry Christmas from the Libertarian Party
 
(...) Can you send me the bounce messages (by email ;) )? I'd be interested in seeing what the errors were. (...) I rather meant ignoring the irrational urge to respond to your strange notions of society ;) (...) Anyway, here's the probable problem: (...) (24 years ago, 8-Jan-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Goodness of Man? (was: Re: Merry Christmas from the Libertarian Party
 
(...) Nope. And your own citation disproves it. (...) Comparison != mention. Jasper (24 years ago, 8-Jan-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Goodness of Man? (was: Re: Merry Christmas from the Libertarian Party
 
Mail me so I know it works and I'll mail you the headers. But your conjecture is right, it is "MX loops back" or some similar (...) Yes, in order to get $BIGNUM you first have to transfer $BIGNUM-X to someone else. :-) (24 years ago, 8-Jan-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Thread Nazis! (was Re: Goodness of Man? (was: Re: Merry Christmas from the Libertarian Party)
 
(...) Using an example/hyperbole involving the Nazis probably counts though. (24 years ago, 8-Jan-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Goodness of Man? (was: Re: Merry Christmas from the Libertarian Party
 
(...) I stepped back a bit, and I suspect that what is frustrating both of us, leading to perhaps less well reasoned posts than normal on one or both sides, is that we're trying to discuss several things at once. Perhaps we should pick one topic, (...) (24 years ago, 8-Jan-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Thread Nazis! (was Re: Goodness of Man? (was: Re: Merry Christmas from the Libertarian Party)
 
(...) Consider this; perhaps it will help placate the pendant in you: the Nazi-thread-death convention is not Godwin's Law, merely derived from it. And as a tradition, it's often been that bringing Nazis into your argument in any way is grounds for (...) (24 years ago, 8-Jan-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Goodness of Man? (was: Re: Merry Christmas from the Libertarian Party
 
(...) I think you could well be right. (...) I guess that's why I don't have much respect for lawyers ;=> (...) Drive-by isn't the word. Running around "Clue" manor with guns and trying to have a duel, more like. Jasper (24 years ago, 8-Jan-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Thread Nazis! (was Re: Goodness of Man? (was: Re: Merry Christmas from the Libertarian Party)
 
(...) Some claim so. I disagree. Sometimes I'm a pedant. Jasper (24 years ago, 8-Jan-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Thread Nazis! (was Re: Goodness of Man? (was: Re: Merry Christmas from the Libertarian Party)
 
(...) <pedant>pedant</pedant> (...) I know. That corollary is mentioned in several places, though, and in its original form, and almost all others, refers only to Godwin's Law -Strict. (...) Often, yes, majority, no. Not that this is an issue for (...) (24 years ago, 8-Jan-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Goodness of Man? (was: Re: Merry Christmas from the Libertarian Party
 
Dave Schuler wrote in message ... (...) up (...) Great point, Dave! The people should have nothing to do with it. Let the cows pay for it. Or maybe the mice will pick up the tab. But, absolutely, positively don't let the people pay for anything! -- (...) (24 years ago, 13-Jan-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

©2005 LUGNET. All rights reserved. - hosted by steinbruch.info GbR