Debate : Search Results: all rights are property rights


Off-Topic / Debate / Search Results: all rights are property rights

Results 1001 – 1020 of about 12000.

Search took 0.01 CPU seconds.

Messages: Full | Brief | Compact

Sort: Prefer Newer | Prefer Older | Best Match

		Re: Customs question...
(...) I'm not sure. I guess my strongest notion about morality is that it's a bogus idea (like religion) designed to manipulate others into building a society that benefits certain people. (i.e. my sense of morality, had I one that I championed, (...) (23 years ago, 23-Nov-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

all, rights
(score: 2.343)

		Re: Conspiracy theories
(...) Because I thought it was an interesting link and that it would spark some interesting discussion. And it was, and it did. You all know that I'm mostly in the "can't trust government" camp. And I have no doubt whatever that (to pick one facet) (...) (23 years ago, 22-Nov-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

all, rights
(score: 2.343)

		Re: Medical Marijuana
(...) I'll buy that, at least about certain issues. It seems to me that some states would immediately erode civil rights if given the chance and not prevented by the Fed from doing so. Yes, we always have privacy and search-and-seizure issues (...) (23 years ago, 23-Nov-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

all, rights
(score: 2.343)

		Re: Medical Marijuana
(...) No, it's too plausible not to be true. The government thinks heroin is some big bad thing (it is) that we need to be protected from because we're too stupid (we're not)... so we have wild gyrations in the street price as we either bribe the (...) (23 years ago, 23-Nov-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

all, rights
(score: 2.342)

		Re: Apology.
(...) No. Remove "think". He SAID it. Either it is true, or he's a liar. (I am not going to argue epistemology with you on this) My mistake was twofold (1) First, forgetting that he's a consistent liar and thinking that I'd be doing him a service in (...) (23 years ago, 23-Nov-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

all, rights
(score: 2.342)

		Re: The real Phantom Menace and the fall of the republic
(...) You mean over the past hundred years? It seems to me that today is the natural evolution of a hundred years of incrementally giving up the American way. (...) Yeah. From my informal discussion over the past two months, most people don't really (...) (23 years ago, 30-Nov-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

all, rights
(score: 2.341)

		Re: The real Phantom Menace and the fall of the republic
(...) I disagree. Two hundred years ago, as now, the rights of the individual were paramount, but the definition of individual was very different and was suited to the demands of the time. Would slave-dependent states have signed the Constitution (...) (23 years ago, 2-Dec-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

all, rights
(score: 2.340)

		Re: The real Phantom Menace and the fall of the republic
(...) Well, if they were alive today -- I'd kiss Thomas Jefferson, shake hands with guys like Madison and Jay, and kick Hamilton in the pain zone (::sigh:: if only Burr had killed him sooner =oP). No arguments over the value of the Declaration, it (...) (23 years ago, 1-Dec-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

all, rights
(score: 2.340)

		Re: The real Phantom Menace and the fall of the republic
(...) Some people were already agitating for the freeing of slaves. The southern states would not accept such a change to their economy. I am pretty sure slaves were understood to be individuals with rights, denied them or not, what was asserted (...) (23 years ago, 3-Dec-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

all, rights
(score: 2.340)

		gay by birth vs. gay by choice
the following is a question and answer excerpt from a debate on another website. The questions seem to me very clear and logical. The answers, however, do not; sometimes they seem rather desperate. I find it very interesting that the person (...) (23 years ago, 3-Dec-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

all, rights
(score: 2.339)

		Re: gay by birth vs. gay by choice
As far as i am concerned, the whole deate is moot. Not only that, but it is dangerous because of its potential impact on society. Also, the way the various quotes describe homosexuality leave the issue somewhat clouded. As i see it: - (...) (23 years ago, 3-Dec-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

all, rights
(score: 2.339)

		Is this fair?
U.S. Supreme Court, ASHWANDER v.TENNESSEE VALLEY AUTHORITY, 297 U.S. 288 (1936) [abridged, for full text try somewhere like findlaw.com] The Court developed, for its own governance in the cases confessedly within its jurisdiction, a series of rules (...) (23 years ago, 4-Dec-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

all, rights
(score: 2.339)

		Re: FOTY, at least for me.
(...) There was recently a flap in the paper here about scalping. NC State has a new policy banning resale of tickets on their property which upset people like season ticket holders or just folks who showed up for a game and one person wasn't able (...) (23 years ago, 19-Jan-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

all, property
(score: 2.337)

		Re: An armed society...
(...) Ah, the dangers of abridged source material. I found a more extensive discussion of that case at: (URL) appears that the case involved due process and the right to use one's property (in this case, residence) as one sees fit, as is spelled out (...) (23 years ago, 23-Jan-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

all, property
(score: 2.336)

		Re: An armed society...(what if?)
(...) The Templars, indeed. It was the Hospitalars, but the money was provided by the Gnomes of Zurich. Fnord. (...) To actually address Chris' question back up at the top: as few as two. But conspiracy is usually defined as having some illegal (...) (23 years ago, 25-Jan-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

all, property
(score: 2.335)

		Re: An armed society...(what if?)
(...) I'm not sure what your point is or how you can draw that conclusion (I already addressed your "liberal media" comment - did I miss the reply?). (...) Well, you lost me again. What does that have to do with gun control? And passing a (...) (23 years ago, 24-Jan-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

all, property
(score: 2.335)

		Re: questions on current events
If youi want to talk bastardy things that so-called enlightened western powers have done, how about: 1. The international land mine ban (not signed by the US, Israel or Finland- also not signed by China, Russia parts of africa, Iraq, Iran, etc.) (...) (23 years ago, 18-Dec-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

all, rights
(score: 2.335)

		Re: questions on current events
(...) Where have you been? Read this: US admits second bombing error (URL) (...) Givin that China & Israel are members and Russia is knocking at the door for entry, that should not surprise you all that much. More about the meeting in Qatar here: (...) (23 years ago, 18-Dec-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

all, rights
(score: 2.335)

		Re: Eduardo is out of line (was: Re: The Lego Group will attempt to stop some "brickfilms")
Tim, I'm choping your note and reassembling because I think it's important... (...) I believe I detect a double standard in your rhetoric. Is it "pinning" something on you to identify the fault in your thinking? (...) For me, this isn't really about (...) (23 years ago, 23-Dec-01, to lugnet.admin.general, lugnet.off-topic.debate)

all, rights
(score: 2.335)

		Re: The Lego Group will attempt to stop some "brickfilms"
In lugnet.mediawatch, John Neal writes: <snip> I'm having a hard time reconciling "Jason Rowoldt" and "merely another slimeball" as phrases that belong in the same post, frankly. Jason has done a great deal of good for the hobby with his efforts, (...) (23 years ago, 21-Dec-01, to lugnet.mediawatch, lugnet.off-topic.debate)

all, rights
(score: 2.334)

More: Next Page >>