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 : PRESIDENT GEORGE W. BUSH -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: TigerPaw who wrote (29618)	8/16/2000 5:22:31 PM
From: lorrie coey	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 769667

Ah, the Truth, beautifully spoken, will set us all Free...!

To: TigerPaw who wrote (29618)	8/16/2000 5:24:25 PM
From: Bill	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 769667

When I was 4, I had the right to get into amusement parks free. When I turn 62, I get the right to travel on the bus for half price. When I worked at my last job, I had the right to join the credit union. When I worked retail, I had the right to buy clothes at 30% off. So many rights, so few categories...

To: TigerPaw who wrote (29618)	8/16/2000 5:40:26 PM
From: J.B.C.	Respond to of 769667

>>I get power of attorney privledges for each other without having to fill out special paperwork.<< This is not a right, and is not refused to anyone. >>We get the right to not testify against each other<< It's small one with regard to law abiding citizens but I'll concede this one. However I don't believe that this is what gays are seeking, correct? >>survivorship benefits to property and pensions. << these again are not rights and most of this can be achieved through properly prepared wills. >>right to insurance at favorable rates and a reduction in car insurance.<< These are a result of statistics for man and women unions. >>can't lose date on New Year's.<< I'd like to be around if your husband said "no, I'm watching football that night", hehehe, ( I seem to remember somewhere that you're female, forgive me if otherwise) Here's the 5th amendment: No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a Grand Jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the Militia, when in actual service in time of War or public danger; nor shall any person be subject for the same offence to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb; nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation. --------------- Is it through court interpretation that a spouse can't testify against that person? Jim