Debate : Search Results: all rights are property rights


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

Results 1781 – 1800 of about 12000.

Search took 0.02 CPU seconds.

Messages: Full | Brief | Compact

Sort: Prefer Newer | Prefer Older | Best Match

		Re: FOTY, at least for me.
(...) Oh, I never said it was a good thing for them to do. I'm not sure how I feel about a government university limiting this particular activity on their property. Obviously it would be better if the university were not government in the first (...) (23 years ago, 19-Jan-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

property
(score: 0.453)

		Re: Blue Hopper Car Mania...
I figured I'd let this percolate for a while before I responded. First a side point, auctioning IS selling. What else would it be? You all know my stance on it, it's the fairest way to allocate a scarce quantity. And it is a kind of sale. Now, I'm (...) (25 years ago, 11-Oct-99, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

all, rights
(score: 0.453)

		Re: left-leaning pantywaists in Britain (Re: So are they prisoners of war or what?)
(...) I thought that Walker was charged with acting against coalition forces in Afghanistan – not involvement in the events of 11.09.01? (...) That was my understanding. (...) Given that his change of sides was so complete, I must admit it did (...) (23 years ago, 5-Feb-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

rights
(score: 0.453)

		Does it pay to be a Patriot?
I've been reading a lot about supposed infringements on civil liberties lately. It doesn't require a significant search to find a site highlighting an "infringement" that most citizens are ignorant of. I find much of the subject matter to be over my (...) (23 years ago, 4-Feb-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

rights
(score: 0.453)

		Re: left-leaning pantywaists in Britain (Re: So are they prisoners of war or what?)
(...) is alleged to have (...) alleged to have been (...) Indeed. But there are UK "detainees" in Cuba too. Could these guys not have committed treason against the UK? Could they not go on trial in the UK with real charges against them? (...) One (...) (23 years ago, 4-Feb-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

rights
(score: 0.452)

		Re: Don Quixote puts away his lance (was Re: McDonalds set
(...) And that's really why I feel the need to judge by intent. If I see one person kill another, I can see the action, but not the intent. Perhaps the killer had no idea he was killing, or whatever. His intent could concievably be such that his (...) (25 years ago, 29-Sep-99, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

all, property
(score: 0.451)

		Re: Don Quixote puts away his lance (was Re: McDonalds set
(...) Yep. What it really means is I can't judge you. Only you can judge you. I can do my darndest to try, and usually, in our society, we can do a pretty good job of determining someone else's intent. We don't always get the details right, and (...) (25 years ago, 28-Sep-99, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

all, property
(score: 0.451)

		Re: An armed society...(what if?)
(...) What does it mean to "live unarmed?" I'd wager that living armed can vary--if you have a handgun locked away somewhere in the home, that's very different from "packing" 24/7/365. I'd bet that the vast majority--more than 95%--of gun owners fit (...) (23 years ago, 24-Jan-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

rights
(score: 0.450)

		Re: So are they prisoners of war or what?
(...) Probably. I suspect you mean, "are they being treated legally?", to which I would answer, probably not. (...) Interesting gray area. In the conventional sense, I would think not - but they would then have the rights of any accused criminal (...) (23 years ago, 24-Jan-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

rights
(score: 0.450)

		Re: An armed society...
(...) [snip] (...) I think discounting the possibility of change is short-sighted. The world changes. Laws change. Governments change. People change. Maybe this hasn't changed in a long time, but the fact there's a significant opposition to it (...) (23 years ago, 23-Jan-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

rights
(score: 0.450)

		Re: An armed society...
(...) Well, there is stuff that is covered by the federal government to make trade and travel amongst the many states more or less an easy thing -- one of the true limited purposes of the U.S. federal govt. I have no problems with any of that. But (...) (23 years ago, 23-Jan-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate) !

rights
(score: 0.450)

		Re: An armed society...
(...) Um, I was kind of playing, but what do you mean? I think the 2nd is pretty clear on the matter. The issue of how the Supreme Court has allowed the curtailing of our constitutional rights is interesting, but I'm not sure that I'm ready to (...) (23 years ago, 23-Jan-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

rights
(score: 0.450)

		Re: An armed society...
(...) Dave, your post is too full of errors to take on as a whole so I picked just this one spot. I think it is also an erroneous statement. I could certainly mount arguments that would show that the second amendment is indeed a protection to keep (...) (23 years ago, 23-Jan-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

rights
(score: 0.450)

		Brickworld & Rebate Checks
So I saw on the news today that Bush signed his "economic stimulus" plan into law today. This means that many of us in the U.S. could be receiving rebate checks starting in May. How does this relate to LEGO you ask? Well, with Brickworld coming up (...) (17 years ago, 14-Feb-08, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

all
(score: 0.450)

		Re: An armed society...
(...) Before some of the sillier rhetoric goes much further -- the historical reason for the 2nd Amendment in the U.S. is exactly as Mike states in the above. Yes, we have a system of checks and balances. Yes, we are supposed to have separate (...) (23 years ago, 21-Jan-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

rights
(score: 0.450)

		Re: scalpers
(...) What do you mean "should have been"? The goal of a store is to sell things. Stores are within their rights to put quantity limits in place, if they so choose. They are also within their rights to sell as many as they like to the first person (...) (23 years ago, 19-Jan-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

rights
(score: 0.450)

		Re: Art? (was Re: LEGO as Art)
Hello John; I certainly don't want to get into a huge debate with you... :-) But I would be happy to participate in a civilized discussion. I am not one who normally goes to art exhibitions or one who has a passion for art; both viewing and (...) (25 years ago, 30-Sep-99, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

all, rights
(score: 0.450)

		Re: Don Quixote puts away his lance (was Re: McDonalds set
(...) As with all these little morality puzzles, we don't have enough facts to conclude that. For all we know, Heinz skipped buying health insurance to cover the drug because he wanted to go bowling, or because he needed the money to pay his last (...) (25 years ago, 27-Sep-99, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

all, rights
(score: 0.449)

		Re: Don Quixote puts away his lance (was Re: McDonalds set
(...) Old debates die hard :) (...) I certainly agree here. Heinz doesn't appear to me to have any right to the drug; and neither does his wife. Rights don't really seem to dictate proper ownership in this case other than the druggist. After all, (...) (25 years ago, 27-Sep-99, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

all, rights
(score: 0.449)

		Re: 22/7 & infinities (was: Re: The nature of the JC god, good or evil?)
David Eaton wrote in message ... (...) you (...) to (...) cause (...) it (...) can (...) act (...) our (...) I didn't really mean either of your definitions. I think every creature has the same morality - to survive by whatever means necessary, but (...) (25 years ago, 16-Sep-99, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

all, property
(score: 0.448)

More: Next Page >>