Debate : Search Results: all rights are property rights


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

Results 2861 – 2880 of about 12000.

Search took 0.01 CPU seconds.

Messages: Full | Brief | Compact

Sort: Prefer Newer | Prefer Older | Best Match

		Re: We're being attacked by the intelligent, educated segment of culture!
(...) On that, I concur completely. It's a leap I'm not able to make, but I agree that it's central to accepting creationism as an explanation. (...) Oh, I know that. Heck, I think I know a whole lot less than you probably think I think. (...) Fair (...) (20 years ago, 31-Mar-05, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)

all
(score: 0.348)

		Re: We're being attacked by the intelligent, educated segment of culture!
(...) Essentially, just saying that nature throws this string of numbers at us. Not sure what it represents. We see the 1st number is 1. We have to wait 500 years to see what the next number is. During those 500 years, what do we think the next (...) (20 years ago, 31-Mar-05, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

all
(score: 0.348)

		Re: We're being attacked by the intelligent, educated segment of culture!
(...) Eh, I think the counterargument goes that 1) what you call an "actual" scientist doesn't necessarily match what others might call an "actual" scientist 2) why should this be classified as "science"? Calling it "history" might be what (...) (20 years ago, 30-Mar-05, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

all
(score: 0.348)

		Re: We're being attacked by the intelligent, educated segment of culture!
(...) I'm not sure I agree. If we found a dynamic systems model of the universe which predicted the future (and the past) with ridiculous accuracy, and used it to backtrack in time, I think it could effectively prove evolution to be accurate or not. (...) (20 years ago, 31-Mar-05, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)

all
(score: 0.348)

		Re: We're being attacked by the intelligent, educated segment of culture!
(...) I'll hold off here-- is that what you meant to say about a scientific theory being proven? IE that no contradictions "prove" it (and accepting that it is a falsifiable theory) (...) See, there's the bit that I was getting at: "reasonable (...) (20 years ago, 31-Mar-05, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

all
(score: 0.348)

		Re: We're being attacked by the intelligent, educated segment of culture!
(...) I'm gonna skip down to here, because here's the meat of the argument, I think. Proof is in the eye of the beholder. DISPROOF is far more objective. I'm thinking of a number sequence. The first number is 1. A creationist (I'm gonna go back to (...) (20 years ago, 30-Mar-05, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

all
(score: 0.348)

		Re: We're being attacked by the intelligent, educated segment of culture!
(...) I think what the person meant was that we are being attacked by the intelligensia, the secular "educated" elite, and I think he is right on. There is a culture war going on in our country. Heh, what I find hysterical is the thought of (...) (20 years ago, 30-Mar-05, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)

all
(score: 0.348)

		Re: We're being attacked by the intelligent, educated segment of culture!
(...) Or, framed another way, an overwhelming minority who wish to impose their elitist, secular beliefs on the unwashed masses. (...) See, here is the crux of the issue for me: science has the temerity to assume that it will ever come close to (...) (20 years ago, 30-Mar-05, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)

all
(score: 0.348)

		Re: We're being attacked by the intelligent, educated segment of culture!
(...) Ha! Reminds me of the poll I heard wherein some majority of people found Kerry to be more intelligent, but W to be more trustworthy. In effect, it showed that there were lots of people out there who preferred someone who was trustworthy to (...) (20 years ago, 30-Mar-05, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

all
(score: 0.348)

		Re: We're being attacked by the intelligent, educated segment of culture!
(...) This attitude is, unfortunately, exactly at the heart of the problem. It is abhorrent that anyone suggests that the mythology of Creationism (under whatever label) should be taught alongside a scientific theory so thoroughly confirmed that no (...) (20 years ago, 30-Mar-05, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

all
(score: 0.348)

		Re: What age does buying lego become embarrassing?
Scott, (...) I agree people who purchase such vehicles though, well within their rights, are selfish and ignorant. Not the normal kind of ignorance, but a willful ignorance of the true cost of such vehicles. The US does not fight wars in the mideast (...) (24 years ago, 14-Jul-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, lugnet.general)

rights
(score: 0.348)

		Re: wild west creations
(...) Indeed. John Brown would have brought down slavery at a much lower cost in human life, I think, had he been allowed to do so (and had he made some wiser choices about how to go about procuring arms). With the benefit of not having trampled (...) (24 years ago, 14-Jul-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

rights
(score: 0.347)

		Bye, bye Canada
(...) Do you speak French? If not, I guess you don't speak to the vast majority of people here that speak French as their natural language, that have no idea that there is a Canadian culture (most people here wouldn't know that Avril Lavigne, Bryan (...) (20 years ago, 2-Mar-05, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

all
(score: 0.346)

		Re: Excellent news!
(...) If you can prove that all confessions are 100% truthful. What if he's lying to protect his sister? Sure he probably deserves a penalty for lying about it, but the needle? ROSCO (20 years ago, 4-Mar-05, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)

all
(score: 0.346)

		Re: Excellent news!
(...) Why would you be so reticent to conclude that the taking of an innocent human life for no reason or purpose, but for, say amusement, isn't absolutely wrong and evil for everyone, not just you yourself? (...) Yes, but according to you, nothing (...) (20 years ago, 7-Mar-05, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)

all
(score: 0.346)

		Re: Excellent news!
(...) Because if a person is doing it for amusement, then chances are that it’s not absolutely wrong for that person. The most broadly inclusive conclusion I can draw is to say that the taking of life is generally considered to be objectionable to (...) (20 years ago, 7-Mar-05, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)

all
(score: 0.346)

		Re: Excellent news!
In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Dave Schuler wrote: <snip> (...) Surely you'd agree that the victims differ from the two cases of loss of life-- one "victim" is a murderer, and the other is an innocent. Therein lies all the difference in my view. (...) (...) (20 years ago, 4-Mar-05, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)

all
(score: 0.346)

		Re: Excellent news!
(...) Not sure where you are going with that since no one is going to live a couple of hundred years. (...) So we don't murder innocent people. (...) My point exactly. (...) How so? (...) No. There's lots of people who confess to crimes that they (...) (20 years ago, 5-Mar-05, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)

all
(score: 0.346)

		Re: Excellent news!
At this point I should restate my standard disclaimer that I see no reason to conclude that any moral absolutes can be known by humans with certainty. With this in mind, any seemingly absolute statements I make along the lines of “reality TV is (...) (20 years ago, 4-Mar-05, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)

all
(score: 0.346)

		Don't know how this'll be received
Considering that sometimes I've been 'pro Canada' in the past... but anyway-- (URL) which former Foreign Minister of Canada, Lloyd Axwothy, wrote an open letter to Condi-- " By LLOYD AXWORTHY Dear Condi, I'm glad you've decided to get over your fit (...) (20 years ago, 4-Mar-05, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

all
(score: 0.346)

More: Next Page >>