| Topic: |
Science > Abortion |
| User: |
"*ProteanThread*" |
| Date: |
09 Jun 2004 04:42:42 PM |
| Object: |
beware of symantics in abortion debate |
ok, quesiton:
if the general media (either right and or left) uses the terms:
Pro Choice for those supporting abortion
Anti Abortion for those against abortion
Then why don't they ever use the following terms for the "other" side of the
issue (just to be fair):
Pro Life for those against abortion
Anti Choice for those against abortion
or
Pro Abortion for those supporting abortion
Anti Life for those against abortion
it seems only fair doesn't it? On the other hand, if you were to break down
the phrase "Planned Parenthood" into synonyms, strangely enough the phrase
"Selective Breeding" comes to mind. (can you think of one for right to life
that can be found in a thesaurus?) Is the media telling the truth when they
say more and more Americans are pro choice but how can one really judge that
or believe that when they "selective" choose the words to describe the
debate (meaning the media has already made up our minds for us)?
--
Woodzy
http://www.rtdos.com (alternate OS for games based on the classics)
http://rtdos.com/debate (politically charged discussions)
http://rtdos.com/forum (rtdos message boards)
http://rtdos.com/rtdos (rtdos active developer chat)
http://rtdos.com/chat
retro themed chats scheduled every Thursday @ 7PM MDT (0100 GMT) and
every Sunday @ 1PM MDT (1900 GMT)
.
|
|
| User: "Ray Fischer" |
|
| Title: Re: beware of symantics in abortion debate |
10 Jun 2004 10:01:23 PM |
|
|
*ProteanThread* <sysop@rtdos.com> wrote:
ok, quesiton:
if the general media (either right and or left) uses the terms:
Pro Choice for those supporting abortion
Anti Abortion for those against abortion
Then why don't they ever use the following terms for the "other" side of the
issue (just to be fair):
Pro Life for those against abortion
Anti Choice for those against abortion
or
Pro Abortion for those supporting abortion
Anti Life for those against abortion
it seems only fair doesn't it?
It's not about "fair". It's about accuracy and telling the truth.
--
Ray Fischer
rfischer@sonic.net
.
|
|
|
| User: "J Young" |
|
| Title: Re: beware of symantics in abortion debate |
11 Jun 2004 05:19:25 PM |
|
|
From: (Ray Fischer)
Date: 6/10/2004 11:01 PM Eastern Daylight Time
Message-id: <cab7a3$gvp$1@bolt.sonic.net>
*ProteanThread* <sysop@rtdos.com> wrote:
ok, quesiton:
if the general media (either right and or left) uses the terms:
Pro Choice for those supporting abortion
Anti Abortion for those against abortion
Then why don't they ever use the following terms for the "other" side of the
issue (just to be fair):
Pro Life for those against abortion
Anti Choice for those against abortion
or
Pro Abortion for those supporting abortion
Anti Life for those against abortion
it seems only fair doesn't it?
It's not about "fair". It's about accuracy and telling the truth.
--
Ray Fischer
rfischer@sonic.net
how about calling it murder?
******************************************
formerly
.
|
|
|
| User: "Ron Nicholson" |
|
| Title: Re: beware of symantics in abortion debate |
12 Jun 2004 12:16:36 AM |
|
|
In article <20040611181925.13190.00000547@mb-m20.aol.com>,
youngopinions@aol.comnojunk (J Young) wrote:
From: (Ray Fischer)
Date: 6/10/2004 11:01 PM Eastern Daylight Time
Message-id: <cab7a3$gvp$1@bolt.sonic.net>
*ProteanThread* <sysop@rtdos.com> wrote:
ok, quesiton:
if the general media (either right and or left) uses the terms:
Pro Choice for those supporting abortion
Anti Abortion for those against abortion
Then why don't they ever use the following terms for the "other" side of the
issue (just to be fair):
Pro Life for those against abortion
Anti Choice for those against abortion
or
Pro Abortion for those supporting abortion
Anti Life for those against abortion
it seems only fair doesn't it?
It's not about "fair". It's about accuracy and telling the truth.
--
Ray Fischer
rfischer@sonic.net
how about calling it murder?
Okay. Let's call it murder. I'm still okay with it.
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Somesappywriter" |
|
| Title: Re: beware of symantics in abortion debate |
11 Jun 2004 05:28:50 PM |
|
|
On 11 Jun 2004 22:19:25 GMT, youngopinions@aol.comnojunk (J Young)
wrote:
From: (Ray Fischer)
Date: 6/10/2004 11:01 PM Eastern Daylight Time
Message-id: <cab7a3$gvp$1@bolt.sonic.net>
*ProteanThread* <sysop@rtdos.com> wrote:
ok, quesiton:
if the general media (either right and or left) uses the terms:
Pro Choice for those supporting abortion
Anti Abortion for those against abortion
Then why don't they ever use the following terms for the "other" side of the
issue (just to be fair):
Pro Life for those against abortion
Anti Choice for those against abortion
or
Pro Abortion for those supporting abortion
Anti Life for those against abortion
it seems only fair doesn't it?
It's not about "fair". It's about accuracy and telling the truth.
--
Ray Fischer
rfischer@sonic.net
how about calling it murder?
That wouldn't be an honest call.
