Justin Schwartz wrote:
>
> It's not irrelevant. I think Nathan's "acceptance" is cheap and merely
> verbal because it is idle, particualr in view of his waffling on Israel in
> other contexts. jks
I do not know how to draw the line, but even in my pre-marxist days I was suspicious of those who had no power over events taking rigorous moral positions. Such positions (or posturings) always reminded me of the astronomer in _Rasselas_ who was anxious to find a replacement before his death to carry on his important task of causing the sun to rise each morning.
Carrol