Re: META: Not another flamewar
Thu, 3 Jun 1999 20:51:29 EDT

In a message dated 6/3/99 4:22:48 PM, you wrote:

>Hey by the way, what does everyone think about the Abortion Debate. Or
>how about euthanasia? ummmm Sexual Harrasment laws ummmm Positive
>Discrimination ummmm Welfare ummmm.....

This is exactly what happens when you bring up not easily resolved issues with many repercussions. With grey areas. With more than one solution. One falls into a conundrum, based on values, and flames ensue. Same damn thing happens at gatherings.

I believe that most people are not as easily swayed as Danial and his mother by the ideas of others. Especially if the "others" face off against you and take a stand.
I agree with Tom's post that reading a few books on rhetoric could be helpful.

Point taken also that if we are not verbal about our constitutional right we could lose it. Write to your congressman, get a bumper sticker. Vote.

My point about the debate was merely this: I felt as if I had been in a time . Low and behold, when I returned to the list nearly three years later: the same exact conversaions were occuring!!!!! Now, in a group that wants to hasten CHANGE, is this productive?

With all the love in the universe,
"The capacity to tolerate complexity and welcome contradiction, not the need for simplicity and certainty, is the attribute of an explorer" --Heinz R. Pagels, Perfect Symmetry