Home |
Search |
Today's Posts |
#14
|
|||
|
|||
Now even spiders, squid and lobsters could have rights, and about time too!
On Sun, 01 Jul 2007 19:44:10 -0700, Rupert
wrote: On Jun 26, 6:39 am, Rudy Canoza wrote: On Jun 25, 1:05 pm, "Dutch" wrote: wrote in message .. . On Sun, 24 Jun 2007 22:43:31 GMT, "Dutch" wrote: wrote On Sun, 24 Jun 2007 20:10:03 GMT, Rudy Canoza wrote: [..] You claim to support animal "rights", but your daily behavior proves you do not. Not at all. For the reasons I have already given. What are those reasons? Read my previous posts. They provide nothing material. But humans have rights and we the UK have killed tens of thousands of them in the past few years in Iraq. Not comparable to the way you participate in the killing of animals. So do you think the humans in Iraq have no rights? That figures. You can't escape your willing complicity in the systematic killing of animals by farmers by pointing out that wars kill people. [..] Not only wars kill people. Traffic kills people but not intentionally. That doesn't excuse your complicity in the systematic killing of animals in agriculture. There are choices, albeit hard ones, that you COULD make which would all but eliminate that complicity. The same cannot be said for traffic deaths or casualties of war. That's why that argument is not genuine. It's a diversion. It isn't a real argument at all; it's a _tu quoque_, a fallacy. What's all this rubbish about tu quoque? You're the ones who are doing the tu quoque. You're trying to say she has no valid criticisms to make of the status quo regarding our treatment of animals, because her contribution to animal suffering and death is not zero. It's a blatant tu quoque and it proves absolutely nothing. You wont get any sense out of Jonny Ball, he has short legs and is bald you know? ;-) |
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
Display Modes | |
|
|