Re: If life is a benefit...

On Sun, 30 Nov 2003 18:18:15 GMT, Jonathan Ball <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

>[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
>> On Sat, 29 Nov 2003 18:01:58 GMT, ipse dixit <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> 
>> If life is a benefit, then it's logically certain that
>> no life [ie never existing at all] is a loss. 
>
>Right.  That's what Fuckwit, née David Harrison, 
>believes.  It's what he MUST believe; 

    We know it's not what I believe. It's what you "ARAs"
want people to believe concerning the fact that many
farm animals benefit from farming, because you're 
desperate to prevent the fact from becoming more
accepted. That of course is because it could have a
negative influence on your hopes of ethically doing
away with domestic animals.

>he has no choice, 
>if he is to be logically consistent.  It explains this 
>quote from Fuckwit:
>
>        Yes, it is the unborn animals that will be
>        born if nothing prevents that from happening,
>        that would experience the loss if their lives
>        are prevented.
>        Fuckwit - 08/01/2000