Huge study about safety can be misinterpreted by SUV drivers
12-04-2003, 11:59 AM
#6011
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Global Warming - a Liberal Scam?, (was Huge study aboutsafetycanbemisinterpreted by SUV drivers)
Lloyd Parker wrote:
> >Married people have rights that unmarried people don't have. Is that
> >discrimination?
>
> No, but when you prevent an entire class from getting married so they CAN have
> those rights, that is.
Sigh, talk about circular arguments. The traditional legal definition of a
marriage is a union between a man and a woman. Without changing the definition of
the word, same --- couples can't get married in a legal sense. They could be
granted the same rights by passing a law that made same --- unions equivalent to a
traditional marriage. Why is this concept so hard for you to understand. When laws
were enacted to provide rights to married couples, no one conceived that it would
apply to same --- unions. I think it is desirable that same --- couple have those
same rights and responsibilities. I just don't think this should be implemented by
redefining the long established legal meaning of the word "marriage."
Ed
12-04-2003, 11:59 AM
#6012
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Global Warming - a Liberal Scam?, (was Huge study aboutsafetycanbemisinterpreted by SUV drivers)
Lloyd Parker wrote:
> >Married people have rights that unmarried people don't have. Is that
> >discrimination?
>
> No, but when you prevent an entire class from getting married so they CAN have
> those rights, that is.
Sigh, talk about circular arguments. The traditional legal definition of a
marriage is a union between a man and a woman. Without changing the definition of
the word, same --- couples can't get married in a legal sense. They could be
granted the same rights by passing a law that made same --- unions equivalent to a
traditional marriage. Why is this concept so hard for you to understand. When laws
were enacted to provide rights to married couples, no one conceived that it would
apply to same --- unions. I think it is desirable that same --- couple have those
same rights and responsibilities. I just don't think this should be implemented by
redefining the long established legal meaning of the word "marriage."
Ed
12-04-2003, 11:59 AM
#6013
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Global Warming - a Liberal Scam?, (was Huge study aboutsafetycanbemisinterpreted by SUV drivers)
Lloyd Parker wrote:
> >Married people have rights that unmarried people don't have. Is that
> >discrimination?
>
> No, but when you prevent an entire class from getting married so they CAN have
> those rights, that is.
Sigh, talk about circular arguments. The traditional legal definition of a
marriage is a union between a man and a woman. Without changing the definition of
the word, same --- couples can't get married in a legal sense. They could be
granted the same rights by passing a law that made same --- unions equivalent to a
traditional marriage. Why is this concept so hard for you to understand. When laws
were enacted to provide rights to married couples, no one conceived that it would
apply to same --- unions. I think it is desirable that same --- couple have those
same rights and responsibilities. I just don't think this should be implemented by
redefining the long established legal meaning of the word "marriage."
Ed
12-04-2003, 12:00 PM
#6014
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Global Warming - a Liberal Scam?, (was Huge study aboutsafetycanbemisinterpreted by SUV drivers)
"Can't you three or four guys that are continuing this thread find some common
group to post to, rather than all of this crossposting?
Try alt.argumentative.idiots.wont.give.up"
Dan Gates wrote:
> Daniel J. Stern wrote:
> > On Wed, 3 Dec 2003, Bill Putney wrote:
> >
> >
> >>Canada's healthcare system sucks.
> >
> >
> > I daresay you don't know what you're talking about. I'm an American living
> > here in Canada, and guess what? Canada's healthcare system is *vastly*
> > better than the US system in the vast majority of cases. Are there
> > exceptions? Surely. There's no such thing as perfection. But the Canadian
> > system does a much better job of handling most of the healthcare needs of
> > most of the people at a reasonable cost.
> >
> > DS
> >
>
> Further, Canada's healthcare system has been cut to pieces by Reaganist
> neo-Conservatives. Savings had to be realized, clearly, but the cuts
> went to the bone, where they should have gone to the fat.
>
> My experience (ageing parents, two fairly recent children and their
> maladies, friends surviving cancer) has been extremely positive. Waits
> tend to be for MRIs, synthetic hip and knee replacements and such, 15
> years ago, how long did you have to wait for such things? About 10
> years! We keep forgetting that these are pretty new, expensive
> technologies, some of which have not proven to be any more effective
> than the old, cheap technologies.
