Case in Point...

[Lestat]

I guess I'll just wrap up by saying I don't see how you can assume they "tend" to approve of their restrictions. Again, they don't have a choice. As luckyme suggested when they DO have a choice and opt for the same restrictions I'll buy what you're saying. Until then, I think it's best to assume they are oppressed. Kinda like innocent until proven guilty. Last thing...

If I'm wrong and they're ok with these restriction (and mutilations, and beatings, and death for enjoying the freedom every human being should have a right to enjoy), then the worst that can happen is things remain the same. However, if YOU'RE wrong... It's a complete and utter tragedy to allow human beings to become the property of another and to endure what they do.

[chezlaw]

[ QUOTE ]
I guess I'll just wrap up by saying I don't see how you can assume they "tend" to approve of their restrictions. Again, they don't have a choice. As luckyme suggested when they DO have a choice and opt for the same restrictions I'll buy what you're saying. Until then, I think it's best to assume they are oppressed. Kinda like innocent until proven guilty. Last thing...

If I'm wrong and they're ok with these restriction (and mutilations, and beatings, and death for enjoying the freedom every human being should have a right to enjoy), then the worst that can happen is things remain the same. However, if YOU'RE wrong... It's a complete and utter tragedy to allow human beings to become the property of another and to endure what they do.

[/ QUOTE ]
I think the slavery analogy works here too. Some people defended slavery by arguing the slaves were better off as slaves or preferred being slaves or some such nonsense but they don't. Given any viable choice between freedom or slavery they chose freedom.

chez