Debate : Search Results: all rights are property rights


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

Results 7101 – 7120 of 11764.

Search took 0.02 CPU seconds.

Messages: Full | Brief | Compact

Sort: Prefer Newer | Prefer Older | Best Match

		Re: Is this fair?
Nope, doesn't seem fair at all, but the buck has to stop somewhere right? That's why it's so important to know what's happening with the supreme court during election years: will any positions open up during the next presidency? what kind of people (...) (23 years ago, 4-Dec-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

all
(score: 0.231)

		Re: gay by birth vs. gay by choice
(...) I don't see how this relates to my post. You said that all of 4000 years of religious doctrine was correct (except possibly the gay genes). I argued that with the diversity of the various doctrines, it couldn't _all_ be correct. Fredrik (23 years ago, 5-Dec-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

all
(score: 0.231)

		Another interesting essay & how I found it (was: gay by birth vs. gay by choice)
Here is the essay on Homosexauality: (URL) I don't agree with a lot of the conclusions drawn) & here is how I found it. A few months ago I found out about the Baha'i faith. The following principles of the Baha'i faith are why I researched it (...) (23 years ago, 6-Dec-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

all
(score: 0.231)

		Re: Another interesting essay & how I found it (was: gay by birth vs. gay by choice)
(...) For contrast, here are some principals for Unitarian Universalism set with those of the Bahai faith: Unitarian Universalists commonly hold: (...) The inherent worth and dignity of all people. (UU pricipal #1) (...) Acceptance of one another (...) (23 years ago, 6-Dec-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

all
(score: 0.231)

		Re: gay by birth vs. gay by choice... who cares!
(...) First of all, IMO, Channel 4 holds no credibility anyway, so a test by them is more luducrious. Having taken the test, I found it very interesting, and self defeating, that you must chose your sexual orientation prior to taking the test. I (...) (23 years ago, 4-Dec-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

all
(score: 0.231)

		Re: gay by birth vs. gay by choice
(...) Doesn't it depend on what the demands are? What if all they want is a fair shot? (...) Probably the same number that are currently labelled criminal for disliking negros. None. You are free to dislike whomever you want. The problem is when you (...) (23 years ago, 4-Dec-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

all
(score: 0.231)

		Re: Another interesting essay & how I found it (was: gay by birth vs. gay by choice)
(...) I would certainly personally agree with the sentiment. Point was being that both acting homosexually AND wanting to cheat on a spouse are considered to be sinful acts by some sects of Christianity, regardless of who they hurt. IE, even if it (...) (23 years ago, 6-Dec-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

all
(score: 0.231)

		Re: Another interesting essay & how I found it (was: gay by birth vs. gay by choice)
(...) change (...) Thanks for that Carl, I enjoyed your post (although I've not read the follow up URLs yet) and tend to agree with your sentiment. The notion of choosing who you fancy seems absurd; I mean how many of us end up with the partners we (...) (23 years ago, 6-Dec-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

all
(score: 0.231)

		Re: Another interesting essay & how I found it (was: gay by birth vs. gay by choice)
(...) Not if they don't find out. The very nature of the "harm" that takes place -- that you have to know about it in order for it to hurt -- makes me question the validity of calling it harm. DaveE previously asserted that it would be bad for him (...) (23 years ago, 6-Dec-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

all
(score: 0.231)

		Re: gay by birth vs. gay by choice
(...) The Bible simply IS part of the discussion. Christians and homosexuals alike have argued it to such a degree that it is difficult have a discussion of only homosexuality. For what it's worth, when I began debating gay-by-birth elsewhere, a (...) (23 years ago, 4-Dec-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

all
(score: 0.231)

		Opinion of the American Psychological Association (was: gay by birth vs. gay by choice)
Here is something that is interesting (though I forgot where I found it): ===...=== The American Psychological Association released a Statement on Homosexuality in 1994-JUL. Their first two paragraphs are: The research on homosexuality is very (...) (23 years ago, 6-Dec-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

all
(score: 0.231)

		Re: gay by birth vs. gay by choice
(...) "For every one that curseth his father or his mother shall be surely put to death: he hath cursed his father or his mother; his blood shall be upon him." This has what to do with homosexuality? (...) "Know ye not that the unrighteous shall not (...) (23 years ago, 4-Dec-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

all
(score: 0.231)

		Re: gay by birth vs. gay by choice
(...) In my research I found that there were indeed a total of three tests that showed positive results, unfortuanately all three tests were performed by the same scientist. (...) If science can prove that a gay gene exists, then the Bible has also (...) (23 years ago, 4-Dec-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

all
(score: 0.231)

		Re: gay by birth vs. gay by choice
(...) That's why they should all be in Burkhas. ;-) Chris (23 years ago, 3-Dec-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

all
(score: 0.231)

		Re: trolling? (Was all that OT God stuff)
(...) All right then. Stipulating that "troll" can reasonably be used as a neutral term, then I'll agree that I was trolling. Generally I don't accept that definition, however; never have I seen "troll" used with a positive connotation, and it's (...) (23 years ago, 15-Nov-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

all
(score: 0.231)

		Re: End of Year Thoughts
in article Gnw1yv.Kwx@lugnet.com, Hendo (John P. Henderson) at hendo@valyance.com wrote on 12/5/01 2:52 PM: (...) No. It's off topic for LUGNET, and so does not belong on the front page. I refer people with kids to LUGNET all the time, and tell them (...) (23 years ago, 6-Dec-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

all
(score: 0.231)

		Re: gay by birth vs. gay by choice
(...) Why? What part is falacious? I presume that you mean to say that God would create humans with equal desires towards sinning. Hence, if it were found that SOME people had MORE desire to sin based on their genetics, that it would prove that God (...) (23 years ago, 4-Dec-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

all
(score: 0.231)

		Re: gay by birth vs. gay by choice
(...) A simple internet search for "gay gene" will give you all the information you're asking for plus some. (...) The Holy Bible directly refers to homosexuality more than once as a sin. (...) I wish your example is how things actually work. (...) (23 years ago, 4-Dec-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

all
(score: 0.231)

		Re: Cheap Scientist (Re: Doing the Discover Mag Rag )
(...) As I was going through my inbox right after I posted about this I found the same message Scott posted. I should read all my mail when it arrives. Thanks Scott -chris (23 years ago, 5-Dec-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

all
(score: 0.231)

		Re: gay by birth vs. gay by choice
(don't mind me, I'm just a teenager who doesn't really know alot) I've been reading through this whole debate with interest, I know a girl who is gay and she says she knew ever since puberty (However she still hasn't told her parents [which makes me (...) (23 years ago, 5-Dec-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

all
(score: 0.231)

More: Next Page >>