On 1 May 2021 20:12:18 GMT, Tim Streater
wrote:

On 01 May 2021 at 19:10:55 BST, The Natural Philosopher
wrote:

On 01/05/2021 13:42, NY wrote:
"T i m" wrote in message
...
we only have to think of the animal suffering and we would rather just go
without. The problem is the assumption that we had the right to any of
this stuff in the first place and we didn't

This is the problem I have with veganism: the fact that you (and other
vegans) would rather go without than compromise animal suffering. For
me, the needs/desires of humans comes first. If those can be satisfied
without compromising animals, so much the better.

The problem I have is that he starts off by assuming something as
nebulous and ill defined as 'right' actually exists.

The he compounds it by implying its a universal quality, not just a
human thing.

It's pure Marxist ********.
Star off by assuming an absolute moral position that is entirely
unsupported by dialectical materialism, which is allegedly what Marxism
espouses, and go on to 'prove' a load of socialist spaff...

Neither humans nor animals have any rights at all. Let's start from there.

Yes, it's funny eh?

You have a very strange sense of humour.

Long article in the Times Magazine today about the Chinese
behaviour regarding the Uighur minority.

Yup, being 'looked into' by all sorts of people.

Not something that luvvies bother
much about, though.

I don't know about you but people *are* very much looking at the
Uighur issue, along with loads of other human on human stuff.

But funnily enough (or not etc), the Uighur are within China as
voiceless as most the livestock around the world ...

Cheers, T i m