3 ms·
> Maybe a little extreme but by the same logic we could breed humans for slavery and say that it's OK because they got bred for it. The day an animal can artic
by d0100 8y ago
> Maybe a little extreme but by the same logic we could breed humans for slavery and say that it's OK because they got bred for it.
The day an animal can articulate that, I'll agree with you.
Until then such comparison bears no meaning.
- goodrubyist 8y agoThat's wrong. What matters is the capacity to suffer. There are humans who do not have the mental capacity to articulate such a thing either. I'd highly recommend as it deals with such arguments in greater length. http://lockeanliberal.com/2014/11/02/what-a-conservative-columnists-tweet-tells-us-about-our-approach-to-animal-rights/ http://lockeanliberal.com/2014/11/02/what-a-conservative-col...
- d0100 8y agoSuffering wasn't brought up. Just the comparison of being bred for food vs slavery.
- malloryerik 8y agoSo if I can't speak the language of my torturer, my suffering rightly has no meaning to them?
- option_greek 8y agoWe also don't make everyone who can't speak our language suffer.
- d0100 8y agoHistorically, we do. However, we are able to communicate even if we don't know a specific language.
- maxxxxx 8y ago"The day an animal can articulate that, I'll agree with you." They can if you keep your eyes open just a little.
- spraak 8y agoSo a retarded person would likely not be able to articulate that. Is it ok to murder them, then?