It would also be not quite right, but I've just been told off by Helen for excessive logical nitpicking. 
-
-
I'm not making any sense? If rights can be justified by universally caring (about women kin), then lack of caring
-
(about snakes) would leave snakes with no rights (animal welfare). Which is wrong, thus so it initial argument
-
Obv. History shows us this. We make rights up so they can't exist until humans care enough. Animal rights are new.
-
Indeed and given our emotional need to create rights, we can then think more deeply on how to do it.
-
As we've thought further and reasoned better, we expanded rights in various directions.
-
If we limits ourselves again to our gut feelings, rights will regress.
-
That's why we don't do that.
-
The problem is you seeing a call to emotional bonds as a claim we should be limited to them.
- 11 more replies
New conversation -
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.
