On Fri, 01 Apr 2005 23:52:36 GMT, "David Lentz"
 wrote:

>
>"Gunner"  wrote in message
>news:kuvq41dna12b6cbg1d9lpa56q2vq07knkc{at}4ax.com...
>> On Fri, 01 Apr 2005 16:29:31 GMT, "David Lentz"
>>  wrote:
>>
>> >
>> >"Gunner"  wrote in message
>> >news:i61q411ugqrnlkun67ii9p9dhjeu4cra9r{at}4ax.com...
>> >> On Fri, 01 Apr 2005 00:29:02 GMT, "David Lentz"
>> >>  wrote:
>> >>
>> >> >
>> >> >"Samuel Goldstine"  wrote in
>message
>> >> >news:c53p41h7qfqgt6bej9781145bhh2puph57{at}4ax.com...
>> >> >> On Thu, 31 Mar 2005 16:16:43 -0700, TDKozan

>wrote:
>> >> >
>> >> >
>> >> >
>> >> >> >So maybe you'd care try reading the court's
actual opinion?  Try
>> >> >> >starting on page 3
>> >> >> >
>> >> >>
>http://www.ca11.uscourts.gov/opinions/ops/200511628reh2.pdf
>> >> >>
>> >> >>
>> >> >> the court also said that blacks were 3/5 of a
person and that
>> >> >> integration is illegal..   that make those
rulings right also..?
>> >> >
>> >> >What is this, more outcome based education?   The
above assertion is
>> >plain
>> >> >ignorant.
>> >> >
>> >> >David
>> >> >
>> >> Ah...Dave...review Dred Scott..then get back to us, ok?
>> >
>> >Scott v. Sandford never refered to person has three fifths of a person:
>> >
>> >
>>
>>http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/scripts/getcase.pl?navby=case&court=us&vol=60
>&page=393
>> >
>> >Good luck finding such a attribution in the text.
>> >
>> >David
>> >
>>
>> Ah...Dave?  What was the decision of the court in this case?
>>
>> or do you wish to remain literal and ignore the implications?
>>
>> Gunner
>
>Concesssion accepted.
>
>David
>
You conceded?  Odd way to do it.

Gunner

Rule #35
"That which does not kill you,
 has made a huge tactical error"


--- UseNet To RIME Gateway {at} 4/2/05 12:47:52 AM ---