Mike wrote to the Freedom Ring Manager asking about the gun-control sites
on the ring. This his his response to the ring manger's explanation:

Date: Fri, 24 Oct 1997 14:33:21 -0400
From: "Mike Brown" cooties@netinc.ca
To: rpc man rpcman@mailexcite.com
Subject: Re: Freedom Ring Membership

>I personally don't view gun laws as "bigger government". Some may
>disagree and that is fine. Like the main page says, people can disagree
>with other sites in the ring. >Joining the ring does not imply that one
>agrees with everything on the other pages in the ring.

It hasn't been a rule for a while. When you accepted Carolyn Gargaro's
site, the rule wasn't there. You added it when she and Jen nailed you for
accepting CArolyn and then deleting her (with so much as a courtesy note).
I wouldn't bring this up blindly - I've seen the rules since the first
time Carolyn mentioned you weren't responding - more than a month ago.

This isn't an issue of some people not people not agreeing with others on
the ring. This is the pro-lifers not agreeing with your personal
pro-choice ideology. You can't justify having both sides of the gun issue
represented on the ring, and claim a different standard for the issue of
abortion. That's not "freedom" - it's a petty exclusion based on one
ideology.