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