In article , Grunff
wrote:
John Cartmell wrote:

Check back at my objection which was to someone killing rats 'because
they were rats' without any reference to 'adverse impact'. Also note that
the species with greatest 'adverse impact' on everything and everyone
else is H. sapiens; unless you provide a much better argument you are
justifying general slaughter of all of us. I'd object to that! ;-)

???

I'm talking about an adverse impact on my own existence - not on the
planet as a whole (the latter can take care of itself just fine, and
doesn't need anyone's help).

But are you distinguishing between rats that inconvenience you and rats that
just happen to be passing? Are you even distinguishing between rats that
inconvenience you and something that happens to dine on that rat after you
have poisoned it? Humans are far more vermin-like than any other creature
unless we use special pleading arguments, so on the 'rats are better off dead'
or 'kill vermin' philosophy we should all have our necks on the line.

--
John Cartmell john@ followed by finnybank.com 0845 006 8822
Qercus magazine FAX +44 (0)8700-519-527 www.finnybank.com
Qercus - the best guide to RISC OS computing