Debate : Search Results: all rights are property rights


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

Results 2481 – 2500 of about 12000.

Search took 0.02 CPU seconds.

Messages: Full | Brief | Compact

Sort: Prefer Newer | Prefer Older | Best Match

		Re: Essay on Emerson vs. Thoreau; civil disobedience
(...) Yep. That is a good summation of both David's position and mine, I think. Now back to might makes right... isn't moral relativism a kind of "might makes right"? I think it is (without too much, if any, twisting) and that's one of my issues (...) (24 years ago, 31-Jan-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

rights
(score: 0.384)

		Re: lowering noise
(...) It seemed to me he was trying to show a percieved double standard. While I do disagree with the use of the term "flaming" here in this thread (I consider flaming to be a post in order to denigrate another individual openly and and for no (...) (19 years ago, 8-Apr-06, to lugnet.admin.general, lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)

all
(score: 0.384)

		Re: Essay on Emerson vs. Thoreau; civil disobedience
Snip most, hope to come back later... address a tiny fraction. (...) We differ strongly. I suspect this is moral relativism. I reject that... I go even farther than rejection. I think there are moral absolutes and no government, even with the (...) (24 years ago, 30-Jan-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

rights
(score: 0.384)

		Re: Essay on Emerson vs. Thoreau; civil disobedience
(...) At the risk of being accused of jury tampering by making you aware of your rights and duties as a juror(1), check this out: (URL) discusses "jury nullification". This is a unique power that American jurors have... to find a defendent innocent (...) (24 years ago, 30-Jan-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

rights
(score: 0.384)

		Re: Essay on Emerson vs. Thoreau; civil disobedience
(...) Hmm... actually I'm not sure anymore what parts voice it best... I think I tried to sum it up at the bottomish part of: (URL) a lot of that was expounded upon in the (vastly long) thread that followed... so I don't think it goes into as much (...) (24 years ago, 30-Jan-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

rights
(score: 0.384)

		Re: guns, guns, guns (was: demographics (was: My Gun Control Rant))
(...) Well, I suppose guns are necessary for an insurgency to be armed. They may not be the only effective means of achieving substantial political change; cf feminism for another example. (...) Not necessarily, but that's not my point. Gandhi's (...) (24 years ago, 15-Jan-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

property
(score: 0.384)

		Re: Awww (was: IRON MECHA...)
(...) No Paul, you are not speaking only for yourself. It's a safe bet that you are speaking for virtually all women. I'd say much of the righteous indignation in this thread is misplaced. And I also agree with LFB, Lugnet sure ain't what it used to (...) (19 years ago, 30-Mar-06, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, lugnet.market.buy-sell-trade, FTX) !

all
(score: 0.384)

		Re: Why not Both?
(...) In effect what you are doing here is inventing you're own God. Because the God of the Bible DOESN'T fit what you'd like him to be, you decide that you cannot believe in that God. From whence did you get any rights you may have? I believe in (...) (24 years ago, 25-Jan-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

rights
(score: 0.384)

		Re: Why not Both?
(...) Biblically - no human has any rights. Just like the laptop that doesn't work (sin), God's righteousness (no sin) demands that we pay for our sin. The only sufficient payment is death. Where that "leaves us" - is destined for eternal separation (...) (24 years ago, 23-Jan-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

rights
(score: 0.383)

		Re: Heads Up, Non-Atheists
(...) Probably true, and it's a shame. We've discussed Pat Robertson before, and what a shame it would be if he were everyone's idea of a "typical" Christian. (...) I hear that all the time, and it baffles me! Besides, I've told you before--if it (...) (19 years ago, 23-Mar-06, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)

all
(score: 0.383)

		Re: Why not Both?
(...) And really, here's where we get to the problem as I personally regard it. Why? Because for me, in order for me to have faith in a universalist religious system, things like morality (sins, etc) must be dealt with fairly. For me. I think I went (...) (24 years ago, 24-Jan-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

rights
(score: 0.383)

		Re: A Berkeley Study That Portrays Liberalism Positively?!!
(...) Okay, Tom, let me take a stab at justifying a position such as this one. A pro-life stance would hold that a human life above all is sacred. So, the ultimate crime would be the taking of an innocent life. Therefore, the ultimate punishment (...) (19 years ago, 23-Mar-06, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)

all
(score: 0.383)

		Re: Heads Up, Non-Atheists
(...) I've heard the argument that since an agnostic doesn't actively believe in god, they are technically a subset of atheists. I might call it 'soft atheism' versus 'hard atheism.' This is actually something I've been thinking about recently. How (...) (19 years ago, 24-Mar-06, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)

all
(score: 0.383)

		Re: Why not Both?
Taking points one at a time? Indeed another difference between us mayap :) (...) Because I trust my judgement, and I don't trust the Bible's. The two don't mesh. For me. And as a result, I'm forced to choose. And I'll choose my judgement. Go check (...) (24 years ago, 23-Jan-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

rights
(score: 0.383)

		Re: A Berkeley Study That Portrays Liberalism Positively?!!
(...) That's an inside joke between Mr. Neal and me. Nothing to do, incidentally, with discussions of the UN Embassy in Denmark, which we have all "let go." (...) I don't know about that last part, but a sample of 2,000 kids growing up in a famously (...) (19 years ago, 22-Mar-06, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)

all
(score: 0.383)

		Re: A Berkeley Study That Portrays Liberalism Positively?!!
Honest question - which is more ridiculous? 1 - pro-life and pro-death-penalty 2 - pro-choice and anti-death-penalty I don't know, but I see far too many conservatives that fit #1, which makes little sense. And of course I see a decent amount of (...) (19 years ago, 22-Mar-06, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

all
(score: 0.383)

		Re: A Berkeley Study That Portrays Liberalism Positively?!!
In lugnet.off-topic.debate, John Neal wrote: <snip> (...) Yeah, O'Reilly uses his radio program to say things he wouldn't say on the telly, and vice versa--in this way, he can claim he didn't say something bigotted or factually wrong on whatever (...) (19 years ago, 22-Mar-06, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

all
(score: 0.383)

		Re: A Berkeley Study That Portrays Liberalism Positively?!!
(...) I read about this on a certain Other Forum and basically said "eh." It's a too-small sample size from a too-small geographic area. I'd say it's close to meaningless, and in any case the factors of adolescent life and parental leanings likely (...) (19 years ago, 22-Mar-06, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)

all
(score: 0.383)

		Re: My Gun Control Rant
(...) be (...) First, I really (really!) meant consumer firearms. Military contract is a bit different. Now, the purpose (if you mean _my_ purpose) when I travel with a concealed firearm is not to kill people. It is to defend myself. I have defended (...) (24 years ago, 7-Jan-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

property
(score: 0.383)

		Re: Is space property?
(...) 8^) I make it a habit only to be burgled by people who accept Visa. I might be unknowingly straddling two issues here; I'm comparing taxation with burglary in terms of the "taxation is theft" principle I've read, but perhaps that's not (...) (24 years ago, 2-Jan-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

property
(score: 0.383)

More: Next Page >>