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Patrick Lee Humphrey" |
|
| Title: Re: beware of symantics in abortion debate |
11 Jun 2004 05:53:19 PM |
|
|
youngopinions@aol.comnojunk (J Young) writes:
From: (Ray Fischer)
*ProteanThread* <sysop@rtdos.com> wrote:
ok, quesiton:
if the general media (either right and or left) uses the terms:
Pro Choice for those supporting abortion
Anti Abortion for those against abortion
Then why don't they ever use the following terms for the "other" side of the
issue (just to be fair):
Pro Life for those against abortion
Anti Choice for those against abortion
or
Pro Abortion for those supporting abortion
Anti Life for those against abortion
it seems only fair doesn't it?
It's not about "fair". It's about accuracy and telling the truth.
how about calling it murder?
How about calling you and your sockpuppet brigade masters of denial? (Free
clue: prior to 1973, what jurisdictions in this country charged a woman with
murder for obtaining an abortion?)
--
Patrick "The Chief Instigator" Humphrey (patrick@io.com) Houston, Texas
www.chiefinstigator.us.tt/aeros.php (TCI's 2003-04 Houston Aeros)
.
|
|
|
| User: "James Roberts" |
|
| Title: Re: beware of symantics in abortion debate |
14 Jun 2004 09:53:32 PM |
|
|
On 11 Jun 2004 17:53:19 -0500, <szkfz913dwg.fsf@fnord.io.com> Nazi Patrick Lee
Humphrey defends the Holocaust against the unborn <patrick@io.com> wrote:
youngopinions@aol.comnojunk (J Young) writes:
From: (Ray Fischer)
*ProteanThread* <sysop@rtdos.com> wrote:
ok, quesiton:
if the general media (either right and or left) uses the terms:
Pro Choice for those supporting abortion
Anti Abortion for those against abortion
Then why don't they ever use the following terms for the "other" side of the
issue (just to be fair):
Pro Life for those against abortion
Anti Choice for those against abortion
or
Pro Abortion for those supporting abortion
Anti Life for those against abortion
it seems only fair doesn't it?
It's not about "fair". It's about accuracy and telling the truth.
how about calling it murder?
How about calling you and your sockpuppet brigade masters of denial? (Free
clue: prior to 1973, what jurisdictions in this country charged a woman with
murder for obtaining an abortion?)
The Holocaust against Jews was "perfectly legal" in Germany and because it was
legal at the time does that mean it was acceptable? You are one pathetic nazi
and you're too stupid to see it. You are truly a nazi heathen.
--
Patrick "The Chief Instigator" Humphrey (patrick@io.com) Houston, Texas
www.chiefinstigator.us.tt/aeros.php (TCI's 2003-04 Houston Aeros)
.
|
|
|
| User: "Spartakus" |
|
| Title: James Roberts is a poster child for Godwin's Law |
16 Jun 2004 01:15:58 PM |
|
|
James Roberts <jimbo12@yahoo.com> wrote:
The Holocaust against Jews was "perfectly legal" in Germany
No it wasn't. Why do you think the Nazis took such pains to hide what
they were doing from their people?
.
|
|
|
| User: "Chris" |
|
| Title: Re: James Roberts is a poster child for Godwin's Law |
18 Jun 2004 02:37:22 AM |
|
|
"Spartakus" <spartakus@my-deja.com> wrote in message
news:6ed74dfa.0406161015.343adb92@posting.google.com...
James Roberts <jimbo12@yahoo.com> wrote:
The Holocaust against Jews was "perfectly legal" in Germany
No it wasn't.
Law is RARELY chosen by a majority of the populace.
Why do you think the Nazis took such pains to hide what
they were doing from their people?
.
|
|
|
| User: "Spartakus" |
|
| Title: Re: James Roberts is a poster child for Godwin's Law |
18 Jun 2004 09:06:44 AM |
|
|
"Chris" <reddd@juno.com> wrote...
"Spartakus" <spartakus@my-deja.com> wrote...
James Roberts <jimbo12@yahoo.com> wrote:
The Holocaust against Jews was "perfectly legal" in Germany
No it wasn't.
Law is RARELY chosen by a majority of the populace.
Non sequitur.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Chris" |
|
| Title: Re: James Roberts is a poster child for Godwin's Law |
20 Jun 2004 10:04:07 PM |
|
|
"Spartakus" <spartakus@my-deja.com> wrote in message
news:6ed74dfa.0406180606.26608d4@posting.google.com...
"Chris" <reddd@juno.com> wrote...
"Spartakus" <spartakus@my-deja.com> wrote...
James Roberts <jimbo12@yahoo.com> wrote:
The Holocaust against Jews was "perfectly legal" in Germany
No it wasn't.
Law is RARELY chosen by a majority of the populace.
Non sequitur.
Since the law in Germany was chosen by the few with the biggest guns, and
they chose the holocaust, it was "perfectly legal" in Germany. NOT a non
sequitur.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Patrick Lee Humphrey" |
|
| Title: Re: James Roberts is a poster child for Godwin's Law |
20 Jun 2004 10:31:20 PM |
|
|
"Chris" <reddd@juno.com> writes:
"Spartakus" <spartakus@my-deja.com> wrote in message
news:6ed74dfa.0406180606.26608d4@posting.google.com...
"Chris" <reddd@juno.com> wrote...
