From: zursch@whizkid.wpd.sgi.com (Jeffrey B. Zurschmeide)
Newsgroups: talk.politics.animals,alt.peeves
Subject: Re: A rat is a pig-headed moron is a ...
Date: 13 Jan 93 01:58:48 GMT
Reply-To: zursch@whizkid.wpd.sgi.com (Jeffrey B. Zurschmeide)
Organization: Silicon Graphics, Inc.

Nicholas Kushmerick whines:
>gee, you two sure have stumbled onto a novel attack on animal rights:
>Plants Have Rights, Too.

Oh hell, Nick, this whole newsgroup is based on dragging people
down into endless "slippery slope" arguments. It's the most 
common thing on the net, except for stupidity and attitude.
If you're going to do the slippery slope trick, you might as well
go all the way...

>I'm going to respond seriously because while you two are apparently beyond
>hope I think this sort of argument is made all the time, and occasionally
>people believe it.

Well, from your frame of reference, I guess I am beyond hope. I'm terminally
amused by the rantings of your ilk. You are doomed forever to a marginal 
place in society's discourse. Face it Nick, you're a looney toon. 

>(1) You are lying when you tell me you believe plans are conscious.

I'm not so sure, and to be truthful, I wouldn't care if they were. Go 
rent Stevie Wonder's "The Secret Life of Plants" and then we'll talk. 

>(2) Even if you did believe that plans are conscious, it wouldn't matter. 
>maybe the name of the game should be "Eliminate All Suffering", but it
>isn't.  The name of the animal rights game is "Reduce Suffering."  So you
>not only need to convince me that plans are conscious, but that they are
>MORE conscious than animals (and therefore capable of suffering more.)

If it weren't for that last sentence, you might have scored a point. This 
business of More or Less conscious and the implied sliding scale of suffering
opens up this wonderful slippery slope that I will now toss you down, like
box of unwanted kittens. 

Why does it matter if plants are more or less conscious than animals? They
turn towards the sun, they grow, they can close vulnerable parts when they 
sense danger....are *you* any wiser than me when you draw the line of
suffering on one side of the Venus Flytrap and not the other? Do you have
the omniscience to say "well, it's not *really* aware of its surroundings and
therefore its suffering is acceptable..."?  What does it matter if they are more
conscious than animals? How about just as conscious, or even slightly less. 
You remind me of those who said that negroes don't feel pain the way others
do, so whipping them is not really cruel... 

If this is really just a value judgement, and you're qualified to say "well, the
goal is to reduce suffering, not eliminate it" - 
then your pomposity is outrageous. And meaningless, since you're 
arguing moral relativism within your moral absolutes. Go retake
Freshman Comp, granola-head, while I go have a steak and rationalize 
it away by saying "well, a cow's not capable of suffering like the 
rest of us"  - As Ted Nugent said, a chicken McNugget don't die any
easier than a baby seal.

Perhaps when you get out of school, you'll end up like the rest of us, who
by and large consider ourselves animal lovers but don't have enough free
time to get ourselves all up in arms thinking that we're violating the dog's
fundamental rights when we whack him on the nose for shitting on the 
living room carpet. 

Jeeeee-sus, kids nowadays....

JZ

p.s. 

   Sorry if there are line length problems. It looks good on this end, but 
   the news posting software here is kind of screwy...