Re: :-(

• Messages sorted by: [ date ][ thread ][ subject ][ author ]
• Next message: Mark A. Nadler: "Re: :-("
• Previous message: Douglas B Hanson: "Hatfield Amendment in Holding Pattern"

Michael,

I did not take your post -- unlike a couple of others I got which called me a
racsist and an ingorrant dwebe -- as a personal attack, at all.

My stance here is very complicated, and I am not surpirsed that I cannot
communicate it properly.

I just simply see no reason for the government to be involved in our
science. IT's not part of the government's job. The government was not set
up to better our knowledge and increase our mind-powers. Those are admirable
goals, but hey are not for the government to achieve.

I'm also a little offended by this idea that without government there would
be no science. This is not true, at all! Science can prevail, no matter
what the government says or does. Galleleo Galleli and Copernicus got
*punished* for their science, but they still did it. We're not looking at
being punished here, we're looking at not being helped -- there's a big
difference.

Furthermore, people say that without universities there's no forum. That's
probably true, and while most major universities are state schools -- and,
BTW, there is a *BIG* difference between state government and national
government, and the former's role is far more tolerable in a federalistic
nation -- there are also plenty of privately run schools and universities.

I really do not understand why my being against government involvement means
I do not love the science . . .

Nick---

--

Nick Corduan                 "...there is as much dignity in tilling

     at                       a field as in writing a poem."

(nickc@use.com)                               --Booker T. Washington

• Next message: Mark A. Nadler: "Re: :-("
• Previous message: Douglas B Hanson: "Hatfield Amendment in Holding Pattern"