Debate : Search Results: all rights are property rights


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

Results 5701 – 5720 of about 12000.

Search took 0.02 CPU seconds.

Messages: Full | Brief | Compact

Sort: Prefer Newer | Prefer Older | Best Match

		Re: New Web Page
(...) What's HCI? (...) On the open road, you are only seconds away from death. Scary thought, the first time you realize it. Especially if you're doing 70MPH through a forest area at the time. In case anyone hasn't noticed, I see a big parallel (...) (25 years ago, 18-May-99, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

rights
(score: 0.270)

		Re: Gun debate (was Re: New Web Page
(...) Once. (...) Once. (same case both times) I was the foreman on a jury that got the "wrong" verdict. Wrong in that we let someone go who clearly was guilty. But "clearly" was not clear to us until after the fact, when we talked to the prosecutor (...) (25 years ago, 17-May-99, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

rights
(score: 0.269)

		Re: What a downer :-(
"Steve Burge" <steveburge@b_i_g_f_o_o_t.com> wrote in message news:H856EB.6DA@lugnet.com... <snip> Video games have an advantage over board games in that you can play them when no-one else is willing to play a game with you</snip> Isn't that down to (...) (22 years ago, 4-Jan-03, to lugnet.general, lugnet.lego.direct, lugnet.off-topic.debate, lugnet.technic)

all
(score: 0.269)

		Re: New Web Page
Mr L F Braun wrote in message <373D07C9.3E786497@p...su.edu>... (...) wrong.) (...) Your entirely ignoring the reason for the Declaration of Independance... The reason the United States has its own government totally independant of England is (...) (25 years ago, 16-May-99, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

rights
(score: 0.269)

		Re: New Web Page
(...) The second amendment means that if they get too carried away with negating our rights, we can take them back. (25 years ago, 14-May-99, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

rights
(score: 0.269)

		Re: New Web Page
(...) Why does it matter? The first half of it is merely a justification for the second which is direction on what rights are granted to (actually affirmed for) whom. (...) No. (...) That's right, they didn't want to limit it to any particular kind (...) (25 years ago, 14-May-99, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

rights
(score: 0.269)

		Re: stopping topics vs. dealing with troublemakers and nonconstructive participants
(...) Alright then, I don't accept your perspective. I think it's a baseless emotional response to Larry. (...) That's another baseless accusation AND name calling. (...) There is no balance point. There is no line to cross between "good" and "bad". (...) (22 years ago, 30-Dec-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

all
(score: 0.269)

		Re: New Web Page
(...) When the British marched on Concord April 19, 1775, the militia essentially consisted every able bodied citizen. I believe that the 2nd amendment is specifically referring to an informal militia NOT controlled by the wider government (though (...) (25 years ago, 14-May-99, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

rights
(score: 0.269)

		Re: New Web Page
(...) I would have to agree with Mike. The biggest problem with gun legislation, is that it's in the second amendment of the US Constitution. Spelled out specifically. If the government deems is necessary to take away that amendement, what's to stop (...) (25 years ago, 13-May-99, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

rights
(score: 0.269)

		Re: New Web Page
(...) For the record, I think that my beliefs are subject to change, but others have tried to convince me and it hasn't happened on this issue. (...) This is the key practical point, as far as I see it. (...) And this is the key ethical point which (...) (25 years ago, 13-May-99, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

rights
(score: 0.269)

		What's the big deal about the Mini TIE?
Just wondering, I received my Mini TIE today, and for such a small scale it looks fairly good. But what's so great about it????? Why would anyone pay thirty bucks for this??? I'm not a large Star Wars fan (I mean, I don't drool over a poster of (...) (22 years ago, 24-Dec-02, to lugnet.starwars, lugnet.general, lugnet.off-topic.debate)

all
(score: 0.268)

		Re: The Brick Testament parts the Red Sea
(...) existance, than one must acknowledge the probability that the "Christian God" will be facing extinction in the near future. The nations that are Muslim, Hindu, and Buddhist (not in the article above presumably because it is more a philosophy (...) (22 years ago, 20-Dec-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

all
(score: 0.268)

		Re: The Brick Testament parts the Red Sea
(...) No, probably on CNN. BTW whenever I saw "colorised" in the listings I just turned the saturation all the way down on my receiver to turn it black and white again. Made for some interesting commercials. But I digress. (22 years ago, 23-Dec-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

all
(score: 0.268)

		Re: The Brick Testament parts the Red Sea
(...) Obviously, those artists were just imagining how things might have looked if there had been color. Creative license and all... 8^) -H. (22 years ago, 23-Dec-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

all
(score: 0.268)

		Re: The Brick Testament parts the Red Sea
(...) Hmm... If popular opinion is all that's required to establish "proof" of a metaphysical entity's existence, then I'd say that the Christian God had better watch over His Shoulder. According to one set of statistics, Christianity can lay claim (...) (22 years ago, 20-Dec-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

all
(score: 0.268)

		Re: IGNORANT views fuel oppression?
(...) Perhaps you can explain why? BTW, I prefer John, 8:7. (...) But how do we deem when that line in the sand has been crossed? Can it not be abused if a poster is simply posting an unpopular [but valid] view? In this group [without any (...) (22 years ago, 23-Dec-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

all
(score: 0.268)

		Re: stopping topics vs. dealing with troublemakers and nonconstructive participants
(...) I'd be happy so see where. (...) I would acknowledge your perspecive if it had a basis I could see. I could claim that George Bush is smarter than Stephan Hawking, but I don't expect you to acknowledge my perspective without me explaining (...) (22 years ago, 23-Dec-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

all
(score: 0.268)

		Re: stopping topics vs. dealing with troublemakers and nonconstructive participants
(...) I thought I had responded already? (...) From my perspective, Larry's post was a troll. I read it as just another of similar posts he has made. I stopped myself going through it line-by-line just after it was posted – as I thought it would be (...) (22 years ago, 23-Dec-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

all
(score: 0.268)

		Don't you even think about "America the Great!"
In the very same paper that carried an article that has to do with our favourite pastt-time (which shall not be mentioned here in ot-d), I came across two very different types of articles: (URL) you say? Well, somehow I find the reporter easier to (...) (22 years ago, 22-Dec-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

all
(score: 0.268)

		Re: stopping topics vs. dealing with troublemakers and nonconstructive participants
(...) Very true, but the Wright brothers didn't say "Let's try the same methods that failed for all those other guys." They also didn't say "Let's try to make our airplane work by flying repeatedly into an impenetrable barrier." Your attempt to (...) (22 years ago, 20-Dec-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

all
(score: 0.268)

More: Next Page >>