[CONC] BOR, was Re: Banning morphological freedom

From: Michael M. Butler (mmb@spies.com)
Date: Wed Apr 02 2003 - 14:50:42 MST

  • Next message: Charles Hixson: "Re: Ad Hominem fallacy again"

    On Wed, 2 Apr 2003 11:04:33 -0800, R. Coyote <coyyote@hotmail.com> wrote:

    > The BOR is not a declaration of positive rights, and it does not say "and
    > that's all" at the end.

    Absolutely. We can all count ourselves lucky that Porky Pig's goiter kept
    him from accepting the post of Representative from New Jersey. :)

    Seriously, this is of course correct on both counts.

    -- 
    I am not here to have an argument. I am here as part of a civilization. 
    Sometimes I forget.
    


    This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Wed Apr 02 2003 - 14:57:37 MST