On Thu, 01 Feb 2018 11:06:24 -0700, Jibini Kula Tumbili Kujisalimisha
wrote:

Chris L Peterson wrote in
:

On Thu, 1 Feb 2018 12:20:46 -0500, Bill
wrote:

On Thu, 01 Feb 2018 07:31:32 -0700, Chris L Peterson wrote:

I don't believe it makes sense to consider non-sentient
entities as having rights. You need to understand the concept
of rights to have rights.

You need to be able to understand the concept of rights to
appreciate that you have them; but you need not understand the
concept of rights them to have rights. After all, a newly born
infant, or comatose person, does not have the capacity to
understand much of anything - yet they have rights under our
(U.S.) law.

Sure. But I would not call those "rights" (yes, I know the law
does).

Which is to say, you choose to use words differently than anyone
else, and not admit it until called out on it.

I make it clear how I'm using words. This usage is not different from
anyone else. It's a perfectly common usage within moral philosophy.