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.

Politics : Should God be replaced? -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Greg or e who wrote (21347)	7/19/2005 1:15:33 PM
From: TigerPaw	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 28931

I draw a clear distinction between people and cows, It is a distinction more of degree than of a clear divide. For example I value the black footed ferrit more than a cow. It's not because it is intrinsicly a better animal. Both are but twigs on a 4 billion year old bush. It is because without careful consideration the black footed ferrit will be extinct, and extinct is forever (at least until DNA freezing and cloning is perfected). There are plenty of cows. In another example I value a dog more than a mouse. Both dog and mouse are common enough so the rarity issue does not apply. The reasoning is that a dog displays a greater sense of empathy to me (and fellow humans) than a mouse. I value that for reasons that have nothing to do with extinction or survival. Along the same reasoning I value people more than dogs because they have an even greater empathy and understanding. It's natural to have preferences. What is not natural is when those because a step-function ... a discontinuous jump between values. That is the sign of an compulsive disorder or phobia. TP

To: Greg or e who wrote (21347)	7/19/2005 1:26:14 PM
From: one_less	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 28931

"although whack jobs like the PETA crowd put animals ahead of people. " The problem with some PETA advocates and with their adversaries is that neither are able to properly place the rights of animals. Animals do have rights, equal to human beings, but not anthropomorpic, not ahead of or behind that of humans. Animals are endowed differently on their creation than human beings are. It is not a violation of an animal's natural rights to be killed and eaten when it was naturally created in a food chain, where it occupies a position of prey. It is a violation of animal rights to torture them for human entertainment, or to contain them while neglecting their basic health needs. There is of course much more to it but that much should be obvious to anyone employing sound reason.

To: Greg or e who wrote (21347)	7/20/2005 2:23:29 PM
From: Solon	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 28931

"just don't understand how someone could be a vegetarian on moral grounds and yet be for partial birth infanticide which seems to be the case with most of them." Leaving aside that D&C is not "partial birth infanticide" (moron)--what evidence are you relying on when you claim that MOST vegetarians favour abortion?? Intuitively, a connection would seem gratuitous. But if there is evidence for such a claim (if not, then why would you make it?), then it would be interesting to discuss the matter.