Walter,
I find it hard to believe that having made most of these
points several times, you feel that we still do not
understand your position. I have no difficulty under-
standing your position, but I do have trouble under-
standing how you justify it. For example, you wrote:
> How about a W.Va. Senator whose tremer
> and voice Rush Limbaugh mimiced on his
>late night "show."
as a reason why people should be angry enough to speak out.
And it is reason indeed for anger. But it is only one side of the
coin. Some people would see avoiding being treated like that
as a good reason for not speaking out. By the way, I assume
that as you believe it is the responsibility of all PWP to speak
out on all occasions (that is what you are saying isn't it Walter
or is it just the celebrities?) that you protested this slight from as
public a platform as is at your command
Later you say:
> Unless we, PWP, speak out for ourselves,
>how may we expect others to do so for us?
Are you really saying that only when EVERY SINGLE PWP in
the world is an activist can we ask others to take up our cause.
Celebrities are no different to the rest of us, some will speak out,
others will not. Those who do have my admiration - I wish I
had half their courage. If we are not going to ask others for help
until all PWP are 'doing their bit, we had better forget that source
of publicity - its never going to happen.
And then:
> I am not "mad"..."Judgemental"..".Irreligious" ...
>" detractor"..."an iconoclast."..I am saying that
>while people, especially celebrities have the right
>to privacy, if they can help their fellow sufferers,
> they should..
Why should they? - because we want them to? Yes, I say we.
I would love to see every WKPWP taking up the cause but I
respect their right not to, for whatever reasons they see fit.
Your words say 'should', but your tone says 'must' and therein
lies the bone of contention.
>Didn't they use celebrities during WW II to sell
>war bonds? Don't politicians use celebrities to fill
>their war chests. Hey, we are in a war, a war
>against PD. Have I made a point?
They certainly did 'use' celebrities to sell war bonds in WW II.
That was how they did their bit for the war effort. They were
not also asked to carry a rifle at the front. I feel fairly certain
that anyone given the choice of having PD or raising money
to combat PD would opt for the later. Interesting choice of
verb -'use', a touch dehumanizing for my taste.
> A couple in our local support group are Holocaust
> survivors. Only one, the caregiver, is able to speak
> out. She is dedicated to giving talks and speeches at
> every opportunity. The husband can't speak out
> because of his PD. Celebrities have their privacy,
>you still say?
I do indeed. The holocaust was the ultimate expression of the point
of view that says one group of people must bend to the will of
another. I cannot subscribe to it in any manifestation.
> "Endure and persist - the pain will turn to our good."
>OVID - Latin
Walter - ease up - Ovid also said " Drops of water hollow out a stone, a
ring is worn thin by use" .
Take the long view.
Dennis.
++++++++++++++++++++
Dennis Greene 47/10
[log in to unmask]
++++++++++++++++++++
