| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
Tom
Guest
|
 Posted: Thu Jun 12, 2008 9:43 pm Post subject: Re: Belief's Role in Perception/Learning (was Re: Tabula Ras |
 |
|
"marques de sade" <jesucristo2@netscape.net> wrote in message
news:48512fbf.223654669@news.sysmatrix.net...
| Quote: | On Wed, 11 Jun 2008 18:40:26 -0700, "Tom"
dantPAYATTENTIONomel@comcast.net> wrote:
"marques de sade" <jesucristo2@netscape.net> wrote in message
news:485050e2.166593625@news.sysmatrix.net...
On Wed, 11 Jun 2008 11:52:33 -0700, "Tom"
dantPAYATTENTIONomel@comcast.net> wrote:
how many of those philosophical or social systems have a 54 year
old having sex with a 9 year old as the main legend...
An important one, to be sure, but as to whether it's the "main" legend
or
not,
muhammed is the central legend in islam...
You really don't know much about Islam.
it's still pedophilia in my book... main legend or not...
|
Of course it's pedophilia in *your* book. Their book is not your book. And
that's pretty much all you know about their book. |
|
| |
|
 Back to top |
Guest
|
| Posted: Thu Jun 12, 2008 10:15 pm Post subject: Re: Belief's Role in Perception/Learning (was Re: Tabula Ras |
|
|
On Fri, 06 Jun 2008 02:37:29 GMT, jesucristo2@netscape.net (marques de sade) wrote:
| Quote: | On Thu, 05 Jun 2008 15:03:12 -0100, dh@. wrote:
On Wed, 04 Jun 2008 15:48:57 GMT, jesucristo2@netscape.net (marques de sade) wrote:
On Wed, 04 Jun 2008 10:14:57 -0100, dh@. wrote:
On Sun, 01 Jun 2008 16:31:49 GMT, jesucristo2@netscape.net (marques de sade) wrote:
On Thu, 29 May 2008 15:28:13 -0100, dh@. wrote:
On Wed, 28 May 2008 07:48:29 -0700, "Tom" <dantPAYATTENTIONomel@comcast.net> wrote:
dh@.> wrote in message news:c5bq345tj7j495d3eqcv0oa8kq5to1gsth@4ax.com...
All we have is our own interpretation, regardless of whether
it's right or wrong.
The thing is, we should do our best to find out whether our interpretations
are right or wrong. It's not enough to decide that whatever you would like
to believe is true. You have to make sincere and continual efforts to find
out just how true, and how false, it is. Failure to do this is a huge
error.
Where our interpretations cannot be tested, they should not be asserted as
fact.
Yet strong atheists often act like they know it's a fact that
God does not exist, even though they have no way of finding
out.
i know for a fact YOUR god doesn't exist...
Yet you have no idea at all what "my" God is. It makes a
person wonder how many of the many things that you are
clueless about, have you somehow managed to convince
yourself that you know all about.
all i need to look at
is all the pedophilia that is linked to your god and that's all
the proof i need...
This isn't the first time I've seen someone who is completely
clueless about something consider himself to be an authority
on the subject, but it certainly is an excellent example.
my beliefs are unshaken by anything you say...
You try to believe what you want to believe.
you are an agent of satan to me...
That's amusing, especially coming from you. If Satan
does exist, I wonder why he put that thought in your
head...maybe just to see if he could get you to believe
it. But you LIKE the beast, so working against yourself
on this one anyway, which may be why the beast wanted
to see if he could trick you into doing it.
used metaphorically... my religion is to oppose
your religion...
And you LIKE the beast...
i accept that we are beasts... yes...
