To LUGNET HomepageTo LUGNET News HomepageTo LUGNET Guide Homepage
 Help on Searching
 
Post new message to lugnet.off-topic.debateOpen lugnet.off-topic.debate in your NNTP NewsreaderTo LUGNET News Traffic PageSign In (Members)
 Off-Topic / Debate / 11381
11380  |  11382
Subject: 
Re: Did animals have rights before we invented rights?
Newsgroups: 
lugnet.off-topic.debate
Date: 
Thu, 5 Jul 2001 05:05:47 GMT
Viewed: 
3329 times
  
I've read it.  You are being your normal obfuscating self.

If you can't keep your story straight within a single post, why should we trust
anything you say whatsoever across an entire thread or more?



Scott A wrote:

> Tom,
> try reading the whole thread before you jump in with your one-liners.
> 
> Scott A
> 
> In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Tom Stangl writes:
> > Scott A wrote:
> > 
> > > > > > Don't all morally conscious
> > > > > > creatures pass moral judgement?
> > > > > 
> > > > > By doing so we infer our morals on them - rather conceited I think.
> > > > 
> > > > Ah, so all morality is conceited? If not, please clarify.
> > > 
> > > No, inferring ones own morals on others is. If an individual makes a
> > > donation to a charity they deem worthy - good for them. But it is wrong of
> > > them to pass judgement on me for not doing the same.
> > 
> > So inferring ones own morals on others is conceited, but inferring "your
> > society's" is not?  Why not?
> > 
> > 
> > > > > > If not, then what's the point (read use) of
> > > > > > having a moral judgement? If so, then what standard can we judge against
> > > > > > except our own?
> > > > > 
> > > > > The morals of the societies we live in - not our individual morals.
> > 
> > So soceity is conceited?  If not, why not?  If inferring an individual's morals on
> > another is conceited, why is inferring a society's morals on another NOT
> > conceited?
> > 
> > 
> > > > Can we pass judgement on society?
> > > 
> > > Why not? Some societies are clearly questionable.
> > 
> > Rather conceited, don't you think?
> > 
> > 
> > "I don't thin that word means what you thin it means."
> > 
> > 
> > --
> > Tom Stangl
> > ***http://www.vfaq.com/
> > ***DSM Visual FAQ home
> > ***http://ba.dsm.org/
> > ***SF Bay Area DSMs

--
Tom Stangl
***http://www.vfaq.com/
***DSM Visual FAQ home
***http://ba.dsm.org/
***SF Bay Area DSMs



Message has 1 Reply:
  Re: Did animals have rights before we invented rights?
 
(...) Tom, I can't remember the last time I read a constructive post from you in this group. Scott A (...) (25 years ago, 5-Jul-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Message is in Reply To:
  Re: Did animals have rights before we invented rights?
 
Tom, try reading the whole thread before you jump in with your one-liners. Scott A (...) (25 years ago, 4-Jul-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

244 Messages in This Thread:
(Inline display suppressed due to large size. Click Dots below to view.)
Entire Thread on One Page:
Nested:  All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:  All | Brief | Compact

This Message and its Replies on One Page:
Nested:  All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:  All | Brief | Compact
    

©2005 LUGNET. All rights reserved. - hosted by steinbruch.info GbR