Debate : Search Results: all rights are property rights


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

Results 61 – 80 of about 12000.

Search took 0.01 CPU seconds.

Messages: Full | Brief | Compact

Sort: Prefer Newer | Prefer Older | Best Match

		Re: Ticket prices going up
(...) I'm not scared, I'm not apprehensive, I'm just busy. Not SO busy that I wasn't willing to toss one post in, but busy enough that I wanted to keep it short. It's a large topic, it's been visited before, etc. As for doing away with ot-d, I (...) (22 years ago, 21-Jan-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

all, rights, property
(score: 1.310)

		Infinite Justice
Infinite Justice. Has anyone noticed the peculiar nature of those words? It sounds very like what was imagined as a perpetual war in the essay within a novel, "The Theory and Practice of Oligarchical Collectivism" by Emmanual Goldstein that resides (...) (23 years ago, 20-Sep-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

all, rights, property
(score: 1.300)

		Please make a donation via Paypal to the Red Cross!
I am sure that most of us received the following message from Paypal If possible, please make a donation, even the smallest amounts count. There will always be someone in need who could use everthing possible right now. I am just about to donate (...) (23 years ago, 14-Sep-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, lugnet.loc.au, lugnet.general)

all, rights, property
(score: 1.296)

		Re: Victories for smokefree ballot initiatives
(...) Where? You have no right to breathe ANY air (clean OR dirty) when on my property, unless I grant it. And conversely I have no right to emit smoke on your property, unless you grant it. Therefore when you're on my property, you will breathe the (...) (20 years ago, 10-Nov-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

rights, property
(score: 1.283)

		Re: Santorum Fails In His Effort To Pervert The Constitution
(...) I guess it depends on who you think gets to interpret the constitution and define our rights. The Supreme Court has at least sometimes supported the understanding that Larry and I share (I think), that the 9th is an umbrella for all rights (...) (20 years ago, 2-Aug-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

all, rights
(score: 1.277)

		Re: 40 Reasons to support Gun Control.
"David Koudys" <dkoudys@redeemer.on.ca> wrote in message news:I2An93.779@lugnet.com... (...) up--I (...) believe (...) Which side is "the dark side" in your estimation? I don't see gun ownership "giving up". I see it as a realistic approach to self (...) (20 years ago, 16-Aug-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

all, rights
(score: 1.267)

		Re: Santorum Fails In His Effort To Pervert The Constitution
(...) It is necessary to distinguish between "scientific proof" and "literal proof" in this context. Scientific proof is established when all observable data are consistent with theory and prediction. Literal proof is established only when something (...) (20 years ago, 23-Jul-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)

all, rights
(score: 1.264)

		Re: Lavender Brick Society
(...) Since that happened well before the civil rights movement, the only applicable legality that I can think of is the 5th Amendment (nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law), but I believe they were classified as (...) (20 years ago, 21-Sep-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)

rights, property
(score: 1.264)

		red light cameras CAUSE accidents
(...) Don't get me started on these cameras... they're bad. It's not the rights violation claim (which is false, unless you report the car stolen because it actually was stolen, you're responsible for what people do with your property), it's the (...) (22 years ago, 23-Sep-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

all, rights, property
(score: 1.254)

		Re: Santorum Fails In His Effort To Pervert The Constitution
(...) Prior to 1965, the 9th Amendment was not used to restrict the states from excercising their 10th Amendment rights. At that point, it was used to safeguard the privacy of one's home, but subsequent citations of the 9th Amendment have shown that (...) (20 years ago, 3-Aug-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

rights, property
(score: 1.245)

		Re: polygyny in "biblical times"
(...) But there IS a humane way. Help societies to move away from subsistence agriculture (and the modern sweatshop equivalent) by introducing the rule of law, property rights, and fostering the growth of free enterprise. This reduces the incentive (...) (20 years ago, 20-Jul-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

rights, property
(score: 1.242)

		Re: JLUG - The Forum that WAS.
Phew! Finally got my posting rights back. I've been with JLUG since a few days after it was made and even today it's the one place that made me feel at home on the internet. I remarked to CM Janey the day it was announced here on lugnet that I felt (...) (17 years ago, 21-Jun-07, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

all, rights
(score: 1.241)

		Re: Not Saving Private Ryan.
(...) Yeah. I cried too. I suddendly realized I was the same species as those butchers who sent men get butchered there that day. Both sides. If Europe and N. America had solved the problem with diplomacy BEFORE it got out of hand, none of this (...) (20 years ago, 4-Jun-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

all, rights
(score: 1.241)

		Re: Arkham Asylum - A cool set, but a bit disturbing.
(...) Okay, I take it now that we have dispensed fantasy and are now dealing with real life situations. Vigilantism isn't ideal, because there isn't a standard-- that, of course, is the beauty of Law. The problem comes when the law fails to bring (...) (17 years ago, 9-Jun-07, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)

all, rights
(score: 1.238)

		Re: Why the founding fathers limited government scope (was Re: Rolling Blackouts
(...) I think you can start from an unfairer place and move towards a fairer place without having to start completely from scratch. I about 1% of the time think we should throw all property documentation away in NA and start over, negotiating afresh (...) (23 years ago, 11-May-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

all, rights, property
(score: 1.232)

		Re: Bad day for individual rights
(...) I don't have an opinion on the second ruling -- it seems OK (without reading the laws in question), but I do disagree with the first. In 1906, in _Hale v. Henkel_, the court wrote: "The individual...owes no such duty [to submit his books and (...) (20 years ago, 21-Jun-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

rights, property
(score: 1.231)

		Re: What Censorship Isn't
(...) Nope. The child and parents can still read the book at the local library or at the bookstore or even online. The private school is choosing not to carry a particular book on private property, which isn't censorship. Suppose I write a book that (...) (17 years ago, 13-Apr-07, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)

all, property
(score: 1.227)

		Re: What Censorship Isn't
(...) What's the standard, then? Does censorship cover anything that doesn't include everything? That would define "censorship" so thinly that it would have no meaning at all. But if we insetad define "censorship" to be an action of government, then (...) (17 years ago, 13-Apr-07, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)

all, rights
(score: 1.222)

		Re: 'Lego Ban' at Seattle School Fueled by Anti-Private Property Crusaders
(...) Right! Anyone should be allowed to walk into your home, treat your house with disrespect, and call you evil when you object. (...) Of course, because civil engineering has taught us that all humans of every culture fit very neatly and easily (...) (18 years ago, 28-Feb-07, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

all, property
(score: 1.216)

		Re: malicious behavior
In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Timothy Gould wrote: <snip> (...) I couldn't give a rats ass about DMCA, 'fair usage', 'freedom of speech' or '1st ammendment rights' or whatever people are going on about now--it's all obfuscating the actual issue. (...) (18 years ago, 14-Feb-07, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

all, rights
(score: 1.207)

More: Next Page >>