|
You changed the subject. You like the beast,
yet also want to disbelieve, and probably would
be afraid to trust him even though you have
such a thing for him. If he exists, it appears that
he's got you the way he wants you to be. |
|
| |
|
| Back to top |
Guest
|
| Posted: Thu Jun 12, 2008 10:16 pm Post subject: Re: Belief's Role in Perception/Learning (was Re: Tabula Ras |
|
|
On Wed, 11 Jun 2008 04:18:14 -0700 (PDT), "J.P. \"Julian Sebastian\" Bacchae" <juurgenizixexoxos@gmail.com> wrote:
| Quote: | On Jun 9, 7:48 pm, dh@. wrote:
On Thu, 5 Jun 2008 13:58:06 -0700 (PDT), Janine Starscream <zevillkaa...@yahoo.com> wrote:
On Jun 5, 11:59 am, dh@. wrote:
On Thu, 5 Jun 2008 00:16:58 -0700 (PDT), "J.P. \"Julian Sebastian\" Bacchae" <Tipsyswe...@gmail.com> wrote:
On Jun 4, 7:14 am, dh@. wrote:
He believes what he wants when he wants, and changes
his beliefs to suite whatever he wants to believe at the time,
or at least he tries to give that impression. There was a time
when he claimed to believe individuals could have multiple
lives, but the last time we discussed it he denied it. There's
no telling what he would say about it by now. There were
times when he insisted nothing with any intelligence had
anything to do with the development of the universe, or
life itself, and then later acted as if he thought there could
have been or something like that. He doesn't really know
what to think, so...
I've been experimenting with that method of (dis(cordian))organized
thinking, just to get a feel for each and every kind of fanaticism
available on the planet right now, with the exception of debased Islam
for personal reasons, as a means to gain a wider perspective on the
whole suprapsychology of religious and non-religious thinking
patterns. Everybody has the option of doing that, but without
interplay, or ugh, synergy, between the altered veiw points it's just
being wishy washy.
He appears to have a very hard time making connections
and tying things together in general even though he is trying
to blame religion for encouraging child abuse somehow.
People get religious at times, even about non-religious subjects. If
Rev. Suzy the Floozy was correct about this, the word religion
essentially means to bind, or was it to be bound again? Now
occassionally getting bound up can be fun: getting bound up in a
fruitful activity, getting bound up in sexual pleasure (many meanings
for that one, hehe), getting bound up in an adventure, but it can also
mean being bound up in servitude, bound up in a parasitic idea, being
bound up in disgusting degeneracy which is, regardless if you view
them as emotional patterns or shiny hell creatures, rather daimonic.
Many sexual-negative faiths, the overly dogmatized ones, do indeed
encourage members towards perversion
What kind?
if they restrict healthy
consensual conscious activities to procreation only policies (what a
waste of time that is, and overpopulating!) or create matrices of
guilt and penance on essentially naturale animal activities that
release tension in evolution/design (one can see it either/or/both
ways) foundation approved fashions (but not cultural taboos, usually).
I consider majikal progress partially a collage of the many forces/
intelligences (i figure now it depends on the scope of definitions any
observer has as the limiting factors on how THAT comes out)
Like what might make it actually work, if it does?
Could you specify by what you mean by "it", please? :)
The supposedly majikal progresss.
I don't want to
go on a tangent if it's based on a misunderstanding of the subject. By
Gods Inc. that happens way too much anyway, oy.
to equivalent exchange,
Of what? you ask... everything... all interactions at all times
forever and ever amen... ala The Art of Shen Ku (which imho is very
effective)
But religious hocus pocus aside, it comes down to what form of justice
doesn't penalize personal quirks, opens up the world to creativity,
quashes fundamentalism, and in general takes the darkness by the neck
and screams the terrorgrammtron in it's face so loud it either dies
forever or transmutes into something that isn't going to parasitize
existence forever.
It also has quite a bit to do with ecology, and the earth's conscious
punishment of man for it's inequity to everything, including man. I
don't want to sound too militant about it, because without an easy
relaxed attitude this perspective too could become quite a
fundamentalism (it already has in some circles unfortunately). I
consider it my duty to assist with the earths immune response.
Help the Goddess out and she makes life real easy... It's better than
working with asinine demons thats for Dame sure.
Are you a Wicken?- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -
no, not at all. i'm a second-guessing luciferian is what i am/trying
not to be, and probably a homonculus to boot. I'm working through the
issues that creates.
i would prefer to be a zeal-crazed love priest of YHWH if i could ever
figure out just who he actually is.
|
If you ever do, it's not likely to happen before you're dead.
| Quote: | I find the pagan god/desses to be
attractive, but somewhat mentally disturbed, and that rubs off on me
it should be mentioned. I need a goat. |
|
|
| |
|
| Back to top |
Guest
|
| Posted: Thu Jun 12, 2008 10:18 pm Post subject: Re: Limits of Theistic Abilities, Echo, Fake Conversations |
|
|
On 11 Jun 2008 07:41:24 GMT, nocTifer <yronwode.com@nagasiva> wrote:
| Quote: | Thom:
The first thing theists try to say when they talk to a non-believe is
that there are MORE ways of proving god exists that an "atheist" can
think of.
dh@.:
I've never known a theist to say there is any way to prove it,
this is false. I have myself explained how it might be done.
you forget too fast.
and certainly don't know of any examples of them trying to
do it.
again false. perhaps your short-term memory is shot.