"Spartakus" <spartakus@my-deja.com> wrote...
James Roberts <jimbo12@yahoo.com> wrote:
The Holocaust against Jews was "perfectly legal" in Germany
No it wasn't.
Law is RARELY chosen by a majority of the populace.
Non sequitur.
Since the law in Germany was chosen by the few with the biggest guns, and
they chose the holocaust, it was "perfectly legal" in Germany. NOT a non
sequitur.
Is there anything you *aren't* ignorant of? The Nazis, in their supreme
arrogance, never got around to repealing the existing body of German criminal
law that had been in effect -- and they wound up being held responsible at
Nürnberg thanks to oversights like that...
--
Patrick "The Chief Instigator" Humphrey (patrick@io.com) Houston, Texas
www.chiefinstigator.us.tt/aeros.php (TCI's 2003-04 Houston Aeros)
.
|
|
|
| User: "Chris" |
|
| Title: Re: James Roberts is a poster child for Godwin's Law |
22 Jun 2004 04:48:13 AM |
|
|
"Patrick Lee Humphrey" <patrick@io.com> wrote in message
news:szk4qp560zb.fsf@fnord.io.com...
"Chris" <reddd@juno.com> writes:
"Spartakus" <spartakus@my-deja.com> wrote in message
news:6ed74dfa.0406180606.26608d4@posting.google.com...
"Chris" <reddd@juno.com> wrote...
"Spartakus" <spartakus@my-deja.com> wrote...
James Roberts <jimbo12@yahoo.com> wrote:
The Holocaust against Jews was "perfectly legal" in Germany
No it wasn't.
Law is RARELY chosen by a majority of the populace.
Non sequitur.
Since the law in Germany was chosen by the few with the biggest guns, and
they chose the holocaust, it was "perfectly legal" in Germany. NOT a non
sequitur.
Is there anything you *aren't* ignorant of?
The fact that my claim is not a non sequitur, for starters.
The Nazis, in their supreme
arrogance, never got around to repealing the existing body of German
criminal
law that had been in effect --
Sure they did; by way of their guns.
and they wound up being held responsible at
Nürnberg thanks to oversights like that...
--
Patrick "The Chief Instigator" Humphrey (patrick@io.com) Houston, Texas
www.chiefinstigator.us.tt/aeros.php (TCI's 2003-04 Houston Aeros)
.
|
|
|
| User: "Patrick Lee Humphrey" |
|
| Title: Re: James Roberts is a poster child for Godwin's Law |
22 Jun 2004 07:40:00 AM |
|
|
"Chris" <reddd@juno.com> writes:
"Patrick Lee Humphrey" <patrick@io.com> wrote in message
news:szk4qp560zb.fsf@fnord.io.com...
"Chris" <reddd@juno.com> writes:
"Spartakus" <spartakus@my-deja.com> wrote in message
news:6ed74dfa.0406180606.26608d4@posting.google.com...
"Chris" <reddd@juno.com> wrote...
"Spartakus" <spartakus@my-deja.com> wrote...
James Roberts <jimbo12@yahoo.com> wrote:
The Holocaust against Jews was "perfectly legal" in Germany
No it wasn't.
Law is RARELY chosen by a majority of the populace.
Non sequitur.
Since the law in Germany was chosen by the few with the biggest guns, and
they chose the holocaust, it was "perfectly legal" in Germany. NOT a non
sequitur.
Is there anything you *aren't* ignorant of?
The fact that my claim is not a non sequitur, for starters.
You really should quit using terms you don't understand.
The Nazis, in their supreme arrogance, never got around to repealing the
existing body of German criminal law that had been in effect --
Sure they did; by way of their guns.
Tell that to the judges at Nürnberg, Brainiac.
--
Patrick "The Chief Instigator" Humphrey (patrick@io.com) Houston, Texas
www.chiefinstigator.us.tt/aeros.php (TCI's 2003-04 Houston Aeros)
.
|
|
|
| User: "Chris" |
|
| Title: Re: James Roberts is a poster child for Godwin's Law |
23 Jun 2004 05:54:51 AM |
|
|
"Patrick Lee Humphrey" <patrick@io.com> wrote in message
news:szkk6xz22cf.fsf@fnord.io.com...
"Chris" <reddd@juno.com> writes:
"Patrick Lee Humphrey" <patrick@io.com> wrote in message
news:szk4qp560zb.fsf@fnord.io.com...
"Chris" <reddd@juno.com> writes:
"Spartakus" <spartakus@my-deja.com> wrote in message
news:6ed74dfa.0406180606.26608d4@posting.google.com...
"Chris" <reddd@juno.com> wrote...
"Spartakus" <spartakus@my-deja.com> wrote...
James Roberts <jimbo12@yahoo.com> wrote:
The Holocaust against Jews was "perfectly legal" in Germany
No it wasn't.
Law is RARELY chosen by a majority of the populace.
Non sequitur.
Since the law in Germany was chosen by the few with the biggest guns,
and
they chose the holocaust, it was "perfectly legal" in Germany. NOT a
non
sequitur.
Is there anything you *aren't* ignorant of?
The fact that my claim is not a non sequitur, for starters.
You really should quit using terms you don't understand.
Thank you, but the only problem with your advice is that I cannot quit doing
that which I am NOT doing.
