From: Tony Belding (tlbelding@htcomp.net)
Date: Mon Apr 27 1998 - 14:21:19 MDT
Hal Finney <hal@rain.org> wrote:
HF> Speaking of "animal rights" lumps all animals together, but in fact
HF> there are many differences among animals. Not all animals eat
HF> others, for example.
I don't see how this relates. I've noticed many of the biggest and baddest
predators tend to be the species admired most by humans. What this says about
us, I don't know.
HF> It also suggests that there are only two cases, animals with full
HF> human rights and animals with none. Actually it would make more
HF> sense to propose that animals should have some rights. Most
HF> states protect animals against cruelty, for example,
As a Libertarian, I would argue such laws exist not because animals are
considered to have "rights", but rather because some humans simply find these
activities unpleasant. It's the same way we get misguided laws against
gambling, prostitution, possession of narcotics, and other victimless crimes.
-- Tony Belding http://hamilton.htcomp.net/tbelding/
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Fri Nov 01 2002 - 14:49:00 MST