|
Understanding through Discussion |
|
|
Register | Sign In |
|
QuickSearch
| EvC Forum active members: 64 (9164 total) |
|
| |
| ChatGPT | |
| Total: 916,840 Year: 4,097/9,624 Month: 968/974 Week: 295/286 Day: 16/40 Hour: 0/1 |
| Thread ▼ Details |
|
|
| Author | Topic: When does killing an animal constitute murder? | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
New Cat's Eye Inactive Member |
But (and correct me if I'm wrong) under no jurisdiction is the slaughter of a gorilla legally considered murder. Animal cruelty perhaps, but nowhere near as serious as the killing of another human. Why is this? Simple: They ain't us.  Even vampires know this:
quote:
Considering how gorillas share nearly all of our DNA, and their intelligence and level of self-awareness rival our own, why do we consider cruelty to gorillas to fall under the same legal category as cruelty to cows? Laws take time to catch up... I think there are activists out there for apes to be better protected by law than, say, cows.
Or to look at it from an evolutionary perspective: If someone were to go back 50,000 years and kill a cro-magnon, any jury would find him just as guilty of murder as if he'd have killed a contemporary. But suppose he went back 100,000 years, or 500,000, or 1,000,000 years? Or 6,000,000 years? At what point should he be tried for "animal cruelty" instead of murder? If they're ancestors then they *is* us.
So I guess my question is: Given that all life is related and that the traits that we consider "human" are shared by many other animals to varying degrees, Do you believe there is a sharp moral distinction between the killing of one subset of animals and all other animals, and where do you place it? No, not really. I could draw lots of lines though... and I think they'd sorta follow the nested hierarchy. I could put a line between other apes and animals, between other primates and other animals, between other mammals and other animals, between other vertibrates and other animals, etc. I don't find much of a moral distinction there though.
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
New Cat's Eye Inactive Member |
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
New Cat's Eye Inactive Member |
It's a safe measure. Not everyone needs it to be safe; the net's only there for if you fall.  That's just stupid. The point is that people *are* falling and they don't need the net, so it seems that the net isn't doing anything at all!
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
New Cat's Eye Inactive Member |
Huh? How are those scientists falling? They're torturing animals.
Are they killing babies in their cribs? Do they beat their wives; wait at bus stops and snipe off random people? Its not coincidence that that is what crash was asking you
They aren't falling at all; that is why they ignore the net. "Falling" is torturing animals, the net is there to keep them from "beating their wives"... it not being needed is the point you've missed.
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
New Cat's Eye Inactive Member |
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
New Cat's Eye Inactive Member |
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
New Cat's Eye Inactive Member
|
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
New Cat's Eye Inactive Member |
In the Science Fiction world you may run across the acronym HILF, which stands for Highly Intelligent Life Form. What do they call a Minimally Intelligent Life Form?
Edited by Catholic Scientist, : No reason given.
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
|
Do Nothing Button
Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved
™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024
(1)