>
> The best news that you can hope for when you take your child into the
> kids hospital here is that you have a long wait ahead of you! It means
> that your kid is going to be OK and you likely should have waited till
> morning and gone to your GP. If you get an orange sticker on your file
> and they grab the kid and run, call your family and your priest! The
> kid is in trouble. This I know from friends' experiences. I love to
> wait at the kids ER!!!
>
> Dan
group to post to, rather than all of this crossposting?
Try alt.argumentative.idiots.wont.give.up"
Dan Gates wrote:
> Daniel J. Stern wrote:
> > On Wed, 3 Dec 2003, Bill Putney wrote:
> >
> >
> >>Canada's healthcare system sucks.
> >
> >
> > I daresay you don't know what you're talking about. I'm an American living
> > here in Canada, and guess what? Canada's healthcare system is *vastly*
> > better than the US system in the vast majority of cases. Are there
> > exceptions? Surely. There's no such thing as perfection. But the Canadian
> > system does a much better job of handling most of the healthcare needs of
> > most of the people at a reasonable cost.
> >
> > DS
> >
>
> Further, Canada's healthcare system has been cut to pieces by Reaganist
> neo-Conservatives. Savings had to be realized, clearly, but the cuts
> went to the bone, where they should have gone to the fat.
>
> My experience (ageing parents, two fairly recent children and their
> maladies, friends surviving cancer) has been extremely positive. Waits
> tend to be for MRIs, synthetic hip and knee replacements and such, 15
> years ago, how long did you have to wait for such things? About 10
> years! We keep forgetting that these are pretty new, expensive
> technologies, some of which have not proven to be any more effective
> than the old, cheap technologies.
>
> The best news that you can hope for when you take your child into the
> kids hospital here is that you have a long wait ahead of you! It means
> that your kid is going to be OK and you likely should have waited till
> morning and gone to your GP. If you get an orange sticker on your file
> and they grab the kid and run, call your family and your priest! The
> kid is in trouble. This I know from friends' experiences. I love to
> wait at the kids ER!!!
>
> Dan
12-04-2003, 12:00 PM
#6015
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Global Warming - a Liberal Scam?, (was Huge study aboutsafetycanbemisinterpreted by SUV drivers)
"Can't you three or four guys that are continuing this thread find some common
group to post to, rather than all of this crossposting?
Try alt.argumentative.idiots.wont.give.up"
Dan Gates wrote:
> Daniel J. Stern wrote:
> > On Wed, 3 Dec 2003, Bill Putney wrote:
> >
> >
> >>Canada's healthcare system sucks.
> >
> >
> > I daresay you don't know what you're talking about. I'm an American living
> > here in Canada, and guess what? Canada's healthcare system is *vastly*
> > better than the US system in the vast majority of cases. Are there
> > exceptions? Surely. There's no such thing as perfection. But the Canadian
> > system does a much better job of handling most of the healthcare needs of
> > most of the people at a reasonable cost.
> >
> > DS
> >
>
> Further, Canada's healthcare system has been cut to pieces by Reaganist
> neo-Conservatives. Savings had to be realized, clearly, but the cuts
> went to the bone, where they should have gone to the fat.
>
> My experience (ageing parents, two fairly recent children and their
> maladies, friends surviving cancer) has been extremely positive. Waits
> tend to be for MRIs, synthetic hip and knee replacements and such, 15
> years ago, how long did you have to wait for such things? About 10
> years! We keep forgetting that these are pretty new, expensive
> technologies, some of which have not proven to be any more effective
> than the old, cheap technologies.
>
> The best news that you can hope for when you take your child into the
> kids hospital here is that you have a long wait ahead of you! It means
> that your kid is going to be OK and you likely should have waited till
> morning and gone to your GP. If you get an orange sticker on your file
> and they grab the kid and run, call your family and your priest! The
> kid is in trouble. This I know from friends' experiences. I love to
> wait at the kids ER!!!
>
> Dan
group to post to, rather than all of this crossposting?
Try alt.argumentative.idiots.wont.give.up"
Dan Gates wrote:
> Daniel J. Stern wrote:
> > On Wed, 3 Dec 2003, Bill Putney wrote:
> >
> >
> >>Canada's healthcare system sucks.
