Race/Breed/Species-variant differentiation

[Nevver]

Originally posted by Dr Tiny
((Rubi-Ka will be a poorer place without such creatures ))

Will be a poorer place? Will??? What's that supposed to mean!?!?!?
Nevver gets worked up into a paranoid frenzy like only an Omni can!

[UwensBack]

Originally posted by Vixentrox
You say some critters are extinct in some areas, but I have noticed that hyper evolution has taken place with localized versions of "super beasts" being guarded and served by their lesser bretheren. It seems some species are THRIVING and improving, not degrading at all. One can assume that these "super beasts" will spread their enhanced genes through their lesser mates and improve the species as a whole.

Forget the Nevzilla, the EVIL LEET is a MUCH bigger threat and skewed radiation created super monster! Standing a mighty 24 cm with glowing red eyes and PSYCHIC POWERS! MUHUHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAH! I'd say the evil leet have the ability to shoot mind bullets, but I'd get sued

[Praecautus]

Originally posted by Nevver
Will be a poorer place? Will??? What's that supposed to mean!?!?!?
Nevver gets worked up into a paranoid frenzy like only an Omni can!

If we have no Nevzilla, bestridingRubi-Ka like an 8 foot tall collusus, then Rubi-Ka just isnt the place it should be!

[Vashtiklorna]

First I want to say that for the most part, I appreciate Nelida's post, and the distinction she makes between creation and ownership. I also appreciate your articulate, though unfocused, response.

I'd to respond to several other quips.

Originally posted by Nelida
Animal ownership has been common since the dawn of man. Humans have bred and owned animals as far back as history goes.

During the "dawn of man" however, humans had very different relationships with companion animals. Prehistoric humans were less seperated from their natural environment and depended on other animals as partners. Only with post-agricultural cultures do we find the idea of ownership in the sense of "having sovereignty over." The history of human society in relation to their natural environment has been one of increased alienation, assumed superiority, leading to exploitation of the worlds natural resource base.

Originally posted by Nelida
I think this entire arguement is silly...

As for the questionn of 'superiority' I consider that just as silly....

Sorry but once again this 'superiority' thing is a silly and meaningless arguement.

But it is not silly to the rest of us, whose lives it effects disproportionately. Dismissing dialogue not only shows a position of priviledge (so priviledge in fact, that it doesn't affect you) but also a rooted disrespect and carelessness for those you're dismissing as 'silly.'

Perhaps you didn't consciously mean to be dismissive or disrespectful, but your languages reveals your fundamental assumptions. That an answer is obvious to you could mean that you're not seeing something those within the conflict see, that your understanding is incomplete.

Even if you're view is well thought-out, it is still disrespectful and disharmonizing to immediately rule out a line of discourse.