2002 22:51:21 -0800
From: radtimes [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Animal rights - Huntingdon quits LSE
Animal rights - Huntingdon quits LSE
http://www.planetark.org/dailynewsstory.cfm/newsid/14253/story.htm
Story by Mark Potter
REUTERS NEWS SERVICE
UK: January 28, 2002
LONDON - The British
Animal rights group denounces Japan tiger trade
TOKYO (Reuters) - With the world tiger population dwindling toward
extinction, Japanese traditional medicine shops continue to cash in on
potions using parts of the rare animals, an environmental group said
Wednesday. According to a survey
I didnt say that Christians are the ONLY ones that use animal
research--but since they are the MAJORITY in this country and in
Marguerites country--YES they do ultimately claim the responsibility for
the funding and use of animal research. They also are the ones that
usually are hypocritical by
Good going Marguerite! Action against this desire on behalf of so-called
Christians to elevate mankind through animal research is OK in my book!
What makes these people feel they have a right to do that--is it EVIL?!?
Does anyone see the irony in it all?
Bertina
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Dear Amanda,
I love plants--all plants from trees to mosses--and I'm curious
what reply you would make to my questions: Given that human beings must
eat to live, is it any less wrong/destructive/immoral/etc. to eat plants
than to eat animals? Are animals inherently more deserving than
I've been lurking for months, Glynis, you hit on a question I've struggled
with a lot in the past year. I was a vegetarian for 10 years, vegan for
about half that, but the closer I got to really studying and understanding
and worshipping all of life the more I realized that my distinction
I think it was Kant (philosopher) who did not believe animals had rights
and argued against such belief, but he argued that since the animal was
owned by a human being that it would be a violation of the human owners
rights to disrespect his/her pet.
It would have been his pet then. A similar
Thanks to Amanda for giving us something exciting to think about!
- What are the connections between ecofeminism and animal rights? Is
ecofeminism inherently in favor of animal rights? Why?
I don't think ecofeminism is INHERENTLY in favor of animal rights, let
alone human rights
reanimal rights
In response to Brian Luke's "... if for some reason we must insist on deriving
our ethics by looking at other animals, why focus on the 20% of animal species
who are predators, rather than the 80% who are vegetarians? Instead of
insisting on the human right to "kill with the
reanimal rights
In response to Brian Luke's "... if for some reason we must insist on deriving
our ethics by looking at other animals, why focus on the 20% of animal species
who are predators, rather than the 80% who are vegetarians? Instead of
insisting on the human right to "kill with the
On Tuesday, 27 Sept. 1994, Gene Hunn wrote:
We recognize the pig's pain because it is expressed in ways very similar
to our own way of expressing pain; plants may feel pain, say as the
chainsaw rips into their cambium layers... or as their fruits (plant
fetuses?) are plucked from their
Those who oppose eating meat or any
animal products seem to be motivated by a certain revulsion at taking the
life of an animal. However, what of the plants? Is there a clear moral
distinction between parasitizing animals to sustain our life and
parasitizing plants?
Three points:
Brian Luke writes:
1) For most of us there is a undeniable moral difference between
killing a carrot and killing a pig;
2) If one is concerned about plants, it is apparently possible in many
ecological niches to feed oneself without killing anything, plant or
animal.
pig. Why is that? Is it
Brian,
ok...here is that thread from AR-Talk.
Those who oppose eating meat or any
animal products seem to be motivated by a certain revulsion at taking the
life of an animal. However, what of the plants? Is there a clear moral
distinction between parasitizing animals to sustain our life
H.C.
There are a few people out there who are fruititarians - that is, they eat
nothing that requires the killing of anything. I don't know a whole lot of
foods that they can eat (other than fruits - which if picked very carefully off
of the tree or vine doesn't kill anything, it's more like
Brian et al.,
The difference between a pig and a carrot is in part due to the fact that
we judge the pig more like us and therefore more deserving of moral
consideration as a sort of quasi-human. But where does one draw the
line? At fowl, fish, crabs, clams... eggs, milk... ? As for a way
dear HC ELLIS:
could you please clarify whether or not you were saying this tongue in
cheek (for what purpose i still dont understand) or because you are an
ignorant pompass condescending paternalistic idiot you sound like?? and
another question, why are you on this list? i think your
On Mon, 26 Sep 1994 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
A Modest Proposal
For those who want to live without destroying anything, plant or animal,
because all living things have rights, I suggest eating only what
doesn't have rights, is not "alive" and is completely expendable for the sake
The difference between a pig and a carrot is in part due to the fact that
we judge the pig more like us and therefore more deserving of moral
consideration as a sort of quasi-human.
When a pig thrashes around in pain, and I react against it, I'm not
thinking "oh, this is horrible
May I ask the resident vegetarians how they feel about the fact that cats
not only eat meat, they seem to take great pleasure in torturing their
prey? If animals do it, why shouldn't we?
We're not cats.
Brian Luke
Some posters have brought up the issue of animal rights. I am curious about
what other ecofeminists think about the issue of what to do when the interests
of a species of animals conflicts with the interests of members of the species.
For example, where I live there is a conflict over dear
Hi,
My name is Gene Hunn, dept. of anthro, U of Washington, Seattle and I've
been listening with interest. I'm an environmentalist but also a student
of human subsistence across time space. Humans are not by
physiological adaptation vegetarians, nor carnivores for that matter, but
May I ask the resident vegetarians how they feel about the fact that cats
not only eat meat, they seem to take great pleasure in torturing their
prey? If animals do it, why shouldn't we?
Doug
Doug Henwood [[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Left Business Observer
212-874-4020 (voice)
212-874-3137 (fax)
May I ask the resident vegetarians how they feel about the fact that cats
not only eat meat, they seem to take great pleasure in torturing their
prey? If animals do it, why shouldn't we?
gosh doug, youve always got the million dollar questions on hand!!
this is a can of worms, but i will
24 matches
Mail list logo
