Monday, September 9, 2002, 5:41:55 PM, you wrote: BD> Really? I've seen HS football player wrench knees, ankles, wrists, etc. all BD> the time, and just tape it up. They're back playing again the next week. BD> However, having only one leg /would/ be a problem.
You are nitpicking...this line of argument has been assimilated. : BD>> By lumping all chemical imbalances of the nervous system BD> : together, you are : BD>> equating someone like me and your average theme park BD> : thrill-seeker with : BD>> violent psychopaths and people who face-jump off tall BD> : buildings. Not quite : BD>> the same thing, IMHO. BD> : BD> : I don't see the link, and I don't think I made it. BD> : Violent psychopaths cannot become governor usually, and a thrill-seeker BD> : would be fine with me. BD> You defined Parkinson's as a mental illness because it was caused by a BD> chemical imbalance in the brain. You then said you would never vote for BD> someone who had a mental illness. I never said that! Please read my posts. The closest I came was my original post which said that I didn't think it was wise to vote for someone who we already knew had a mental illness, which was a subtle sarcastic joke about most politicians being mentally ill but we don't know it. Either it was too subtle, you guys just want to argue, or you are all rampaging Democrats who would vote one of those hairless cats into office if it went with the part line. That was also a joke... BD> : I used to work with a guy who was insanely bi-polar, we became quite BD> : close, and I thought he was one of the funniest guys I've ever met, BD> : however I would never ever vote for him for anything... BD> : The job descriptions of programmer and politician are quite different, BD> : programmers can be crazy, no one dies if they are grumpy or BD> : unproductive. Politicians need to be extremely mentally stable imho. <snipped good stuff> BD> I agree that polititians /should/ be stable individuals. However, I don't BD> think it's always the case that they are, and I don't think that the BD> diagnosis of a treatable mental illness should be a red flag that removes BD> them from your consideration. I think it is a point to ponder, and a reason BD> to look at their performance history, but shouldn't we be doing that anyway? BD> I just don't think it's fair to rule them out based on a chemical imbalance. Exactly what I have been trying to say, but put more eloquently. -- jon mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] ______________________________________________________________________ Your ad could be here. Monies from ads go to support these lists and provide more resources for the community. http://www.fusionauthority.com/ads.cfm Archives: http://www.mail-archive.com/[email protected]/ Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/index.cfm?sidebar=lists
