Re: Boston radio's pizza connection

["Joseph Pappalardo" <joepappalardo2001@yahoo.com>]

I was making a point about the protocol....not the philosophies involved.

(BTW...I only pursue this discussion on this list for it's relevance to
media, mass communications and it's journalistic flavor. )

Again, we are speaking about an organizations...with a charters, membership,
spokespersons etc.  It is generally accepted that you refer to someone by
what they wish to be called......

BTW...The biggest pro-life organization in Massachusetts,  MCFL, ARE
anti-euthanasia, anti-death penalty.
Therefore they logically choose the name "pro-life" to describe themselves.

Again, I am not arguing your philosophy...nor mine.  Just the manner and
order of polite discourse and discussion.  When someone sneaks in a phrase
or term that indicates a value judgement...especially in a news story, they
have stopped "reporting" the facts and have started editorializing.   Or in
this case a radio discussion mailing list...they have stopped discussing
radio and made statements about their personal philoosphies....which is
apparently what Paul Hopfgarten objected to.

(BTW...If I were to refer to your postion as 'pro-death'...I think you would
not consider that an accurate or flattering portrayal of your side....which
Mike said he sees no problem with.)

>>"Anti-choice" is the opposite of "pro-choice" which is how the left
promotes their position because
>> to them, the issue of "choice" is the most important.  Either one is
acceptable IMHO.



Joe Papp


----- Original Message -----
From: "Dan Strassberg" <Dan.Strassberg@att.net>
To: "Joseph Pappalardo" <joepappalardo2001@yahoo.com>
Cc: <hopfgapr@sprynet.com>; <boston-radio-interest@khavrinen.lcs.mit.edu>;
<rac@gabriel.cambridge.ma.us>
Sent: Saturday, March 03, 2001 8:25 AM
Subject: Re: Boston radio's pizza connection


> Joe: You have made a reasoned and rather eloquent argument. However, I
think
> it is flawed. Most people on the so-called pro-life side are scarcely
> pro-life. People who oppose women's right of reproductive choice almost
> universally favor capital punishment. Calling such people pro-life sticks
in
> my craw because it's a falsehood, just as calling me pro-abortion would be
a
> falsehood. I wanted to identify Operation Rescue. Had I worded my posting
> "the so-called pro-life Operation Rescue" or "Operation Rescue, an
> origanization that calls itself pro-life," I think my phrasing would have
> drawn negative comments from the same people. And if I had said "the
> self-proclaimed pro-life Operation Rescue," I think the reactions would
have
> been even stronger. So, carried to its logical extreme, your approach
would
> prohibit mentions on the list of any group that espouses a controversial
> cause, even in postings whose subjects are appropriate to the list. Is
that
> the outcome you really want?
>
> I find it interesting that this has turned into a debate on political
> correctness, with me, the so-called liberal (I consider myself a moderate,
> not a liberal) on the anti-PC side and those who most likely call
themselves
> conservatives on the PC side.
>
> --
>
> Dan Strassberg, dan.strassberg@worldnet.att.net
> Phone: 1-617-558-4205, eFax: 1-707-215-6367
>
> -----Original Message-----
> >
> >> So what if Dan said "anti-choice?"  Just because that is how he chose
to
> >look at it does not mean he's "politicizing" this list.
> >
> >It was a word chosen to 'stick it' to anyone who might be part of the
> >pro-life movement...and had no purpose except to express his need to
extol
> >his own politics.
> >
>
>
>
>
>
>


_________________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Get your free @yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com