Gatocamera wrote: Asshole McBiscuitBarlow wrote: I don't think animals should have the same rights as humans, just a right to freedom from excessive cruelty.

Define 'excessive.' And why is that a 'right?'You're such a fucking cunt sometimes I swear to God.

Kalupakki wrote: Gatocamera wrote: Asshole McBiscuitBarlow wrote: I don't think animals should have the same rights as humans, just a right to freedom from excessive cruelty.

Define 'excessive.' And why is that a 'right?'You're such a fucking cunt sometimes I swear to God. If animals are to have rights, there'd damn well better be a reason why.
Oh, and for the record, I may be a dick, but I am not a bleeding, drooling, festering cavity in the underbelly of a woman.

Gatocamera wrote: Kalupakki wrote: Gatocamera wrote: Asshole McBiscuitBarlow wrote: I don't think animals should have the same rights as humans, just a right to freedom from excessive cruelty.

Define 'excessive.' And why is that a 'right?'You're such a fucking cunt sometimes I swear to God. If animals are to have rights, there'd damn well better be a reason why.Because he already made his point and told you that he wasn't particularily good at politics or debating, yet you're still trying to debate him.

Kalupakki wrote: Gatocamera wrote: Kalupakki wrote: Gatocamera wrote: Asshole McBiscuitBarlow wrote: I don't think animals should have the same rights as humans, just a right to freedom from excessive cruelty.

Define 'excessive.' And why is that a 'right?'You're such a fucking cunt sometimes I swear to God. If animals are to have rights, there'd damn well better be a reason why.Because he already made his point and told you that he wasn't particularily good at politics or debating, yet you're still trying to debate him.

He's an intelligent guy. I think this exercise will help him define some of his own beliefs.

Gatocamera wrote: Kalupakki wrote: Gatocamera wrote: Kalupakki wrote: Gatocamera wrote: Asshole McBiscuitBarlow wrote: I don't think animals should have the same rights as humans, just a right to freedom from excessive cruelty.

Define 'excessive.' And why is that a 'right?'You're such a fucking cunt sometimes I swear to God. If animals are to have rights, there'd damn well better be a reason why.Because he already made his point and told you that he wasn't particularily good at politics or debating, yet you're still trying to debate him.

He's an intelligent guy. I think this exercise will help him define some of his own beliefs.You're assuming he wants to play you and Demo's favorite game (endless back-and-forth defining of each other's views, only to agree to disagree 90% of the time), which I'm going to take a wild guess and say he doesn't, since he isn't a regular in the Politics subforum.

Why am I talking about this and arguing with you? Now I've fallen into your trap.

Kalupakki wrote: Gatocamera wrote: Kalupakki wrote: Gatocamera wrote: Kalupakki wrote: Gatocamera wrote: Asshole McBiscuitBarlow wrote: I don't think animals should have the same rights as humans, just a right to freedom from excessive cruelty.

Define 'excessive.' And why is that a 'right?'You're such a fucking cunt sometimes I swear to God. If animals are to have rights, there'd damn well better be a reason why.Because he already made his point and told you that he wasn't particularily good at politics or debating, yet you're still trying to debate him.

He's an intelligent guy. I think this exercise will help him define some of his own beliefs.You're assuming he wants to play you and Demo's favorite game (endless back-and-forth defining of each other's views, only to agree to disagree 90% of the time), which I'm going to take a wild guess and say he doesn't, since he isn't a regular in the Politics subforum.

Why am I talking about this and arguing with you? Now I've fallen into your trap.

Define 'arguing.'

Gatocamera wrote: Kalupakki wrote: Gatocamera wrote: Kalupakki wrote: Gatocamera wrote: Kalupakki wrote: Gatocamera wrote: Asshole McBiscuitBarlow wrote: I don't think animals should have the same rights as humans, just a right to freedom from excessive cruelty.

Define 'excessive.' And why is that a 'right?'You're such a fucking cunt sometimes I swear to God. If animals are to have rights, there'd damn well better be a reason why.Because he already made his point and told you that he wasn't particularily good at politics or debating, yet you're still trying to debate him.

He's an intelligent guy. I think this exercise will help him define some of his own beliefs.You're assuming he wants to play you and Demo's favorite game (endless back-and-forth defining of each other's views, only to agree to disagree 90% of the time), which I'm going to take a wild guess and say he doesn't, since he isn't a regular in the Politics subforum.

Why am I talking about this and arguing with you? Now I've fallen into your trap.

Define 'arguing.' I actually lolled. That was a beautiful, perfectly-executed troll.

'Excercise?'

Let me put it this way: Pure reason in thought is a great ideal; however, and this is the biggest problem I always had with Rand, pure reason tends to make one a cold-hearted bitch. I believe that there is some degree of objective morality. That morality tells me that putting a couple of dogs, driven nuts by mistreatment, in a ring to kill each other for the amusement of some sick bastards is wrong, and anyone who disagrees should have their eyeballs mutilated with icepicks.

