us.legal

In article <n9r771tv9fn017bnus2br3pbg5v9ma5gk3@4ax.com>, Jon Beaver <jbeaver@NO.com> wrote: > On 30 Apr 2005 06:25:03 -0700, "forevernitefan" <fvrnite@yahoo.com> > wrote: > > >Jon, that's bullcrap about " voluntary" and " involuntary".. What Ken

In article <4273E037.1010407@it.com>, Ken Smith <forget@it.com> wrote: > > In this forum, I have no power to prevent you from continuing to be > willfully dishonest, Jon. You can call it whatever you want, but you > don't have a right to be b

In article <4273EC9A.9060001@it.com>, Ken Smith <forget@it.com> wrote: > Jon Beaver wrote: > > > And when it's your staple mode of expression, you > > find yourself talking to no one but the very thick-skinned, like me > > and Larry, who are willi

Jon Beaver wrote: > If it happened to me, I'd have resisted their motion to require the > exam, subject to appeal all the way to the Supreme Court. If I lost > there, I'd have taken the goddamn exam under protest and reservation > of rights. If th

Scott Hedrick wrote: || If you engage in sex with contraceptives and *don't* know how || effective they are, then you're a moron and should be castrated, || then sentenced to hard labor to support any resulting children (or || the children of other

"IanAl" <me@privacy.net> wrote in message news:0me771hq8hnsqco995o1qqcm7h800f27rr@4ax.com... > On Sat, 30 Apr 2005 09:26:40 -0400, "Scott Hedrick" > <dinehnm@yahoo.net> wrote: > > > > >"Cynic" <cynic_999@yahoo.co.uk> wrote in message > >news:opk6

"Scott Hedrick" <dinehnm@yahoo.net> wrote in message news:Y_Lce.12601$lf2.12432@bignews6.bellsouth.net... > > "Martin Davies" <mart2306@hotmail.com> wrote in message > news:S_Fce.8692$z%5.29@fe1.news.blueyonder.co.uk... > > Or have sex and use 2 or

Scott Hedrick wrote: || "Rob" <rsvptorob-usenetREMOVE@yahoo.co.uk> wrote in message || news:d507l0$559$1@nwrdmz01.dmz.ncs.ea.ibs-infra.bt.com... ||| Would this be some kind of universal law, or is this strange notion ||| of 'implied consent' || || W

Jon Beaver wrote: > And when it's your staple mode of expression, you > find yourself talking to no one but the very thick-skinned, like me > and Larry, who are willing to work hard to cut through the insults to > maintain focus on the legal issues.

"Martin Davies" <mart2306@hotmail.com> wrote in message news:lrTce.9743$j54.8050@fe3.news.blueyonder.co.uk... > And if the effective contraception they are using is 99% effective, then > pregnancy can still occur. Who supports the child then? > Or h

"Martin Davies" <mart2306@hotmail.com> wrote in message news:4nTce.9737$j54.2098@fe3.news.blueyonder.co.uk... > > "Scott Hedrick" <dinehnm@yahoo.net> wrote in message > news:Y_Lce.12601$lf2.12432@bignews6.bellsouth.net... > > > > "Martin Davies" <

"Rob" <rsvptorob-usenetREMOVE@yahoo.co.uk> wrote in message news:d50ve6$1po$1@nwrdmz01.dmz.ncs.ea.ibs-infra.bt.com... > Scott Hedrick wrote: > || "Rob" <rsvptorob-usenetREMOVE@yahoo.co.uk> wrote in message > || news:d507l0$559$1@nwrdmz01.dmz.ncs.ea.

http://washingtontimes.com/metro/20050429-111718-3674r.htm -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Lawman likes eye in sky as monitor By Tarron Lively THE WASHINGTON TIMES Published April 30, 2005 -----

"Rob" <rsvptorob-usenetREMOVE@yahoo.co.uk> wrote in message news:d5103m$j2a$1@nwrdmz03.dmz.ncs.ea.ibs-infra.bt.com... > Rubbish, there are other options - abortion being one of them. Right- kill a child because it's inconvenient for you. Fortunatel

Jon Beaver wrote: > On Sat, 30 Apr 2005 12:15:53 GMT, Ken Smith <forget@it.com> wrote: >>Jon Beaver wrote: >>>On Fri, 29 Apr 2005 21:53:03 GMT, Ken Smith <forget@it.com> wrote: >>>>Larry wrote: >>> >>>> Caselaw, Lar? Somehow, I didn't think so. >>

on Beaver wrote: > On Sat, 30 Apr 2005 12:14:22 GMT, Ken Smith <forget@it.com> wrote: >>Jon Beaver wrote: >>>On Fri, 29 Apr 2005 20:19:57 GMT, Ken Smith <forget@it.com> wrote: >>>>"'An act taken in retaliation for the exercise >>>>of a constitutio

