4 ms·

By consent I meant, without duress, which I thought was pretty clear. We can quibble about what represents "true" consent but that's aside the point since it is

By consent I meant, without duress, which I thought was pretty clear. We can quibble about what represents "true" consent but that's aside the point since it is clear that imprisoning and torturing animals is nonconsensual, not in any grey area. In the theory of socialism, consenting to working is illegitimate since the alternative is homelessness. Do you have any actual arguments or just hypothetical slippery slopes? https://www.logicallyfallacious.com/logicalfallacies/Appeal-to-Definition https://www.logicallyfallacious.com/logicalfallacies/Appeal-... https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fallacies_of_definition https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fallacies_of_definition

tsol 4y ago
That's not a slippery slope. I argued that by your logic testing on desperate 3rd workers is more moral than testing on animals.
- goldenkey 4y ago
  That's not really an argument against me, it's one against capitalism, since consent of certain actions is almost always under duress in a capitalistic society. Your argument is more for socialism, and I would agree with you.