On Jul 22, 6:28=A0am, Dutch <n...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
> dh@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
> > On Thu, 17 Jul 2008 19:29:55 GMT, Dutch <n...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
> >> The Logic of the Larder was defeated in 1914. Many legitimate
argument=
s
> >> exist for the humane use of animals, LoL (aptly) is not one of them.
>
> >>"It is often said, as an excuse for the slaughter of animals, that it
i=
s
> >> better for them to live and to be butchered than not to live at all.
"=
- Salt
>
> > =A0 =A0 Only to people who believe that experiencing a decent life of
> > positive value is better than not experiencing it,
>
> It's an illegitimate argument. The wish is so obviously father to the
> thought...
>
> [..]
>
> > =A0 =A0 There's nothing that you have ever written, said, or
> > thought that tells us how you think pre-existent entities
> > are ruining our lives. So I AGAIN challenge you to try
> > explaining it NOW:
>
> How did you get this confused? "Pre-existent entities" are not ruining
> anything, the concept is postulated as a way to allow the idea "coming
> into existence is a benefit" to make logical sense. Of course common
> sense says that no such entities "exist", therefore coming into
> existence cannot be a benefit.
How do you know they don't "exist"?
|
