Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.2 9/18/84; site dciem.UUCP
Path: utzoo!dciem!mmt
From: mmt@dciem.UUCP (Martin Taylor)
Newsgroups: net.social
Subject: Re: AA just institutionalizes class struggle
Message-ID: <1614@dciem.UUCP>
Date: Wed, 3-Jul-85 19:01:45 EDT
Article-I.D.: dciem.1614
Posted: Wed Jul  3 19:01:45 1985
Date-Received: Wed, 3-Jul-85 20:35:36 EDT
References: <297@looking.UUCP> 
Reply-To: mmt@dciem.UUCP (Martin Taylor)
Organization: D.C.I.E.M., Toronto, Canada
Lines: 25
Summary: 


>>/* jchapman@watcgl.UUCP (john chapman) /  1:12 pm  Jun 24, 1985 */
>
>> As long as how you spend/sell doesn't affect anyone then you're right; as
>> soon as the way you or a class of people behave acts to lower the quality
>> (or potential quality) of life for someone else (or some class) then they
>> do have a right to attempt to control it.
>
>That would mean that if you decided to date X rather than Y, Y would have
>a right to force you to date her instead.  Sounds reasonable, right?
>
>I guess ENVY only used to be a dirty word.  Now we have self-righteous envy.
>
>                                                Mike Sykora

Interesting rewrite! "attempt to control" -> "force"  Talk about strawmen!!

If you decided to date X instead of Y, Y most certainly would have a
right to try to get you to change your mind, if she wanted to.  It happens
all the time, doesn't it?  Does anyone (except X) complain?
-- 

Martin Taylor
{allegra,linus,ihnp4,floyd,ubc-vision}!utzoo!dciem!mmt
{uw-beaver,qucis,watmath}!utcsri!dciem!mmt