(stanfieldsarah{at}yahoo.com) writes:
>>Andre Lieven
>>Hint: You get to define your parameters. Period.
>
> - No you don't define the parameters,

Sure I do, and everyone does, when discussing whats on topic.

DEal with it, newbie.

> you live under one legal system
> or you don't speaking of the "law" when there are many different
> readers from many different legal systems fails to have meaning.

Hint: Look up where most Usenet posters are from: Answer: G7 nations.

>> Equality is legal term which applies to a specific legal system.
>>>Thats one definition, yes. Its NOT the only one.
>
> -Nope, it is the only one.

No proof offered ? Claim fails.

>> So
>> this just begs the question, which legal system are you talking
> about?
>
> Ibid.
> -See above

Twice wrong, is still wrong...

>> French napolionic code? Sudanese reading of the Sharia? or are you
>> being philosophical and speaking of Rousseau or John Locke?
>
>> As you have noted in another thread this is a world wide usenet, so
>> your statement above has absolutely no meaning because it lacks
>> context and a frame of reference.
>
> No proof offered ? Claim fails.

Non sequitur. Feel free to prove my point wrong. *Experience* here
proves me right. DEal with that, too, newbie.

> - Reread the the above sentence and try to figure out if I was making a
> claim or asking a question.  Bright one this guy is.



> Thanks for that, now we regulars here know what weight to give your
> claims: AbZero.
>
> - God forbid someone wouldn't have "the regulars" respect! How is this
> an insult?

Its not. Only your poor widdle hurt feelings tried to make it be one,
but thats your own issue to deal with.

People here for some time have *earned* mutual credibility. You
haven't done that, so you're quite cred-free.

HTH.

Andre



--
" I'm a man... But, I can change... If I have to... I guess. "
                                    The Man Prayer, Red Green.


--- UseNet To RIME Gateway {at} 3/26/05 8:46:24 PM ---