annie - So... why does it have to be the sub that must support the Dom?
Because the sub has submittied to the will of the Dom not the other way round. True, he is duty bound to protect but protect and support are not the same. Yes support in the sense of wellbeing but not in the sense of "support my point of view".

annie - i don't agree with my husband's take on a few political issues but i choose careully when to fight that battle and when to let it rest.
The Ds model is not a equal rights democracy. If a sub is choosing when to fight and when not to then she has not given over decision making to the Dom (notwithstanding agreed limits) and is retaining free will and self determination.

annie - The point, i believe, is what makes a sub a "true" sub?
Submitting completely to the will and authority of the dom within the boundaries of any mutually agreed limits.

sisterhoney - He made it very clear that he expected her to change her innermost beliefs and conform completely to his; otherwise, he considered her to be unworthy of his time.
Without doubt the Dom is not only wrong but foolish to think that a person can change their beliefs at the snap of his fingers, even if they wanted to. (thanks honey for clarifying this)

Damyanti - But you cant really compare a loving relationship between a normal couple and a "contract" between politicians and their harpies.
Fair enough, lets look at the spouses (male and female) of political candidates and leaders. The overwhelming majority support their partner's policies which, unless political views are a factor in love and marriage, makes the statistics sufficiently skewed for me to smell a rat. I'd love to go scurrying into the political archives on this but sadly don't have the time. We will just have to agree to disagree on this one.

juicysub - Just a question i need a large range of answers for..Dom/mes: would You have Your subbie/slave change thier point of view and thoughts on politics or religion?
To put my posts back on track and address only the specific question asked.... In normal circumstances I would not instruct my sub to change her views. However I can not rule out a theoretical scenario where I would require her not to publicly express any views that may work against my interest. I would seek to convince her through logical argument that my views are right, and should she be able to convince me otherwise would be prepared to change my views.

The Dom was not juicysub's Dom so it doesn't matter what he said. And with a view like that it's clear juicysub and the Dom were not compatible and would never be in a relationship anyway, assuming it's done the right way round ie know and trust the Dom first before submitting.

Apologies to all for going off topic in my previous post. Having played devil's avocate and stirred the pot I think I will bow out of this one. I don't know, maybe it was just my inate British feeling of sympathy for the underdog when everybody was bashing a Dom who had not presened his case. Or maybe I just felt like Henry Fonda in the American movie 12 Angry Men where all the jurors jumped so quickly to a guilty verdict that he felt it merited a closer look.

"Truth will ultimately prevail where there is pains taken to bring it to light." - George Washington