The Nazis, in their supreme arrogance, never got around to repealing
the
existing body of German criminal law that had been in effect --
Sure they did; by way of their guns.
Tell that to the judges at Nürnberg,
For what purpose?
Brainiac.
--
Patrick "The Chief Instigator" Humphrey (patrick@io.com) Houston, Texas
www.chiefinstigator.us.tt/aeros.php (TCI's 2003-04 Houston Aeros)
.
|
|
|
| User: "Spartakus" |
|
| Title: Re: James Roberts is a poster child for Godwin's Law |
23 Jun 2004 08:51:05 PM |
|
|
"Chris" <reddd@juno.com> wrote...
"Patrick Lee Humphrey" <patrick@io.com> wrote...
The Nazis, in their supreme arrogance, never got around to
repealing the existing body of German criminal law that had
been in effect --
Sure they did; by way of their guns.
Tell that to the judges at Nürnberg,
For what purpose?
To give them a heads-up that, in your considered opinion, they
blundered when convicting all those Nazis of murder under German law,
since those laws had been repealed by "their guns".
To enlighten them in the same way you are enlightening us.
*snicker*
.
|
|
|
| User: "Chris" |
|
| Title: Re: James Roberts is a poster child for Godwin's Law |
24 Jun 2004 02:01:37 AM |
|
|
"Spartakus" <spartakus@my-deja.com> wrote in message
news:6ed74dfa.0406231751.7925a907@posting.google.com...
"Chris" <reddd@juno.com> wrote...
"Patrick Lee Humphrey" <patrick@io.com> wrote...
The Nazis, in their supreme arrogance, never got around to
repealing the existing body of German criminal law that had
been in effect --
Sure they did; by way of their guns.
Tell that to the judges at Nürnberg,
For what purpose?
To give them a heads-up that, in your considered opinion, they
blundered when convicting all those Nazis of murder under German law,
since those laws had been repealed by "their guns".
So they were reinstated (retroactively) by those with the (current) biggest
guns. What's your point?
To enlighten them in the same way you are enlightening us.
*snicker*
.
|
|
|
| User: "Spartakus" |
|
| Title: Re: James Roberts is a poster child for Godwin's Law |
24 Jun 2004 10:08:54 AM |
|
|
"Chris" <reddd@juno.com> wrote...
"Spartakus" <spartakus@my-deja.com> wrote...
"Chris" <reddd@juno.com> wrote...
"Patrick Lee Humphrey" <patrick@io.com> wrote...
The Nazis, in their supreme arrogance, never got around to
repealing the existing body of German criminal law that had
been in effect --
Sure they did; by way of their guns.
Tell that to the judges at Nürnberg,
For what purpose?
To give them a heads-up that, in your considered opinion, they
blundered when convicting all those Nazis of murder under German
law, since those laws had been repealed by "their guns".
So they were reinstated (retroactively) by those with the (current)
biggest guns. What's your point?
German laws protecting everyone, including Jews, against murder were
never reinstated, because they were never repealed, fuckwit.
To enlighten them in the same way you are enlightening us.
"Mit der Dummheit Gotter kampfen selbst vergebens." -- Friederich von
Schiller
.
|
|
|
| User: "Adam H." |
|
| Title: Re: James Roberts is a poster child for Godwin's Law |
24 Jun 2004 10:54:43 AM |
|
|
On 24 Jun 2004 08:08:54 -0700, (Spartakus)
wrote:
"Chris" <reddd@juno.com> wrote...
"Spartakus" < > wrote...
"Chris" <reddd@juno.com> wrote...
"Patrick Lee Humphrey" <patrick@io.com> wrote...
The Nazis, in their supreme arrogance, never got around to
repealing the existing body of German criminal law that had
been in effect --
Sure they did; by way of their guns.
Tell that to the judges at Nürnberg,
For what purpose?
To give them a heads-up that, in your considered opinion, they
blundered when convicting all those Nazis of murder under German
law, since those laws had been repealed by "their guns".
So they were reinstated (retroactively) by those with the (current)
biggest guns. What's your point?
German laws protecting everyone, including Jews, against murder were
never reinstated, because they were never repealed, fuckwit.
Have you noticed that Chris and Bobby seem to have the same outlook
regarding law enforcement? Does Chris really believe that when a
government disobeys a law, that action makes the law go away?
To enlighten them in the same way you are enlightening us.
"Mit der Dummheit Gotter kampfen selbst vergebens." -- Friederich von
Schiller
---
"Question with boldness even the existence of a god;
because, if there be one, he must more approve of
the homage of reason, than that of blindfolded fear."
- Thomas Jefferson
.
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Attila" |
|
| Title: Re: James Roberts is a poster child for Godwin's Law |
24 Jun 2004 05:22:54 AM |
|
|
On Thu, 24 Jun 2004 00:01:37 -0700, "Chris" <reddd@juno.com> in
alt.abortion with message-id <EvvCc.20538$wS2.13845@okepread03> wrote:
"Spartakus" <spartakus@my-deja.com> wrote in message
news:6ed74dfa.0406231751.7925a907@posting.google.com...
"Chris" <reddd@juno.com> wrote...
"Patrick Lee Humphrey" <patrick@io.com> wrote...
