Chambers wrote:
> Patrick Elliott wrote:
>> That's a bit like arguing that a union didn't take an official stand 
>> on an issue, but its "members" voted to go on strike....
> 
> What's wrong with that?
> 
> The Union itself may or may not take an official stance on an issue, but 
> its members most like share a number of characteristics (median income, 
> living conditions, work environment, etc) that make them more likely to 
> vote the same way.
> 
> It's not the same thing.
> 
Sorry, but you seem to be missing my point. The people "are" the union, 
as far as what the union itself "does" about any of the stuff it votes 
on. To suggest that a) it has no stance, and b) that stance isn't what 
is "presented" to vote on, is just silly. How likely do you think it 
would be that a church's priest(s) would go against its congregation, 
instead of allowing them to "vote" in some sense on what issues they 
plan to push?

Still, you may be right, its possibly not the right example.

-- 
void main () {
   If Schrödingers_cat is alive or version > 98 {
     if version = "Vista" {
       call slow_by_half();
       call DRM_everything();
     }
     call functional_code();
   }
   else
     call crash_windows();
}

<A HREF='http://www.daz3d.com/index.php?refid=16130551'>Get 3D Models, 
3D Content, and 3D Software at DAZ3D!</A>

Post a reply to this message