Not true, your statement implies ALL western. Again Nevada the entire state it is legal.

Next WHAT specific moral code or "compass" are you using that dictates that? Are you using a universally accepted "Moral Code?" If so which one SPECIFICALLY.

Next you claim that Prostitution is Immoral by the standard of the West, again implying all of it, yest even the Huffington (http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/03...) post indicates that Prostitution flourishes all across the United States, and many, many other countries accept prostitution as normal and ok, making your argument again false.

You in the latter part of your statement talk about Liberty requiring morality, but again Who's morality, from what source SPECIFICALLY.

Moral, Legal and Ethical are not all mutually inclusive. Especially when Morality is in the eye of the beholder. Hitler believed he was completely moral in his endevour to exterminate the Jews.

Objectivism is not at all complicated and is based on "Rational Self-Interest."

Welcome to my world!

"for future needs of ecosystem stability. In a sustainable population"

this is what my mom said-"farm life is brutal" she would have been 79 on Tuesday. anyway, you are using your prog words and so therefore it went over my head, dear OA :)

wow. this post became something else entirely :) well done there cheerleader :)

just because something is a law does not mean I adhere to it from any sense of morality. wow. much reading you need to do. start with Virtue of Selfishness

wait. woodlema is saying this? I'm almost tempted to make this a best of, wood. :)

Individuals must have a moral basis for their decisions.

oh. you said that much more elegantly than me. thanks

no wait. that's not true. you are conflating two concepts. One is cheating, which is immoral. You take advantage of someone who you have committed to, to wreak that commitment on the side. that is an act of force, because you have impugned the goodwill of our promise. Prostitution is a way for people to get value for value-until they don't. Obviously, if you do not care for your body, it is not in your rational interest. Until you are destitute on the street. what alternatives, A?

Not to drag it on - it's clear you've had enough of this conversation - but just to point it out...

Your statement "I don't know where to start." is the crux of the matter.

One of the great hallmarks of AR's genius is that she WENT where you "don't know where to start." And in her thorough examination of the matter made some very interesting conclusions...
...like prostitution, in and of itself, is not inherently immoral.

It's interesting reading if you ever get around to it.

Thoritsu, et tu? surely you see the value of property rights over "national parks" (esp in Africa-where the leaders have all the money and the animals starve in droughts, etc. Hunting fees are a capitalistic way of preserving wild life. plus-that Cecil would have bit your head off if you wanted to pet him

me too! and I saw that pair in Chicago. freaked me out

"You can deny reality, but you can't deny the consequences of denying reality." AR

This wasn't about Kimmel so much, I posted it show what "men" are becoming in this country. He who cries first gets the attention. He's just so sensitive and caring...and trashes activities he doesn't understand. Knee jerk reaction with ZERO research or interest in the overall picture of trophy hunting.

Oh, we're already on the third page of his play list? Start oinking, it's almost over.

Oh please please please tell us what else we know.

Next he'll attack your intellect and then he'll throw out some strawmen to try and get you off topic, then he'll resort to calling you a pig. (See his 'Jackass' post for his tactical play list.)

Hello khalling,
This particular lion was apparently wearing a tracking collar and being studied. If this was in an effort to sustain the species and keep them off the endangered list that is my only real concern. The collar should have been more visible if they wanted it to be unmolested for further study and the local game commission needed it to sustain the species.. Other than that I have no feelings for this particular beast. I do not believe in domesticating lions. They would just as soon eat your liver as be your buddy.

Now here are some real "Born freers" that have gone off the deep end. http://www.aol.com/article/2015/07/30...
Real moral people that would kill a man for killing a beast...

Personally my only interest is in the continuation of the species for future needs of ecosystem stability. In a sustainable population there is nothing wrong with hunting. In fact it may be necessary to keep the population from killing too many of other species including humans.

I deer hunt annually on private property and sometimes on vast areas of state land. Deer pose less of a threat to humans. Am I too soft?

Respectfully,
O.A.

not interested in getting votes. correct or incorrect is not a popularity issue.
2. FYI, Objectivist ethics apply to any and all rational self aware beings. AR was not referring to featherless bipeds in her use of the term "man". Objectivism stands on it's merits as a philosophical system, on its conformance to reality. Or it falls. If its ethics/politics fails to apply to a thinking self aware entity that is not a member of the biological/genetic group of homo sapiens, it falls - or at least can no longer be considered universal.
3. all of which is largely beside the point. The end focus of Objectivism being to identify a reality conforming metaphysical and epistemological base from which to further identify the guiding principles for maximizing the individuals happiness & success in its life. The life of a rational, self aware, thinking and, yes, caring being.
I can't conceive of any way whatsoever that such psychologically self destructive behaviour as trophy hunting, i.e. the deliberate torture & consequent killing of another conscious being for sport (read "thrills"), can actually enhance any rational being's self esteem and thus its long term happiness. Lots of ways to enhance a social metaphysician's pseudo self esteem - envy shown by drinking buddies', etc. Consequently, I think the condemnation of such behaviour on this forum should be entirely appropriate. Though a further exploration of why, would be perhaps even more appropriate?
4. "Man over nature"?? Curious to know by what process you exclude humans from the universe?
Or do you actually mean "man over all the rest of nature"?? And if so, why? Before responding, please investigate at least some of the recent literature regarding emotion and cognition research being done regarding other species.

You did NOT read what I wrote.

WHOS Morality from what source, and what paradigm?

Immoral can also simply be something illegal. Prostitution is legal in Nevada hence not immoral by those who tax it, or pay for it.

So who's morality and from what source do you say wrong and immoral?

You may be more appropriate to state, "In YOUR opinion and based on your personal morals you believe it is wrong and immoral, therefore YOU would never participate, however others who do not share are certainly free to engage in what they choose as long as they are not "harming another" or forcing someone against their will to perform acts for money."