| knowledge-database (beta) |
 |
Current group: rec.video
Pigs can sing, express thanks, and think about the afterlife
| dh_ld at nomail.con | | dh_ld at nomail.com | | Rudy Canoza |
|
|
| | From: | dh_ld at nomail.con | | Subject: | Pigs can sing, express thanks, and think about the afterlife | | Date: | Sun, 16 Jan 2005 01:19:10 GMT |
|
|
 | Later on the pig sings "Swing Low", is thankful that it
got to live, and hopes to have some life beyond this one.
|
|
| | From: | dh_ld at nomail.com | | Subject: | Re: Pigs can sing, express thanks, and think about the afterlife | | Date: | Sun, 16 Jan 2005 17:48:04 GMT |
|
|
| On Sun, 16 Jan 2005 01:19:10 GMT, dh_ld@nomail.con wrote:
>Later on the pig sings "Swing Low", is thankful that it
>got to live, and hopes to have some life beyond this one.
And now the "Animal Rights" view (always keep in mind
that "AR" is a gross mi$nomer in regards to domestic
animals since it would eliminate them, *not* provide them
with better lives, longer lives, rights, or anything else):
From: Jonathan Ball
So far, the "debate" (huh!) has been David reposting his
observation - that billions of animals will not get to
experience life - and me pointing out that this is of no
moral importance
People who don't want them to exist should be "vegans".
"vegans" are interested in their influence on animals,
Fuckwit. They want everyone to be "vegan", which would
mean no animals raised for food and other products.
That's an influence, whether you like it or not.
"Veg*nism" certainly doesn't harm any living farm
animals. And if everyone adopted "veg*nism", no farm
animals would live in bad conditions.
the "getting to experience life" deserves NO moral
consideration, and is given none; the deliberate killing
of animals for use by humans DOES deserve moral
consideration, and gets it.
there is no moral loss if domesticated species go extinct.
Since there is no moral loss to any animals, there is
nothing for any human to take into consideration
if domestic animals were to go extinct, there would be
no moral loss
his basic rationale for opposing "animal rights" and
"vegans" is nonsense (that it prevents animals from
"getting to experience life")
If there is no moral loss, which he coyly has hinted at
before, then he has no grounds for bashing "vegans" for
wanting domestic farm animals to disappear
If they never live in the first place, there is no moral
loss to humans, animals or the universe.
I said that their experiencing of life is of no moral
significance: if domestic animals were to go extinct,
there would be no moral loss
|
|
| | From: | Rudy Canoza | | Subject: | Re: Pigs can sing, express thanks, and think about the afterlife | | Date: | Sun, 16 Jan 2005 18:10:53 GMT |
|
|
| dh_ld@nomail.com wrote:
> On Sun, 16 Jan 2005 01:19:10 GMT, dh_ld@nomail.con wrote:
>
>
>>Later on the pig sings "Swing Low", is thankful that it
>>got to live, and hopes to have some life beyond this one.
>
>
> And now the "Animal Rights" view
Yes, you ought to be able to present the "ar" view, as
you have ALWAYS embraced elements of it.
|
|
|
| | |
|
 |