maybe it's the "in your face part", think of that. In Stranger in a Strange Land I kept think yes yes we understand that you are all very liberated and unconventional. So what? I like my protagonists a little more complicated. They're both important figures in science fiction, don't get me wrong, but we are talking Willie Nelson vs.... I dunno, John Mayall.
On Wed, Mar 31, 2010 at 7:28 AM, LRS Scout <[email protected]> wrote: > > They are both heavy into a philosophy I try and follow. You have a > different view of lfe and ethics and morals, not a negative one, just > different. If anything I'd say thats probably the problem you'd have with > those writers. They are very obvious and in your face with their satire. > > -----Original Message----- > From: Dana [mailto:[email protected]] > Sent: Wednesday, March 31, 2010 4:39 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 > > > 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:314626 Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-community/subscribe.cfm Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-community/unsubscribe.cfm
