On Mon, May 12, 2008 at 1:29 PM, Kerim Aydin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > This is also true. The contract itself defines what a member of the > > religion is -- but does > > not precisely equate it with being party to the contract, > > The preamble says "This religion is a private contract...I am the only > member of this religion." Set R = Set C -> Members of R = Members of C.
A party to a contract is not the same as a member of a contract. All members are parties, but not all parties are members. Anyway, I quoted a piece of text that looked like a contract and certainly fit the proper form of a contract, and said I agreed. My intention was to agree to that piece of text. I think I did. --Ivan Hope CXXVII
