Jealous?
-----Original Message----- From: Larry C. Lyons [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: Wednesday, March 31, 2010 12:59 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 After Stranger in a Strange Land, I think that Heinlein just rewrote the same book over and over again. The characters were the same (at times they were the same character), the situations almost the same etc. They became libertarian polemics rather than anything decent. They were becoming so predictable that I'm surprised no one came up with a Heinlein novel generator based on a mad lib game. On Wed, Mar 31, 2010 at 12:31 PM, Dana <[email protected]> wrote: > > 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:314651 Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-community/subscribe.cfm Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-community/unsubscribe.cfm
