Were I a lion, I might say that it's simply a natural step to recognize my people. Your arguments on this one are a direct parallel to those used against the non-white and the female. They worked - for awhile - in those situations; as a rhetorical device , I think perhaps their time is over.
Piffle. Not even a good try, Mellowicious.
Yours,
Issodhos
I didn't write the obvious because it was ... obvious.
The fundamental natural Right of Man is self-ownership -- the ownership of one's person. Without this natural Right, man would exist in one of two states -- ownerless or as the property of another. The same is true of animals. Does an animal have self-ownership? No. And again, it is because animals in general, like the lion, do not and cannot recognize the Right of self-ownership in other animals of their kind. What does this mean for the animal? If it is a domestic animal it is the property of its human owner.
The fundamental natural Right of Man is self-ownership -- the ownership of one's person. Without this natural Right, man would exist in one of two states -- ownerless or as the property of another. The same is true of women. Does a woman have self-ownership? No. And again, it is because women in general do not and cannot recognize the Right of self-ownership in other women. What does this mean for the woman? If it is a wife, it is the property of its male owner.
The argument is just as wrong if you replace the gender with a race. For me, that means the argument is seriously doubtful when applied to any class of being.
As for the Declaration of Independence making no such distinction - it may not a legally binding document, but I've never heard it discounted for that reason before, and that does not negate its effect on this country. The writers may have made no such distiction; the readers most definitely have.
Second, if you have not read it, I'd introduce you to
a Declaration of the Rights of Women?; even the first two paragraphs make a huge difference.
Which is why I'll tell the lioness to get it in writing.
(Edited note: I realize this is not a discussion of women's rights. My point is that if this form of argument stands, then all we have to do re-define the kinds of people we don't like, as animals, and rights are gone. And I don't put it past us, because I believe it's been done before.)
