His writing is ok but his female characters just ring totally wrong and it I can't take his books seriously because of this. Partly this is his time (Asimov is also kinda bad about this, but so few significant of *his* characters are women...) and partly -- I don't know. I re-read some of his books because Tim was raving about them, and I just don't get it. Mind you I couldn't get past the first few pages of Atlas Shrugged either.
On Tue, Mar 30, 2010 at 1:13 PM, Eric Roberts <[email protected]> wrote: > > Yup...I have read it. Didn't care for the writing style (I dont like most > writings styles in sci-fi), but it was otherwise a good book. He did put > some interesting ideas out there...even formed the basis of a Pagan > Tradition (Church of All Worlds). > > Eric > > -----Original Message----- > From: LRS Scout [mailto:[email protected]] > Sent: Tuesday, March 30, 2010 2:20 PM > To: cf-community > Subject: RE: _Speaking_of_the_Supreme_Court:_Marine's_father_ord_ere > d_to_pay_court_costs_to_Westboro_Baptist_Churc > > > Have you read stranger in a strange land? If not please do. Incredible > book if you can grok it. > > They have public and private spheres in life, and the individual decides > which sphere he is in in most cases. > > Interesting concept. Would be difficult to implement. Man Heinlein was an > incredible mind. What I would give to sit and puff one with him. > > -----Original Message----- > From: Eric Roberts [mailto:[email protected]] > Sent: Tuesday, March 30, 2010 2:49 PM > To: cf-community > Subject: RE: _Speaking_of_the_Supreme_Court:_Marine's_father_ord_ere > d_to_pay_court_costs_to_Westboro_Baptist_Churc > > > From my reading, it's no so much an enumerated right, but one that is > inferred by the enumerated rights and backed up by several SCOTUS decisions. > One article stated that Justice Louis Brandeis cited the 14th Amendment as > an example of this. They also used the phrase the right to be left the hell > alone...heheheh > > Eric > > -----Original Message----- > From: Dana [mailto:[email protected]] > Sent: Tuesday, March 30, 2010 1:45 PM > To: cf-community > Subject: Re: _Speaking_of_the_Supreme_Court:_Marine's_father_ord_ere > d_to_pay_court_costs_to_Westboro_Baptist_Churc > > > maybe. I feel there is a right to be left the hell alone. But yeah, > privacy may not be the best word. > > On Tue, Mar 30, 2010 at 12:42 PM, LRS Scout <[email protected]> wrote: >> >> Well, as Denny mentioned. The rights enumerated in the constitution are > not >> our only rights, just the ones they wrote down. >> >> I just think "privacy" is too loose a word, and we would need to have an >> amendment clarifying what it means. >> >> Shit I think we need a new constitutional convention. >> >> -----Original Message----- >> From: Dana [mailto:[email protected]] >> Sent: Tuesday, March 30, 2010 2:14 PM >> To: cf-community >> Subject: Re: _Speaking_of_the_Supreme_Court:_Marine's_father_ord_ere >> d_to_pay_court_costs_to_Westboro_Baptist_Churc >> >> >> true but it's a pretty established constitutional extrapolation. >> Sometimes judicial activism is needed. I personally think that it does >> not arise in the constitution because it's not an 18-century concept. >> The United States was so sparsely populated then that it really wasn't >> hard to be left the hell alone. This is less so now. But isn't that >> really what underlies all of the other rights? The right to be left >> the hell alone? >> >> On Tue, Mar 30, 2010 at 8:52 AM, LRS Scout <[email protected]> wrote: >>> >>> Also the word privacy is never mentioned in the constitution, it's an >>> invention of judicial activism. >>> >>> -----Original Message----- >>> From: G Money [mailto:[email protected]] >>> Sent: Tuesday, March 30, 2010 8:31 AM >>> To: cf-community >>> Subject: Re: _Speaking_of_the_Supreme_Court:_Marine's_father_ord_ere >>> d_to_pay_court_costs_to_Westboro_Baptist_Churc >>> >>> >>> On Mon, Mar 29, 2010 at 5:14 PM, Eric Roberts < >>> [email protected]> wrote: >>> >>>> >>>> The family's >>>> right to privacy and their freedom of (and from) the religious beliefs > of >>>> others trumps all of that. >>> >>> >>> Their right to privacy is protected, in so far as the protesters are not >>> allowed on the private property of the cemetery, but must remain off the >>> property to carry their stupid signs. >>> >>> If these people were carrying signs that said "God bless your son for his >>> service", you wouldn't be up in arms about it. My point is that it's not >>> really their privacy that you are worried about, it's the type of speech. >>> >>> America and her freedoms are not easy. They were not obtained easily, and >>> they are not defended easily. Our military protects our freedoms from >> armed >>> assailants domestic and foreign, but we citizens are the last great >> defense >>> of what our country really stands for......freedom. These assholes test > us >>> as citizens of a free country. Is our devotion to freedom of speech just >>> rhetoric, or are we capable of passing the test and suffering those who >>> would test the limits of our freedoms? >>> >>> Don't fail the test. >>> >>> -- >>> Everybody knows the war is over >>> Everybody knows the good guys lost >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >> >> >> >> > > > > > > > > ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~| Want to reach the ColdFusion community with something they want? Let them know on the House of Fusion mailing lists Archive: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-community/message.cfm/messageid:314556 Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-community/subscribe.cfm Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-community/unsubscribe.cfm
