[lit-ideas] Re: Paying taxes for months on end
- From: "Phil Enns" <phil.enns@xxxxxxxxxxx>
- To: <lit-ideas@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Tue, 7 Jun 2005 19:47:26 -0400
Robert Paul continues to take the issue to be one of contingency. I
continue to not be able to see how this is possible. What can
'absolutely no right to do that' mean except that we are no longer in
the land of contingencies? That is, does Robert bump into 'absolutely
no right to do that' in his quotidian life? In Robert's analogy, there
is no mention of absolutes. Take away the reference to 'absolutely no
right' and everything Robert says is correct. Add a reference to
"absolutely no right" and we are no longer in Kansas.
But this is a silly point and not worth the time we are taking on it.
Let me say, then, that Robert is right that a verdict in a court case
cannot decide a question of rights or powers.
Sincerely,
Phil Enns
Toronto, ON
------------------------------------------------------------------
To change your Lit-Ideas settings (subscribe/unsub, vacation on/off,
digest on/off), visit www.andreas.com/faq-lit-ideas.html
Other related posts:
