Re: Hahnemannian homeopathy VS. combos LONG
Posted: Sun Sep 24, 2006 6:46 pm
I don't think that--whether "Stanza 3 suffices"-- is what we've been
debating! The broader debate, and the one we started with and keep
coming back to, is whether the list must exclude all mention and all
discussion of any topics not related to non-Hahnemannian homeopathy.
This would be a huge departure from this list's "tradition", and from
the wishes of what appears to me to be the majority of the list
membership.
If we are *not* moving to exclude everything non-Hahnemannian, then
where are we--or I guess I should ask where are you, Joy--moving to
draw the lines--excluding discussions of combos only, or excluding
combos and Sankaran and Scholten, or ??
Shannon
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
debating! The broader debate, and the one we started with and keep
coming back to, is whether the list must exclude all mention and all
discussion of any topics not related to non-Hahnemannian homeopathy.
This would be a huge departure from this list's "tradition", and from
the wishes of what appears to me to be the majority of the list
membership.
If we are *not* moving to exclude everything non-Hahnemannian, then
where are we--or I guess I should ask where are you, Joy--moving to
draw the lines--excluding discussions of combos only, or excluding
combos and Sankaran and Scholten, or ??
Shannon
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]