The Nazis, in their supreme arrogance, never got around to
repealing the existing body of German criminal law that had
been in effect --
Sure they did; by way of their guns.
Tell that to the judges at Nürnberg,
For what purpose?
To give them a heads-up that, in your considered opinion, they
blundered when convicting all those Nazis of murder under German law,
since those laws had been repealed by "their guns".
So they were reinstated (retroactively) by those with the (current) biggest
guns. What's your point?
They weren't 'reinstated. They had always been there.
To enlighten them in the same way you are enlightening us.
*snicker*
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Spartakus" |
|
| Title: Re: James Roberts is a poster child for Godwin's Law |
21 Jun 2004 08:56:47 AM |
|
|
"Chris" <reddd@juno.com> wrote...
"Spartakus" <spartakus@my-deja.com> wrote...
"Chris" <reddd@juno.com> wrote...
"Spartakus" <spartakus@my-deja.com> wrote...
James Roberts <jimbo12@yahoo.com> wrote:
The Holocaust against Jews was "perfectly legal" in Germany
No it wasn't.
Law is RARELY chosen by a majority of the populace.
Non sequitur.
Since the law in Germany was chosen by the few with the biggest guns,
and they chose the holocaust, it was "perfectly legal" in Germany.
Chris, you are just plain, flat out wrong. In the Nuremberg trials
following the war, the prosecution had no trouble getting murder
convictions against Nazi defendants UNDER EXISTING GERMAN LAW.
NOT a non sequitur.
It had nothing at all to do with the previous exchange. You shouldn't
use terminology you don't understand.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Patrick Lee Humphrey" |
|
| Title: Re: James Roberts is a poster child for Godwin's Law |
21 Jun 2004 11:17:41 PM |
|
|
(Spartakus) writes:
"Chris" <reddd@juno.com> wrote...
"Spartakus" < > wrote...
"Chris" <reddd@juno.com> wrote...
"Spartakus" < > wrote...
James Roberts <jimbo12@yahoo.com> wrote:
The Holocaust against Jews was "perfectly legal" in Germany
No it wasn't.
Law is RARELY chosen by a majority of the populace.
Non sequitur.
Since the law in Germany was chosen by the few with the biggest guns,
and they chose the holocaust, it was "perfectly legal" in Germany.
Chris, you are just plain, flat out wrong. In the Nuremberg trials
following the war, the prosecution had no trouble getting murder
convictions against Nazi defendants UNDER EXISTING GERMAN LAW.
That's already been pointed out a few times, but apparently it (like most of
the rest of reality) isn't relevant to whatever alleged thought process he may
be capable of.
NOT a non sequitur.
It had nothing at all to do with the previous exchange. You shouldn't
use terminology you don't understand.
If he followed that advice, he'd never have posted at all. ;-)
--
Patrick "The Chief Instigator" Humphrey (patrick@io.com) Houston, Texas
www.chiefinstigator.us.tt/aeros.php (TCI's 2003-04 Houston Aeros)
.
|
|
|
| User: "Chris" |
|
| Title: Re: James Roberts is a poster child for Godwin's Law |
22 Jun 2004 04:40:02 AM |
|
|
"Patrick Lee Humphrey" <patrick@io.com> wrote in message
news:szk659kql96.fsf@fnord.io.com...
spartakus@my-deja.com (Spartakus) writes:
"Chris" <reddd@juno.com> wrote...
"Spartakus" <spartakus@my-deja.com> wrote...
"Chris" <reddd@juno.com> wrote...
"Spartakus" <spartakus@my-deja.com> wrote...
James Roberts <jimbo12@yahoo.com> wrote:
The Holocaust against Jews was "perfectly legal" in Germany
No it wasn't.
Law is RARELY chosen by a majority of the populace.
Non sequitur.
Since the law in Germany was chosen by the few with the biggest guns,
and they chose the holocaust, it was "perfectly legal" in Germany.
Chris, you are just plain, flat out wrong. In the Nuremberg trials
following the war, the prosecution had no trouble getting murder
convictions against Nazi defendants UNDER EXISTING GERMAN LAW.
That's already been pointed out a few times, but apparently it (like most
of
the rest of reality) isn't relevant to whatever alleged thought process he
may
be capable of.
Like the fact that "UNDER EXISTING GERMAN LAW" is a matter of opinion.
NOT a non sequitur.
It had nothing at all to do with the previous exchange. You shouldn't
use terminology you don't understand.
If he followed that advice, he'd never have posted at all. ;-)
I was not the one who introduced such terminology.
--
Patrick "The Chief Instigator" Humphrey (patrick@io.com) Houston, Texas
www.chiefinstigator.us.tt/aeros.php (TCI's 2003-04 Houston Aeros)
.
|
|
|
| User: "Patrick Lee Humphrey" |
|
| Title: Re: James Roberts is a poster child for Godwin's Law |
22 Jun 2004 07:37:01 AM |
|
|
"Chris" <reddd@juno.com> writes:
"Patrick Lee Humphrey" <patrick@io.com> wrote in message
news:szk659kql96.fsf@fnord.io.com...
spartakus@my-deja.com (Spartakus) writes:
"Chris" <reddd@juno.com> wrote...
"Spartakus" <spartakus@my-deja.com> wrote...
"Chris" <reddd@juno.com> wrote...
"Spartakus" <spartakus@my-deja.com> wrote...