On Sat, 30 Apr 2005 09:26:40 -0400, "Scott Hedrick" <dinehnm@yahoo.net> wrote: > >"Cynic" <cynic_999@yahoo.co.uk> wrote in message >news:opk671pm0ens0ms2e3nc0ug823riglj7on@4ax.com... >> I think that is a bit extreme. It is akin to saying that anyo

On Fri, 29 Apr 2005 21:54:39 GMT, "Falky foo" <falkyfoo@bonksbcglobal.net> wrote: >Hi, is it illegal for a person to mail a letter or write an email or post on >a website his or her support for violent anti-american activities? Not >contributing mo

On 30 Apr 2005 06:25:03 -0700, "forevernitefan" <fvrnite@yahoo.com> wrote: >Jon, that's bullcrap about " voluntary" and " involuntary".. What Ken >apparently went through is akin to an abusive boyfriend saying to his >"girl" " EIther I get you to d

"IanAl" <me@privacy.net> wrote in message news:0me771hq8hnsqco995o1qqcm7h800f27rr@4ax.com... > > In my view, if a woman deliberately deceives a man into thinking that > they are using effective contraception when they are not, then she > should be

"joe parkin" <joefpmail-newsgroup@yahoo.co.uk> wrote in message news:MPG.1cddbad895ff41cb989cdd@news.individual.net... > You do not control in any way, the actions of other parties when > driving. THat's right- but you do control *your own*. If yo

"Rob" <rsvptorob-usenetREMOVE@yahoo.co.uk> wrote in message news:d507l0$559$1@nwrdmz01.dmz.ncs.ea.ibs-infra.bt.com... > Would this be some kind of universal law, or is this strange notion of > 'implied consent' What "implied consent" are you refer

In article <Z_Lce.12602$lf2.9191@bignews6.bellsouth.net>, dinehnm@yahoo.net says... > > "Cynic" <cynic_999@yahoo.co.uk> wrote in message > news:opk671pm0ens0ms2e3nc0ug823riglj7on@4ax.com... > > I think that is a bit extreme. It is akin to saying t

"Falky foo" <falkyfoo@bonksbcglobal.net> wrote in message news:z2yce.2826$zu.456@newssvr13.news.prodigy.com... > Hi, is it illegal for a person to mail a letter or write an email or post > on > a website his or her support for violent anti-america

Scott Hedrick wrote: || Why is that relevant? The use of contraceptives *does not eliminate* || pregnancy. The use of contraceptives is completely irrelevant to the || obligations of parenthood. || || No matter how many contraceptives you use, if you

Falky, The point, I think, is that the government is at present not well restrained by the law. Using the pretext of "National Security" the Bill of Rights has been abrogated. You do have the right of free speech but the government can impove

forevernitefan wrote: > Jon, that's bullcrap about " voluntary" and " involuntary".. What Ken > apparently went through is akin to an abusive boyfriend saying to his > "girl" " EIther I get you to do whatever sex I want or I beat you up." > or a sch

his is a multi-part message in MIME format. --------------070105070007060300060902 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit solar wrote: > Ken Smith wrote > > >>" The main difference here is tha

Jon Beaver wrote: > On Fri, 29 Apr 2005 17:22:06 GMT, Ken Smith <forget@it.com> wrote: >>Jon Beaver wrote: > > >>>The question of whether the Bar's STATED reasons for denying your >>>application are lawful is a separate question from whether you h

Jon Beaver wrote: > On Fri, 29 Apr 2005 10:15:14 -0700, Jon Beaver <jbeaver@NO.com> wrote: >>On Fri, 29 Apr 2005 15:03:34 +0000, dhm@best.com wrote: >>>On Fri, 29 Apr 2005, Larry wrote: >>> >>> >>>>In article <427115B3.1040005@it.com>, Ken Smith <fo

Jon Beaver wrote: > On Fri, 29 Apr 2005 21:53:03 GMT, Ken Smith <forget@it.com> wrote: >>Larry wrote: > >> Caselaw, Lar? Somehow, I didn't think so. >> >> Your legally unsupported opinion isn't even worth what I am paying >>for it, as it is ju

Jon Beaver wrote: > On Fri, 29 Apr 2005 20:19:57 GMT, Ken Smith <forget@it.com> wrote: > >>"'An act taken in retaliation for the exercise >>of a constitutionally protected right is actionable under [Section] 1983 >>even if the act, when taken for

