Collapse - Yes. The point by neilb@uk · 13 years ago In reply to Am I missing something? The point made by the previous post was that "cut-and-paste" was in the language long before it became used as a common computer term in wysiwyg and, although "copy-and-paste" is possibly what you're actually doing, the former has stuck (pi).Come on, Jules. Concentrate! Collapse - Nothing wrong with my concentration by jardinier · 13 years ago In reply to Yes. The point Please note original post:12) Usage of the phrase "Cut and Paste".If it is copy and paste that is being done, then say it as "Copy and Paste" :-))Note, clear distinction between "cut and paste" and "copy and paste." Collapse - counter rants by jdclyde · 13 years ago In reply to Things that bug me Rant!! ... religion. while the wackos of ANY faith should stay out of your face, so should the anti-religion people. Saying "under god" in the pledge did not scar you as a child and it won't anyone else. get over it.Until ID is disproven or Evolution becomes more than a theory, get over yourself monkey boy.abortion. safe, legal, rare. should NEVER be casual or "just one of those things". Anyone that wears an "I had an abortion" shirt is scum.drugs. depends. no excuses for people on drugs, EVER. can't pay your bills because you spent your money on drugs? Starve. Got kids and your strung out? Take the kids away and put you in jail for child endangerment.same sex marriage. this is not taking anything away from gays by not changing existing definitions of what marriage is and has been. the existing rules do not need to be changed just so you can validate yourself. it isn't marriage. civil unions were created for this purpose. If you don't like what marriage is, don't do it. do the NEW union for the new type of union.divorce. now that being the better parent isn't based on who has the ******, fine. women, you want to leave then you are entitled to half that you worked for. you are NOT entitled to a paycheck. men, give them what they are due and nothing more. kids. parents that WANT to be involved should have equal time. If you have equal time, there should not be any support paid as you support the kids when you have them.GWB and war. It turns out that some of the early Democrats were right. Iraqies are NOT worth it. let them kill each other like the bloody savages they are. make trade partners with whoever is left standing.sexism/racism and all other isms are stupid thoughts by stupid people. but that is the double edge of a free society. freedom of speech protects even hate speech. (ask the ACLU). It should be illegal in hiring/housing, but is hard to apply a law anywhere else. (hard enough to do it in the work place). charging someone with a "hate crime" is just stupidity as well. Is it better to kill someone I don't hate?smoking. people in CA show that they are only interested in SOME rights. They are quick to pick and choose, showing their complete lack of integrity. If your in an open place, or a private business, then it should be dependant on the owner of that place to decide if they want to cater to smokers or non-smokers. If they make an unpopular choice, they go out of business because people won't go there. on the other hand, smokers have already shown THEIR questionable intelligence by smoking in the first place.But the number one rule, as long as you don't affect my life, you have the right to be wrong. Collapse - Nice... by Ciderick · 13 years ago In reply to counter rants Now that's what we like to see. I noticed some of your opinions differ (which is good) but in a lot of cases you seem to be in violent agreement there. Collapse - If people get emotion out of their arguements by jdclyde · 13 years ago In reply to Nice... they would realize that there is more they would agree on than disagree. It is usually getting hung up on a detail here or there, or even having different understandings of what something means.Everyone that has different ideas is not ALWAYS a bad person, because you can have good people with bad ideas. A lot of that comes from people being too lazy to get informed on issues before they blindly take a side.Emotions in arguments will be seen in the next election as the Democratic party has already said they are running against the policies of the current administration. Hello? If they couldn't win an election based on Bush hate when they were running against him (twice), why do they think it would work when they are running against someone else? This is going to be ugly in 08.Got to admit that when you saw the title of your last post "nice", I expected sarcasim..... :0 Collapse - Counter counter rants by JamesRL · 13 years ago In reply to counter rants I will only pick on same sex, cause we agree on most things.Marriage is a religious institution, that the state (political science meaning of state) has institutionalized. There are gay friendly churches here in Canada who happily support and perform same sex marriages. More power to them. Freedom of religion is not freedom to support my religion. If the state wants to back out of doing "marriage" ceremonies, and go back to doing a ceremony for civil unions, and lets churchs hold marriage ceremonies for whoever they want (or deny who they don't want as is their right), then go ahead, but come on people this is just an argument over semantics. Before the white man came to the New world, there were no christian wedding