On Jul 12, 5:52 am, Rudy Canoza > wrote:
> Back in the excellent thread "Karen Winter, impenitent
> schismatic and bird diddler", rupie declared himself a
> deontologist in his approach to 'ar', specifically
> denying being a utilitarian. That means he professes a
> belief in 'ar'.

I wrote to Derek:

"No, I do not. I hold that in an ideal society, we would inflict no
more
harm on nonhuman animals than we must to survive. Inflicting any more
harm would violate a constraint. Unfortunately, those constraints are
currently being violated. But the constraint on me as an individual
living in this society is only that I make every reasonable effort to
avoid financially supporting it, not every possible effort. And
considerations of good which I could otherwise achieve is relevant to
what counts as a reasonable effort. All deontologists hold that
sometimes consequences are relevant. Since I hold that there are
constraints on how we can pursue the good, I am a deontologist. If I
were a utilitarian I would hold that there are no constraints."

Apparently by your definition this passage means I profess a belief in
AR. Okay, fine.