Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP Posting-Version: version B 2.10.2 9/18/84; site ccice2.UUCP Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!mhuxr!ihnp4!zehntel!tektronix!decvax!genrad!panda!talcott!harvard!seismo!rochester!ritcv!ccice5!ccice2!cjk From: cjk@ccice2.UUCP (Chris Kreilick) Newsgroups: net.abortion Subject: Re: animal vs human rights, morality Message-ID: <583@ccice2.UUCP> Date: Sat, 2-Feb-85 19:39:46 EST Article-I.D.: ccice2.583 Posted: Sat Feb 2 19:39:46 1985 Date-Received: Sat, 9-Feb-85 06:58:00 EST References: <232@usl.UUCP> <545@mhuxt.UUCP> Organization: CCI Central Engineering, Rochester, NY Lines: 22 > Joseph Arceneaux writes: > > If we should place such a premium on that trait known as intelligence that we > > give moral superiority to our species over the others on our planet, then we > >must also give such MORAL superiority to those of our species who are most in- > > telligent. > You don't have to worry about morals. > The second part of the above statement doesn't follow from the first, and > the author makes absolutely no effort to support it. I've read other comments > along these lines too, like: "Well, if it's conciousness which is important, > what if you're temporarily unconcious. Is it all right to kill you?" or "What > about stupid people, don't they have rights?" > WAKE UP, PEOPLE! We're not talking about according rights in varying > amounts depending on how intelligent people are on some linear scale. The > straw man builders are the only ones who have made statements like that. I use clay. -- Wally Ball