Ajax wrote on Jun 27
th, 2017 at 7:06pm:
Your a sick puppy, people like you should be banned from adopting children.
I hope that rhino tears you a new arsehole.
Will you ask the rhino for consent.....?
OHHHhhhhh thats very clever, you assumed I was talking about having sex with the rhino or you. Bravo, great wordplay. I was of course, talking about the choice between keeping one alive or the other, but hey.
Quote:Nope, never read it. But, in the interest of my amusement, I took a gander (see what I did there) at what the insane conservative idiots over at the quadrant had to say about it.
Quote:Many descriptions could be applied to the Greens, but none seems more accurate than Jack Mundey’s own description of “ecological Marxism”, which sums up the two core beliefs of the Greens. First, the environment or the ecology is to be placed before all else. This is spelt out in the first principle in the Greens Global Charter, to which the Australian Greens are subscribers: “We acknowledge that human beings are part of the natural world and we respect the specific values of all forms of life, including non-human species.”
Yep that seems about right. If the environment is buggered, then we as a species are buggered. Just wait a couple of decades and you will see. Thanks to the boomers smacking everything up, ecological disaster is unfolding before us.
Quote:Second, the Greens are Marxist in their philosophy, and display the same totalitarian tendencies of all previous forms of Marxism as a political movement. By totalitarian, I mean the subordination of the individual in the impulse to rid society of all elements that, in the eyes of the adherent, mar its perfection.
This is just patently wrong. The greens celebrate diversity more than any other party. Would you like me to post the image of the LNP when they were being sworn in? oldwhitedudeswithtokenfemales.jpg isnt exactly celebrating diversity there, is it champ?
Quote:Let me expand. According to the Greens’ ideology, human dignity is neither inherent nor absolute, but relative.
I have seen humans behave in a very undignified manner, on these very forums. Assuming that human dignity is absolute and inherent seems to be pretty foolish when you can look around and see for yourself that its not. Course, you arent that big on things like evidence and facts, are you?
Quote: Humans are only one species amongst others. As Brown and Singer write: “We hold that the dominant ethic is indefensible because it focuses only on human beings and on human beings who are living now, leaving out the interests of others who are not of our species, or not of our generation.”
Are they trying to say that humans are the only species worth thinking about? Its plain as day that the older generation could not give one iota of a poo about anyone other than themselves. If they did, we wouldnt be in the situation that we are in right now. But we are, they dont, and the previous statement is true.
Quote:Peter Singer expands these notions in his other works on animal liberation. He charges that humans are guilty of “speciesism”, that is, preferring their own species over all others. It leads him to argue in favour of infanticide and doctor-assisted suicide on one hand; and bestiality on the other, provided there is mutual consent!
Again, this is all correct. Heres a clue for the clueless, animals are incapable of giving informed consent, hence, bestiality is still bad. You might want to read that sentence a couple of times so it sinks in, what with you being one of the clueless.
Quote:For the Greens, a pristine global environment represents earthly perfection. It underpins their “ecological wisdom”[41] and is at the core of the new ethic.[42] It is to be protected and promoted at all costs.
Yes, I agree.
Quote: Hence, all old growth forests are to be locked up;[43] logging is to be prohibited;
Actually, the greens are all for logging in new growth forests. Old growth forests take centuries to form (thats why they are called old) and are some amazingly complex systems where if you upset the balance there will be unforseen consequences. Plus they are a massive carbon sink and we need that more then ever.
there was more but im running out of characters. Honestly, the article is full of outright lies, falsehoods, equivocations and an ideological bent that shows a desperation of knowing you are wrong but having swallowed too much of the koolaid to back out now.