Subject:
|
Re: We are what we eat. Or is that "whom we eat?"
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.off-topic.debate
|
Date:
|
Mon, 31 Jul 2000 17:28:56 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
2221 times
|
| |
|
|
In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Christopher L. Weeks writes:
> Your claim was that the 'need' to do something (eat) granted the 'right' to
> do something (kill (almost) anything).
See that sentence above? Read it in its entirety. See the word "right"? See
the word "need"? See how you place them in the same sentence and attribute
them to me?
This is your interpretation (i.e. what you THINK is the case). It is not
accurate. I don't mind it being wrong, but when I have to correct you three
times it gets old.
I see no point in responding to the rest since you base the rest on this
misinterpretation.
DON'T write back saying "but you did talk about needs". THAT'S NOT WHAT YOU
SAID ABOVE!!!!!!! You linked "needs" and "rights" together as what I said.
Bruce
|
|
Message is in Reply To:
149 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
|
|
|
|
