An internet oasis of open discussion without personal attacks
system-hater wrote:I don't know whether i should scoff or laugh at this question given its absurdity.
The origin of man tracing back to primordial time periods, is encapsulated by the natural urge to consume meat.
Only the oversocialized retentive, bubble gum blowers that call themselves "animal rights activists" would take such an ansinine standpoint to a preposterous question as this. Need there be anymore that need's to be said on this matter?
cynicallyinsane wrote:Murder is immoral, right?
So, is it immoral to eat animals?
We don't kill them in defense, it's murder. Right?
theSingerNietzsche wrote:OK, I never entered into this with my post nameless but I think either you haven't been succinct enough or you are simply wrong.
Firstly to rephrase clinicallyinsane's comment:
Murder, ceterus parabus, is immoral right?
- almost undeniably it is, so stop being pedantic, you knew what he intimated.
Under your definition of murder,
if I killed a human to eat him or her I would not be committing the crime of murder?
We present sentience as a morally pertinent criterion,
while you simply point to being human. What is it about being human that bestows such basic moral consideration?
Murder is “to kill or slaughter inhumanely or barbarously” [dictionary . com ].
Anyways, I don’t think appealing to the definition of murder suffices to serve either of our causes in this particular argument.
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest