I can understand protesting fox hunting, but to partake in eating the same breed of dog that the Queen fancies?
Yes, it garners media-attention to the issue, but you are fighting savagery with savagery. You are as barbaric as they are.
I understand the creature was previously deceased, but we don’t eat dog in civilized culture!
Yoko Ono took a bite too. Bunch’a savages in this town.
(Source)
How individuals interact with others can be revealing of sexual appetites and “promiscuity.” Supposedly, those who are overtly friendly or antagonistic have far more partners.
A bizarre quote from the article:
Patrick Markey says it’s particularly interesting that warm people tend to be promiscuous, because in some ways, it conflicts with the moral thinking that promiscuity is bad.
Warm, friendly ppl participating in an activity thereby makes it good?
Personally, I question who quantified and defined “promiscuity” for this study, their basis for comparison.
(Source)
This part particularly strikes me:
The essence of a lie implies in fact that the liar actually is in complete possession of the truth which he is hiding. A man does not lie about what he is ignorant of; he does not lie when he spreads an error of which he himself is the dupe; he does not lie when he is mistaken.
from Being and Nothingness by Jean-Paul Sartre.
It clarifies the mechanics of deceit. Applications are limitless.
The ancient coelacanth fish was thought to have died out with the dinosaurs, a 4-foot, 110-pound fish… yet one was found ALIVE in Indonesia.
WTF do they do? They don’t release it, but keep it to ensure death. It lived 17 hours after being caught, instead of the 2 marine biologists would anticipate, further adding to how fucking amazing this very fish was.
Why would you snuff a rare creature? Surely more can be learned while it’s alive. It will eventually die, then you can study it more in depth.
However, in this case, I get the impression that it was more of a novelty, caught by a regular fisherman.
(Source)
Carter offered his harshest assessment for the White House’s Office of Faith-Based and Community Initiatives, which helped religious charities receive $2.15 billion in federal grants in fiscal year 2005 alone.
“The policy from the White House has been to allocate funds to religious institutions, even those that channel those funds exclusively to their own particular group of believers in a particular religion. Those things in my opinion are quite disturbing,” Carter said. “As a traditional Baptist, I’ve always believed in separation of church and state and honored that premise when I was president, and so have all other presidents, I might say, except this one.”
(Source) - Free signup required
The Bush administration’s response? To call Carter irrelevant. (Source)
This statement, from the jackass-in-chief’s ranch, is what’s irrelevant. How about an explanation, some answers, instead of a deflection?
I hardly think Carter’s irrelevant, when he is nobly combatting malaria and river blindness in Ethiopia. He’s contributing to the planet more than he destroys, which can’t be said for everyone. (Source)
Continuation of a prior post, here are some of the lesser known consequences, all broken down into succinct bulletpoints for those with limited attention spans.
How are we really affected?
Source: Di Silvestro, Roger. “GLOBAL WARMING: COMING TO YOUR BACKYARD?.” National Wildlife 45.2 ([2007]): 14-17. Academic Search Premier. 11 February 2007. http ://search.ebscohost.com.
You are currently browsing the archives for the Ethics category.
