From: nyikos@math.scarolina.edu (Peter Nyikos)
Subject: Re: Revised consistency check
Organization: USC  Department of Computer Science
Distribution: usa
Date: 14 Aug 92 15:46:25 GMT

The distribution of this follow-up got screwed up, so I'm using this means
of re-posting it.

In <nyikos.713718828@milo.math.scarolina.edu> nyikos@math.scarolina.edu (Peter Nyikos) writes:

>In <BssBC1.9Hq@news.udel.edu> roby@chopin.udel.edu (Scott W Roby) writes:

>>In article <1992Aug10.182914.9899@csus.edu> chaneysa@nextnet.ccs.csus.edu (Steve Chaney : Borg Operating Space Systems, Revision 2.0) writes:

>>    [editted for brevity, but some juicy parts left in]

>>>Okay, folks, here it is again, revised:

>>>*Suppose your kid switches sides, and becomes pro-life? And:
>>>*Suppose they want to join the Catholic Church?
>>>*Suppose they announce that they're voting Republican?
>>   [etc]

>[Some very drastic possible courses of action, with negative answers to them
>all from Roby, omitted here.]

>>>6) Do something as simple as harass or put enormous family pressure on
>>>them? 
>>no

>>Once again Chaney mistakenly assumes that everyone is as rabid as he is.
>>Another mistaken assumption is implied by the use of the words "switched 
>>sides".  My parents did not presume to indoctrinate me in political 
>>matters.

>People switch sides even if they were not previously indoctrinated.
>Probable examples from the pro-choice side:  Nathanson, Reagan, Bush,
>all of whom were very strongly pro-choice at some stage of their
>careers.  "Flip-floppers" from the pro-life side are even more common.
>When Newsweek ran a post-election analysis in 1990 one of the "myths"
>it said held up well was that "flip-floppers don't do well".  Guess 
>what? all the examples it gave were people who flip-flopped from
>pro-life to pro-choice, and lost the election as a result.

>>  In our family, it was understood that we should make up our 
>>own mind in such matters, rather than tow the "family line".

>Was this lip service, or did some member of your family really
>go over to the pro-life side?  convert to Catholicism, evangelical
>Protestantism, or some other politically incorrect religion?
>Sometimes families realize that they really did not mean what they
>said about "make up our own mind about such matters" until 
>a hypothetical possibility suddenly becomes an actuality.

>>Hey, I've learned to tolerate my parent's opposing political views from 
>>the very start.  What's the big deal? 

>Classic example from the 1960's: student radicals tolerating their
>establishment-liberal parents, and "Clean for Gene" fellow students
>trying to work within the system.  No such tolerance for conservative
>parents, fellow students.

>>>There's no WAY you can get out of this one, except to ignore what I've
>>>said, and let all the net.readers in the world know I'm right. Not that my
>>>being right is any less than a common occurrence here, but this would seal
>>>it up beyond a doubt. 


>>The above paragraph is my candidate for funniest post of the week.

>As I said in an earlier post, which did not get through: too many people
>in talk.abortion count their chickens (not to be confused with eggs with
>developing embryos inside) before they are hatched.  The earlier example
>was a hilariously anachronistic Deuteronomy reference ("kingdom of heaven"
>appears nowhere in the Old Testament, let alone the Pentateuch) from the
>pro-choice side, with the pro-choicers crowing "Boy, that'll really 
>knock them down!" or some such comment. ["Them" presumably refers to
>pro-choicers from the Judeo-Christian-Islamic tradition, which holds
>the Pentateuch sacred, or something close to that.]
>This is an example [Chaney] from the pro-life side.