Originally Posted by Mellowicious
Quote
I didn't write the obvious because it was ... obvious.

Quote
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.

[quote]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.

For those who may be confused, the second 'quote' is a paraphrase of what I wrote. The flaw in it need not be pointed out because -- well -- because it is so obvious.:-)

Yours,
Issodhos

"When all has been said that can be said, and all has been done that can be done, there will be poetry";-) -- Issodhos