If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#61
|
|||
|
|||
Gotta keep it from The Children
In article , "LaTreen says...
x-no-archive: yes So address the issue, Banty. You sure talk a lot but I don't see any arguments about the diaper complaints. Just another mother, blowing her horn - hiding her head in the sand. LaTreen Washington You misspelled "hey not fair you didn't chase my red herring"! And top posting to boot. Alt.peeves sure has some winners.. Banty "Banty" wrote in message ... In article , Nan says... On 23 Jun 2003 20:25:03 -0700, Banty wrote: In article , "LaTreen says... x-no-archive: yes Do you raise as big a fuss when people change diapers in public? Do you object when people bring their children into public pools wearing swim diapers (that release fecal matter - a PROVEN health hazard) into public pools? Both are an entitlement issue with parents. How many times are diapers changed in cafes and airplanes? I WILL smoke outside. When I wait for a bus - I go under the shelter with everyone else and I DO light up. If people are there with children I make a point to stand by them. You can take your ill-behaved children anywhere you want. I WILL smoke where ever I am allowed to by law. If they don't like it, they can move - that's the entitlement attitude that applies to me when your children are obnoxious and ill-mannered. There is an law against smoking in an athletic field near my house and I will smoke there until I am fined for it. If I am fined, I will drag the case out in court as long as I can to run up the cost and waste the town's money. I see the litter left behind by breeders from little league and the feces left from the dog owners. These people don't care about the public - why should I? LaTreen Washington The Problem Exhibit B. Banty No, just another CF troll. Nan OK - Problem Smoker's Attitude Exhibit B. Problem CF Attitude Exhibit A :-) Banty |
#62
|
|||
|
|||
Gotta keep it from The Children
"toto" wrote in message ... On Sat, 28 Jun 2003 00:39:00 +0930, "silvasurfa" wrote: "toto" wrote in message .. . So yeah... no smoking is a damn good idea and I don't care if the law was passed for the children, the adults, the environment or the benefit of a small grey rabbit living halfway up a drainpipe. End result = good. So you believe that the end justifies the means in all cases? -- Dorothy And you believe that the end never justifies the means? In general, yes. The means must be appropriate to the ends, imho. Otherwise you can justify all kinds of draconian measure because the object is you are trying to achieve is a good one. I think that you must use means that are good as well as having a good result. Ah. So it is just that we disagree about *when* the end justifies the means, not that the end can justify the means. For example.... I hate causing my children pain, yet I will remove splinters if they have 'em. End, Means, Justified. I guess you agree? So how about you quit with the hyperbole? It makes it a good deal easier to discuss things if we stick to the topic and avoid generalising and exaggeration. |
#63
|
|||
|
|||
Gotta keep it from The Children
Why don't you want this archived? (no further text added, don't bother scrolling unless you actually want to read Ms Latreen's post) "LaTreen Washington" wrote in message ... x-no-archive: yes Gee banty, once again you fail to address the point I made. I guess I score as winning the argument by default. It's funny that you should attribute my top posting to alt.peeves. YOU know that isn't where I read the thread. It's not like misc.kids is moderated or anything. You know banty, you sure post frequently. Who's watching the "children"? LaTreen Washington "Banty" wrote in message ... In article , "LaTreen says... x-no-archive: yes So address the issue, Banty. You sure talk a lot but I don't see any arguments about the diaper complaints. Just another mother, blowing her horn - hiding her head in the sand. LaTreen Washington You misspelled "hey not fair you didn't chase my red herring"! And top posting to boot. Alt.peeves sure has some winners.. Banty "Banty" wrote in message ... In article , Nan says... On 23 Jun 2003 20:25:03 -0700, Banty wrote: In article , "LaTreen says... x-no-archive: yes Do you raise as big a fuss when people change diapers in public? Do you object when people bring their children into public pools wearing swim diapers (that release fecal matter - a PROVEN health hazard) into public pools? Both are an entitlement issue with parents. How many times are diapers changed in cafes and airplanes? I WILL smoke outside. When I wait for a bus - I go under the shelter with everyone else and I DO light up. If people are there with children I make a point to stand by them. You can take your ill-behaved children anywhere you want. I WILL smoke where ever I am allowed to by law. If they don't like it, they can move - that's the entitlement attitude that applies to me when your children are obnoxious and ill-mannered. There is an law against smoking in an athletic field near my house and I will smoke there until I am fined for it. If I am fined, I will drag the case out in court as long as I can to run up the cost and waste the town's money. I see the litter left behind by breeders from little league and the feces left from the dog owners. These people don't care about the public - why should I? LaTreen Washington The Problem Exhibit B. Banty No, just another CF troll. Nan OK - Problem Smoker's Attitude Exhibit B. Problem CF Attitude Exhibit A :-) Banty |
#64
|
|||
|
|||
OT (wildly): photo tix and dropping the hammer was Gotta keep it from The Children