You have no idea, and haven't even begun to think about
the possibilities in a realistic way.
'realistic'? not sure what that means, but your notions
of possibilities seem fatuous, and based on your own
inherited doctrines (what you 'were told').
|
No one ever told me to believe God might not
even be aware that this planet exists, but I consider
the possibility none the less.
| Quote: | To feel so certain that no intelligent beings have
had any influence on the development of life on
any planets in the universe
obviously that isn't true. cf. husbandry.
cf. eugenics. you're outside of your league.
|
Agreed, but apparently I can't help it if no one
else can think about this stuff in a realistic way.
You can't, so you won't. |
|
| |
|
| Back to top |
Guest
|
| Posted: Thu Jun 12, 2008 10:19 pm Post subject: Re: God Possibilities a Fiction of Theistic Minds |
|
|
On Tue, 10 Jun 2008 11:00:59 GMT, jesucristo2@netscape.net (marques de sade) wrote:
| Quote: | On Mon, 09 Jun 2008 22:46:32 -0100, dh@. wrote:
On Fri, 06 Jun 2008 06:53:59 GMT, jesucristo2@netscape.net (marques de sade) wrote:
On Mon, 26 May 2008 13:12:10 -0100, dh@. wrote:
God would have to be an alien.
illegal?
Can you think of any way he could be illegal?
if he tried pulling that mohammed sex with a minor this day in age
he might have legal problems...
|
You should try to think about older women sometimes and
forget about sex with little kids...well...imo you damn sure should
try to. |
|
| |
|
| Back to top |
Guest
|
| Posted: Thu Jun 12, 2008 10:21 pm Post subject: Re: I SEE A CONNECTION BETWEEN RELIGION AND PEDOPHILIA--don' |
|
|
On Tue, 10 Jun 2008 11:03:29 GMT, jesucristo2@netscape.net (marques de sade) wrote:
| Quote: | On Mon, 09 Jun 2008 21:59:02 -0500, Free Lunch
lunch@nofreelunch.us> wrote:
On Mon, 09 Jun 2008 22:49:15 -0100, dh@. wrote in alt.atheism:
On Thu, 05 Jun 2008 21:16:32 GMT, jesucristo2@netscape.net (marques de sade) wrote:
On Thu, 05 Jun 2008 15:06:13 -0100, dh@. wrote:
It doesn't mean they're encouraging people to do
whatever they want
that's exactly what it means... with jesus, sins are erased... do
you understand?
Unless you can show where some faiths are encouraging
child abuse, we are left with no reason to believe that any do.
Leviticus 20
13 "`If a man lies with a man as one lies with a woman, both of them have
done what is detestable. They must be put to death; their blood will be
on their own heads.
Also from that chapter:
9 " 'If anyone curses his father or mother, he must be put to death. He
has cursed his father or his mother, and his blood will be on his own
head.
18 " 'If a man lies with a woman during her monthly period and has
sexual relations with her, he has exposed the source of her flow, and
she has also uncovered it. Both of them must be cut off from their
people.
25 " 'You must therefore make a distinction between clean and unclean
animals and between unclean and clean birds. Do not defile yourselves by
any animal or bird or anything that moves along the ground—those which I
have set apart as unclean for you. 26 You are to be holy to me [c]
because I, the LORD, am holy, and I have set you apart from the nations
to be my own.
27 " 'A man or woman who is a medium or spiritist among you must be put
to death. You are to stone them; their blood will be on their own
heads.' "
bla bla, old covenant, erased by jesus... jesus = new covenant...