Kalupakki wrote: Gatocamera wrote: Kalupakki wrote: Gatocamera wrote: Kalupakki wrote: Gatocamera wrote: Kalupakki wrote: Gatocamera wrote: Asshole McBiscuitBarlow wrote: I don't think animals should have the same rights as humans, just a right to freedom from excessive cruelty.

Define 'excessive.' And why is that a 'right?'You're such a fucking cunt sometimes I swear to God. If animals are to have rights, there'd damn well better be a reason why.Because he already made his point and told you that he wasn't particularily good at politics or debating, yet you're still trying to debate him.

He's an intelligent guy. I think this exercise will help him define some of his own beliefs.You're assuming he wants to play you and Demo's favorite game (endless back-and-forth defining of each other's views, only to agree to disagree 90% of the time), which I'm going to take a wild guess and say he doesn't, since he isn't a regular in the Politics subforum.

Why am I talking about this and arguing with you? Now I've fallen into your trap.

Define 'arguing.' I actually lolled. That was a beautiful, perfectly-executed troll.

What kind of troll would I be if I didn't take that perfect oppurtunity?

Asshole McBiscuitBarlow wrote: 'Excercise?'

Let me put it this way: Pure reason in thought is a great ideal; however, and this is the biggest problem I always had with Rand, pure reason tends to make one a cold-hearted bitch. I believe that there is some degree of objective morality. That morality tells me that putting a couple of dogs, driven nuts by mistreatment, in a ring to kill each other for the amusement of some sick bastards is wrong, and anyone who disagrees should have their eyeballs mutilated with icepicks.

Of course it is wrong. But you must remember that when you're speaking on the level of legality that you're saying all actions of a certain group of people should be regulated to conform to that law. You must realize how enormous any law truly is.

Asshole McBiscuitBarlow wrote: 'Excercise?'

Let me put it this way: Pure reason in thought is a great ideal; however, and this is the biggest problem I always had with Rand, pure reason tends to make one a cold-hearted bitch. I believe that there is some degree of objective morality. That morality tells me that putting a couple of dogs, driven nuts by mistreatment, in a ring to kill each other for the amusement of some sick bastards is wrong, and anyone who disagrees should have their eyeballs mutilated with icepicks.Indeed. Gato should listen to the title track of Rush's Hemispheres and check the lyrics out.

Kalupakki wrote: Asshole McBiscuitBarlow wrote: 'Excercise?'

Let me put it this way: Pure reason in thought is a great ideal; however, and this is the biggest problem I always had with Rand, pure reason tends to make one a cold-hearted bitch. I believe that there is some degree of objective morality. That morality tells me that putting a couple of dogs, driven nuts by mistreatment, in a ring to kill each other for the amusement of some sick bastards is wrong, and anyone who disagrees should have their eyeballs mutilated with icepicks.Indeed. Gato should listen to the title track of Rush's Hemispheres and check the lyrics out.

I have. Love Rush. I always interpreted it to mean reason's application into the individual life, however, versus politics. Politics should ALWAYS be governed by reason, considering that you're regulating the actions of others.

Gatocamera wrote: Kalupakki wrote: Asshole McBiscuitBarlow wrote: 'Excercise?'

Let me put it this way: Pure reason in thought is a great ideal; however, and this is the biggest problem I always had with Rand, pure reason tends to make one a cold-hearted bitch. I believe that there is some degree of objective morality. That morality tells me that putting a couple of dogs, driven nuts by mistreatment, in a ring to kill each other for the amusement of some sick bastards is wrong, and anyone who disagrees should have their eyeballs mutilated with icepicks.Indeed. Gato should listen to the title track of Rush's Hemispheres and check the lyrics out.

I have. Love Rush. I always interpreted it to mean reason's application into the individual life, however, versus politics. Politics should ALWAYS be governed by reason, considering that you're regulating the actions of others.I both agree and disagree with you, because though you're right, it can also be taken way too fucking far.

Kalupakki wrote: Gatocamera wrote: Kalupakki wrote: Asshole McBiscuitBarlow wrote: 'Excercise?'

Let me put it this way: Pure reason in thought is a great ideal; however, and this is the biggest problem I always had with Rand, pure reason tends to make one a cold-hearted bitch. I believe that there is some degree of objective morality. That morality tells me that putting a couple of dogs, driven nuts by mistreatment, in a ring to kill each other for the amusement of some sick bastards is wrong, and anyone who disagrees should have their eyeballs mutilated with icepicks.Indeed. Gato should listen to the title track of Rush's Hemispheres and check the lyrics out.

I have. Love Rush. I always interpreted it to mean reason's application into the individual life, however, versus politics. Politics should ALWAYS be governed by reason, considering that you're regulating the actions of others.I both agree and disagree with you, because though you're right, it can also be taken way too fucking far.

How's that?