Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Libertarian Discussion Forum -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: chalu2 who wrote (3698)	5/16/2000 4:51:00 AM
From: Jim S	Read Replies (3) \| Respond to of 13062

This is my last attempt. Gosh, I really wish that were true. I expect I'll be hearing more from you later. I said that the Court viewed the law as impinging on the state right of rape victims to sue. That's NOT what you said. Here's what you said: >>Plus, I said explicitly that they found it a states' right violation, plainly meaning that the state right of rape victims to sue was being impinged.<< I hate to tell you, pal, but WORDS MEAN THINGS. You can try to obfuscate all you want, but the meaning of your words are clear -- States don't have the right to sue because a person was raped. Your position on the ruling is not material to the discussion. What counts is your intentionally misleading and (pardon the repitition) OBFUSCATING wording. Like most people in the Mountain West, I object to being treated like a colonial. If you New Englanders don't try to understand our different attitudes and bridge the gap, you should be prepared for more discussions like this one. You have the major news media, so we understand your point of view better than we care to. If you really want to set us off, though, just mention guns, spotted owls, or wolves. Do I have regional animosities? You damn betcha. How many regional "wilderness areas" areas are there east of the Mississippi? Zero. How many wolves have been "reintroduced" into Manhatten? Zero. How much of YOUR land has been taken for "preservation of indian artifacts?" Zero. I could go on with mineing, timber, and cattle, but I won't. So don't play the "who, me?" game with me, dude. It is precisely YOUR type of person that is causing the hardship on MY type of person. You folks who live in a condo somwhere and think it is just fine that wolves eat 10% or more of our calves while we exist on subsistance incomes just "don't get it" when it comes to "regional differences." I realize I've expanded the discussion to areas I didn't intend. But, you wanted to know why I have hard feelings toward a NY lawyer. That's why. That, and the fact that you have serious problems with honesty.