Commenting on his rules I said, "The second is mere personal opinion and runs counter to a huge amount of what is considered furry. Many furs do not insist on bipedalism, and I doubt any taur fans would grant that point, though a mental shift is usually present."
Immediately on introducing that idea I was against it.
Near the end of the essay I said, "Most furs would accept human intelligence as sufficient, but this is only one trait. Crossaffliction cited a human-like body, but having a tail is not enough to make something furry." and, "To qualify, the characteristics must have a significant impact. Human intelligence has such an impact on an animal; adding a tail to a human does not. "
How much more explicit could I be?
"If all mankind minus one, were of one opinion, and only one person were of the contrary opinion, mankind would be no more justified in silencing that one person, than he, if he had the power, would be justified in silencing mankind."
~John Stuart Mill~
Commenting on his rules I said, "The second is mere personal opinion and runs counter to a huge amount of what is considered furry. Many furs do not insist on bipedalism, and I doubt any taur fans would grant that point, though a mental shift is usually present."
Immediately on introducing that idea I was against it.
Near the end of the essay I said, "Most furs would accept human intelligence as sufficient, but this is only one trait. Crossaffliction cited a human-like body, but having a tail is not enough to make something furry." and, "To qualify, the characteristics must have a significant impact. Human intelligence has such an impact on an animal; adding a tail to a human does not. "
How much more explicit could I be?
"If all mankind minus one, were of one opinion, and only one person were of the contrary opinion, mankind would be no more justified in silencing that one person, than he, if he had the power, would be justified in silencing mankind."
~John Stuart Mill~