benny

A person who has been a welfare recipient all her/his life will see a quite big increase in her/his income as soon as s/he reaches age 65.

Also questioning the founding fathers seems to terrorize our very patriotic American neighbors.

If you don't have your own original ideas to communicate, at least you can put parts of the text in bold characters.

To me, lack of time is too easy an excuse.

Under Bush, you could forget about the independence of the judiciary and the executive branches of power. Just remember Alberto Gonzales firing US attorneys for not being Republican enough!

Blackmore should know that access to justice would be freer if little girls would have been free to dream becoming lawyers and judges.

Because they are less than 65 years old.

But questioning the values of our fathers is a form of (mental) torture that is too much underestimated by their sons.

A people is more than an aggregate of isolated individuals.

Sharia-like punishments are undemocratic.

No chateau without fortune.

We the People.

Sixty-five per cent of respondents to be exact.

Segnosaur is a creation.

Food has to perish in hungry stomachs.

Posts are like gifts.

Given the results of the poll, there is room for Canadians to reasonably accommodate Betsy given her beliefs.

You prove my point: hunger gives (natural) rights (over owners).

When a government leaves royalties in the hands of a man, this government should not be surprised to find this man behaving like a royalty toward women.

The victim of the robbery is definitely not justified to protect his property since the initial appropriation of nature has still to be legitimated (see my posts on the Lockean proviso).

In arguing its case against Canadian unfair subsidies to its forestry sector, the US should have added the argument of these unwanted polygamists.

Pitiful are countries crumbling over "legislative inflation".

There you go! Terrorism will disappear only after exchanging our respective views about what distributive justice requires.

There is no doubt in my mind that forest private owners would not be rich enough to have several wives if the Canadian government would capture decent (i.e. much higher) stumpage fees (royalties).

Then Rousseau wrote in his Social Contract (1762): The problem is to find a form of association which will defend and protect with the whole common force the person and goods of each associate, and in which each, while uniting himself with all, may still obey himself alone and remain as free as before.