Debate : Search Results: all rights are property rights


Off-Topic / Debate / Search Results: all rights are property rights

Results 1081 – 1100 of about 12000.

Search took 0.02 CPU seconds.

Messages: Full | Brief | Compact

Sort: Prefer Newer | Prefer Older | Best Match

		Re: Validity testing (was: Did animals have rights before we invented rights?)
(...) No, because I don't know of any boundary conditions where it would hold, contrasted with the many boundary conditions where "don't yell at your kids" is invalid, and the few boundary conditions where "free speech" is invalid. (to your (...) (23 years ago, 5-Jul-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

all, rights
(score: 0.632)

		Re: Validity testing (was: Did animals have rights before we invented rights?)
(...) Just as a quick note, I'm not sure I've given such a definition, other than by example ("I know it when I see it", or so I think). I'm open to someone trying to give one, I suspect it's a thorny problem. (the circular definition "you're self (...) (23 years ago, 5-Jul-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

all, rights
(score: 0.632)

		Re: Validity testing (was: Did animals have rights before we invented rights?)
(...) Well, for one, I tend to be somewhat of a perfectionist when it comes to this kind of thing (philisophical). If I can tell something does break in extremes, I can tell it's not "perfect". And sure, that means (for me) that I accept almost (...) (23 years ago, 5-Jul-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

all, rights
(score: 0.632)

		Re: What has happened to .space?
(...) Nobody "stole" the name of your spacecraft since you do not hold exclusive rights to the name "Galaxy Enforcer" It's especially silly for you to claim ownership of this name, because you admitted that it's a name for a spaceship you haven't (...) (23 years ago, 11-Jul-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

all, rights
(score: 0.632)

		Re: Did animals have rights before we invented rights?
(...) To what end? Your implication seems to be simply that there are bad people. But we all know that. The discussion of what a 'right' actually is, has nothing to do (in my mind, at least) with whether or not certain people respect rights, or even (...) (23 years ago, 2-Jul-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

all, rights
(score: 0.632)

		Re: Did animals have rights before we invented rights?
(...) Why? He's done it before. Why enable him dodging a simple yes no question by urging him to indulge himself rather than urging a straight answer? Besides, I freely admit that I don't always have all the answers nor do I always answer every (...) (23 years ago, 3-Jul-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

all, rights
(score: 0.632)

		Re: Did animals have rights before we invented rights?
(...) I for one would actually like to see you do that. Demonstrate away.... (...) Speaking of language, could you try re-stating that again? That is a very difficult sentence to read - and I wouldn't want to put words in your mouth. (...) Leave it (...) (23 years ago, 3-Jul-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

all, rights
(score: 0.632)

		Re: Did animals have rights before we invented rights?
(...) Ah, excellent. But then see below. (...) (URL) for those (like me) who hate to follow links: Scott: (...) Chris: (...) Scott: (...) So, in that case, perhaps I should ask this: Were you wrong to agree? Or were to agreeing with something else? (...) (23 years ago, 3-Jul-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

all, rights
(score: 0.632)

		Re: Did animals have rights before we invented rights?
(...) I'm not sure what infering our morals on them really means, but I do agree that we are anthropocentric in our judgement of other critters. But I'm not sure a) that this is a bad thing, or b) that it is possible to get away from. How would we (...) (23 years ago, 3-Jul-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

all, rights
(score: 0.632)

		Re: Did animals have rights before we invented rights?
(...) No no, your position on whether animals are moral/immoral OR amoral. Do you think they are moral/immoral or amoral? If your position is in fact the one above then you wouldn't be allowing yourself to even HAVE an opinion on the issue, and yet (...) (23 years ago, 3-Jul-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

all, rights
(score: 0.632)

		Re: What is spam? (was Re: Scary Survey results about the US First Amendment
(...) (sic) (...) Loss of first amendment rights (while the populace cheers on the loss) in the US is a real issue, whether you like it or not. In fact, whether you understand it or not, actually, since you have demonstrated with your slurring (...) (23 years ago, 10-Jul-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

all, rights
(score: 0.632)

		Re: Art Debate Was: [Re: Swearing?]
Matt, (...) Well, going on the UN, and other organizations, like EU, etc. I would hope the US never joins it. (...) This whole rights discussion is pretty funny, Matt. Let's see, if corporations have no rights, than we should not have rights, nor (...) (25 years ago, 12-Jan-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

rights, property
(score: 0.632)

		Re: Did animals have rights before we invented rights?
(...) My aim was to show how western morels have treated these two so differently. One is bought by the west so he can go on trial for murder, the other is given ~3.5 billion dollars in aid per year so that he may continue to murder. At the same (...) (23 years ago, 2-Jul-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

all, rights
(score: 0.632)

		Re: Did animals have rights before we invented rights?
(...) If you mean you avoid the point(1), and I don't - I agree. (...) This sounds almost threatening. You must be pretty thin skinned Larry. Do you keep a little black book of all of those who "no longer have standing" with you, or do you use (...) (23 years ago, 3-Jul-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

all, rights
(score: 0.632)

		Re: 3 Question (was: Did animals have rights before we invented rights?)
(...) You're creating a false dichotomy between a la "it must happen at specific point X, or else it cannot happen at all." This is simply untrue. I would assert that, far from occuring at a single, threshhold point, morality is a system of values (...) (23 years ago, 3-Jul-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

all, rights
(score: 0.632)

		Re: Did animals have rights before we invented rights?
(...) There is nothing amoral about a lion killing a wilder beast with all its might – it is its natural right to do so. A lion will kill its prey as quickly and cleanly as it can – it does not pump it full of antibiotics and growth hormones first. (...) (23 years ago, 2-Jul-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

all, rights
(score: 0.632)

		Re: Did animals have rights before we invented rights?
I'm very confused. Chris: (...) Scott: (...) Larry: (...) Scott: (...) Scott, please clarify. What is your position? Or is it merely whatever Larry is not? (...) Do you not do the same? Don't I? Doesn't Larry? Don't all morally conscious (...) (23 years ago, 2-Jul-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

all, rights
(score: 0.632)

		Re: A question for my Canadian pals
(...) How so? Can you elaborate? What routine things do I expect others to pay for on my behalf? I buy my own stuff. (...) Or the ability of his insurance to pay? (...) You wouldn't hold that person responsible for those costs to the maximum extent (...) (20 years ago, 6-Oct-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

rights
(score: 0.632)

		on topic?
the recent "debate" on animal rights/cruelty is "off-topic". The thread that this debate happens to be in, was originally about sexism in the work place. since someone kindly suggested to another that the "animal" debate should remain "on-topic", I (...) (23 years ago, 8-Jul-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

all, rights
(score: 0.632)

		Re: Did animals have rights before we invented rights?
(...) Evidence? (...) Again, do you have evidence that other animals can't choose? (...) We may be higher on the sliding "moral" scale than most animals, but I don't agree that all other animals are at the bottom (ie totally amoral). I think (...) (23 years ago, 2-Jul-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

all, rights
(score: 0.632)

More: Next Page >>