James Roberts <jimbo12@yahoo.com> wrote:
The Holocaust against Jews was "perfectly legal" in Germany
No it wasn't.
Law is RARELY chosen by a majority of the populace.
Non sequitur.
Since the law in Germany was chosen by the few with the biggest guns,
and they chose the holocaust, it was "perfectly legal" in Germany.
Chris, you are just plain, flat out wrong. In the Nuremberg trials
following the war, the prosecution had no trouble getting murder
convictions against Nazi defendants UNDER EXISTING GERMAN LAW.
That's already been pointed out a few times, but apparently it (like most
of the rest of reality) isn't relevant to whatever alleged thought process
he may be capable of.
Like the fact that "UNDER EXISTING GERMAN LAW" is a matter of opinion.
Keep confirming how far afield of reality you are, dummy. Never mind that
it's documented, since the Germans *did* have a thing about keeping records.
NOT a non sequitur.
It had nothing at all to do with the previous exchange. You shouldn't
use terminology you don't understand.
If he followed that advice, he'd never have posted at all. ;-)
I was not the one who introduced such terminology.
You're the one who'd need to be watered three time a day if he was any more
stupid. Live with your limitations.
--
Patrick "The Chief Instigator" Humphrey (patrick@io.com) Houston, Texas
www.chiefinstigator.us.tt/aeros.php (TCI's 2003-04 Houston Aeros)
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Spartakus" |
|
| Title: Re: James Roberts is a poster child for Godwin's Law |
22 Jun 2004 08:40:04 PM |
|
|
"Chris" <reddd@juno.com> wrote...
"Patrick Lee Humphrey" <patrick@io.com> wrote...
spartakus@my-deja.com (Spartakus) writes:
"Chris" <reddd@juno.com> wrote...
"Spartakus" <spartakus@my-deja.com> wrote...
"Chris" <reddd@juno.com> wrote...
"Spartakus" <spartakus@my-deja.com> wrote...
James Roberts <jimbo12@yahoo.com> wrote:
The Holocaust against Jews was "perfectly legal" in Germany
No it wasn't.
Law is RARELY chosen by a majority of the populace.
Non sequitur.
Since the law in Germany was chosen by the few with the biggest guns,
and they chose the holocaust, it was "perfectly legal" in Germany.
Chris, you are just plain, flat out wrong. In the Nuremberg trials
following the war, the prosecution had no trouble getting murder
convictions against Nazi defendants UNDER EXISTING GERMAN LAW.
That's already been pointed out a few times, but apparently it (like most
of the rest of reality) isn't relevant to whatever alleged thought process
he may be capable of.
Like the fact that "UNDER EXISTING GERMAN LAW" is a matter of opinion.
Rise and shine, Chris - show us where and when the Nazis changed
German law to exclude Jews from protection against murder.
NOT a non sequitur.
It had nothing at all to do with the previous exchange. You shouldn't
use terminology you don't understand.
If he followed that advice, he'd never have posted at all. ;-)
I was not the one who introduced such terminology.
If someone were to introduce a term like "coloratura", would you use
that too?
How about "blue-footed booby"?
.
|
|
|
| User: "Chris" |
|
| Title: Re: James Roberts is a poster child for Godwin's Law |
23 Jun 2004 12:30:54 PM |
|
|
"Spartakus" <spartakus@my-deja.com> wrote in message
news:6ed74dfa.0406221740.63e1b7f5@posting.google.com...
"Chris" <reddd@juno.com> wrote...
"Patrick Lee Humphrey" <patrick@io.com> wrote...
spartakus@my-deja.com (Spartakus) writes:
"Chris" <reddd@juno.com> wrote...
"Spartakus" <spartakus@my-deja.com> wrote...
"Chris" <reddd@juno.com> wrote...
"Spartakus" <spartakus@my-deja.com> wrote...
James Roberts <jimbo12@yahoo.com> wrote:
The Holocaust against Jews was "perfectly legal" in Germany
No it wasn't.
Law is RARELY chosen by a majority of the populace.
Non sequitur.
Since the law in Germany was chosen by the few with the biggest
guns,
and they chose the holocaust, it was "perfectly legal" in Germany.
Chris, you are just plain, flat out wrong. In the Nuremberg trials
following the war, the prosecution had no trouble getting murder
convictions against Nazi defendants UNDER EXISTING GERMAN LAW.
That's already been pointed out a few times, but apparently it (like
most
of the rest of reality) isn't relevant to whatever alleged thought
process
he may be capable of.
Like the fact that "UNDER EXISTING GERMAN LAW" is a matter of opinion.
Rise and shine, Chris - show us where and when the Nazis changed
German law to exclude Jews from protection against murder.
I don't demonstrate that which is NOT my claim.
NOT a non sequitur.
It had nothing at all to do with the previous exchange. You
shouldn't
use terminology you don't understand.
If he followed that advice, he'd never have posted at all. ;-)
I was not the one who introduced such terminology.
If someone were to introduce a term like "coloratura", would you use
that too?
Hypothetical question.
How about "blue-footed booby"?
(see above)
.
|
|
|
| User: "Spartakus" |
|
| Title: Re: James Roberts is a poster child for Godwin's Law |
23 Jun 2004 08:42:36 PM |
|
|
"Chris" <reddd@juno.com> wrote...
