Leaving the community

"Bob Noel" wrote in message
...
In article ,
"Peter Duniho" wrote:

Legalized abortion has in the long-run made our country safer, not less
so.

not for the children killed during the abortion.

What is the definition of a child? (from a legal standpoint)



--
Bob Noel

"Nomen Nescio" ] wrote in message
...
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----

From: "Jay Honeck"

If it were a "science" there would be "facts" and "truth" in economics.
Instead, we have "Keynesian" theory, and "Supply Side" theory, and
"Trickle
Down" theory, and a hundred other theories, all attempting to provide some
sort of plausible explanation for why the very human creation called an
"economy" actually behaves the way it does.

And this is as the macro-economic level, where things are a bit closer to
science. It's a far cry from physics, chemistry or pure mathematics.

And a the micro-economic level, you might as well toss the bones, or read
your tea leaves -- you'll be just as accurate at predicting the future.


Einstein dies and goes to heaven only to be informed that his room is
not yet ready. "I hope you will not mind waiting in a dormitory. We
are very sorry, but it's the best we can do and you will have to share
the room with others." he is told by the doorman (say his name is
Pete). Einstein says that this is no problem at all and that there is
no need to make such a great fuss. So Pete leads him to the dorm.
They enter and Albert is introduced to all of the present
inhabitants. "See, Here is your first room mate. He has an IQ of
180!"
"Why that's wonderful!" Says Albert. "We can discuss mathematics!"
"And here is your second room mate. His IQ is 150!"
"Why that's wonderful!" Says Albert. "We can discuss physics!"
"And here is your third room mate. His IQ is 100!"
"That Wonderful! We can discuss the latest plays at the theater!"
Just then another man moves out to capture Albert's hand and shake it.
"I'm your last room mate and I'm sorry, but my IQ is only 80."
Albert smiles back at him and says, "So, where do you think interest
rates are headed?"


outstanding.


(author unknown)


-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: 2.6.2

iQCVAwUBQZMVLpMoscYxZNI5AQE+ygP/QRRaCUpu0o37LarPt8U+w/lByYqrZ5LI
/n5+JHPG36u/IRERJJtaayEHo+z+AKQ2KHu0Zf7JCIHfNLeS4sq3Ml2LO+ff1x Tc
sEdZqP7YJLGO420qlGszp1LnoXTB5r5qbOpA+dChS7AIeHGktV I0J0Cbp/MJImVw
ytKTrxlYxP8=
=ceRT
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

Morgans,

I have been unable to find any reports on the internet, on this subject.
Anyone have any more info?


Nothing at all. Don't believe all you hear on the internet...

--
Thomas Borchert (EDDH)

Morgans,

Oh, kinda like Clinton telling us under oath, that he did not have sexual
relations with Monica?


Tell us again how many American citizens got killed or maimed by Clinton
doing that?

--
Thomas Borchert (EDDH)

Richard Hertz wrote:

"C J Campbell" wrote in message
...

"Peter Duniho" wrote in message
...

But regardless, none of this is even required to show that you don't

require

religion to justify happiness. A simple global desire to be happy is
sufficient (if you have no such desire to be happy, you may have a hard

time

comprehending this, but it sure would explain some other things). That's
why large groups of humans get together and agree to try to be happy
together, rather than killing and stealing from each other all the time.


I think a good argument can be made that one reason people kill and steal
stems from the desire to be happy. In this respect happiness (or the
desire
for happiness) could be a negative trait.


It makes no difference why they do it. Unless it is self defense it is
criminal. That has nothing to do with religion.

Criminal by whose standard? What if the majority decided that stealing
and killing were OK?

Matt

I have been unable to find any reports on the internet, on this subject.
Anyone have any more info?


Nothing at all. Don't believe all you hear on the internet...

Interesting, isn't it? The sarin find was reported by NPR's female
correspondent (whose name escapes me), who is embedded with a Marine unit in
Fallujah. I heard it myself on NPR's "All Things Considered," which airs in
the afternoons.

Now, it's no where to be found.

