JuiceJones

Members
  • Content Count

    3
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

0 Neutral

About JuiceJones

Previous Fields

  • Full Name
    Slade Sanders
  • Looking or Not Looking
    not looking
  1. Thanks for the welcomes everyone. Not at all. I see how you took that, I phrased it poorly. I simply meant, "Haha, how funny the thought of animal cruelists actually coming to defend themselves! (If there actually are some on OL, I'm surprised.) I originally intended to post concerning 'Backyard Breeders', but followed a long train of thought back to this." Never did I intend to sound like I was meekly backing away and brushing the issue aside. Yes, and I have been thinking about this. I would probably have to say it is less the plight of the animal, and more the perverse intentions and a
  2. Haha, I understand this is a fringe issue and not a rampant problem. I was just getting annoyed reading people vehemently condemn others for accidentally letting their dogs get impregnated and overthought the whole animal rights nonsense back to this fundamental. I probably should have stuck to that for the thread. "The Anti-concept of 'Backyard Breeders'".
  3. As an Objectivist, thoroughly committed to rationality, I, like many, have struggled with formulating an objective justification for laws preventing cruelty to animals. I have failed to find many compelling arguments within the existing discussion, and have questions I do not see posed and would love to ask the Objectivist community. A free society entails being free to make all the choices for the furtherance of our own lives, without having our rights violated or violating the rights of others, as we all know. While this is clearly just and logically defensible in just about every scenario