Debate : Search Results: all rights are property rights


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

Results 1961 – 1980 of about 12000.

Search took 0.02 CPU seconds.

Messages: Full | Brief | Compact

Sort: Prefer Newer | Prefer Older | Best Match

		Is this an overreaction and a violation of rights?
I was just reading this news item: (URL) think it is extremely scary that a woman has been arrested on the sole evidence of a surveillance camera, and her sister is being charged with accessory to a crime. While the incident caught on tape might (...) (22 years ago, 22-Sep-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

rights
(score: 1.976)

		Re: Is this an overreaction and a violation of rights?
In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Frank Filz writes: We MUST avoid letting paranoia destroy our freedom. (...) It's a little late to be thinking like that. Millions of dollars have been handed over for hightech security just for this purpose. Here in (...) (22 years ago, 22-Sep-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

rights
(score: 1.976)

		Re: Is this an overreaction and a violation of rights?
(...) If I broke into your home and stole your stereo, but you had no other evidence than your in-home video surveillance system, wouldn't you at least want me to be questioned? (...) Okay, what if I broke into your house, stole your stereo, and was (...) (22 years ago, 23-Sep-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

rights
(score: 1.976)

		Re: Is this an overreaction and a violation of rights?
(...) After a brief thought, and remembering from a class I took yesterday on the Meyers Briggs Type Indicator, I was just thinking of something that might be useful to add here about my debating style. As an ENFP, my way of working through problems (...) (22 years ago, 23-Sep-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

rights
(score: 1.976)

		Re: Is this an overreaction and a violation of rights?
(...) Well, you're just a silly goofball for thinking that in ridiculous way. What's an ENFP? I believe a lot of that "thinking out loud" goes on here, but many times it's clarified as such. I know that I sometimes forget to disclaim, and I wind up (...) (22 years ago, 23-Sep-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

rights
(score: 1.976)

		Re: Is this an overreaction and a violation of rights?
(...) (URL) can find hundreds of descriptions on the web. This was the first which had an extensive description. Frank (22 years ago, 23-Sep-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

rights
(score: 1.976)

		Re: Is this an overreaction and a violation of rights?
(...) Oops! Disregard most of that--I looked at the wrong test. The correct one on that site is apparently: (URL) However, aside from the precise questions, the methodology seems equally suspect. The user is asked for a series of bafflingly simple (...) (22 years ago, 23-Sep-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

rights
(score: 1.976)

		Re: Is this an overreaction and a violation of rights?
(...) I didn't look at or take the test at this site, so I can't comment on their specific set of questions. The first time I took the indicator, I balked at these binary questions. The trick is to pick the answer which best fits your true feelings. (...) (22 years ago, 23-Sep-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

rights
(score: 1.976)

		Re: Is this an overreaction and a violation of rights?
(...) Ah, the light shines... Yes, evidence is a sticky issue. And we did use to have other standards -- the manner in which we arrive at a hopefully objective approximation of the "truth" is ever changing, however slowly. Sometimes the change is (...) (22 years ago, 23-Sep-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

rights
(score: 1.976)

		Re: Is this an overreaction and a violation of rights?
(...) You just described for yourself exactly what the MBTI means by Introverted. MBTI Introverted doesn't mean "doesn't like being with people" it means something more like "isn't energized by being with people". Your SO is a classic MBTI (...) (22 years ago, 24-Sep-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

rights
(score: 1.976)

		Re: Is this an overreaction and a violation of rights?
(...) Me, I like to read someone else's horoscope and pretend that it was intended for me and me alone! I mean, it was -- right?! =) -- Hop-Frog (22 years ago, 24-Sep-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

rights
(score: 1.976)

		Re: Is this an overreaction and a violation of rights?
(...) Well sure, for you. But what about the rest of us? 8^) Dave! (22 years ago, 24-Sep-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

rights
(score: 1.976)

		Re: Is this an overreaction and a violation of rights?
(...) But that's the whole problem--the so-called "personality types" are as subjective as astrological assessments or phrenological readings. And so are the criteria that make up each "type." (...) Trouble is, you can usually discern when you're (...) (22 years ago, 24-Sep-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

rights
(score: 1.976)

		Re: Is this an overreaction and a violation of rights?
(...) I'm not sure that I'd say the test is arbitrary. If we are to discount any subjective things, then there is a lot which totally falls apart (for an example related to the original post in this thread, demonstrate to me that there is no (...) (22 years ago, 24-Sep-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

rights
(score: 1.976)

		Re: Is this an overreaction and a violation of rights?
(...) The question of what is and what is not a crime is determined by (in many cases centuries of) tradition and by societal consensus. The question of what is "INFP" and what is "ENTP" is determined by the whim of Myers-Briggs. For that matter, (...) (22 years ago, 24-Sep-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

rights
(score: 1.976)

		Re: Is this an overreaction and a violation of rights?
(...) Ok, two questions: 1. Is there any method of understanding personality in a way which allows one to make guarded generalizations that you feel is sufficiently objective to be useful? 2. Do we just not bother trying to understand different (...) (22 years ago, 24-Sep-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

rights
(score: 1.976)

		Re: State department report on Saudi Arabia's Human Rights record
(...) Perhaps once Iraq's oil has been securred, the house of Saudi will be sidelined? ;) Scott A (22 years ago, 3-Apr-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

rights
(score: 1.976)

		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: 1.976)

		Re: Preaching to the Choir
(...) "Deserve" a better word? What rights would you ascribe to children? (...) I'm not even sure by what criteria one could use to support or reject such a claim. I go by this: men and women are very different by nature; vastly more different than (...) (20 years ago, 11-Aug-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)

rights
(score: 1.976)

		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: 1.976)

More: Next Page >>