Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: kattracks; dighton
"He defined speciesism as the belief that being a member of a certain species "makes you superior to any other being that is not a member of that species."

AND ...

"...why humans should not be able to eat animals when animals eat other animals, Singer acknowledged that humans have to be held to a different standard. "Animals generally are not making moral choices. Animals are not the same as humans. They can't reflect on what they are doing and think about the alternatives. Humans can. So there is no reason for taking what they do as a sort of moral lesson for us to take. We're the ones who have to have the responsibility for making those choices..."

Okay, now, maybe someone much smarter .. or more able to decypher spin .. can explain to me how these two statements could both be true.

If we're not superior to animals, then how can we be expected to be held to a higher standard.

If we ARE superior to animals, that answers all of the questions raised by this nitwit, categorically.

19 posted on 07/01/2002 5:49:19 AM PDT by BlueLancer
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]


To: BlueLancer
Singer is an idiot, and boy am I hungry for a good hamburger!;)
93 posted on 07/01/2002 9:26:26 AM PDT by Frank_2001
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson