Debate : 11447


Off-Topic / Debate / 11447	11446 \| 11448

Subject:	Re: Lobster Bisque (was: Did animals have rights before we invented rights?)
Newsgroups:	lugnet.off-topic.debate
Date:	Sat, 7 Jul 2001 13:46:36 GMT
Viewed:	1644 times

Daniel Jassim wrote: > If you didn't make it... > If you didn't buy it... > If it wasn't made or bought and then given to you... > --then-- > It does not belong to you. > > I don't believe in the notion of "finders-keepers." Hmm, since we've been playing with taking interpretations to extremes to see how they work out, a technique which I wholeheartedly endorse... - Can you justify your ownership of anything metal? The metal was "found". - Can you justify your ownership of anything plastic? The petroleum products used to make it were "found". - Can you justify eating anything? Even the vegetables you eat are derrived from something which at one point was "found". - Can you justify breathing? The air you breathe was "found". I conclude that the notion of "finders keepers" is not absolutely flawed. However, we do put limits on it. For example, if you find money on the ground, in theory you are supposed to make an effort to find the owner, or at least make it available for them to claim (the last time I found a $20 bill in the parking lot, I made a trip out of my way to security to turn it in to them to make it available should the owner claim it - I never got around to checking if it had been claimed after the 30 days or whatever they hold such property). You are not allowed to "find" things on other people's property (I have even seen signs on beaches asking you not to take the sand - though they didn't shake you down to make sure you didn't accidentally carry any sand off in your clothers - presumably what they are actually concerned about is folks taking a truckload of sand to fill their kid's sandbox, and may not really care if someone takes home a small jar of sand to remind them of their summer vacation). If you do really believe that "finders keepers" is totally wrong, I'll be happy to make an effort to return your LEGO to it's rightfull place.... :-) :-) :-) :-) -- Frank Filz ----------------------------- Work: mailto:ffilz@us.ibm.com (business only please) Home: mailto:ffilz@mindspring.com

Message has 2 Replies:

		Ownership (was: Lobster Bisque (was: Did animals have rights before we invented rights?))
(...) I've been having a crisis of faith over the past several months and tried to bring it up unsuccessfully once before, but this ties into it. To get to the point, I'm having trouble justifying ownership. The entire notion of ownership actually. (...) (23 years ago, 7-Jul-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

		Re: Lobster Bisque (was: Did animals have rights before we invented rights?)
Frank: Try envisioning the greater ethic behind my statement about ownership and maybe you'll appreciate it more. I think by picking it apart and making it overly technical, you've missed the greater lesson. If you want to disagree with the notion (...) (23 years ago, 7-Jul-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Message is in Reply To:

		Re: Lobster Bisque (was: Did animals have rights before we invented rights?)
(...) I say if you must eat them, at least kill them swiftly before tossing them in the boiling water. Why miss opportunities to be humane? It's good self discipline and shows character, in my opinion. For example, when an old and sick or dying pet (...) (23 years ago, 7-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

Custom Search