Debate : Search Results: all rights are property rights


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

Results 2041 – 2060 of about 12000.

Search took 0.01 CPU seconds.

Messages: Full | Brief | Compact

Sort: Prefer Newer | Prefer Older | Best Match

		Re: From Harry Browne
(...) There are tons of sentients (not people) who are excluded from the possesion of rights. When this is justified, the arguments are typically based on the fact that they're dumber than us, religious dictate, or something seemingly undefinable (...) (24 years ago, 12-Nov-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

rights
(score: 1.976)

		Re: Yet another push for thoughtful legislation from Tennessee
(...) If I am Todd, isn't that my right? Need I justify my reasons? And to whom? (...) I think the ratio is a lot higher for other reasons. I like this (from their web site): (URL) Fetal Rights> You might suppose that the ACLU might be concerned (...) (21 years ago, 18-Mar-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)

rights
(score: 1.976)

		Re: Government's role [Was: Re: What happened?]
(...) I think environmental protection and animal "rights" are harder than defense to privatize. In fact, I think defense is relatively easy. Probably easier than roads. (25 years ago, 19-Jul-99, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

rights
(score: 1.976)

		Re: We are what we eat. Or is that "whom we eat?"
(...) No. You keep equating rights and needs as the same thing. I'm saying they are not the same thing. Your first line in this sequence is incorrect on my outlook: that's your interpretation of it but that's NOT what I said. (...) don't (...) of (...) (24 years ago, 31-Jul-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

rights
(score: 1.976)

		Re: "unconstitutional detention" (Re: So now it's official...)
(...) Before anyone gets hot and bothered about rights in the UK, this is an AI overview of detention without trial due to risk of terrorism in the UK: ==+== The maximum period of detention without charge is seven days, with an extension of up to (...) (23 years ago, 26-Oct-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

rights
(score: 1.976)

		Re: Free Speech, again
(...) Na. You show ME where it's guaranteed they don't! Remember, enumeration of rights is not necessarily exhaustive. (...) How so? If they mail in their utterances and they get published, it doesn't matter where they were when they were uttered, (...) (21 years ago, 23-Apr-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

rights
(score: 1.976)

		Re: Swift was Right! (He just named the wrong people...)
(...) Assuming that you don't infringe on other's rights (as I gather from your last comment). (...) Do you assert the right to have society pay to put you back together again, humpty dumpty? Just wondering. JOHN (...) (21 years ago, 17-Jun-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)

rights
(score: 1.976)

		Re: For Those That Don't Get the 2nd Amendement (was Re: Those stupid liberal)
David: I am trying hard to respect your words, but I get the funny idea that this is just one long troll for you. Either that or you have some kind of blinders on over this particular subject. Those quotes were just the tip of the iceberg -- there (...) (22 years ago, 24-Sep-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

rights
(score: 1.976)

		Re: McViegh is no Libertarian
(...) I honestly don't know the answer to this one. Animals don't have rights the way we do but I still don't think that being cruel to animals is OK. I have heard claims the market can take care of most of it if a little publicity is used... But (...) (23 years ago, 18-Jun-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

rights
(score: 1.976)

		Re: Gotta love Oracle...
(...) So, being asked for a proof of identity violates one of your rights? Which one? I would be opposed to any other than a very brief use of my ID information, but giving it out to briefly check whether I am on a list of wanted people seems OK (...) (23 years ago, 24-Oct-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

rights
(score: 1.976)

		My3rs-Briggs waste of time (was Re: Is this an overreaction and a violation of rights?)
ENOUGH already! This thread, as usual for many in .debate, no longer has a DAMNED thing to do with the Subject. If you are going to continue this tomfoolery, at least continue it under a new Subject, so people can easily set it on Ignore. I was (...) (22 years ago, 25-Sep-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

rights
(score: 1.976)

		Re: Not embarassed to be a Canadian anymore...
(...) Bull. I don't trust John Ashcroft to protect anyone's rights. Nor did I trust Janet Reno either. Did you even look at the "Habeas Corpus" post I posted? "sounds convenient" indeed. (...) I don't trust that the president isn't so wacked. (...) (22 years ago, 27-Nov-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

rights
(score: 1.976)

		Re: What's actually the task of the moderators on BrickShelf?
(...) But nothing; were the rights of Communists not restricted? Search google for "McCarthyism" & "freedom" to see what I mean. Scott A (20 years ago, 7-Sep-04, to lugnet.general, lugnet.build, lugnet.off-topic.debate)

rights
(score: 1.976)

		What Were Those Justices Smoking? (was Re: Supreme Court Rules Agains State Rights
(URL) via Reason) COMMENTARY June 7 2005 What Were Those Justices Smoking? - The medical marijuana ruling is legally and morally flawed. By Nick Gillespie, Nick Gillespie is editor in chief of Reason magazine. The most important quote, IMHO: - start (...) (19 years ago, 9-Jun-05, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

rights
(score: 1.976)

		Re: National vote on handguns?
In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Richard Marchetti writes: <snip> WELL SAID, froggy friend. I have one tiny point of confusion... I had always heard Jefferson, et. al., referred to as a "classical liberal" rather than a "radical conservative". I suspect (...) (23 years ago, 22-Jul-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

rights
(score: 1.976)

		Re: Blue Hopper Car Mania...
A few nits. Clarifications, really. (...) And as long as it doesn't violate the rights of others. (remember, free goods are not a right, nor is it a right that you must accept custom from anyone) (...) or fraud. But of course I hold fraud to be a (...) (25 years ago, 13-Oct-99, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

rights
(score: 1.976)

		Re: Does God have a monopoly on gods?
(...) No. Only intolerance acted upon in a way that suppresses rights. We even tolerate someone discrminiating who he will sell scissors to because he only likes right handed people and can't tolerate lefties, as long as there are no governmental (...) (25 years ago, 11-Mar-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

rights
(score: 1.976)

		Re: A question of remembrance...
(...) You're referring to this bit, I trust: "Both sides were responsible for human rights abuses during the conflict, in which an estimated 4,500 civilians were killed, around 3,000 settlements evacuated or burned down and up to three million (...) (23 years ago, 27-Apr-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

rights
(score: 1.976)

		Re: Those stupid liberal judges are at it again!
(...) When you adequately explain from where our government claims our rights originate, then we can talk about the constitutionality of "God language". -John (22 years ago, 10-Sep-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

rights
(score: 1.976)

		Re: Democracy.... Dubya Style
(...) So Bush talks about Freedom and Liberty whist funding gross human rights abuses in places like Uzbekistan & Israel and you think he is not "dishonest"? He hands out "lucrative" contracts to his buddies and you think he is not corrupt? Wake up, (...) (21 years ago, 18-Dec-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)

rights
(score: 1.976)

More: Next Page >>