2 commandments: love god and love your neighbor... period.
|
Still no evidence of religion encouraging child abuse. |
|
| |
|
| Back to top |
Guest
|
| Posted: Thu Jun 12, 2008 10:21 pm Post subject: Re: 'Right Interpretation' = Knowledge |
|
|
On Tue, 10 Jun 2008 10:57:30 GMT, jesucristo2@netscape.net (marques de sade) wrote:
| Quote: | On Mon, 09 Jun 2008 22:48:57 -0100, dh@. wrote:
You're just wishing for something you can't have.
that's usually the definition of wishing...
|
What do you think would happen if you got it? |
|
| |
|
| Back to top |
marques de sade
Guest
|
| Posted: Fri Jun 13, 2008 4:36 am Post subject: Re: God Possibilities a Fiction of Theistic Minds |
|
|
On Thu, 12 Jun 2008 16:19:53 -0100, dh@. wrote:
| Quote: | On Tue, 10 Jun 2008 11:00:59 GMT, jesucristo2@netscape.net (marques de sade) wrote:
On Mon, 09 Jun 2008 22:46:32 -0100, dh@. wrote:
On Fri, 06 Jun 2008 06:53:59 GMT, jesucristo2@netscape.net (marques de sade) wrote:
On Mon, 26 May 2008 13:12:10 -0100, dh@. wrote:
God would have to be an alien.
illegal?
Can you think of any way he could be illegal?
if he tried pulling that mohammed sex with a minor this day in age
he might have legal problems...
You should try to think about older women sometimes and
forget about sex with little kids...well...imo you damn sure should
try to.
|
i'll think about whatever i want and say whatever i want...
--
`We come now to the idea of the Gaeia Universe, where the whole of the Universe would be a single living entity of which all mankind is barely an organelle. But unlike the organisms of Earth, the elements of the Universe, energy and matter, are not connected by the bloody and battering interaction of consumption that we experience on Earth, but by the same forces of physics and mechanics which govern the aforementioned astronomical principles. The concept of pantheism proposes an additional connection, one of an overarching divine presence. In this divinity, mind and matter are one, and all things in the Universe are evenly connected'' --B.D. Abramson |
|
| |
|
| Back to top |
marques de sade
Guest
|
| Posted: Fri Jun 13, 2008 4:38 am Post subject: Re: Belief's Role in Perception/Learning (was Re: Tabula Ras |
|
|
On Thu, 12 Jun 2008 09:43:41 -0700, "Tom"
<dantPAYATTENTIONomel@comcast.net> wrote:
| Quote: |
"marques de sade" <jesucristo2@netscape.net> wrote in message
news:48512fbf.223654669@news.sysmatrix.net...
On Wed, 11 Jun 2008 18:40:26 -0700, "Tom"
dantPAYATTENTIONomel@comcast.net> wrote:
"marques de sade" <jesucristo2@netscape.net> wrote in message
news:485050e2.166593625@news.sysmatrix.net...
On Wed, 11 Jun 2008 11:52:33 -0700, "Tom"
dantPAYATTENTIONomel@comcast.net> wrote:
how many of those philosophical or social systems have a 54 year
old having sex with a 9 year old as the main legend...
An important one, to be sure, but as to whether it's the "main" legend
or
not,
muhammed is the central legend in islam...
You really don't know much about Islam.
it's still pedophilia in my book... main legend or not...
Of course it's pedophilia in *your* book. Their book is not your book. And
that's pretty much all you know about their book.
|
and of course YOU would come to their defense...
--
`We come now to the idea of the Gaeia Universe, where the whole of the Universe would be a single living entity of which all mankind is barely an organelle. But unlike the organisms of Earth, the elements of the Universe, energy and matter, are not connected by the bloody and battering interaction of consumption that we experience on Earth, but by the same forces of physics and mechanics which govern the aforementioned astronomical principles. The concept of pantheism proposes an additional connection, one of an overarching divine presence. In this divinity, mind and matter are one, and all things in the Universe are evenly connected'' --B.D. Abramson |
|
| |
|
| Back to top |
marques de sade
Guest
|
| Posted: Fri Jun 13, 2008 4:43 am Post subject: Re: Belief's Role in Perception/Learning (was Re: Tabula Ras |
|
|
On Thu, 12 Jun 2008 16:15:36 -0100, dh@. wrote:
| Quote: | And you LIKE the beast...
i accept that we are beasts... yes...
You changed the subject.
|
you already know that i'm going to do that, so why do you act as
if you're surprised.
| Quote: | You like the beast,
|
crowley? yeah... he's OK...
| Quote: | yet also want to disbelieve,
|
since i want to use your terminology for the sake of
communicating, OK, you're right...
| Quote: | and probably would
be afraid to trust him
|
trust the beast? i have no reason to distrust him... do you have
one?
| Quote: | even though you have
such a thing for him. If he exists, it appears that
he's got you the way he wants you to be.
|
you're getting mixed up... who are we talking about?
