| Home |
| Search |
| Today's Posts |
|
|
|
#1
03-07-2007, 10:56 AM
posted to talk.politics.animals,uk.environment.conservation,misc.rural,uk.rec.gardening,alt.animals.ethics.vegetarian
|
|||
|
|||
Now even spiders, squid and lobsters could have rights, and about time too!
On Tue, 03 Jul 2007 08:50:14 GMT, "Dutch" wrote:
"Rupert" wrote On Jul 3, 2:53 pm, "Dutch" wrote: "Rupert" wrote in message [..] If the intended conclusion is "therefore, you have no valid criticisms of the status quo", then it certainly is a fallacy. You apparently acknowledge this below. The intended conclusion is "those who live in glass houses should not throw stones". Get more specific. Those whose comfortable lifestyles and diets depend upon the systematic harming of animals do not have moral standing to criticize others. Right. So you don't have the moral standing to criticize anyone at all. Is that the story? No, stupid. I don't have the standing to criticize people for doing essentially what I do myself. If I do so I become a hypocrite. I don't agree with you that the people you're debating on this newsgroup are doing that in any sense which you're not. That was just another one of your argumentative statements. I don't criticize people's diets and lifestyles here. You're constantly doing just that. You're an argumentative, natural bully and you don't even realise it. |
|
#2
03-07-2007, 08:33 PM
posted to talk.politics.animals,uk.environment.conservation,misc.rural,uk.rec.gardening,alt.animals.ethics.vegetarian
|
|||
|
|||
|
Now even spiders, squid and lobsters could have rights, and about time too!
"Gloria" wrote in message
... On Tue, 03 Jul 2007 08:50:14 GMT, "Dutch" wrote: "Rupert" wrote On Jul 3, 2:53 pm, "Dutch" wrote: "Rupert" wrote in message [..] If the intended conclusion is "therefore, you have no valid criticisms of the status quo", then it certainly is a fallacy. You apparently acknowledge this below. The intended conclusion is "those who live in glass houses should not throw stones". Get more specific. Those whose comfortable lifestyles and diets depend upon the systematic harming of animals do not have moral standing to criticize others. Right. So you don't have the moral standing to criticize anyone at all. Is that the story? No, stupid. I don't have the standing to criticize people for doing essentially what I do myself. If I do so I become a hypocrite. I don't agree with you that the people you're debating on this newsgroup are doing that in any sense which you're not. That was just another one of your argumentative statements. I don't criticize people's diets and lifestyles here. You're constantly doing just that. You're an argumentative, natural bully and you don't even realise it. That's completely incorrect, I do not criticize anyone's diet or lifestyle here. I criticize their statements or arguments when I find them to be flawed or poorly thought-out, which is the primary purpose of a newsgroup. You perceive me to be a bully because my criticisms are frequently spot-on. |
| Reply |
| Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
| Display Modes | |
|
|
Hybrid Mode