Either the report has been discredited, or it's being suppressed.
--
Jay Honeck
Iowa City, IA
Pathfinder N56993
www.AlexisParkInn.com
"Your Aviation Destination"

"Richard Hertz" no one@no one.com wrote in message
. net...

"Bob Noel" wrote in message
...
In article ,
"Peter Duniho" wrote:

Legalized abortion has in the long-run made our country safer, not less
so.

not for the children killed during the abortion.

What is the definition of a child? (from a legal standpoint)



--
Bob Noel

He doesn't know, obviously, but at common law the foetus or embryo has never
been treated as a child. In some cases the foetus when "quickened," i. e.,
capable of living outside of the uterus, has been viewed as a human being
within the purview of the homicide laws.

There is a movement among religious pharmacists to refuse to fill
prescriptions for the morning-after pill. Watch this absurdity grow and
fester, including the belief of many religious that a human life begins at
the instant of conception.

My lawgivers are Erasmus and Montaigne, not Moses and St. Paul. (E. M.
Forster)

"Frank" wrote in message ...
Peter Duniho wrote:

snip

My main point was simply that the electorate in general believes what
they
want to believe, regardless of what the actual truth is. This is true
of
all people, regardless of party affiliation. My secondary, much less
important point (especially now that the election is over), might be
that
I personally feel that lying to the public in order to justify a deadly
war is a much bigger transgression than has been witnessed in the
Executive branch since the Iran-Contra scandal.

Pete

Very well put Pete.

I'd add that even if the Iraq invasion was justified it was bungled badly.
The administration ignored its own experts and we lost lives because of
it.
For that reason alone they don't merit being returned to office.

If it was bungled so badly, why do the military and veterans overwhelmingly
support Bush instead of Kerry?

Why did Kerry participate in this supposed lie? For a long time, there, he
was Bush's biggest critic for not invading Iraq sooner than he did. Kerry
was the biggest hawk in the country. How come you do not think Kerry was
lying?

On Thu, 11 Nov 2004 19:56:38 -0500, "Morgans"
wrote:

Oh, kinda like Clinton telling us under oath, that he did not have sexual
relations with Monica?
--
Jim in NC

Oh please.

The Bush White House's selective use of information took us to war
where many thousands have now died (yes, I'm including Iraqi
civilians). Let me repeat that, they took us to war, and they took us
there by manipulating the only information that we and the rest of the
world had.

Whatever Clinton did, it FOR SURE did not result in war or the death
of anyone. Sure, he showed a lack of fidelity towards his marriage,
but that's IT and it's his and Hillarie's problem, not the nations'.

Death, destruction, misery, torture, refusal to abide by the Geneva
Convention and world condemnation, not to mention the cost in money,
which we the citizens have to pay. And we could be just getting
started here. There's no telling how this will play out with the rest
of the world eventually. Versus an oddball use of a cigar and a
stained dress. Yup, I sure can see the comparison.

Corky Scott

"Corky Scott" wrote in message
...

snip
Whatever Clinton did, it FOR SURE did not result in war or the death
of anyone. Sure, he showed a lack of fidelity towards his marriage,
but that's IT and it's his and Hillarie's problem, not the nations'.
snip

I don't agree. He lied under oath and that's pretty serious. The president
of the United States commited PERJURY. Especially serious since he was the
president of the United States at the time. It goes way deeper than a
marital problem, I think he shamed the office a la Nixon. I agree that what
he tried to cover up was more of a personal problem, but when he lied under
oath, he knew exactly what he was doing: lying to you and me and everyone
else. It didn't have to be a big deal, but he made it a huge one.

I was a Clinton supporter until I found out that he would lie under oath. It
showed and shows a serious flaw in character. It made me wonder what else he
had done or was willing to do. I don't blame him for trying to cover it up,
but commiting perjury crossed the line for me.

The issue of President Bush's lying is open to debate because no one has all
the facts here and only time will tell. The fact that President Clinton
perjured himself cannot be debated. I consider a sitting president commiting
perjury to be extremely serious, no matter what he is lying about.

-Trent
PP-ASEL