Re: Lily

[pwh@bradley.bradley.edu (Pete Hartman)]

rpugh@arcadia.win-uk.net (Raymond Pugh) writes:
>In article <3cirjs$chp@bradley.bradley.edu>, Pete Hartman (pwh@bradley.bradley.edu) writes:
>>Kate is none of those things to me, nor in any other way my intimate
>>friend.
>I'm afraid that kind of attitude is the reason the world of today is
>in such a mess.  Why should our concern be limited to a small
>circle of intimate friends and family?  

I'm afraid the opposite is true.  What business is it of mine what
people who don't affect me do?

Your attitude is the common justification for many travesties against
the US Constitution, not to mention encroachments on freedom the
world over (yes, I note your UK address).

I'm not saying "let them die in the streets", though I knew it was
inevitable that someone would imply that.

>>That being the case, I have no business having more than perhaps a
>>faint disapproval of her association with someone who hasn't even
>>been demonstrated to have any negative effect on her.
>You don't work for the government by any chance? :-)

Oh, no, the government is WAY too busy protecting me from myself,
telling me what I can and cannot ingest in all sorts of stupid ways.

>>If you claim to care about Kate as much as you would a wife/sister/etc
>>*without knowing her personally*, you would do better to be concerned
>>about yourself.
>Hee hee, no I don't rise to the bait that easily.  That is *not*
>what I was saying as you know full well.

You are just as good at misinterpreting what I say.

>The sad fact is that most of the rest of the world thinks the same
>way you do

Hardly.

>		(and I'm as guilty as anyone, before you put me on a
>moral high horse.)  "It's not down to ME to do something about it"

That is not my point AT ALL.

It's not down to ME to TELL AN INDIVIDUAL how to behave.

It *is* down to ME to do something about *causes* that are important
to me.

To put greenpeace et. al. on the same level as telling someone how
to live their spiritual life "because they *may* be defrauded"
trivializes those causes shamefully.

As I said:  if there were some PROOF that Kate was actually being
HARMED, or worse, that the person harming her was also harming others,
I'd be concerned enough, (as I already said) to think somehting ought
be done, and in fact if no one else was willing or able, might even
do it myself.

But of course the only criteria I've seen for judgement against this
"Lily" person was personal bias against a particular set of beliefs.



As for taking it to email, I am not particularly interested in leaving
myself blamed for the worlds ills publically without public comment
in my defense.

Perhaps you can take that fine step into email yourself, as you should
have in the last round, if that is really what you believe should be done.
-- 
Pete Hartman		       Bradley University	pwh@bradley.bradley.edu
                We have computers because man, nobody is perfect