no, not really...you see, if you are not interested in the subject, then you do not have to listen to it, read about it, or otherwise involve you or yourself in it!!

TA DA!!! that is the beauty of free will!! YOU can choose to NOT be included in it!!

so, if YOU do not want to listen to something about someone, read about them, watch them on TV....then don't!

Your choice...

Reflect, enjoy, remember.... but put the real emotions towards the people who are there everyday in your life. They are the ones who should sadden us when they pass. They are the ones I would take a day off from work or sit and cry about. Family, friends, even some good acquaintances.... they are within reach everyday. They care whether we succeed or fail. THEY matter.

oh but it'll all spill, all spill, there's money in them thar paedo stories!

I do understand what you are saying and indeed there are relationships in our lives that go way beyond the more general types of relatiships we experience. The relationships you refer to include an intimate interconnectedness that does not exist between us and more general others. You are making the point that such relationships are based on resiprosity.

Now I would ask you to re-think your position based on the following. Since it was Michael Jackson that brought this up I will use this example. Michael Jackson has been around for 40 years. Many of us have known of him this long. We have shared in much of his life and watched him grow. His songs bring back memories for us, it is true they are not memories of him, but he and his music are the catalist for those memories.

Reciprocation - We enjoyed his music, we reveled in it, a pop-culture developed from it. Michael influenced millions an many people were influenced in such personal ways that their life was altered. Did he stop when he became famous, did he stop when he had all the money he could ever need? No, he felt an obligation to his fans and what's more he found a purpose in life, to write, sing, and entertain. That is a reciprocation that each of his fans connect with.

There is one last thing to consider. It is true that we should mourn those we have shared love and caring with. It is true that we will be more deeply distressed at those losses. But to deny the fans of a highly public and visable personality, the opportunity to openly mourn such an icon, is to objectify all the rest of humanity that is not part of the group with whom you share an intimate interconnectedness. This is a commen occurance today, and it is a dangerous thought pattern. For when we begin to think of all those others as objects, we forget they are humans and their value to many others is just as great as your value to those you love and care for.

Nothing doing. Not until you can admit you're wrong for being jury, judge, and executioner all in one, based only on speculation instead of facts.

u crack me up Lee

Lee

Yes, they do. Here's just one example:

A 14-year-old girl named Bernadette Whelan died of heart faiure on May 30, 1974, four days after collapsing at a concert held by David Cassidy at London's White City Stadium. Six hundred and fifty were injured, and 30 taken to the hospital. The shaken Cassidy brought Whelan a bouquet of flowers as she lie unconscious in the hospital, and sent her parents a letter of regret. When she died, he was so rattled, he quit both touring and The Partridge Family, and took a 3-year sabbatical. Whelan's death was a turning point in his career, and he's never forgotten her.

So yes, it does happen.

I just got an email from some guy named Mahoney in New York asking me if I've seen his kid