> proffsl wrote:

>> Larry wrote:

>>> klunk wrote:

>>>>
>>>> if you did, you would not only have answered my questions
>>>> but you would have also responded honestly to many other
>>>> aspects of our exchange... in fact, your entire disingenuous
>>>> argument was constructed for the sole purpose of bullying
>>>> your way into an outcome you had already predetermined...
>>>> and as far as pearls of wisdom are concerned... you're
>>>> simply too stupid and pig-headed to realize that i gave you
>>>> many, dumbfuck.

>>>
>>> Proffy, do you ever stop and think why it is that everyone who
>>> discusses a topic with you calls you disingenuous at some
>>> point?

>>
>> Because I don't debate with those who agree with me, and I
>> oppose lying scum. ...

> Larry wrote:

>> klunk wrote:

>>>
>>> if you did, you would not only have answered my questions but you
>>> would have also responded honestly to many other aspects of our
>>> exchange... in fact, your entire disingenuous argument was
>>> constructed for the sole purpose of bullying your way into an
>>> outcome you had already predetermined... and as far as pearls
>>> of wisdom are concerned... you're simply too stupid and
>>> pig-headed to realize that i gave you many, dumbfuck.

>>
>> Proffy, do you ever stop and think why it is that everyone who
>> discusses a topic with you calls you disingenuous at some
>> point?

>
> Because I don't debate with those who agree with me, and I oppose lying
> scum.

> klunk wrote:

>>
>> if you did, you would not only have answered my questions but you
>> would have also responded honestly to many other aspects of our
>> exchange... in fact, your entire disingenuous argument was
>> constructed for the sole purpose of bullying your way into an
>> outcome you had already predetermined... and as far as pearls
>> of wisdom are concerned... you're simply too stupid and
>> pig-headed to realize that i gave you many, dumbfuck.

>
> Proffy, do you ever stop and think why it is that everyone who
> discusses a topic with you calls you disingenuous at some
> point?

> "RD (The Sandman)" comcast.net> wrote :
>
>

>>> Does your wife, mother or sister have an absolute right not to be
>>> raped,
>>> or would you compromise them too? Answer please.

>>
>> They have the right not to be raped, but it isn't absolute. If it was
>> rape would never happen.

>
> Oh, this is interesting. So if you were with them and a rapist knocked
> on the door and said he wanted to have them for a few days, should you
> compromise and only let him have them for 1 day?

> "Neil Harrington" wrote in message
> news:Y4ydnSSBK4pvcgrYnZ2dnUVZ_oannZ2d@comcast.com...

>>
>> "Arved Sandstrom" wrote in message
>> news:49klh.96393$YV4.3130@edtnps89...

> [ SNIP ]

>>> My statement: "How do I define an inalienable right? As something that
>>> cannot *unjustly* be taken away."

>>
>> This may be devolving into a semantics quibble, but I don't see
>> "unjustly" in any definition of "unalienable rights." I take the phrase
>> to mean rights that cannot be taken away at all, whether unjustly or
>> justly. That narrows it down (in my opinion) to very, very few rights.
>> You have the right to your opinion, to think as you want -- and that's
>> pretty much the whole enchilada as far as "unalienable rights" is
>> concerned. You *may* have the right to express those thoughts and
>> opinions too, or not, depending largely on where you are.

> [ SNIP ] ...

> Countries are best left to solve their own problems

>
> if you did, you would not only have answered my questions but you would have
> also responded honestly to many other aspects of our exchange... in fact,
> your entire disingenuous argument was constructed for the sole purpose of
> bullying your way into an outcome you had already predetermined... and as
> far as pearls of wisdom are concerned... you're simply too stupid and
> pig-headed to realize that i gave you many, dumbfuck.

> klunk wrote:

>> proffsl wrote:

>>>
>>> So, after all the denial and all the lies, you finally admit what
>>> Registration is ultimately about. Confiscation. But, of course,
>>> only the Confiscation of the guns of Law Abiding Citizens,
>>> because we all know Criminals won't Register.

>>
>> hay popsicle, so after all the childish crying and hypocritical
>> demanding you've proven that you don't give a flying fuck about
>> the truth...

>
> No. I just see I won't be getting any Truth from YOU.

> Anthony Wilson wrote:

>> My wife is part Cherokee. I
>> grew up within an hour of NYC for 55 years before moving here. All
>> races and ethnic groups are common up there as are mixed marriages.
>> If we make reparations to blacks, then what do we do for the Native
>> Americans?

>
> You make a good point in that other groups have been wronged by
> English-America. The Cherokee are a great example of that; and in fact I
> live in the area where Trail of Tears started.