Subject:
|
Re: Why is AIDS such a big deal?
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.off-topic.debate
|
Date:
|
Thu, 25 May 2000 17:27:18 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
2911 times
|
| |
|
|
In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Eric Joslin writes:
> In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Christopher L. Weeks writes:
>
> > To put my stance in perspective, and I
> > expect the vast majority of you to disagree, I don't feel that there is any
> > moral difference between testing drugs on Negros or homosexuals (or any other
> > group) and testing drugs on monkeys or cats.
>
> Does this mean that if you contracted a life-threatening illness, you would
> refuse any treatment that in large part resulted from animal testing?
>
> If not, why not?
Further, he must by definition be either a full vegetarian or a full
cannibal, at least in principle.
Dave!
|
|
Message has 1 Reply:
 | | Re: Why is AIDS such a big deal?
|
| (...) other (...) I don't think so. By my above statements: I could be a full cannibal - but I'd also have to think that eating other animals was OK, just not as tasty. Or I could eat anything that I wanted to - people, veggies, beef, whatever - (...) (26 years ago, 26-May-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
Message is in Reply To:
228 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
|
|
|
|
