Debate : 3595


Off-Topic / Debate / 3595	3594 \| 3596

Subject:	Re: Libertarian stuff (Was: Re: Art Debate Was: [Re: Swearing?])
Newsgroups:	lugnet.off-topic.debate
Date:	Wed, 12 Jan 2000 21:19:13 GMT
Viewed:	1555 times

In lugnet.off-topic.debate, John DiRienzo writes: > Fortunately, I live in the best country in the world, How many countries have you lived in??? It must be an awful lot to make that assertion. > More to the point, those are not life affirming societies in much of any > way, they are more like barbaric societies. Okay, but the point that I'm making for the third time is that there are homeless children all over America - does that make you less life-affirming, or more barbaric? > The only guilt I feel is that the system I am an unwilling partial member of > supports (or uses) those barbaric systems. I understand that, but I thought you said you only had responsibility for yourself? Or is social responsibility a secondary optional one? > I'm saying we need to fix this crap, and you are saying I don't know its > there. Again, get real. I'm wasn't saying that you didn't know it was there. Your comment about how if you saw a homeless child in the street, then you (and most everyone else) would take them in, seemed that you had at least forgotten. There will be plenty at your local city.. Richard

Message has 5 Replies:

		Re: Libertarian stuff (Was: Re: Art Debate Was: [Re: Swearing?])
Richard Franks wrote in message ... (...) life-affirming, or (...) So you admit to lying three times now? (...) of (...) At the moment it is mandatory. (...) if (...) would (...) at (...) I live in a city. You must be right, I am blind, because I (...) (25 years ago, 12-Jan-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

		Re: Libertarian stuff (Was: Re: Art Debate Was: [Re: Swearing?])
(...) would (...) Beside the point, really, and I ought to be debugging my example instead of posting, but mostly when I see the homeless, they're adults. They are the deranged, the crackheads and mostly, the winos, mixed in with a few people who (...) (25 years ago, 12-Jan-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

		Re: Libertarian stuff (Was: Re: Art Debate Was: [Re: Swearing?])
(...) Um, you know those links that you said that you'd read.. did you really? I don't know how you can deny this fact, but still, you seem willing to deny most things. Richard (25 years ago, 12-Jan-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

		Re: Libertarian stuff (Was: Re: Art Debate Was: [Re: Swearing?])
(...) Which is good, but doesn't mean that they are not there. (...) As LUGNET is an international forum, that statement is hardly going to go without comment! Best for somethings, not best for others... (...) I'm not arguing (m)any of those points (...) (25 years ago, 12-Jan-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

		Re: Libertarian stuff (Was: Re: Art Debate Was: [Re: Swearing?])
Richard Franks wrote in message ... (...) the (...) of (...) has (...) Don't agree? then why don't you form a "Save the Winos" party? I am in AA (1), and its my first responsibility to stay sober. My utmost responsibility thereafter is to help other (...) (25 years ago, 13-Jan-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Message is in Reply To:

		Re: Libertarian stuff (Was: Re: Art Debate Was: [Re: Swearing?])
Richard Franks wrote in message ... (...) of (...) at (...) the (...) rely on (...) Hey man, You don't need to show me that, I have already looked. I try to point out reality to others whenever possible (often to their disdain), and I have shown (...) (25 years ago, 12-Jan-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

209 Messages in This Thread:
(Inline display suppressed due to large size. Click Dots below to view.)

Entire Thread on One Page:: Nested: All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear: All | Brief | Compact
This Message and its Replies on One Page:: Nested: All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear: All | Brief | Compact

Custom Search