ceremonies - were all the natives living in sin?GWB and the war. I haven't changed my views ever. But you know what - arguing about the past isn't helpful, whats done is done, and what is important is the future. I do believe if you are responsible for pushing humpty dumpty off the wall, you are responsible for cleaning up the mess. I'm not sure civil war in Iraq can be avoided - look at Afghanistan after the Russians left, or Somalia etc. Perhaps it would have happened in any case whenever Saddam died or left power. As I have said before, Iraq's borders were defined by Britain after WWI, prior to that they were part of the Ottoman empire, and it wasn't one province, it was three separate provinces(the lower province included what we know as Kuwait). Smoking. Sure in a reasonable size city you may have choices, but in one horse towns, if the owner decides to make it smoking, you don't have a choice. If you are waitress, second hand smoke is a workplace hazard. Christopher Reeves' wife never smoked in her life, never lived with a smoker, but she worked in a lot of smoky nightclubs. She got lung cancer, and the most credible reason is through the smoke from those nightclubs. If you want to pollute your lungs in the great outdoors or in your car or house, go ahead.JamesJames Collapse - I thought you were big on personal choice James? by jdclyde · 13 years ago In reply to Counter counter rants If I own a business, you think the government should have the ability to dictate if I allow adults to use a legal product?Personal choice. No one MADE her work there or live there. Start your own business.No one is making anyone work in the nightclubs (except for a sex slave trade they JUST broke up in Detroit/Chicago last week).If you don't like the smoke or the uniform or the whatever, don't work there. No sympathy for people making their own choices, and second hand smoke is not a new discovery.Also, this is the minority of cases and as you said it was only "most credible reason". People get lung cancer from more than smoking and being around smokers.I have a hard time being around smokers. I have bad alergies and sinuses that have always bothered me. After I got the double pneumonia a few years ago, it became physically painful to be in the same house with smokine (the ex smoked). After a few days of the middle of winter, (just out of the hospital), bundling up and sitting on the porch till she was done finally got her to at least go into the back room and stand by the window. At that point I couldn't even walk to the corner and back. Was one sick puppy.I by no means am a pro-smoker. I AM pro-freedom. The difference between this freedom and the pro-abortion freedom is we just disagree with whos freedom is being infringed on. You think it is the woman, I think it is the baby getting killed that is loosing the ultimate freedom. So I am still supporting freedom when I am against the evils of causal abortions for birthcontrol. The mothers had the freedom of getting pregnant or not. The baby doesn't have the choice of being aborted or living.Marriage. Symantics is right. Which is why all the people that are so up in armes against the people that don't feel they have to compromise their beliefs should be asked the same question. What is the big deal? If its not a big deal, then why are the gays MAKING this a big deal?The unions give the legal rights of married people, and as many today try to say marriage is just a piece of paper now anyways, again, I ask why it is the pro-gays that are making this into a big deal?Let them have the new defintion for the new relationship. One that doesn't have all the baggage of the quickie divorces that have ruined marriage for many.But yes, we agree more than we disagree. Collapse - Personal choice by JamesRL · 13 years ago In reply to I thought you were big on ... Your right to personal choice ends where it impacts my safety and my rights. I once took a course on the "Philosophy of Economic History" and even the great capitalists were not in favour of unbridled capitalism at the expense of others. I'd suggest that if I and others enjoy clean air, the onus is on the polluter (smoker) not to pollute where I want to be. James Collapse - But james by jdclyde · 13 years ago In reply to Personal choice does your wanting to be somewhere trump how I should be allowed to run a bar?If I OWN this bar, how does your wanting to go there mean I can't allow others that want to go there do as they wish when that wish is the usage of a legal product?The only way this should be legal to do the ban, is if you outlaw smokes completely. Until then you should have no say over what happens in privately owned businesses. government owned is a different case thought.I disagree. Nothing new, huh? Collapse - Sorry, but ... by pete1978 · 13 years ago In reply to But james a bar exists to provide service to people who are patrons, not owners, of the bar. Laws exist to protect those patrons from stupid bar owners who put profit over public safety. Using your same logic -- the "it's my bar, I'll do what I want" logic -- the bar you own should be free to serve food that is years old and is tainted with poisons and the health department should have nothing to say about it. After all, it is your bar!The reason bar owners (and others) DON'T get to set the rules/laws for what happens in their establishments is that too often, they put profit over public safety.