"Spartakus" <spartakus@my-deja.com> wrote...
"Chris" <reddd@juno.com> wrote...
"Patrick Lee Humphrey" <patrick@io.com> wrote...
spartakus@my-deja.com (Spartakus) writes:
"Chris" <reddd@juno.com> wrote...
"Spartakus" <spartakus@my-deja.com> wrote...
"Chris" <reddd@juno.com> wrote...
"Spartakus" <spartakus@my-deja.com> wrote...
James Roberts <jimbo12@yahoo.com> wrote:
The Holocaust against Jews was "perfectly legal" in Germany
No it wasn't.
Law is RARELY chosen by a majority of the populace.
Non sequitur.
Since the law in Germany was chosen by the few with the
biggest guns, and they chose the holocaust, it was
"perfectly legal" in Germany.
Chris, you are just plain, flat out wrong. In the Nuremberg trials
following the war, the prosecution had no trouble getting murder
convictions against Nazi defendants UNDER EXISTING GERMAN LAW.
That's already been pointed out a few times, but apparently it
(like most of the rest of reality) isn't relevant to whatever
alleged thought process he may be capable of.
Like the fact that "UNDER EXISTING GERMAN LAW" is a matter of opinion.
Rise and shine, Chris - show us where and when the Nazis changed
German law to exclude Jews from protection against murder.
I don't demonstrate that which is NOT my claim.
It most certainly is your claim that murdering Jews was "perfectly
legal" in Germany during the Nazi regime. And if you want to avoid
being a bigger laughingstock than you already are, you ought to
validate that claim by showing us where and when the Nazis changed
German law to exclude Jews from protection against murder.
I'll save you the trouble - the Nazis *never* changed criminal law to
remove protection from the Jews against murder. What they did to the
Jews was illegal under German law, which is why they took such pains
to hide what they were doing from German citizens, and why the
prosecutors were able to get convictions of Nazi murderers under
existing German law.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Chris" |
|
| Title: Re: James Roberts is a poster child for Godwin's Law |
24 Jun 2004 02:00:41 AM |
|
|
"Spartakus" <spartakus@my-deja.com> wrote in message
news:6ed74dfa.0406231742.83d50eb@posting.google.com...
"Chris" <reddd@juno.com> wrote...
"Spartakus" <spartakus@my-deja.com> wrote...
"Chris" <reddd@juno.com> wrote...
"Patrick Lee Humphrey" <patrick@io.com> wrote...
spartakus@my-deja.com (Spartakus) writes:
"Chris" <reddd@juno.com> wrote...
"Spartakus" <spartakus@my-deja.com> wrote...
"Chris" <reddd@juno.com> wrote...
"Spartakus" <spartakus@my-deja.com> wrote...
James Roberts <jimbo12@yahoo.com> wrote:
The Holocaust against Jews was "perfectly legal" in
Germany
No it wasn't.
Law is RARELY chosen by a majority of the populace.
Non sequitur.
Since the law in Germany was chosen by the few with the
biggest guns, and they chose the holocaust, it was
"perfectly legal" in Germany.
Chris, you are just plain, flat out wrong. In the Nuremberg
trials
following the war, the prosecution had no trouble getting murder
convictions against Nazi defendants UNDER EXISTING GERMAN LAW.
That's already been pointed out a few times, but apparently it
(like most of the rest of reality) isn't relevant to whatever
alleged thought process he may be capable of.
Like the fact that "UNDER EXISTING GERMAN LAW" is a matter of
opinion.
Rise and shine, Chris - show us where and when the Nazis changed
German law to exclude Jews from protection against murder.
I don't demonstrate that which is NOT my claim.
It most certainly is your claim that murdering Jews was "perfectly
legal" in Germany during the Nazi regime.
NOT the same thing as the above claim.
And if you want to avoid
being a bigger laughingstock than you already are, you ought to
validate that claim by showing us where and when the Nazis changed
German law to exclude Jews from protection against murder.
I'll save you the trouble - the Nazis *never* changed criminal law to
remove protection from the Jews against murder. What they did to the
Jews was illegal under German law, which is why they took such pains
to hide what they were doing from German citizens, and why the
prosecutors were able to get convictions of Nazi murderers under
existing German law.
Now we're getting into a semantics contest. The fact is that the Nazi regime
created law, by way of big guns, that made the killing of Jews legal. The
current German government folks created their own law, by way of THEIR
bigger guns, that made such killing (retroactively) illegal. Citing the text
of some old law is irrelevant.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Spartakus" |
|
| Title: Re: James Roberts is a poster child for Godwin's Law |
24 Jun 2004 10:05:45 AM |
|
|
"Chris" <reddd@juno.com> wrote:
Now we're getting into a semantics contest.
Correction: you are playing semantical games in a vain attempt to win
debating points.
The fact is that the Nazi regime created law, by way of big guns,
that made the killing of Jews legal.
That is not a fact. That is your opinion. Which happens to be wrong.
The current German government folks created their own law,
by way of THEIR bigger guns, that made such killing (retroactively)
illegal. Citing the text of some old law is irrelevant.
