[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [APD] Re: Glowfish Banned-now way OT
"I believe in personal responsibility. We need not be protected against our
will." "OK, but how should we be protected against the will of other people,
especially when their will is to cause great harm to an innocent person?"
What this issue comes down to is this: if you don't like the way it is,
"Yes but if the organizations get too large they become corrupt. Hopefully
their interests align with our own out of coincidence. Overthowing the leaders
of foreign countries of slaughtering innocents is wrong but if it protects us
in the large view, it may be acceptable."
You genuinely believe this? I mean...really? With that logic you can
justify ANYTHING. I mean, I'm frightened that people who think the way you do
actually exist. Who are you/we to say what is the greatest good?
"Agreed, but that doesn't mean they aren't a necessary evil. Have you ever
spent time in an area with little or ineffective law enforcement? I spent
agreat deal of time in Bosnia, and it makes me appreciate the safety I've got far
more than I ever thought I would."
I agree. Law enforcement is excellent. It's really your fault if you were
speeding, not the cop's. You should expect to be held accountable for the law
if you live in a geographical area that is under the jurisdiction thereof.
"I think drugs should be legalized though. There are many benefits. Marketing
organizations and other creative institutions use lots of hallucinogens.
Being a prior dabbler myself in the subject at an earlier age I can tell you that
many computer graphics displays are highly inspired." "You're ignoring his
argument. Maybe drugs should be legalized (something we agree on, at least to a
point), however, they do take over people's lives, and I don't want to have
to worry about someone robbing me to buy smack."
We all know where we stand on this one. :) By the way, I know a few people
who do use smack, and they've been given explicit instructions NOT to rob
people whose homes contain aquariums.
"How do you think all breeds of dogs are created? I certainly want to be able
to do experiments in my own home."
Is it your inherent, unalienable RIGHT to "experiment" and play with genetics
in these glorified glass boxes that we have the gumption to deem
"ecosystems"? Dog breeds and "morphs" of fish are as much genetic abominations as these
Glofish are, as are the numerous Echinodorus cultivars spurting forth from
"labs" in Europe. If you're going to ban Glofish, why stop there? Ban these
mutants we've got swimming around at chain stores and at everyone's LFS. Most of
them aren't even genuine species anyway. Xiphophorus helleri? Think again.
More like Poeciliidae x 'Red Wag Swordtail'. LIFE, the very force that gave
rise to US, should not be trifled and "experimented" with. You are not god; do
not presume to be.
"Just remember though, give them an inch and they take a mile. Absolute power
corrupts absolutely and the more they get the greater the taste they get for
Don't you mean US and WE? I suppose most people think they're above that,
"So what? How does this invalidate the entire concept of existing within a
greater society? Thus, the system of checks and balances was created, and,
while there are a number of problems, I'll take it over the anarchic, highly
libertarian notion of winner-take-all."
Hmm. I think a quote will solve this one:
"Look around you and face it. It's been obvious for a long time. The world
is composed mostly of [idiots]. All kinds of ignorant, dangerous, thoughtless
louts are in positions of power, respect, and influence, while some of the
bravest, most capable and most deserving people you know are forced to waste
their talents slugging it out in a thankless cycle of brainbreaking labor and
mental paralysis. Checks and balances? What a JOKE! There are NONE. To think
the system will improve by itself is a pipe dream."
-- J. R. Dobbs
On the same note, the only people who fear "winner-take-all" situations are
those who cannot compete on a fair playing field.
I suppose what it really amounts to is this. You can apply logic to the
situation, thinking that since humans are inherently natural organisms, any impact
they may or may not have on their immediate/extended environment is by
implication also natural and perfectly justified. ON THE OTHER HAND, you can also
use a little INTELLIGENCE (note: this is separate from LOGIC) and realize that
the sale of a genetically altered PET is the literal and unprovoked rape of
nature itself. My heart goes out to those who genuinely believe that such
behavior is right.
(Angry and sarcastic responses welcome; but rather than sending them to the
APD, send them to me personally.)
Aquatic-Plants mailing list
Aquatic-Plants at actwin_com