[Kamehameha34]

Quote by: StrongHeartsWin The case for vegetarianism and animal rights does not solely rest on the "suffering" issue. It rests on the The Principle of Equal Consideration of Interests.

Then pursue that argument.

Then you are discussing what is possible from your view, not what is the reality. I could discuss the possibility of time travel, but until it comes I conduct my life in the constraints of today`s technology.

Animals do not have to suffer in the harvesting process. Adjust the system so they don't, and your objective desires should be met.

I never said it was evidence. Throughout history respected and wise men and their words are often turned to for moral and ethical guidance on how we should endeavor to conduct ourselves. The volumes of words written and spoken by Martin L. King is not evidence either as to how whites and blacks should conduct relations between themselves, but they are there to be guided by, referred to, and quoted on and for ethical and grounds conduct. You need not care about Ghandi`s words anymore than a white supremist need care about MLK`s words. You can accept them or reject them. But, both of those people are widely respected in the world for their moral and ethical strengths and wisdom.

Oh, so if I don't adhere to Ghandi's words, I am equatable to a racist?

Stop correlating everyone who disagrees with you to moral degenerates.

And no, I am not going to let Ghandi make your subjective opinion objective. Martin Luther King, however, fought for the rights of other humans. Humans > Animals.

Equality in form or ability is not a pre-requisite for equal consideration from causing pain and suffering and having concern for interests.

Pain & suffering =/= death. Human rights > Animal rights.

The first statement is objective. The second one, much like the premise for your entire argument, is subjective.

[quote]

Then you had better tell that to law enforcement officers and prosecuters who would prosecute owners for damaging their property. I can take a hack saw and cut my piano up slowly on my front lawn over a few days because I own it and not face prosecution. Should I try that with my dog (even if I gave it anethesia so it would not feel pain) I would be arressted and prosecuted. Clearly the dog has a claim which overrides my right to property. The same could even be said of an ownerlesss dog, e.g. a stray where no porperty rights come into play. Animals have more rights than you seem to be aware of. You had better look a little more into it.

I said an animal's life. Stop equating death to suffering.


DEATH =/= SUFFERING