--- Fred Bauder <fredbaud(a)ctelco.net> wrote:
Alternatives include when it is viable, when it is
born.
Degrees, yes--as others have pointed out, its a
spectrum. But in the context of consensus, that
"spectrum" is also a bell curve, with the two extremes
representing the vocal minorities, while most people
might agree to some fetal age a pragmatic compromise.
I dont own a polling company, so this is not sourced.
In this case, however the extremes appear to be
split along absolute/binary lines, while in reality
most understand the middle ground. Hence the extremes
are almost reflexively represented as majorities
rather than as minorites,(1) and this inverse logic
effects how our articles are written and debated.
IMHO It's incorrect for a general bell curve
consensus to be represented as simply exclusively a
bunch of "minorities"(2) just because there are
different degrees. IOW, to claim that an intuited
'general compromise POV' is merely a group of
conceptual, unrelated, and distict POVs is not
correct, as even a 'conceptual consensus'(3) =
rationality == NPOV. With representation for all the
conceptual and political degrees of course.
Fn
1 minorities (though certainly there's a political
split point)
2 (Perhaps so because there is yet no definitive
popular consensus yet on where the line is, other than
that represented in Roe.)
3 ...consensus, (as opposed to segmentalism on the
particulars)...
SV
Apologies for U.S.-centrist language and footnotes.
____________________________________________________
Start your day with Yahoo! - make it your home page
http://www.yahoo.com/r/hs