If you feel big ridiculing the spelling of a dyslexic on a public 
computer in a third world country that has no spell checker, that is 
your peragative. It does not however add support to your statements.


--- In [email protected], "mark robert" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> Uncool,
> 
>  
> 
> Here's my opening statement playing yours:
> 
> "I knoe it all because I have been curect bufore. It simpli takes
> a smartre person to understand that." 
> 
> (You have got to be joking! At least it prepared me for your next
> "logical" viewpoint.)
> 
>  
> 
> First, your writing is a little better but I still must depend on
> hunches for comprehension. Secondly, I don't remember mentioning
> nicotine in this thread. Thirdly, I don't remember making that
> kind of argument about the drug war in this thread; the one that
> I think you are maybe trying to intend to want to maybe claim
> that I made. But that's just a guess because you see, there's
> this problem with MY intellectual effort. LOL.
> 
>  
> 
> -Mark
> 
> 
> 
> ************
> {American jurors have complete Constitutional authority to vote
> "not guilty" based on nothing more than a disagreement with the
> case, no matter the evidence - despite the judge's instructions.
> There is absolutely no obligation to vote "guilty" to arrive at a
> unanimous verdict. Get on a jury, stand your ground, and fulfill
> its other main purpose: to counteract abusive government and
> unjust lawsuits.
> See www.fija.org 
> [Please adopt this as your own signature.] }
> 
> 
> 
> 
>   _____  
> 
>  
> 
> It is not inpossible, as I have been understood before. It simply
> 
> takes more intelectual effort to decipher.
> 
> Restatement
> 
> Devestation of nicotine is greater than devistation of illegal 
> drugs. (summarized thought, not my own)
> 
> Suggesting, thus, that legalization means greater devistation,
> and 
> thus only poor logic could lead to the conclusion (based on above
> 
> thought) that legalization is the right choice, unless greater 
> devestation was your desired goal. 
> 
> So, I find poor logic behind the statement that because legal 
> nicotine does more damage than ilegal narcotics, narcotics too 
> should be legal. 
> 
> This is not nessasarily an attack on legalization, just a comment
> on 
> how nonsensical the propossed logic was.
> 
> 
> 
> --- In [email protected], "mark robert" <colowe@>
> wrote:
> >
> > Uncool,
> > 
> >  
> > 
> > Could you please explain / re-write your post. I honestly can't
> > figure out what you are saying. You may actually have some good
> > points, but I hesitate to reply on a hunch. Your writing is
> > impossible to read because your grammar and punctuation are
> > almost non-existent. Also, it might help if you would stop
> > repeatedly misspelling the topic on which you wish to be heard
> > opining: "PROHIBITION".
> > 
> >  
> > 
> > -Mark
> > 
> >  
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > ************
> > {American jurors have complete Constitutional authority to vote
> > "not guilty" based on nothing more than a disagreement with the
> > case, no matter the evidence - despite the judge's
> instructions.
> > There is absolutely no obligation to vote "guilty" to arrive at
> a
> > unanimous verdict. Get on a jury, stand your ground, and
> fulfill
> > its other main purpose: to counteract abusive government and
> > unjust lawsuits.
> > See www.fija.org 
> > [Please adopt this as your own signature.] }
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> >   _____  
> > 
> >  
> > 
> > That appears like poor logic to appose prohabition... The lack
> of
> > 
> > prohibition on nicotine products, and the far greater
> devestation
> > to 
> > peoples nicotine causes as a legal substance makes you beleive
> > that, 
> > thus, the ilegal substances, the some of wich far more
> powerfull 
> > than nicotine, should also be legal... because......?
> > 
> > Not my position here, just pointing out you just gave an
> argument
> > 
> > for prohibition as your argument against it.
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> 
> 
> 
>   _____  
> 
> 
> 
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>







ForumWebSiteAt  http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Libertarian  
Yahoo! Groups Links

<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
    http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Libertarian/

<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
    [EMAIL PROTECTED]

<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
    http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
 



Reply via email to