I think that it's supposed to refer to people's personal behaviour, 
(e.g. with regard to sexual behaviour or drugs) rather than public 
policies such as sending troops to Iraq. I also agree that people in 
general don't want to do others to do the things that they disapprove
of; and the issue is more that [some types of] conservatives
think that there should be laws against the personal acts of which
they disapprove; whereas [most] liberals are less likely to think 
so. I think that this is much truer in some other countries 
than in the UK at present, where the major issues of political 
division are other ones [the 'regulation of personal behaviour'
issue was probably much more party-political here in the sixties
than now].

I realize that some issues such as fox-hunting are grey areas in this
sense - yes, I do think it is cruel and should be banned; yes, I 
also realize that some people do feel that this is an excessive
infringement on the rights of some country-dwellers to pursue
their own traditional way of life.

This actually does lead back on topic, because school stories 
are full of rules; the reasons for rules; rebellions, justified
or unjustified, against rules; and the arguments for and against
restricting people's personal choices through rules and regulations.
Antonia Forest, though apparently conservative about politics
and religion, seems quite 'liberal' according to this definition
in her attitude to school rules. By contrast, EBD seems to place
a great emphasis on obedience to rules as a good thing in 
itself, though even she points out the possibility of excesses
in this respect [e.g. Miss Bubb.]

I think one could have a very interesting discussion about rules,
restrictions, freedom, obedience, etc. in the school story. 

Ann

 > Mmm.  A bit provocative?   And also one of those witty remarks which 
> disintegrates when  examined.   I'd have said that neither Liberals and 
> Conservatives 
> like  other people to do what they disapprove of - I mean, I hadn't noticed 
> that the  anti-hunting brigade (to avoid flames, I'd better stress that I 
> dislike hunting  and won't mind when it's banned) are happy to let other 
> people go 
> on doing it.  And if I said: "Well, I greatly disapprove of the Iraq war, but 
> if Bush and  Blair want to send troops, who am I to protest?" you'd think I 
> was 
>  crazy.
> 
> Surely the person who disapproves and doesn't want anyone to do it  is simply 
> human?  The person who doesn't approve and doesn't do it, but  lets other 
> people do it is either very tolerant (TRULY tolerant, which means  putting up 
> with things you hate, not just shrugging your shoulders), or lax,  depending 
> on 
> what the thing is. 
> 
> Yep - off-topic, but I'm clearly  Conservative, and don't want anyone to 
> produce tendentious quotations.   Sorry, Con!
> 
> Sue  
> 
> -- 
> ________________________________________
> Girlsown mailing list
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> For self-administration and access to archives see
>  http://home.it.net.au/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/girlsown
> For FAQs see http://www.club-web.pwp.blueyonder.co.uk/girlsown/faq-0.htm
> 
-- 
________________________________________
Girlsown mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
For self-administration and access to archives see
 http://home.it.net.au/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/girlsown
For FAQs see http://www.club-web.pwp.blueyonder.co.uk/girlsown/faq-0.htm

Reply via email to