Debate : Search Results: all rights are property rights


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

Results 301 – 320 of about 12000.

Search took 0.01 CPU seconds.

Messages: Full | Brief | Compact

Sort: Prefer Newer | Prefer Older | Best Match

		Re: UN Gets it Right!
(...) I trust you do not mean that war crimes are constitutional? ;) (...) I'm sure many others would say Bush heading it would also be a "farce". After all, it is Bush's record on human rights which stopped him getting the ICC exemption extended. (...) (20 years ago, 24-Jun-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)

all, rights
(score: 0.936)

		Re: Gay Marriage
I have to admit, being a Massachusetts-ite, this subject line piqued my interest. Pardon while I crash the party... (...) Doesn't it though? I think Larry quoted the rights quite accurately. But you can get more specific than that if you're (...) (20 years ago, 18-Jun-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)

all, rights
(score: 0.936)

		Re: Question for the Conservatives out there
I've written here before that I think it would be more valuable to reframe the entire notion of rights as responsibilities. I think the absolutism of rights is easy to get tripped up on. (At least for me.) (...) One common stance is that an entity (...) (20 years ago, 18-Jun-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

all, rights
(score: 0.935)

		Re: Taking the bait (was Re: Fair use and allusion?)
(...) OK, The support needed is rather different, though. You need to support with logic that my characterisations of Moore somehow falsify what I said.\ I need to support by showing that Moore isn't factual, and that his assertions don't follow (...) (20 years ago, 25-Jun-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)

all, rights
(score: 0.935)

		Re: Taking the bait (was Re: Fair use and allusion?)
(...) Because the willful choice not to support your argument is indistinguishable from forfeiting the argument, I accept this as your forfeiture. If it is not your intent to forfeit, then I invite you to support your argument, as you have demanded (...) (20 years ago, 25-Jun-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)

all, rights
(score: 0.935)

		Re: Question for the Conservatives out there
(...) The problem here is the conflation of legal notion with absolute reality. Rights are the legal/political expression of an aesthetic that nearly everyone (involved in the discussion) supports. While I wrote before that I was siding with John, (...) (20 years ago, 18-Jun-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

all, rights
(score: 0.934)

		Re: Question for the Conservatives out there
(...) This is a very nice summation, overall. (...) A good distinction to bear in mind. I don't think I have the ammunition to prove my case scientifically, so I should probably say I'm aiming for the philosophical angle. To clarify: By "inherent (...) (20 years ago, 18-Jun-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

all, rights
(score: 0.934)

		Re: Fair use and allusion?
(...) No I'm not. Reread what you cited. "tends to suggest" is hardly Summarily Dismissed. Further, being wrong about an issue or cause is not the same as dismissing the issue or cause. I dismiss his opinions about issues (for valid cause since he's (...) (20 years ago, 21-Jun-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

all, rights
(score: 0.934)

		Re: Question for the Conservatives out there
"Christopher Weeks" <clweeks@eclipse.net> wrote in message news:HzICys.15Iv@lugnet.com... (...) as if (...) The (...) same (...) I've definitely had some trouble with the origin of rights. They feel inherent, yet it also seems generally accepted (...) (20 years ago, 18-Jun-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

all, rights
(score: 0.934)

		Re: Gay Marriage
(...) I'm not sure why you're missing my point. I'm OK with any sort of union between any number of people (or, if in future other species are uplifted or discovered such that they can give informed consent) or other species as long as everyone (...) (20 years ago, 18-Jun-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)

all, rights
(score: 0.934)

		Gay Marriage
(...) I'll cite the Bill of Rights to the US Constitution. You even know the amendment... it's the one that discusses the right of citizens to associate (or not) as they choose. Then I'll cite contract law in general. People can enter into (or not (...) (20 years ago, 18-Jun-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)

all, rights
(score: 0.934)

		Re: Gay Marriage
(...) Don't you? I mean, the way US laws are written, I believe there are rights provided to married couples that wouldn't be to anyone under something like 'civil unions'. Speaking of which, is that what you're advocating? If so, how would a 'civil (...) (20 years ago, 18-Jun-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)

all, rights
(score: 0.934)

		Re: Question for the Conservatives out there
(...) All I am asking is upon what do you believe our society is based. If you think it is a myriad of things, fine. What are they? (...) Upon what exactly do you base your assertion? (...) What I mean is that you are asserting things for which you (...) (20 years ago, 18-Jun-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)

all, rights
(score: 0.934)

		Re: Question for the Conservatives out there
(...) Sure, IRL, but I was speaking theoretically, as I believe were the FF. Merely because someone is able to oppress me and take away my rights doesn't justify it. (...) That is precisely why I claim they are divinely-endowed, so that no one has (...) (20 years ago, 18-Jun-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)

all, rights
(score: 0.933)

		Re: From Richard: "It's all bad news - Chaos is my fault"
(...) So you think that the oil wealth is distributed equally per capita? That's remarkably Socialist of you, John, but it's not the reality. The state (states, really, seven of 'em) where wealth distribution on public projects is greatest is the (...) (20 years ago, 29-May-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)

all, property
(score: 0.932)

		Re: From Richard: "It's all bad news - Chaos is my fault"
(...) I see in this post this suggestion advanced again. I think I have seen it before. It goes well with this one that John prepared earlier: (...) I mentioned that I saw a structure and underlying logic in some of Scott's posts, and felt bad for (...) (20 years ago, 28-May-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

all, property
(score: 0.932)

		Re: Question for the Conservatives out there
(...) Thank you for that clarification. I meant that I choose lines that I believe are absolutely drawn out. My point was that I am not the only one who adheres to drawn lines. We all do. (...) Eh, when the perspective is from the Creator of the (...) (20 years ago, 11-Jun-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)

all, rights
(score: 0.931)

		Re: Question for the Conservatives out there
(...) No one thing!!! People often pull this "sky is falling" gimick about some trivial little detail claiming that a change will cause the collapse of society. If we granted universal marriage rights to homosexuals -- as we would if we were a (...) (20 years ago, 10-Jun-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)

all, rights
(score: 0.931)

		Re: Question for the Conservatives out there
(...) But you're wrote "You draw your lines, I draw mine." That is an explicit statement of self-imposed limitations. Is that your intent? Or do you really mean "You draw your lines, I adhere to absolute lines drawn out for me by millennia-old (...) (20 years ago, 10-Jun-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)

all, rights
(score: 0.931)

		Re: Question for the Conservatives out there
(...) I realize this and I believe in an absolute morality, but he doesn't. I am trying to appeal to his sensibilities, not mine (which I know he flatly rejects). I am arguing on his turf, as it were. (...) I assume you are talking about when I (...) (20 years ago, 10-Jun-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)

all, rights
(score: 0.931)

More: Next Page >>