|
 | | Re: A question of remembrance...
|
| (...) Don't need to read it I already know it. So, could you please reread my post and several other previous ones? I ALREADY said that Turkey is not wanted. I already said that I BELIEVE PUTTING TURKEY IN IS NOT GOOD FOR ANY EUROPEAN COUNTRY RIGHT (...) (23 years ago, 3-Aug-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
| |
|  
all, rights
(score: 0.612)
|
|
| | Re: A question of remembrance...
|
| (...) You are completely clueless again. I neither said nor mean anything like that. All I tried to explain is was you are not defending human rights, you are just musterbating. Continue, though. It is quite relieving I believe. And for the EU issue (...) (23 years ago, 29-Apr-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
| |
|
all, rights
(score: 0.612)
|
|
| | Re: Fair use and allusion?
|
| (...) Well, news programs constantly use punch/pun titles, and no one complains about it (except when the torrent of stupid puns overwhelms the discourse (such as when Trent Lott pined for the days of segregation: "Lott of Trouble," "Lott of (...) (20 years ago, 21-Jun-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
| |
|
rights
(score: 0.612)
|
|
| | Re: Question for the Conservatives out there
|
| (...) Um, these rights are already very easy to take away. George W. Bush has, for example, taken them away from a whole bunch of people, both as Governor and as President, both here and abroad. Is Dubya so powerful that he can supplant the Will of (...) (20 years ago, 17-Jun-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
| |
|
rights
(score: 0.612)
|
|
| | Re: A question of remembrance...
|
| (...) Okay, let's assume this is true. It probably is. My question is: so what? Who comes to the table with clean hands? When it comes time to talk of peace there is usually blood on all sides. No side is innocent. No side is able to speak from a (...) (23 years ago, 30-Apr-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
| |
|
all, rights
(score: 0.612)
|
|
| | Re: Gay Marriage
|
| (...) You are deliberately misinterpreting the Bill of Rights. Of course that Amendment had nothing to do with the concept of marriage. (...) The definition of marriage is the union of one man and one women. NO gay person is excluded from entering (...) (20 years ago, 18-Jun-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
| |
|
rights
(score: 0.612)
|
|
| | Re: A question of remembrance...
|
| In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Richard Marchetti writes: <snip rebuffing-of-Scott-part> (...) I agree. That is definitely the key here. (...) I *completely* agree. I think I came off really different in my last post; don't get me wrong here. I am all (...) (23 years ago, 28-Apr-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
| |
|
all, rights
(score: 0.612)
|
|
| | Re: New Product Announcement - 10152
|
| (...) Builtin taxes: gasoline, other fuels, alcohol, cigarettes (at least). I think about 90% of gasoline price is various taxes. health security (in fact a tax) social security (in fact a tax) tax from immobilities (is it 'personal property tax'?) (...) (20 years ago, 27-May-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
| |
|
property
(score: 0.612)
|
|
| | Re: Question for the Conservatives out there
|
| Given that explanation, I think we both agree that discussion of "inherent rights" must assume that it is a social/legal construct. And that discussions of these general topics might be better served focussing on "inherent preferences." At least (...) (20 years ago, 18-Jun-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
| |
|
rights
(score: 0.612)
|
|
| | Re: Question for the Conservatives out there
|
| (...) I can accept your formulation more readily because it doesn't appeal to deus ex machina, but I'm not comfortable with the notion of "inherency." How is inherency identified/verified, and who gets to decide what is inherent? Hmm. Now that I (...) (20 years ago, 18-Jun-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
| |
|
rights
(score: 0.612)
|
|
| | Re: Gay Marriage
|
| "Christopher Weeks" <clweeks@eclipse.net> wrote in message news:HzIL24.D99@lugnet.com... (...) they (...) apply to (...) about (...) There is a lot of baggage associated with marriage that should be available to any couple. The problem with (...) (20 years ago, 18-Jun-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
| |
|
rights
(score: 0.612)
|
|
| | Re: A question of remembrance...
|
| (...) Well, see? Here is my point: acting defensively is totally ethical from my viewpoint. And that takes me fighting right up to the border -- my line in the sand. Once my would-be conquerors are on the other side of that line I just don't care (...) (23 years ago, 28-Apr-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
| |
|
all, rights
(score: 0.611)
|
|
| | Re: A question of remembrance...
|
| (...) One liner, huh? It says 4500 yes. "Background Armed conflict between Turkish security forces and the PKK has continued since 1984 in the southeast of Turkey, which is mainly inhabited by Kurds. Both sides were responsible for human rights (...) (23 years ago, 27-Apr-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
| |
|
all, rights
(score: 0.611)
|
|
| | Re: A question of remembrance...
|
| (...) That was in the bad old days... most other countries were doing pretty much the same - or wanted to. But sure, I'm still not proud of it. Anyhow, we have rebranded ourselves as the "UK" :-) (...) I view some laws as protection for the poor or (...) (23 years ago, 27-Apr-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
| |
|
all, rights
(score: 0.611)
|
|
| |
|
all, rights
(score: 0.611)
|
|
| | Re: Question for the Conservatives out there
|
| In lugnet.off-topic.debate, John Neal wrote: <snip> (...) "We are the Borg. Lower your shields and prepare to be assimilated. Resistance is futile." One person's 'perversion'(1) is another person's societal norm. What makes something a perversion? A (...) (20 years ago, 11-Jun-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
| |
|
rights
(score: 0.610)
|
|
| | Re: A question of remembrance...
|
| (...) I believe that an omission is a lie. So, to omit the whole history of the Holocaust and focus only on one group of people that suffered and died, and to repeat and repeat only that part of the history (allowing the other stats to be obscured) (...) (23 years ago, 24-Apr-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
| |
|
all, rights
(score: 0.610)
|
|
| | Re: Question for the Conservatives out there
|
| (...) I think you just said that it's sick because it's sick. Is that really what you meant? (...) I have, over and over -- across the years, claimed that the rights of the majority and the minority must both be set up so that they do not conflict (...) (20 years ago, 10-Jun-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
| |
|
rights
(score: 0.610)
|
|
| | Re: Question for the Conservatives out there
|
| (...) You keep asserting that the nuclear family is the foundation of society. I guess I thought you meant that the nuclear family is the foundation of society. Silly me. (...) It would improve it! (...) I think you left out some of the respect due. (...) (20 years ago, 10-Jun-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
| |
|
rights
(score: 0.610)
|
|
| | Re: Question for the sane out there
|
| (...) I'll say that. When "one's will" is the pursuit of basic human rights and every other avenue of approach has been reasonably exploited to no avail. It's not like they just want extra chocolates or something. (...) The right to worship is a (...) (20 years ago, 9-Jun-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
| |
|
rights
(score: 0.610)
|
