Mark; You seem to be stuck in an either-or/one-or-the-other mindset. Here is a wake up for you; two unrelated points can both be true.
Debate? No. You want to play, and I am far too old to be behaving like a kid. I'll leave that up to you. Besides, you are not able to discuss only debate.....a game for certain. I believe in facts, not contests. Your country is dying and you want to play games. Pity. On 6/21/06, mark robert <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > John, > > But didn't you just deny that position (that weakening > environmental laws endangers the country)? It appears you started > off supporting it, then denied it, but now are supporting it > again. > > OTOH, your denial pattern is a minor inconsistency compared to > that of your position, which we can now proceed to better debate > since you have made it official. > > Besides my earlier rebuttal points about these laws endangering > our country (by bloating govt size and power and exacerbating > corruption and oppression), I'll include a few points from the > LP's page I linked earlier. > :::::::::::::::::::::::: > Government, both federal and local, is the greatest single > polluter in the U.S. This polluter literally gets away with > murder because of sovereign immunity. > By turning to government for environmental protection, we've > placed the fox in charge of the hen house. > Unfortunately, government's stewardship over our land is > gradually destroying it. > :::::::::::::::::::::::: > > There is a second part to that article at: > http://www.ruwart.com/environ2.lpn.wpd.html > Here are some more relevant points to consider. > :::::::::::::::::::::::: > Libertarians would privatize land and beast to save endangered > species, etc. > Libertarians reject the initiation of physical force as a means > to their ends. > Restitution is the remedy. > Our air (and water) can be protected from pollution with > restitution and private ownership. > > > -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.] } > > ------------------ > > Nope. You got it half right. Keep trying. > > I think it is DIRECTLY harming the country because the Supreme > Court now > works for Bush and I think it DIRECTLY hurts the country ALSO > because these > clean water laws protect US from having our drinking water > contaminated. > > I POSTED it because I do not support EITHER. > > Sorry, you are on your own from here if you still can't decifer > something > that simple. > > On 6/21/06, mark robert <[EMAIL PROTECTED] <colowe%40iquest.net>> wrote: > > > > John, > > > > So you do not think the weakening of environmental laws is > > directly helping to endanger this country. But you DO think > said > > weakening is INDIRECTLY helping to endanger this county; by > > giving an advantage to Bush's backers thereby giving him more > > power. Is that a fair assessment of your position? > > > > > > -Mark > > > > > -- ***************************************** "We must all hang together, or assuredly we shall all hang separately!" ...Ben Franklin [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] ------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor --------------------~--> See what's inside the new Yahoo! Groups email. http://us.click.yahoo.com/2pRQfA/bOaOAA/yQLSAA/KlSolB/TM --------------------------------------------------------------------~-> 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/
