'Ethical veganism is 'philosophical belief'

[Nearly Sane]

Fair point - but my previous post addressed a different point of yours:

'... and I don't really see why any beliefs should necessarily have more protection than others'.
Protection, if it is to be there, should protect the believer, not the belief.

I don't see those as substantially different points, just the second time I was more absolute in order to emphasise that I am saying that it is the privileging of any beliefs that I take issue with it.


In one sense it is obviously the believer that is protected but only if the belief itself passes certain tests. The tests for the believer are harder to evaluate.

[ProfessorDavey]

I don't see those as substantially different points, just the second time I was more absolute in order to emphasise that I am saying that it is the privileging of any beliefs that I take issue with it.

There is a big difference between, on the one hand, considering it inappropriate to protect any beliefs (or believers) and on the other to debating the attributes of beliefs (or believers) that should and should not afford protection. The latter implies that some beliefs (or believers) should be protected, which is entirely inconsistent with the former.

[Nearly Sane]

There is a big difference between, on the one hand, considering it inappropriate to protect any beliefs (or believers) and on the other to debating the attributes of beliefs (or believers) that should and should not afford protection. The latter implies that some beliefs (or believers) should be protected, which is entirely inconsistent with the former.

Yes there is, but my entire position is that it is inappropriate so when I wrote:

'and I don't really see why any beliefs should necessarily have more protection than others',

I was stating that I don't think any beliefs should be protected in this way.

[ProfessorDavey]

Yes there is, but my entire position is that it is inappropriate so when I wrote:

'and I don't really see why any beliefs should necessarily have more protection than others',

I was stating that I don't think any beliefs should be protected in this way.

Then why didn't you simply say that you don't think any beliefs should have protection - and actually why start the thread in the first place as its entire premise is about whether ethical veganism fulfils the criteria of a philosophical belief to allow it protection.

[ProfessorDavey]

I was stating that I don't think any beliefs should be protected in this way.

Except you haven't - you do seem a tad confused on this NS.

In response to Udayana's statement:

'Why should people be discriminated against because they hold a particular opinion?'

You replied:

'I don't think they should but the belief has to qualify as a 'philosophical' one and that seems an issue as it is building in discrimination.'

So you don't think they should be discriminated because of holding a particular opinion -qv they should have protection due to their beliefs.

Yet later you claim no-one should be protected on the basis of their beliefs. You can't have both, either there is no protection, and therefore you allow discrimination or they should not be discriminated against due to their beliefs and therefore there needs to be protection.