--
`We come now to the idea of the Gaeia Universe, where the whole of the Universe would be a single living entity of which all mankind is barely an organelle. But unlike the organisms of Earth, the elements of the Universe, energy and matter, are not connected by the bloody and battering interaction of consumption that we experience on Earth, but by the same forces of physics and mechanics which govern the aforementioned astronomical principles. The concept of pantheism proposes an additional connection, one of an overarching divine presence. In this divinity, mind and matter are one, and all things in the Universe are evenly connected'' --B.D. Abramson |
|
| |
|
| Back to top |
marques de sade
Guest
|
| Posted: Fri Jun 13, 2008 5:06 am Post subject: Re: 'Right Interpretation' = Knowledge |
|
|
On Thu, 12 Jun 2008 16:21:34 -0100, dh@. wrote:
| Quote: | On Tue, 10 Jun 2008 10:57:30 GMT, jesucristo2@netscape.net (marques de sade) wrote:
On Mon, 09 Jun 2008 22:48:57 -0100, dh@. wrote:
You're just wishing for something you can't have.
that's usually the definition of wishing...
What do you think would happen if you got it?
|
then i couldn't wish it any more...
--
`We come now to the idea of the Gaeia Universe, where the whole of the Universe would be a single living entity of which all mankind is barely an organelle. But unlike the organisms of Earth, the elements of the Universe, energy and matter, are not connected by the bloody and battering interaction of consumption that we experience on Earth, but by the same forces of physics and mechanics which govern the aforementioned astronomical principles. The concept of pantheism proposes an additional connection, one of an overarching divine presence. In this divinity, mind and matter are one, and all things in the Universe are evenly connected'' --B.D. Abramson |
|
| |
|
| Back to top |
nocTifer
Guest
|
| Posted: Fri Jun 13, 2008 7:47 am Post subject: Re: Belief's Role in Perception/Learning (was Re: Tabula Ras |
|
|
| Quote: | "nocTifer" <yronwode.com@nagasiva> wrote in message
conventional criticism of forgiveness mechanisms in
Christian religion allowing for amorality in its
participants.
|
"Tom" <dantPAYATTENTIONomel@comcast.net>:
| Quote: | Similarly, there is "conventional criticism" of atheism "allowing for
amorality in its participants". In fact, people who indulge in
"conventional criticism" of virtually every philosophy, social system, or
religion other than their own always say that the other one "allows for
amorality in its participants".
|
completely agreed. it is often simplistic and confrontational.
thanks for the commentary.
nocTifer
--------------------------------------------
yronwode.com@nagasiva ----------------------
-- http://www.luckymojo.com/nagasiva.html --
-- http://www.yronwode.com/sivaworld.html --
-------------------------------------------- |
|
| |
|
| Back to top |
nocTifer
Guest
|
| Posted: Fri Jun 13, 2008 8:18 am Post subject: Re: Belief's Role in Perception/Learning (was Re: Tabula Ras |
|
|
jesucristo2@netscape.net (marques de sade):
| Quote: | nocTifer <yronwode.com@nagasiva>:
Joseph Littleshoes <jpstifel@isp.com>:
marques de sade wrote:
dh@. wrote:
not somehow, by believing in jesus and having him be judged in
your place -- that's the grandness of god's love for you.
(this is the christian claim, not mine...)
forgiveness unending.
you tell a pedo that just believe in jesus and he's going to
heaven, guess what that encourages...
that is the criticism of the RC forgiveness machine, yes,
that it encourages a lack of responsibility because at
the end of every day one may once again be 'cleansed'.
well, in protestanism it should be an ongoing thing... you are
either in a state of grace or not, and most of them think they are
''in'' grace... and all their actions being guided by the holy
spirit... but satan lurks in the shadows... watch out...
|
yes, ready to trip them up. be ever vigilant.
| Quote: | ...without that dark anti-element, their philosophy would
lack action and adventure. what's the point of doing
something that's easy. it has to be hard! ...
|
it generates love and kindness, virtues before the God.
| Quote: | ...typical newsgroup tabloid, knee jerk reasoning.
conventional criticism of forgiveness mechanisms in
Christian religion allowing for amorality in its
participants.
