Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.3 4.3bsd-beta 6/6/85; site hadron.UUCP
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!mhuxr!mhuxn!ihnp4!qantel!lll-crg!seismo!rlgvax!hadron!jsdy
From: jsdy@hadron.UUCP (Joseph S. D. Yao)
Newsgroups: net.followup
Subject: Re: Delhi Declaration - A Response to the Nuclear Dilemma
Message-ID: <92@hadron.UUCP>
Date: Wed, 27-Nov-85 01:47:13 EST
Article-I.D.: hadron.92
Posted: Wed Nov 27 01:47:13 1985
Date-Received: Fri, 29-Nov-85 21:19:18 EST
References: <> <885@nmtvax.UUCP>
Reply-To: jsdy@hadron.UUCP (Joseph S. D. Yao)
Distribution: net
Organization: Hadron, Inc., Fairfax, VA
Lines: 47

Andrew Jonathon Fine,

Most of the ideas expressed in your fine article are (surprise!)
not new.  Ideally, we would be able to do some of what you say.
Other parts are unworkable -- and this newsgroup's not the place
to repeat why.  My reactions were:

(1) The USA was the first government, and is still (I think) one
    of few, to "guarantee" the right to life, liberty, and the
    pursuit of happiness (note, though, only the pursuit, not
    the happiness!) to its citizens.  Although many would argue
    that this guarantee is not being kept well, it is still
    supremely binding law, and should be argued over any local
    law.  Unfortunately, yes, there are now many laws that seem
    to support the wanton taking of innocent life.

(2) Ideally, we could all withdraw from "evil" organizations.
    However, practically, we live in a larger and larger community,
    and have to have some way to work together.  That way is what
    becomes our government.  W. Churchill put it best:  Democracy
    is the worst possible form of government, except for all the
    others.  Some day I may take orders and go into a monastery;
    but even then I'd probably still have to deal with the world
    outside.  All things are tied together, either overtly or
    subtly.

(3) I would not withdraw my association with all groups that are
    associated with the military, or other such non-benificent
    groups.  Two examples.  The Red Cross is a private organisation
    that's been given extraordinary reponsibilities by the gov't to
    work outside of gov't channels to help people in the military
    who have problems, and people outside the military in times of
    disaster.  Plus, they give services to everybody, regardless of
    whether they are military, militaristic, pacifistic, or just
    plain addled.  I will still give them my blood, my time, and
    my money.  The various churches also send chaplains into the
    armed forces -- no longer to bless the carnage, as priests are
    more likely to condemn it now, but to support the people who
    are in the forces as people.  The Church still has my support
    on this one, as in many other things.

(4) PLEASE learn when to use "we" instead of "us".  Even when in
    apposition, "us" may never be used as a subject.  E.g., not
    "us citizens are right" but "we citizens are right."	;-)
-- 

	Joe Yao		hadron!jsdy@seismo.{CSS.GOV,ARPA,UUCP}