On 24/11/04 19:40, in article , "Kay"
wrote:

snip
You could - or I could - say, that whoever
'started it', class was at the bottom of it all *for the politicians*.

I'm not arguing either for or against that. My argument all along has
been that Peter bradley's article is not about who started it, in the
sense of who started the anti-hunting bill, it was about the response to
it. And I know that is not how you read the article. I guess I should
stop banging on about it because I will not convince you that your
interpretation is reading into the article things that are not there.

That's correct. Because I think they are there.


And that is another point although a dangerous one, I know. Why should
people living in the country be 'ruled' by those who lived in towns, simply
because our population is mainly urban? Another can of worms....

Because it's a democracy ;-)

As I said, we are all in a minority. Why should I in the north be
'ruled' by those of you living in the south simply because there are
more of you?


My point, exactly.
--

Sacha
(remove the weeds for email)