Debate : Search Results: all rights are property rights


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

Results 6061 – 6080 of 11764.

Search took 0.01 CPU seconds.

Messages: Full | Brief | Compact

Sort: Prefer Newer | Prefer Older | Best Match

		Re: Tribute to Sept 11, 2001
I spent the last week or so working in NW USA. During my time there I spent some time with a few of the people I met mulling over the events of the previous year, and what the future may hold. On the morning of Sept 11 I took time out to attend a (...) (22 years ago, 16-Sep-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

all
(score: 0.259)

		Re: TJ acknowledged a Creator in DoI (was: Re: Those stupid liberal judges are at it again!
Despite my better Judgement I am going to get sucked into this debate. (If only to prove to Dave! that someone who belives God created the universe is capable of rational thought.) (...) First off John, I want to make it perfectly clear that I (...) (22 years ago, 15-Sep-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

all
(score: 0.259)

		Re: Those stupid liberal judges are at it again!
(...) Practices... Amen, brother. They all practice it, but none of them have gotten it to WORK. (...) Don't confuse using with working. I'm happy with my claim, socialism doesn't work. (...) Um... I dunno. :-) What party sacrifices (...) (22 years ago, 12-Sep-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

all
(score: 0.259)

		Re: Tribute to Sept 11, 2001
Any tribute to the heroic efforts displayed that day deserves recognition. A very nice display showing the infamous bucket brigade that helped uncover the debris in an effort to find fallen brothers and sisters in humanity. They did this with (...) (22 years ago, 11-Sep-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

all
(score: 0.259)

		Re: Those stupid liberal judges are at it again!
(...) If "apples" = "why does the State in one case have the right to endorse or restrict religion" and "oranges" = "why does the State not have the right to endorse or restrict religion," then I am indeed comparing apples and oranges. What's your (...) (22 years ago, 10-Sep-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

all
(score: 0.259)

		Re: Those stupid liberal judges are at it again!
(...) Or suppress it either. Allowing a club to meet isn't support, but preventing one from meeting is suppression. Unless the school has a policy forbidding all clubs from meeting on school grounds it cannot prevent some clubs (which are otherwise (...) (22 years ago, 13-Sep-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

all
(score: 0.258)

		Re: TJ acknowledged a Creator in DoI (was: Re: Those stupid liberal judges are at it again!
(...) Here it is, in terms as simple as I am able to formulate, in the hope that--against all prior evidence--you will be able to formulate a rational conclusion: P1: According to the 1st Amendment, Congress has no right to issue any declaration of (...) (22 years ago, 12-Sep-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

all
(score: 0.258)

		Re: TJ acknowledged a Creator in DoI (was: Re: Those stupid liberal judges are at it again!
(...) To no avail, apparently. Your inability to reason is invulnerable. (...) What do you want to hear, John? That "their Creator" should be stripped frm the Declaration of Independence? Fine, I certainly support that. As Dave K has correctly (...) (22 years ago, 13-Sep-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

all
(score: 0.258)

		Re: Those stupid liberal judges are at it again!
(...) This I think is the crux so I snipped the rest. If a car has a flat tire, but the driver is driving it down the road because the other three tires are OK, is the car "working"? One could argue that it is. After all, the car is moving in the (...) (22 years ago, 13-Sep-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

all
(score: 0.258)

		Re: Averages and Capitalism (was Re: Those stupid liberal judges are at it again!)
(...) Sorry, in what way is redistribution "fair"? (...) This is the same old argument and the refutation is simple. NOT everyone has to do good or be charitable. Merely enough people to take care of the problem. We have empirical evidence that is (...) (22 years ago, 13-Sep-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

all
(score: 0.258)

		Re: Averages and Capitalism (was Re: Those stupid liberal judges are at it again!)
(...) And I would tend to concur. I mean, if I'm going to be fed and housed, and really not have to do anything to 'earn' it, why would I work? In the 'perfect' socialism, everybody works and then everything that they made gets gathered up and (...) (22 years ago, 13-Sep-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

all
(score: 0.258)

		Re: Averages and Capitalism (was Re: Those stupid liberal judges are at it again!)
(...) I don't accept that as a given. Too often pure socialist countries started off way down the ladder anyway, and are further weighted down by being dictatorships. (...) I think it is easier for socialists to take over capitalist countries with (...) (22 years ago, 13-Sep-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

all
(score: 0.258)

		Re: TJ acknowledged a Creator in DoI (was: Re: Those stupid liberal judges are at it again!
(...) Gee, Dave! we simpletons shur 'preshiate when you smart folk done make it easy-like fer us to understand;-) (...) "Congress shall pass no laws respecting religion or the free exercise thereof;..." What do you mean by "issue any declaration"? (...) (22 years ago, 13-Sep-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

all
(score: 0.258)

		Re: Poll tax! (was: Those stupid liberal judges are at it again!)
(...) No, we currently do not. That's the UK I think(1). I was talking about under an idealised constitution if I got to write it. 1 - or at least I recall that there was some talk of introducing same. Note that a "poll tax" was used as a repressive (...) (22 years ago, 13-Sep-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

all
(score: 0.258)

		Re: Those stupid liberal judges are at it again!
(...) I believe that one can acknowledge God without endorsing any particular religion. The fact is that the vast majority of Americans believe that we are a country under God. The religious background of those same Americans is wildly different. (...) (22 years ago, 12-Sep-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

all
(score: 0.258)

		Re: TJ acknowledged a Creator in DoI (was: Re: Those stupid liberal judges are at it again!
(...) Regrettably, your argument is weakened by the fact that it matters a great deal to us all whether the dollar is backed by gold or not, whether you realise it or not. Try another analogy to make your main point, which I feel you are correct (...) (22 years ago, 12-Sep-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

all
(score: 0.258)

		Re: Those stupid liberal judges are at it again!
(...) Hooray--we agree! That's been my intended point all along, in both this exchange and in the previous debate a month or so ago! I absolutely, totally, completely, and unequivocally support your right to religious freedom and freedom of speech! (...) (22 years ago, 10-Sep-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

all
(score: 0.258)

		Re: Those stupid liberal judges are at it again!
(...) I don't really have to: it's you that needs to prove that virtually every single country on the planet is a failure. _ :-O (Edvard Munch) - I said that every country practices socialism to some degree or another. You are stating that socialism (...) (22 years ago, 13-Sep-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

all
(score: 0.258)

		Re: Those stupid liberal judges are at it again!
(...) America is not most definitly moving willingly to the right--it's being forced to the right by the 'chicken littles'--"Oh no! The sky is falling! Remember the good ol' days when kids didn't kill one another in school, when planes weren't (...) (22 years ago, 12-Sep-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

all
(score: 0.258)

		Re: Those stupid liberal judges are at it again!
In lugnet.off-topic.debate, David Koudys writes: <snip> (...) Ooops, fergot the smiley Should've read: (...) Again, IMHO, what Larry said is what I would've if I could've... Though here's a debate... Hypothetically, a teacher askes her grade 3 (...) (22 years ago, 12-Sep-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

all
(score: 0.258)

More: Next Page >>