View Single Post
  #87 (permalink)   Report Post  
Old 10-09-2006, 10:37 PM posted to alt.animals.ethics.vegetarian,,talk.politics.animals
ontheroad ontheroad is offline
external usenet poster
Join Date: Sep 2006
Posts: 49
Default "collateral included deaths in organic rice production [faq]"

"Glorfindel" wrote in message
rick wrote:


You can identify some differences which hold between most humans and
most nonhumans and claim that they are morally relevant, but there will
always be some humans who don't have these differences from nonhuman

But the main difference still remains. Within each person is the seed of
what being human is.

Which is what? How are you defining "human"? And, as
important, why is it morally relevant?

ROTFLMAO You really need a definition of human. But then, you've already
proven yourself as a hate-filled person
that only likes the fringes of any moral behavior anyway.

No such seed exists in ANY animal.

Depends on what your definition is.

No, it doesn't. No other animal can EVER become what makes a person human.
maybe if you were even close to being a humane person you'd see the
difference, eh killer?

The person you claim now doesn't have the differences from animals has
the potential to achieve those differences.

That is not true for all biological members of the human species.
Pick any characteristic which is morally relevant, and you will
find at least some biological humans who lack it from birth and/or
are completely incapable of developing it. Speciesism is simply
a prejudice, like racism or sexism.

LOL And you have porven to be racist already too, eh fool?
Tell me what other animals can ever exhibit human morality, killer.
That YOU cannot exhibit that morality does not count.