 | | Nature of rights? (was: Did animals have rights before we invented rights?) —Christopher L. Weeks
|
| | | (...) It sounds like you're were going somewhere good and have given up Larry. I assume (hope!) your goal in all this was not to get to the point where you could just tell folks that they don't understand rights. I think there must be common (...) (23 years ago, 2-Jul-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| | | |
| | | | | Re: Nature of rights? (was: Did animals have rights before we invented rights?) —Daniel Jassim
|
| | | | | (...) I would speculate, along with Larry, that animals do not have a system of rights in the same form as humans do. But I don't think we invented the condition of rights as much as they revealed themselves to us through nature. Do you think this (...) (23 years ago, 2-Jul-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| | | | | |
| | | | | | | Re: Nature of rights? (was: Did animals have rights before we invented rights?) —Larry Pieniazek
|
| | | | | | (...) I'd go farther than speculating, I'd assert it, unless someone can prove that some specific animals do reason morally, in which case I'd consider that we might want to consider them as "human" rather than "merely" animal. (a tangential SF (...) (23 years ago, 2-Jul-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | Re: Nature of rights? (was: Did animals have rights before we invented rights?) —Daniel Jassim
|
| | | | | | (...) This is how I feel thus it is true to me. I think the fundemental condition of "right" already existed in nature, as nature is our inspiration for nearly everything else-- art, music, even science. Our arts often try to capture that essence (...) (23 years ago, 3-Jul-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| | | | | | |
| | | | | Re: Nature of rights? (was: Did animals have rights before we invented rights?) —Larry Pieniazek
|
| | | | | (...) Well, yes and no. If you know or can establish that the person you are debating has a fundamentally different view of a basic principle, and has a track record of never changing their mind, it may be that the "best" you can do is get that (...) (23 years ago, 2-Jul-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| | | | | |
| | | | | | | Re: Nature of rights? (was: Did animals have rights before we invented rights?) —Frank Filz
|
| | | | | | (...) I was exploring the idea that perhaps the only fundamental right is the right to an impartial "rights based" mediation of disputes. This does suggest why animals then don't specifically have rights since they don't have the capability to (...) (23 years ago, 2-Jul-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | Re: Nature of rights? (was: Did animals have rights before we invented rights?) —David Eaton
|
| | | | | | | (...) Being the relative moralist that I am, I'll push that one step further and say I don't believe there *are* "natural" or "fundamental" rights. It's a moral definition humans create based on an emotional response. Perhaps, however, there are (...) (23 years ago, 2-Jul-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | Re: Nature of rights? (was: Did animals have rights before we invented rights?) —David Eaton
|
| | | | | | (...) I was off by a bit: "To have a right ... is ... to have something which society ought to defend me in the possession of." And also: "When we call anything a person's right, we mean that he has a valid claim on society to protect him in the (...) (23 years ago, 2-Jul-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| | | | | | |
| | | | | Re: Nature of rights? (was: Did animals have rights before we invented rights?) —Kirby Warden
|
| | | | At this moment I am drinking Mountain Dew; Code Red. I have the ability to drink it and have chosen to do so. The right to drink it is mine, I have given this right to myself. If, this afternoon, I were to learn that the governments of the world (...) (23 years ago, 3-Jul-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| | | | |
| | | | | | Re: Nature of rights? (was: Did animals have rights before we invented rights?) —Christopher L. Weeks
|
| | | | (...) So you really do believe that ability == right. Why even use the word right instead of ability? Ability has no confusing connotations to other members of society, after all. (...) This I won't buy. I just zipped over to dictionary.com to show (...) (23 years ago, 3-Jul-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| | | | |
| | | | | | Re: Nature of rights? (was: Did animals have rights before we invented rights?) —Kirby Warden
|
| | | | (...) No. An ability determines the claim to a right. Back up a few decades for a moment... it would be pure foolishness for me to claim the right of flight as I do not have the ability to fly...now, return to the present... I still do not have the (...) (23 years ago, 4-Jul-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| | | | |