> >
> >
> > I daresay you don't know what you're talking about. I'm an American living
> > here in Canada, and guess what? Canada's healthcare system is *vastly*
> > better than the US system in the vast majority of cases. Are there
> > exceptions? Surely. There's no such thing as perfection. But the Canadian
> > system does a much better job of handling most of the healthcare needs of
> > most of the people at a reasonable cost.
> >
> > DS
> >
>
> Further, Canada's healthcare system has been cut to pieces by Reaganist
> neo-Conservatives. Savings had to be realized, clearly, but the cuts
> went to the bone, where they should have gone to the fat.
>
> My experience (ageing parents, two fairly recent children and their
> maladies, friends surviving cancer) has been extremely positive. Waits
> tend to be for MRIs, synthetic hip and knee replacements and such, 15
> years ago, how long did you have to wait for such things? About 10
> years! We keep forgetting that these are pretty new, expensive
> technologies, some of which have not proven to be any more effective
> than the old, cheap technologies.
>
> The best news that you can hope for when you take your child into the
> kids hospital here is that you have a long wait ahead of you! It means
> that your kid is going to be OK and you likely should have waited till
> morning and gone to your GP. If you get an orange sticker on your file
> and they grab the kid and run, call your family and your priest! The
> kid is in trouble. This I know from friends' experiences. I love to
> wait at the kids ER!!!
>
> Dan
12-04-2003, 12:00 PM
#6016
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Global Warming - a Liberal Scam?, (was Huge study aboutsafetycanbemisinterpreted by SUV drivers)
"Can't you three or four guys that are continuing this thread find some common
group to post to, rather than all of this crossposting?
Try alt.argumentative.idiots.wont.give.up"
Dan Gates wrote:
> Daniel J. Stern wrote:
> > On Wed, 3 Dec 2003, Bill Putney wrote:
> >
> >
> >>Canada's healthcare system sucks.
> >
> >
> > I daresay you don't know what you're talking about. I'm an American living
> > here in Canada, and guess what? Canada's healthcare system is *vastly*
> > better than the US system in the vast majority of cases. Are there
> > exceptions? Surely. There's no such thing as perfection. But the Canadian
> > system does a much better job of handling most of the healthcare needs of
> > most of the people at a reasonable cost.
> >
> > DS
> >
>
> Further, Canada's healthcare system has been cut to pieces by Reaganist
> neo-Conservatives. Savings had to be realized, clearly, but the cuts
> went to the bone, where they should have gone to the fat.
>
> My experience (ageing parents, two fairly recent children and their
> maladies, friends surviving cancer) has been extremely positive. Waits
> tend to be for MRIs, synthetic hip and knee replacements and such, 15
> years ago, how long did you have to wait for such things? About 10
> years! We keep forgetting that these are pretty new, expensive
> technologies, some of which have not proven to be any more effective
> than the old, cheap technologies.
>
> The best news that you can hope for when you take your child into the
> kids hospital here is that you have a long wait ahead of you! It means
> that your kid is going to be OK and you likely should have waited till
> morning and gone to your GP. If you get an orange sticker on your file
> and they grab the kid and run, call your family and your priest! The
> kid is in trouble. This I know from friends' experiences. I love to
> wait at the kids ER!!!
>
> Dan
group to post to, rather than all of this crossposting?
Try alt.argumentative.idiots.wont.give.up"
Dan Gates wrote:
> Daniel J. Stern wrote:
> > On Wed, 3 Dec 2003, Bill Putney wrote:
> >
> >
> >>Canada's healthcare system sucks.
> >
> >
> > I daresay you don't know what you're talking about. I'm an American living
> > here in Canada, and guess what? Canada's healthcare system is *vastly*
> > better than the US system in the vast majority of cases. Are there
> > exceptions? Surely. There's no such thing as perfection. But the Canadian
> > system does a much better job of handling most of the healthcare needs of
> > most of the people at a reasonable cost.
> >
> > DS
> >
>
> Further, Canada's healthcare system has been cut to pieces by Reaganist
> neo-Conservatives. Savings had to be realized, clearly, but the cuts
> went to the bone, where they should have gone to the fat.
>
> My experience (ageing parents, two fairly recent children and their
> maladies, friends surviving cancer) has been extremely positive. Waits
> tend to be for MRIs, synthetic hip and knee replacements and such, 15
> years ago, how long did you have to wait for such things? About 10
> years! We keep forgetting that these are pretty new, expensive
> technologies, some of which have not proven to be any more effective
> than the old, cheap technologies.
