Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Pastimes : THE SLIGHTLY MODERATED BOXING RING -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: one_less who wrote (15807)	6/27/2002 5:29:10 PM
From: Lane3	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 21057

The analogies offered here are condescendingly inappropriate. I'm sorry, Jewel. I didn't intend to insult the women in question. I think I have some appreciation of how it might feel to them. My statement was a flip one intended to counter in equivalent tone the cavalier way you assumed you knew what my opinion was on this and responded in a post to me about an opinion expressed by the dawg.

To: one_less who wrote (15807)	6/27/2002 5:33:36 PM
From: Lazarus_Long	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 21057

I think Karen is overstating the problem. I lived with those two words all through school with no horrible damage. They aren't fatal. No one died by saying them. And they do have the right to omit them or refuse to say the pledge. The other example you point to on your side isn't so innocent, though. Women who have made a commitment to cover feel violated when forced to expose themselves to civil authority. It is worse when they have to show their exposed form to the satisfaction of the authorities everywhere they go. There is an overriding public safety concern here. At least at this time. The only reasonable answer I can see for those who refuse to submit is to stay out of situations they find objectionable.