(11-15-2012, 02:21 AM)Occhidiangela Wrote: eppie, your usage of the word "right" is meaningless.
In a survival situation, you eat what you must or you die. Check out Chilean rugby players, if you doubt me. What you don't do is preemptively declare "I would never eat that" and then face that choice.
Unless you are all about non-advantageous survival strategies.
But as usual, you miss the essence of the point, so I'll not waste any more time on you this evening.
Bon appetito
PS: calling a human an animal is usually perceived at the receiving end as an insult.
Think about that before you attempt to form a reply.
Even though it sounds like bon it is written with a 'u'.
My point to kandrathe was that if you try and use science in an argument against abortion (which still seems strange coming from the religious science hating anti-abortion crowd) you need to keep your whole reasoning so objective and scientific. So when you start about heartbeats and neural functions, the same would for sure apply for animals.....so don't then make a subjective choice of regarding humans above animals.
Of course I understand that you will make that subjective choice, but please ditch the scientific talk.
on your ps. What do I have to do with such a statement. I as a natural scientist know a human is an animal.
By the way I am still thinking (as you suggested) what your example of the chilean football team has to do with anything.
By the way; http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-northern-ireland-20321741
sad example from one of the extremist european countries.