Opposition to U.S. metrication cannot be silenced, and this listserver,
by actively silencing its opponents, would be denying the value of the
very process that metrication proponents themselves require for success:
the free flow of ideas. It is much more effective to deal with opposing
views by confronting them directly and working to defeat them in the
court of national popular opinion, and we shall do that.
However, once Congress has chosen the path of active metrication, I
agree that there is no room for opposition on the U.S. Metric Board.
That the first USMB had some metric opponents on it was absurd. That is
like having tobacco company executives on the board of the American
Cancer Society.
Paul Trusten, R.Ph.
Public Relations Director
USMA
www.metric.org
mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Daniel Jackson wrote:
Opposing views should be welcome as long as they lead to a more
effective way to bring about metrication. If the opposing view
counters the efforts of metrication then they should be silenced. A
house divided against itself will fall.
Maybe this is why in almost 100 years of existence, the USMA has
been impotent when it comes to metricating the US. This is also why
the metrication board failed....it let the opposition interfere.
Countries that successfully metricated kept opposing viewpoints on
the outside looking in. The US and the USMA should take a lesson
from their success.
Dan
Paul Trusten
Sun, 03 Feb 2008 13:27:58 -0800
The U.S. Metric Association welcomes an open discussion on U.S.
metricationon. USMA supports U.S. metrication, but opposing points of
view are always welcome.
Paul Trusten, R. Ph.
Public Relations Director
U.S. Metric Assoc
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Never miss a thing. Make Yahoo your homepage.
<http://us.rd.yahoo.com/evt=51438/*http://www.yahoo.com/r/hs>
--
Paul Trusten, R.Ph.
Acting Secretary
The Pharmacy Alliance
Midland TX 79707-2872 USA
+1(432)528-7724
mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://health.groups.yahoo.com/group/ThePharmacyAlliance