ok here is a question, Between American football and Rugby, playing AF
rules and Rugby no padding, who do you think would win this match? or to make it simpler each team traveled to the opposing country and played "their"way who would win? -- Shelly Mommy to Zachariah January 24, 2003 "0tterbot" wrote in message ... "Dan Evans" wrote in message ... "0tterbot" wrote in message ... "Dan Evans" wrote in message ... "0tterbot" wrote in message ... "Nathan Nagel" wrote in message ... Don't take the comparison too far... I'd probably categorize american football as "rugby lite" if pressed. *cough!* rugby league is "rugby lite" if you want to go there. (you don't!!) League is "lite" my arse. I used to live near Featherstone Rovers and Castelford - those are ****ing big guys who train ****ing hard. Your thinking of Union being the "lite" version no i'm not. union was the original game. league has nancy-boy alterations to it, such as a dummy-half after a tackle, & so forth. I take your word for which is the original, but League is by *far* the harder game. why?! you may like it better, which is fine, but i'd have thought simple observation would determine which is "harder". do you mean more physically exertive because play stops after a tackle & the defence must run back, etc? (that's the only thing i can think of). the real difference between the two is glaringly obvious during a scrum. unlike a league scrum, a union scrum is not for the sake of appearances or tradition. both sides actually have a chance at getting the ball & work accordingly... kylie |
#65
|
|||
|
|||
Gotta keep it from The Children
"Shelly" wrote in message
.. . ok here is a question, Between American football and Rugby, playing AF rules and Rugby no padding, who do you think would win this match? or to make it simpler each team traveled to the opposing country and played "their"way who would win? Growing up we had something like this happen. An English high school (American) football team traveled to the US to play some scrimmage games. The American HS freshmen beat the English team (what would have been the equivalent of their HS varsity team). Later they played an exhibition soccer match where the English guys (who never practiced soccer as a team) utterly destroyed the HS varsity soccer team. The Americans would kill the Rugby players at American football and vice versa. -- CBI |
#66
|
|||
|
|||
OT (wildly): photo tix and dropping the hammer was Gotta keep it from The Children
"Shelly" wrote in message
.. . ok here is a question, Between American football and Rugby, playing AF rules and Rugby no padding, who do you think would win this match? or to make it simpler each team traveled to the opposing country and played "their"way who would win? we were discussing rugby league vs rugby union. to the best of my limited knowledge of american football, american football & either rugby code have little in common so there's no real comparison & it would be impossible for someone to play a game of the other & maintain the same professional advantage they'd normally have. are you suggesting american football is "harder"? i watched a game once. i'd strongly disagree with that. kylie |
#67
|
|||
|
|||
OT (wildly): photo tix and dropping the hammer was Gotta keep it from The Children
"0tterbot" wrote in message
... "Shelly" wrote in message .. . ok here is a question, Between American football and Rugby, playing AF rules and Rugby no padding, who do you think would win this match? or to make it simpler each team traveled to the opposing country and played "their"way who would win? we were discussing rugby league vs rugby union. to the best of my limited knowledge of american football, american football & either rugby code have little in common so there's no real comparison & it would be impossible for someone to play a game of the other & maintain the same professional advantage they'd normally have. are you suggesting american football is "harder"? i watched a game once. i'd strongly disagree with that. kylie I think you had it right when you said it would be hard to compare. The physical demands are entirely different. It would be impossible to say either is "harder" than the other. -- CBI |
#68
|
|||
|
|||
OT (wildly): photo tix and dropping the hammer was Gotta keep it from The Children
"CBI" wrote in message ... I think you had it right when you said it would be hard to compare. The physical demands are entirely different. It would be impossible to say either is "harder" than the other. -- CBI Australian football is harder on the knees, apparently this is why Australia has the world's best knee reconstruction surgeons. |
#69
|
|||
|
|||
OT (wildly): photo tix and dropping the hammer was Gotta keep it from The Children
"CBI" wrote in message
... are you suggesting american football is "harder"? i watched a game once. i'd strongly disagree with that. kylie I think you had it right when you said it would be hard to compare. The physical demands are entirely different. It would be impossible to say either is "harder" than the other. "harder" in the context that was being discussed by dan evans & me. not "harder" as in "more difficult". kylie |
#70
|
|||
|
|||
OT (wildly): photo tix and dropping the hammer was Gotta keep it from The Children
"silvasurfa" wrote in message ... Australian football is harder on the knees, apparently this is why Australia has the world's best knee reconstruction surgeons. I think it's an honour they share with the Orthpods at Belfasts "Royal Victoria". Dan |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|