"Mit der Dummheit Gotter kampfen selbst vergebens." -- Friederich von
Schiller
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Attila" |
|
| Title: Re: James Roberts is a poster child for Godwin's Law |
24 Jun 2004 05:33:42 AM |
|
|
On Thu, 24 Jun 2004 00:00:41 -0700, "Chris" <reddd@juno.com> in
alt.abortion with message-id <DvvCc.20537$wS2.6212@okepread03> wrote:
"Spartakus" <spartakus@my-deja.com> wrote in message
news:6ed74dfa.0406231742.83d50eb@posting.google.com...
"Chris" <reddd@juno.com> wrote...
"Spartakus" <spartakus@my-deja.com> wrote...
"Chris" <reddd@juno.com> wrote...
"Patrick Lee Humphrey" <patrick@io.com> wrote...
spartakus@my-deja.com (Spartakus) writes:
"Chris" <reddd@juno.com> wrote...
"Spartakus" <spartakus@my-deja.com> wrote...
"Chris" <reddd@juno.com> wrote...
"Spartakus" <spartakus@my-deja.com> wrote...
James Roberts <jimbo12@yahoo.com> wrote:
The Holocaust against Jews was "perfectly legal" in
Germany
No it wasn't.
Law is RARELY chosen by a majority of the populace.
Non sequitur.
Since the law in Germany was chosen by the few with the
biggest guns, and they chose the holocaust, it was
"perfectly legal" in Germany.
Chris, you are just plain, flat out wrong. In the Nuremberg
trials
following the war, the prosecution had no trouble getting murder
convictions against Nazi defendants UNDER EXISTING GERMAN LAW.
That's already been pointed out a few times, but apparently it
(like most of the rest of reality) isn't relevant to whatever
alleged thought process he may be capable of.
Like the fact that "UNDER EXISTING GERMAN LAW" is a matter of
opinion.
Rise and shine, Chris - show us where and when the Nazis changed
German law to exclude Jews from protection against murder.
I don't demonstrate that which is NOT my claim.
It most certainly is your claim that murdering Jews was "perfectly
legal" in Germany during the Nazi regime.
NOT the same thing as the above claim.
And if you want to avoid
being a bigger laughingstock than you already are, you ought to
validate that claim by showing us where and when the Nazis changed
German law to exclude Jews from protection against murder.
I'll save you the trouble - the Nazis *never* changed criminal law to
remove protection from the Jews against murder. What they did to the
Jews was illegal under German law, which is why they took such pains
to hide what they were doing from German citizens, and why the
prosecutors were able to get convictions of Nazi murderers under
existing German law.
Now we're getting into a semantics contest. The fact is that the Nazi regime
created law, by way of big guns, that made the killing of Jews legal. The
current German government folks created their own law, by way of THEIR
bigger guns, that made such killing (retroactively) illegal. Citing the text
of some old law is irrelevant.
Nonsense. The existence of the camps was secret in Germany during the
war, and there was no open and public killing of anyone. The laws
against murder remained on the books while there were new (and illegal
under the existing German legal structure) laws involving the
classification of Jews and other 'undesirables' into separate
categories of people with few or no rights. These people could be
relocated or imprisoned legally for any or no reason but they could
not simply be killed.
There was never an open policy of killing anyone except on the battle
front.
All of the operations of the camps were done by special troops and not
by the army as such or by civilian guards. The same was true for the
exterminations that occurred in Russia behind the German lines where
entire villages were obliterated along with the people in them.
This was never public policy, was never done openly, and was never
legal under German law, before, during or after the war or the Nazi
government. While how much was actually known by the public is still
open to question, and will never be resolved, the fact is that such
knowledge was by rumor and word-of-mouth and not by open public
policy.
Existing law was ignored by the top levels of the government and by
special military groups organized and trained to quietly exterminate
the designated enemies of the Reich.
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Attila" |
|
| Title: Re: James Roberts is a poster child for Godwin's Law |
22 Jun 2004 06:30:10 AM |
|
|
On Tue, 22 Jun 2004 02:40:02 -0700, "Chris" <reddd@juno.com> in
alt.abortion with message-id <U8TBc.23295$ey.7083@fed1read06> wrote:
"Patrick Lee Humphrey" <patrick@io.com> wrote in message
news:szk659kql96.fsf@fnord.io.com...
spartakus@my-deja.com (Spartakus) writes:
"Chris" <reddd@juno.com> wrote...
"Spartakus" <spartakus@my-deja.com> wrote...
"Chris" <reddd@juno.com> wrote...
"Spartakus" <spartakus@my-deja.com> wrote...
James Roberts <jimbo12@yahoo.com> wrote:
The Holocaust against Jews was "perfectly legal" in Germany
No it wasn't.
Law is RARELY chosen by a majority of the populace.
Non sequitur.
Since the law in Germany was chosen by the few with the biggest guns,
and they chose the holocaust, it was "perfectly legal" in Germany.
Chris, you are just plain, flat out wrong. In the Nuremberg trials
following the war, the prosecution had no trouble getting murder
convictions against Nazi defendants UNDER EXISTING GERMAN LAW.
That's already been pointed out a few times, but apparently it (like most
of
the rest of reality) isn't relevant to whatever alleged thought process he
may
be capable of.
Like the fact that "UNDER EXISTING GERMAN LAW" is a matter of opinion.
Yes, the opinion of the judges who put a lot of people in prison.
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Related Articles |
|
|