>
> The best news that you can hope for when you take your child into the
> kids hospital here is that you have a long wait ahead of you! It means
> that your kid is going to be OK and you likely should have waited till
> morning and gone to your GP. If you get an orange sticker on your file
> and they grab the kid and run, call your family and your priest! The
> kid is in trouble. This I know from friends' experiences. I love to
> wait at the kids ER!!!
>
> Dan
12-04-2003, 12:00 PM
#6017
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Global Warming - a Liberal Scam?, (was Huge study about safety can be misinterpreted by SUV drivers)
"Lloyd Parker" <lparker@NOSPAMemory.edu> wrote in message
news:bqnj60$e8j$13@puck.cc.emory.edu...
> In article <vssrtd7jldov7a@corp.supernews.com>,
> "The Ancient One" <onlytheone@thetopknows.com> wrote:
> >Consumer Reports have no more credibility than you do Lloyd, which is 0.
> >
> >
>
> "The cowardly one" just continues to show how stupid he is.
There, I trimmed the post for you LLoyd, I know that is beyond your
intellectual ability to manage. Lets see, out of all the arguments I've seen
you in, you've won 0. Perfect score Lloyd, you must be proud.
12-04-2003, 12:00 PM
#6018
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Global Warming - a Liberal Scam?, (was Huge study about safety can be misinterpreted by SUV drivers)
"Lloyd Parker" <lparker@NOSPAMemory.edu> wrote in message
news:bqnj60$e8j$13@puck.cc.emory.edu...
> In article <vssrtd7jldov7a@corp.supernews.com>,
> "The Ancient One" <onlytheone@thetopknows.com> wrote:
> >Consumer Reports have no more credibility than you do Lloyd, which is 0.
> >
> >
>
> "The cowardly one" just continues to show how stupid he is.
There, I trimmed the post for you LLoyd, I know that is beyond your
intellectual ability to manage. Lets see, out of all the arguments I've seen
you in, you've won 0. Perfect score Lloyd, you must be proud.
12-04-2003, 12:00 PM
#6019
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Global Warming - a Liberal Scam?, (was Huge study about safety can be misinterpreted by SUV drivers)
"Lloyd Parker" <lparker@NOSPAMemory.edu> wrote in message
news:bqnj60$e8j$13@puck.cc.emory.edu...
> In article <vssrtd7jldov7a@corp.supernews.com>,
> "The Ancient One" <onlytheone@thetopknows.com> wrote:
> >Consumer Reports have no more credibility than you do Lloyd, which is 0.
> >
> >
>
> "The cowardly one" just continues to show how stupid he is.
There, I trimmed the post for you LLoyd, I know that is beyond your
intellectual ability to manage. Lets see, out of all the arguments I've seen
you in, you've won 0. Perfect score Lloyd, you must be proud.
12-04-2003, 12:02 PM
#6020
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Global Warming - a Liberal Scam?, (was Huge study about safety can be misinterpreted by SUV drivers)
"Lloyd Parker" <lparker@NOSPAMemory.edu> wrote in message
news:bqnjba$e8j$17@puck.cc.emory.edu...
> In article <jitssv8suj0cd099p9hi10snvtjud3sfg9@4ax.com>,
> Bill Funk <bfunk33@pipping.com> wrote:
> >On Wed, 03 Dec 03 10:53:28 GMT, lparker@NOSPAMemory.edu (Lloyd Parker)
> >wrote:
> >
> >>>Explain then Lloyd why bus loads of Canadians with life threating
health
> >>>problems are forced to come to the USA for treatment at their own
expense.
> >>>Sure they can get free care in Canada, IF they can wait 6 months to a
year
> >>>for treatment.
> >>>
> >>>
> >>
> >>Like asking why people travel to Mexico for Christmas trees. It simply
does
> >>not happen.
> >>
> >>Read, for example,
> >>http://www.worldpolicy.org/globalrig...da-health.html
> >
> >Um, Lloyd...
> >Remember how you complain when we quote conservative sources?
> >
>
> Because CR is a consumer advocate group. Not liberal or conservative.
Now I
> know to you Taliban anybody to the left of Atilla the Hun is a liberal if
not
> a socialist, but the rest of us aren't stupid like that.
They don't speak for any consumers I know. Consumer Reports is a joke, used
by those people who lack the intelligence to invistigate an issue and learn
the truth.
