From: stcroix@ultra.com (Bill St. Croix)
Subject: Re: Sanctity of relationships
Reply-To: stcroix@ultra.com (Bill St. Croix)
Organization: Ultra Network Technologies
Distribution: usa
Date: Sun, 12 Apr 92 06:34:51 GMT

In article <1992Apr9.173110.24380@cbfsb.cb.att.com> sms@cbnewsf.cb.att.com (steven.m.stein) writes:
>Hank Janssen writes
>>This is getting fun.
>>I guess you also don't hold Hitler responsible for  the  second  world
>>war. Just imagine him saying, I am not responsible for anybody's elses
>>actions. Only my own.
>
>Again, your analogy does not make any sense.  Hitler was and is 
>directly responsible for the slaughter of millions of people.  He
>was the one "incharge" and the one originating the orders.  He was
>the ruler.

Oh...so Hitler killed all those people??  Hitler was responsible for giving
the orders for the killings and the ones that did the transporting/killing
were all just as guilty.  I think the analogy (by the way Steve, look up
the word in the dictionary) is valid for what the discussion is about.  Your
saying that it is the woman's choice to leave the man...whether or not there
is another man in the scene.  But, just as Hilter (for lack of a better word)
*influenced* the others to kill all the people they did, you *influenced* the
woman by being there with her.  You may not have told her, "Hey, you have to
leave him."  But I don't think Hitler handed a gun to each and EVERY one
of his subbordants and told them to kill the people the way they did.

Any way you cut it, the influence is still there!
 
>You apparently do not agree, but I do not feel or believe for a 
>millisecond that I am "incharge" of women and I do not "order" women
>to date me or to leave who ever they might be seeing.

I'm glad you feel this way.

>I do not create the unhappy or unfulfilling relationship they might
>be involved in.  I simply might approach a women (not knowing whether
>she is or is not involved in a relationship) and simply express an
>interest in getting to know her better.  If she agrees, that's her
>choice.  

Oh....so basically you don't care if she is involved with someone or not,
nor do you care what level of involvement there may be.

Forgive me, but it sounds like a scenario of "Get some...at any cost."

>>Also  without you, the people would not have had a reason to brake up.
>>So it damn well makes you (at least, partially) responsible.
>
>Wrong, with or without me, whatever reasons existed for the relationship
>being shakey, they would still exist.  If s/he was unhappy (whatever
>the case may be), they would continue to be unhappy unless both parties
>decided to improve whatever it is that went wrong in the relationship.

Right...and by you interfering in the relationship...you've ruined whatever
chances (however slim) there were at them working out their problems and
staying together (I'm speaking of engagements and marriages.).  And you are
saying this is OK to do.....?????

>How the hell can you say that it is my fault the relationship, which
>I had nothing to do with and no involvement in, failed simply because
>I was interested in the woman????????????  

See Steve, you ARE involved though.  It doesn't mean that you are sleeping
with her...but if you express an interest and she leaves the other guy, then
you dare partially (not wholly) at fault.

An analogy (Steve, you'll like this one...:+)):

Your at work...and you have an interest in a co-workers job (more money, better
benefits).  You see the co-worker do something less than ethical (stealing
or whatever) so you go to your boss and tell him.  The guy gets fired and you
get his job.  Whose fault is it that the guy lost his job?? 

I say...it is MAINLY his fault for doing something so stupid.  But it is also
your fault because you went and told on him for your personal gain.  You 
could have gone to him and told him you saw what he was doing and that you
would tell if he didn't put it back.  The reason that I used stealing is
because it is generally a *morals* issue.  Many people look the other way 
when they see something like that happen, many don't.

It may not be a *perfect* analogy (don't worry, Steve will pick it apart), but
analogies are to represent something with a clear, related example.

>But seriously, if my relationship sucked (and if it did, it would be
>partially my fault) and she were tempted by the kindness and
>compassion of another,
>NO, I wouldn't be happy....but I should have thought about her needs
>before ****** I ****** (and I can't emphasise the word "I" enough)
>drove her away.  It's not that the guy took or stole her from me, it's
>that "I" drove her away.  Understand????

Oh...so you marry a virgin and you are the only one she has ever slept
with.  Another guy comes along and she sleeps with him. She has a wonderful
time and "never thought that sex could feel so wonderful" and leaves you.
That is your fault for driving her away??  No, you'll say it was her fault
for sleeping with him.  Yes, it is her fault and his too for sleeping with
him.  It takes two to tango!

>So true, but I still have hope for you.

I wish I could say as much for you! :+)

>				Steve
				
	Bill

---
I don't believe in the stars or the planets or angels watching from
above, but I believe there's a Ghost of a Chance, we can find someone to
love and make it last...