Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Pastimes : Let's Talk About Our Feelings!!! -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Oeconomicus who wrote (94026)	1/19/2005 2:10:44 PM
From: Grainne	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 108807

The animal rights tract I am gradually sharing here has 96 questions (we're on #3 at the moment). And I did not write it, of course. So I am neither defining a right or proving it exists. Theoretically speaking, how would you assert that an animal has rights? Some sort of argument would be required--circular reasoning or not. Is circular reasoning always bad reasoning? The argument about animals violating one another's rights is an old and irrelevant one, incidentally. If you want to seriously assert that it is important, you would also have to assume that humans are at the level of animals re their reasoning and ability to procure food without hunting it. Are you asserting this? More interestingly (to me, at least) are questions like this one--do you believe that chickens should have the right to flap their wings during their lives?