> Why am I talking about food now? I posted your paragraph (to chris) > with starts out with >>I think the flaw in your reasoning is that you > assume if something exists everyone is entitled to it. << KC really > think about what you are saying. Do you really think that if > something exists, naturally on this planet, that people are Not > entitled to it?
That's the point. In the context of my response to Chris, it was clear that my point was, everyone is not entitled to something just because it is. And what I was referring to was modern marvels in medicine. I didn't follow that up with an argument that no one is entitled to anything. I never made such a broad sweeping argument. > The existence of heart transplants is not different from the existence > of plasma TV's, which neither should fall under the category of > entitlement. Good, then we are in agreement. > Go back a million years KC, food existed, why? So that > people could gather it all up and "Capitalize" in it's "Existence"? I > don't think so. The amount of food that existed back then wouldn't have been sufficient to sustain the population we have now. High capacity production of food is not essential for our survival. --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups ""Minds Eye"" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected] To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/Minds-Eye?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
