Debate : Search Results: all rights are property rights


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

Results 1141 – 1160 of about 12000.

Search took 0.02 CPU seconds.

Messages: Full | Brief | Compact

Sort: Prefer Newer | Prefer Older | Best Match

		Re: Is this an overreaction and a violation of rights?
(...) It was--the problem with typing is that my humour, my flair, my rather gosh darn good looking self just doesn't shine thru. When I go for an understatement, I make it a large understatement. I will be clear, abuse=bad. Abuse=CS (Childrens (...) (22 years ago, 23-Sep-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

all, rights
(score: 2.258)

		Re: Is this an overreaction and a violation of rights?
Very well said. Thanks for providing some background. One point I'd like to add to the punishment/end of punishment (or replace "punishment" with "containment" or whatever if it feels more comfortable): I am comfortable with "punishments" which (...) (22 years ago, 23-Sep-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

all, rights
(score: 2.258)

		Re: Those stupid liberal judges are at it again!
(...) If the US gov't were to break down, laws are irrelevant, and we're back to... who said it, Lock, Hobbes? can't remember polisci 101 (such a long time ago)...'natural law' or, as I like to think of it, 'He who has the biggest stick, rules' The (...) (22 years ago, 19-Sep-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

all, rights
(score: 2.258)

		Re: Is this an overreaction and a violation of rights?
(...) I think we have to understand when subjective measurements are being used, but I don't think we need to reject them. Food preferences are totally subjective, but should someone ignore them because they don't have the objective data on why they (...) (22 years ago, 24-Sep-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

all, rights
(score: 2.258)

		Re: Is this an overreaction and a violation of rights?
(...) Ah, but then you've fallen into the trap already! The whole point of these Myers-Briggs (or Voigt-Kampf, if you prefer) tests is that they're designed to yield apparently "correct" personality assessments, no matter how the answers come out. (...) (22 years ago, 24-Sep-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

all, rights
(score: 2.258)

		Re: Is this an overreaction and a violation of rights?
(...) Done and done! I remember a time in my youth when my mom was so into 'dream interpretation'. She and a few of her close friends would get together and discuss their dreams, look up symbols in books about that stuff that were available at the (...) (22 years ago, 24-Sep-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

all, rights
(score: 2.258)

		Re: Those stupid liberal judges are at it again!
(...) to (...) But it's typical to assume that the factors which multiple study venues (in this case) fail to have in common are most likely trivial in their causative power when compared to a single factor that is common across the study. If a (...) (22 years ago, 20-Sep-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

all, rights
(score: 2.258)

		Re: Is this an overreaction and a violation of rights?
(...) Deeper and deeper... In an English course a few years ago we discussed that bane of rational thought: Postmodernism. In a clever ploy to make PM seem like the thing to be, the author of one of our texts assembled list that I will paraphrase: (...) (22 years ago, 24-Sep-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

all, rights
(score: 2.258)

		Re: Those stupid liberal judges are at it again!
(...) I'll tell you what... if you want to explain a process, explain how it is that the US has two parties in power which are more similar than they are different, and which do everything they can to ensure that no other party or set of ideas can (...) (22 years ago, 20-Sep-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

all, rights
(score: 2.258)

		Re: Is this an overreaction and a violation of rights?
(...) <snip> (...) Now here's a debate I'm so moveable on is not really funny--my girlfriend, taking the courses at the Institute of Christian Studies, expounds the ideals that come with PM--that there is literally no one "right way" of doing (...) (22 years ago, 24-Sep-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

all, rights
(score: 2.258)

		Re: red light cameras CAUSE accidents
(...) I have a SEVERE issue with this statement. If someone borrows your car (with your blessing) and commits a crime with it, how could you possibly say it is the car owner's fault? Unless the owner is sitting next to the driver when the crime was (...) (22 years ago, 24-Sep-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

all, rights
(score: 2.257)

		Re: Those stupid liberal judges are at it again!
(...) He didn't say your opinion was infelicitous. He said it was rooted in ignorance. (...) It's arguable that he was the most powerful, but even that said, there were many many awfully powerful forces aligned against him. He wasn't even supported (...) (22 years ago, 22-Sep-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

all, rights
(score: 2.257)

		Re: For Those That Don't Get the 2nd Amendement (was Re: Those stupid liberal)
(...) Oh if only wishing made it so. Out of context? Where? Not one reply, rebuttal, refute, nada... Everything I laid out followed a very logically made construct, not of my making, but of your founding fathers making. I choose to read all the (...) (22 years ago, 24-Sep-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

all, rights
(score: 2.257)

		For Those That Don't Get the 2nd Amendement (was Re: Those stupid liberal)
(...) Yeah, really! What I find annoying is the refusal of some people to do their own homework (i.e ANY reading at all). I think the meaning of the 2nd Amendment is actually fairly clear, although at this precise moment in time it may be wished (...) (22 years ago, 24-Sep-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

all, rights
(score: 2.257)

		Re: 2nd Amendment -- Bare Bones
(...) Well, perhaps there is no resolution -- we certainly have more than one instance of bad law, bad stare decisis, coming down from the high court...and it does annoy. The court has, in particular, been guilty of making bad law that is in the way (...) (22 years ago, 25-Sep-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

all, rights
(score: 2.257)

		Re: Those stupid conservative (was liberal) judges are at it again!
(...) What the...?! Dave!, you have taken part in these discussion about Jury nullification before -- I have to assume you know all about it. Search "Jury nullification" in this newsgroup, both Larry and I have discussed it many times before (...) (22 years ago, 25-Sep-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

all, rights
(score: 2.257)

		Re: For Those That Don't Get the 2nd Amendement (was Re: Those stupid liberal)
(...) Well, you could choose to call my opinion 'trolling', however, I know I'm not. (...) And in each and every instance you quoted, I looked at the entire quote, and found that I read it differntly than you. I pointed out it should be interpreted, (...) (22 years ago, 24-Sep-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

all, rights
(score: 2.256)

		Re: For Those That Don't Get the 2nd Amendement (was Re: Those stupid liberal)
if I were a critical thinker (which I'm so obviously not)... Oh, before I start, thanks Richard for actually taking the respond with proof, instead of just "you're wrong..." with no backup. (...) I wanna score points with the regulars? Anywhere (...) (22 years ago, 24-Sep-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

all, rights
(score: 2.256)

		2nd Amendment -- Bare Bones
Here is the quote part: "A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed." This could just as easily read: Because a free state must protect itself (...) (22 years ago, 25-Sep-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

all, rights
(score: 2.256)

		Re: Idealism vs Realism?
(...) I don't think this is an accurate description at all. Americans do ACT and they often pay a much higher price than you might imagine. (...) Hmmm, I don't know this one. But if the equations are: privileges = rights (as is done in a lot of case (...) (22 years ago, 30-Sep-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

all, rights
(score: 2.256)

More: Next Page >>