|
|
 Up |
|
|
  |
Date: Jun 11, 2007 09:16
For years people cloaked beneath the gross misnomer
of "animal rights advocates/activists" have been insisting
that we give no consideration at all to the lives of animals
raised for food when those lives are of positive value to
the animals. They insist we do not consider what the animals
gain from being farmed, regardless of the quality of their lives.
To "aras" it is all pure exploitation *because* the animals are
killed deliberately by humans. There are some even more
extreme beliefs than that, going so far as to insist we never
give the lives of any creatures any consideration at all.
|
| Show full article (2.56Kb) |
|
| | 116 Comments |
|
|
Author: DutchDutch Date: Jun 11, 2007 14:10
<·???@¿¿¿.> wrote
> Which lives, if any, should we take into consideration when
> we think about human infuence on animals?
It's simple fuckwit
You can't claim a moral victory for bringing a livestock animal
into existence, that is a conflict of interest, self-serving circular
sophistry. The only moral implications towards livestock
animals are *obligations*.
|
| |
|
| | 7 Comments |
|
|
|
Author: RupertRupert Date: Jun 11, 2007 17:40
|
| |
| no comments |
|
|
Date: Jun 19, 2007 09:50
On Mon, 18 Jun 2007 16:25:29 -0700, Rubystars hotmail.com> wrote:
>On Jun 17, 10:34 pm, dh@. wrote:
>> On Fri, 15 Jun 2007 08:07:49 -0700, Rubystars hotmail.com> wrote:>>>On Jun 11, 11:16 am, ·???@¿¿¿. wrote:
>>>
>>
>>>I can't believe...
|
| Show full article (2.33Kb) |
| no comments |
|
|
|
Date: Jun 19, 2007 14:11
|
| |
| no comments |
|
|
|
Author: chazwinchazwin Date: Jun 20, 2007 09:28
|
| |
| no comments |
|
|
Date: Jun 24, 2007 12:26
On Fri, 22 Jun 2007 12:58:47 -0700, the Goober accused:
>*YOU* don't give any "consideration" to their lives.
Do you, Goo?
|
| |
| no comments |
|
|
Author: the 2nd coming of christthe 2nd coming of christ Date: Jul 6, 2007 10:33
On Thu, 05 Jul 2007 20:02:03 GMT, "Dutch" home.com> wrote:
>Good, you didn't clarify it but I am glad you see that. You just diverged
>from fuckwit's position. He says it is "selfish" to not consider those
>animals who are denied life.
what he says or not is none of my business and i don't care to
discuss it with you...
>
> i see that clearly but you do
>> not see clearly that you are harming a species as a whole if
>> you're calling for their extinction.
>
>Livestock are artificial species, created by us, their primary beneficial
>interrelationship is with us. If we stop needed the products they produce,
>they should stop existing. It's crazy
what's crazy is calling for their extinction as you do...
|
| Show full article (1.72Kb) |
| no comments |
|
|
Author: DutchDutch Date: Jul 6, 2007 11:56
"the 2nd coming of christ" netscape.net> wrote in message
news:468e7b8b.153434763@news.sysmatrix.net...> On Thu, 05 Jul 2007 20:02:03 GMT, "Dutch" home.com> wrote:
>>>Good, you didn't clarify it but I am glad you see that. You just diverged
>>from fuckwit's position. He says it is "selfish" to not consider those
>>animals who are denied life.
>
> what he says or not is none of my business and i don't care to
> discuss it with you...
You have followed his reasoning, that makes his position relevant.
|
| Show full article (2.18Kb) |
| no comments |
|
|
|
|
|
Author: the 2nd coming of christthe 2nd coming of christ Date: Jul 6, 2007 17:29
On Fri, 06 Jul 2007 18:56:26 GMT, "Dutch" home.com> wrote:
>"the 2nd coming of christ" netscape.net> wrote in message
>news:468e7b8b.153434763@news.sysmatrix.net...>> On Thu, 05 Jul 2007 20:02:03 GMT, "Dutch" home.com> wrote:
>>>>>Good, you didn't clarify it but I am glad you see that. You just diverged
>>>from fuckwit's position. He says it is "selfish" to not consider those
>>>animals who are denied life.
>>
>> what he says or not is none of my business and i don't care to
>> discuss it with you...
>
>You have followed his reasoning, that makes his position relevant.
in your mind, i've followed it. all he did was make clear your
position to me, but i've always had my own argumentation...which
in some instances coincides with his and in others doesn't.
|
| Show full article (3.26Kb) |
| no comments |
|
RELATED THREADS |
|
|
|
|
|
|
