I think you exaggerate when comparing metrication with killing someone. Or something.
I don't see any way in which it will kill individual freedom. The civilized society is based on a universal acceptance of a set of rules of behavior. W&M is part of it. If you take freedom to the absolute then we should all define our own meter. So freedom has to stop somewhere! And I personally don't understand where you theory draws that line. A. PS: I sent the last message before reading this last one of yours. I never intended to engage you in an endless debate but your view intrigues me therefore, I cannot keep myself from trying to challenge your arguments. And its very much on topic! -----Original Message----- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Jim Elwell Sent: Wednesday, 30 January, 2002 08:54 To: U.S. Metric Association Subject: [USMA:17767] Re: Fwd: Euro vs. Metrication (was: Thinning the list) At 01:53 PM 1/30/2002 +0100, Louis JOURDAN wrote: >At 15:30 -0700 02/01/24, Jim Elwell wrote: >>Obviously my first email on this topic was not clear. I do NOT have a >>problem with the Euro per se. However, I do not think the method by which >>it was imposed is a good model for metrication the USA. > >Why, Jim ? > >The Euro has not been imposed on Europeans. They have freely chosen it. >Directly, in countries where the Maastricht treaty was submitted to a >referendum, or through parliamentary process.... There are two pieces to this: (1) Would mandatory metric (i.e., required by law, regardless of whether democratically approved or not) be effective in metricating the USA, if it were to happen? Yes, of course it would. It would be the *quickest* way to metricate the country, so if you equate "quick" with "effective," then it is the most effective. (2) Why do I oppose it? Simple: there are more important things in life than metrication. To me, individual freedom (i.e., the right to run one's life and use one's property as one chooses) is vastly more important than metrication. To use a flip analogy, to me the issue is this: if you have a headache, is it an effective cure to take a gun and blow your brains out? Well, you cure the headache quickly, but you lose something much more valuable. An aspirin is much slower, but in the long run much better. ***** As I've stated before, I fully understand that many on this forum do not see things this way (and some probably wonder what planet I came from). So, I'm going to renew a vow that I have made before and keep forgetting: I want to *make* metric happen, and am going to spend more time doing things that will help, and less time engaging in philosophical debate on this forum. Those of you who are sick of the long debates, feel free to call me on this if I forget it again. Jim Elwell
