Yes, historically correct. Mr. Jefferson and colleagues used
"unalienable" in the Declaration of Independence, though "inalienable"
is the overwhelming preference nowadays.
---Jerry Zar
>>> "Reg Jordan" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 07/03/01 04:10PM >>>
Actually, the word is "unalienable."
reg
----- Original Message -----
From: Rich Ulrich <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Sunday, July 01, 2001 7:08 PM
Subject: Re: cigs & figs
> - in respect of the up-coming U.S. holiday -
>
> On Mon, 25 Jun 2001 11:49:47 GMT,
mackeral@remove~this~first~yahoo.com
> (J. Williams) wrote:
>
> > On Sun, 24 Jun 2001 16:37:48 -0400, Rich Ulrich <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > wrote:
> >
> >
> > >What rights are denied to smokers?
> JW >
> > Many smokers, including my late mother, feel being unable to smoke
on
> > a commerical aircraft, sit anywhere in a restaurant, etc. were
> > violation of her "rights." I don't agree as a non-smoker, but
that
> > was her viewpoint until the day she died.
>
> What's your point: She was a crabby old lady, whining (or
> whinging) about fancied 'rights'?
>
> You don't introduce anything that seems "inalienable" or
> "self-evident" (if I may introduce July-4th language).
> Nobody stopped her from smoking as long as she kept it away
> from other people-who-would-be-offended.
<snipped>
=================================================================
Instructions for joining and leaving this list and remarks about
the problem of INAPPROPRIATE MESSAGES are available at
http://jse.stat.ncsu.edu/
=================================================================
