View Single Post
  #20 (permalink)   Report Post  
Posted to alt.animals.ethics.vegetarian,alt.food.vegan
dh@.
 
Posts: n/a
Default Would you like to be eaten?

On Sun, 25 Dec 2005 01:38:45 GMT, "Dutch" > wrote:

>
>"Martin Willett" > wrote
>> ant and dec wrote:

>
>>> But not much respect for the pig?

>>
>> If we didn't eat the pigs they would never exist at all. As long as most
>> of their life is happy and content it must surely better to live and die
>> than not to.
>>
>> Of course I know there's a qualifier in that statement. I put it there, so
>> don't bother pointing it out.

>
>I really like your posts Martin, I agree with everything you have said up to
>now, but


Now he has suggested that something could be ethically equivalent
or superior to the elimination of domestic animals, so of course YOU/"ARAs"
are getting another dose of cognitive dissonance.

>that is a fallacy. You cannot compare living and dying to *not*
>living, since never being born, never existing is not a real state. This is
>called "The Logic of the Larder"


Other than YOU/"ARAs", who else calls considering farm animals' lives
The Logic of the Larder? Of course when I see Logic of the Larder, I
understand what you're really referring to is your hero Salt's Logic of the
Fantastic "AR" Talking Pig, and nothing else. I also understand that there
are no such pigs, and most likely never will be. There are billions of farm
animals' lives to consider however, for those of us able to consider them.

>and there is one fruitcake here who has
>already replied to you who makes it his life's work to promote this idea.


It's just something I've been doing because I hate the mental restrictions
YOU/"ARAs" would impose on everyone if you could, but I doubt that
I've made even half as many posts promoting consideration of the
animals' lives as YOU/"ARAs" have made opposing the suggestion.
Goo alone has probably made far more than twice as many posts
opposing the suggestion as I've made encouraging it.

>http://www.animal-rights-library.com/texts-c/salt02.pdf
>There, in brief, is the key to the whole matter.
>The fallacy lies in the confusion of thought which attempts to
>compare existence with non-existence. A person who is already in existence
>may feel that he
>would rather have lived than not, but he must first have the terra firma of
>existence to argue
>from; the moment he begins to argue as if from the abyss of the
>non-existent, he talks
>nonsense,


You pasted the fact that:
__________________________________________________ _______
From: "Dutch" >
Message-ID: >

The method of husbandry determines whether or not the life
has positive or negative value to the animal.
ŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻ ŻŻŻŻŻŻŻ
even though you continue to prove it's something you can't
understand.

>by predicating good or evil, happiness or unhappiness, of that of
>which we can
>predicate nothing.
>
>When, therefore, we talk of "bringing a being," as we vaguely express it,
>"into the world," we


Could consider Christmas...well...some of us can and others can
not.

>cannot claim from that being any gratitude for our action, or drive a
>bargain with him,

__________________________________________________ _______
From: "Dutch" >
Message-ID: >

Hear that ****wit? The pig says . . .
ŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻ ŻŻŻŻŻŻŻ
>and a very shabby one,


I've been asking for years what YOU/"ARAs" have to offer that
is better, and what it would be better for. So far the best you've been
able to say is that it would be or could be better for mice, frogs and
ground hogs if we eliminate all livestock. Is it really my fault if I can't
see any ethical superiority in that because YOU/"ARAs" are totally
incapable of explaining it? The superiority is not obvious, which even
you should be able to understand if only because of your complete
inability to explain how it would be. What YOU/"ARAs" need to
explain is why it would be superior to make the huge CHANGE of
eliminating ALL livestock for the supposed benefit of mice, frogs and
ground hogs, and whatever else is dinging around inside your hollow
skull.

>on that account; nor can our duties to him be evaded by any
>such quibble, in
>which the wish is so obviously father to the thought. Nor, in this
>connection, is it necessary to
>enter on the question of ante-natal existence, because, if such existence
>there be, we have no
>reason for assuming that it is less happy than the present existence;


Which always brings us back to wondering why you pasted the fact
that life could have positive value to animals, when you obviously can't
understand the fact much less consider it to be signifant in regards to
human influence on animals. And also brings up the question of why
you pasted this when you obviously can't consider it to be signifant in
regards to human influence on animals.
__________________________________________________ _______
From: "apostate" >
Date: Mon, 25 Feb 2002 03:04:25 GMT

Wild animals on average suffer more than farm animals, I think that's
obvious.
ŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻ ŻŻŻŻŻŻŻ
>and
>thus equally the
>argument falls to the ground. It is absurd to compare a supposed
>preexistence, or non-
>existence, with actual individual life as known to us here. All reasoning
>based on such
>comparison must necessarily be false, and will lead to grotesque
>conclusions.


YOU/"ARAs" promote grotesque ideas imo, like:
__________________________________________________ _______
From: "Dutch" >
Message-ID: >

Life does not justify death
ŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻ ŻŻŻŻŻŻŻ
__________________________________________________ _______
From: "Dutch" >
Message-ID: >

Taking moral credit for a livestock animal's very existence is analagous to
taking moral credit for the life of a daughter you sell onto the streets.
ŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻ ŻŻŻŻŻŻŻ
You >
"Hear that ****wit? The pig says, if you are set on killing me for my flesh,
then so be it, just spare me the self-serving bullshit."

The pig doesn't know, and you couldn't explain anything to him
about it if you tried. That dishonest grotesquery is self serving
to YOU/"ARAs" apparently, and it is most obviously bullshit.