Larry wrote: > In article <4272ADEE.7060802@it.com>, Ken Smith <forget@it.com> wrote: >>Larry wrote: >>>In article <4272981D.3040807@it.com>, Ken Smith <forget@it.com> wrote: >>>>Larry wrote: >>>>>In article <42728D5A.5060106@it.com>, Ken Smith <forg

On Fri, 29 Apr 2005 07:20:35 -0400, "Scott Hedrick" <dinehnm@yahoo.net> wrote: >>>if he fails to pay child support, either the child goes without or the >>>general body of taxpayers must pay. neither is acceptable. fathers have to >>>learn that su

On Fri, 29 Apr 2005 07:24:17 -0400, "Scott Hedrick" <dinehnm@yahoo.net> wrote: >"Martin Davies" <mart2306@hotmail.com> wrote in message >news:PNlce.162917$Nr5.119894@fe2.news.blueyonder.co.uk... >> And he tricked her by not using the condoms or a va

On Sat, 30 Apr 2005 12:15:53 GMT, Ken Smith <forget@it.com> wrote: >Jon Beaver wrote: >> On Fri, 29 Apr 2005 21:53:03 GMT, Ken Smith <forget@it.com> wrote: >>>Larry wrote: >> >>> Caselaw, Lar? Somehow, I didn't think so. >>> >>> Your legally

Falky foo wrote: > Hi, is it illegal for a person to mail a letter or write an email or > post on a website his or her support for violent anti-american > activities? > Unless it amounted to some sort of incitement, I can't see how it could be. Ho

Thanks for the comprehensive answer !!!!!!!!!!!!!!! "Justin Kramp" <justin.kramp@gmail.com> wrote in message news:1114809195.027548.265010@g14g2000cwa.googlegroups.com... > Purdy- > > I currently work for Habitat for Humanity International, and

"Cynic" <cynic_999@yahoo.co.uk> wrote in message news:mml6711hi4j5vvus2ditdiaebi5ipru14v@4ax.com... > On Fri, 29 Apr 2005 07:20:35 -0400, "Scott Hedrick" > <dinehnm@yahoo.net> wrote: > > >>>if he fails to pay child support, either the child goes wi

"Cynic" <cynic_999@yahoo.co.uk> wrote in message news:opk671pm0ens0ms2e3nc0ug823riglj7on@4ax.com... > I think that is a bit extreme. It is akin to saying that anyone who > agrees to travel in a motor car is consenting to being killed in a > traffic

"Martin Davies" <mart2306@hotmail.com> wrote in message news:S_Fce.8692$z%5.29@fe1.news.blueyonder.co.uk... > Or have sex and use 2 or more contraceptives. > Much reduces chance of pregnancy. Why is that relevant? The use of contraceptives *does n

On Sat, 30 Apr 2005 12:14:22 GMT, Ken Smith <forget@it.com> wrote: >Jon Beaver wrote: >> On Fri, 29 Apr 2005 20:19:57 GMT, Ken Smith <forget@it.com> wrote: >> >>>"'An act taken in retaliation for the exercise >>>of a constitutionally protected ri

Falky foo wrote: > Hi, is it illegal for a person to mail a letter or write an email or post > on > a website his or her support for violent anti-american activities? Not > contributing money or aiding an anti-american organization, but just > tel

The original poster can express support for Al Qaeda or whoever he/she wants, without any legal consequences. There's lots of quote unquote anti-american websites. Someone on the staff at Brown University had an article last week that they supported

"Scott Hedrick" <dinehnm@yahoo.net> wrote in message news:h%wce.140702$vL3.112616@bignews4.bellsouth.net... > > "Martin Davies" <mart2306@hotmail.com> wrote in message > news:PNlce.162917$Nr5.119894@fe2.news.blueyonder.co.uk... > > And he tricked h

Jon, that's bullcrap about " voluntary" and " involuntary".. What Ken apparently went through is akin to an abusive boyfriend saying to his "girl" " EIther I get you to do whatever sex I want or I beat you up." or a schoolyard bully saying " Give me

cjkv jopdd jio jfiopbfopdfj i4j eog bformb opersdj g io4jiopb eriozsjoerjfiog j90es uj9o3wsdfg9erosfdg9ui4oeudgb9udops 590vdui ho0 umdv-0rmi,er90 d90bmi sv-0 oph90vu90fgo gdmpxo cv, opfihgov rjoi iopcjvoi t4opr 90erjkio 5j4-0er um905eig89i 0-sdruy905

and what law would one be breaking? that's the question. Maybe there's a USC section on it? "Encouraging" the enemy perhaps? Anybody know of anything like that? "Dave" <dland@mytrashmail.com> wrote in message news:1114817124.696911.108420@