Could the 13th Am. prohibit the factory farming of animals?
whoooo26505 at yahoo.com
Tue Aug 8 10:59:25 PDT 2006
... in response to the language argument:
That language is an activity is undeniably true. That all possible references of a word are equal is clearly false. There are archetypes, diffusions and extensions. There is, in short, a cognitive order to the anthropologic references of language. At the outer reach of linguistic reference is the metaphor (called an "extension."). Hence the idea: animals are "slaves." Now, it is true that constitutional poetry has become "law" in the past -- witness the commerce clause and stripping as "speech" -- but it is not true that such constructions are adopted equally with "real" references (ones closer to the archetype). (See my dissertation). Usually, some sort of large social transformation (or political hegemony) accompanies the adoption of poetry into law. One would need to show that the status of animal suffering is of such a political commodity in the larger society so as to warrant the judicial license necessary to turn yet another constitutional word into metaphor. My
own view is that words in the Constitution should only be turned into poetry as a last resort -- a moral necessity.)
MARK STEIN <markstein at prodigy.net> wrote:
In response to Larry and Jon Roland,
Language is as language does. Metaphorical meanings have in the past become real. Which is not to say I expect it to happen here.
Dr. Sean Wilson, Esq.
Penn State University
How low will we go? Check out Yahoo! Messengers low PC-to-Phone call rates.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the Conlawprof