XPost: alt.animals.ethics.vegetarian, rec.pets.dogs.health, misc.rural   
      
   On Wed, 06 Jul 2005 17:13:21 GMT, Rudy Canoza  wrote:   
      
   >dh@. wrote:   
   >   
   >> On Wed, 06 Jul 2005 14:38:05 GMT, Rudy Canoza  wrote:   
   >>   
   >>   
   >>>Brock Ulfsen wrote:   
   >>>   
   >>>>Rudy Canoza wrote:   
   >>>>   
   >>>>   
   >>>>>It's not disappointment.  You're anthropomorphizing - projecting what   
   >>>>>would be *your* sentiment onto the dog.   
   >>>>   
   >>>>   
   >>>>>It's actually a moral failure to do that, because it cheapens the real   
   >>>>>meaning of human emotions.   
   >>>>   
   >>>>   
   >>>>Why, we're just another animal, quantitatviely but not qualitatively   
   >>>>different to dogs.   
   >>>   
   >>>No, we are vastly qualitatively different from other   
   >>>animals.  You are deeply and reprehensibly morally   
   >>>confused.   
   >>   
   >>   
   >>     This aspect isn't a moral issue Goo.   
   >   
   >Stop using baby talk, Fuckwit.  You stupid fuckwit.   
   >   
   >Yes, it is a moral issue.   
      
       No Goo, it's not one. I will let you prove that now, by   
   showing that you're not able to explain...LOL...exactly   
   why it is a moral issue, before adding it to "The cowardice   
   of Goo".   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)