the more they sin, the more grace abounds...
|
usually it is the more people repent the more grace abounds.
nocTifer
--------------------------------------------
yronwode.com@nagasiva ----------------------
-- http://www.luckymojo.com/nagasiva.html --
-- http://www.yronwode.com/sivaworld.html --
-------------------------------------------- |
|
| |
|
| Back to top |
Rupert
Guest
|
| Posted: Wed Aug 20, 2008 1:03 am Post subject: Re: Being And Time by Martin Heidegger |
|
|
On Aug 20, 12:16 am, dh@. wrote:
| Quote: | On Mon, 18 Aug 2008, Goo wrote:
dh asked:
On Sun, 17 Aug 2008 14:00:51 -0700 (PDT), Wanda Tinasky <wandatina...@comcast.net> wrote:
. . .
the last element before the text "not-for-mail" is 6f2e25e0. That is
Goo Fuckwit David Harrison's unique posting ID with BellSouth. It is
the same in the "Dutch" forgery as in all of Goo Fuckwit David
Harrison's other shitty posts. "
Nice to see you admitting you're a liar;
LOL! How did you just happen across that?
You have never even heard of Martin Heidegger.
She's trying to equate the experiment I made on you/"Dutch"/"Derek"
which involved a slight degree of dishonesty, with Howard Levey's lifetime
of lying and his attempts to get millions/billions of people damned to Hell
if there is one, Goo.
How do you think she just happened across the experimental post
in a news group she never participates in, Goo? The mystery will most
likely never be explained, meaning we will be left to guess for ourselves.
|
Most likely she was stalking you via your Google Groups profile. |
|
| |
|
| Back to top |
Guest
|
| Posted: Wed Aug 20, 2008 9:24 pm Post subject: Re: The influence of "pre-existence"?¿? |
|
|
On Tue, 19 Aug 2008 19:02:30 +0100, "Flower of romance" <nevermore@flower.com> wrote:
| Quote: |
"marques de sade" <jesucristo2@netscape.net> wrote in message
news:4874d39b.10381233@news.sysmatrix.net...
On Wed, 09 Jul 2008 10:44:06 -0100, David <dh@.> wrote:
On Thu, 3 Jul 2008 17:30:20 -0700 (PDT), "Mr. Smartypants"
shrubkiller@excite.com> wrote:
On Jul 4, 4:45 am, Goo wrote:
Goo - Fuckwit David Harrison, fat pig-fucker and moronic cracker - lied
and presented no challenge:
On Tue, 01 Jul 2008, Goo wrote:
Goo - Fuckwit David Harrison, fat pig-fucker and moronic cracker -
lied and presented no challenge:
You have never even indicated that you can comprehend
my view of animals
I comprehend it in all its idiotic wrongness, Goo, and I have fully
explained
the wrongness of it. It depends on "pre-existence", Goo - Goo: fits
you
like a glove - and it is utter bullshit. You do not understand
animals, Goo.
You only understand a weird, Southern Baptist, anthropomorphic and
WRONG view
of animals.
You're stupid, Goo - a stupid cracker.
LOL! You have never indicated that you can,
Of course I have "indicated" that, Goo, you stupid pig-fucking cracker.
I "indicated" it by *doing* it, you moron.
When did you do that? How come no one saw it?
And most curiously: Why can't he produce any example(s) of
him doing it? All he can produce is examples of him lying about
it...not refuting it or even trying...just lying. As yet he has never,
in all these years, even acknowledged what I believe. If he ever
does, only then can he begin the what I consider to be futile
task of trying to refute it. Maybe the Goober has enough sense
to know he can't refute it either, and maybe that's why he's never
going to make the attempt.
who cares... shut the fuck up, all of you...
There you have it, boys and girls. Proof of what happens when you throw a
collective of people into the mix.
|
Goo is opposed to anything that suggests some options could
be ethically equivalent or superior to the objective to eliminate
all domestic animals, which hides beneath the gross mi$nomer
of "animal rights". Since I point out that providing decent lives
for them by providing decent animal welfare might be better
than preventing domestic animals from living, Goo and his fellow
eliminationists feel they have to oppose anything that threatens
the idea that the elimimation objective is the most ethical approach
that humans can take. Anything that encourages appreciation for
some livestock having lives of positive value is a direct enemy of
advocates of the misnomer. |
|
| |
|
| Back to top |
|
