BR> who are avaricions, murderous, honorable, deceitful, and just all
BR> around horses asses.  Eventually they get replaced by something
BR> else.  I'm not going
True... keep in mind I sort out why someone uses rhetoric based around 
the words responsible and obligation then wonder why. Turns out 
usually they, or their own, have something to gain from the action of 
the victim, which in the usual case, is the person to whom they are 
directing the "responsibility" clause.  
One of my favorite phrases when I was younger was "who protects us 
from our protectors?"
BR> I hope this doesn't come off as a personal attack, for it si not
BR> so intended.  For now, I'll shut up.
Not to worry. You seem very honorable yourself and have a legitimate 
viewpoint. I don't take this as a personal attack. You perspective is 
just as valid as mine or anyone elses.
DB
---
 * RM 1.31 3089 * I have seen the truth and it makes no sense.
--- WILDMAIL!/WC v4.12 
---------------