Originally Posted by
Ele
Alright, I'll challenge your moral position.
I'm guessing you're still mad about the abortion thing. Alright, go ahead.
Originally Posted by
Ele
Do pigs give consent to be slaughtered and eaten? Do dogs give consent to being raised in our homes? Do lions give consent to being locked in enclosures?
No, and we don't care. We eat bacon, we keep pets and we visit zoos.
What's with the inclusive pronouns? I care and lots of others do, otherwise animal rights wouldn't be debated so often.
Firstly, pigs being slaughtered is not a necessity, or an act that is seeking a good end. It is purely for pleasure and hyperbolized sustenance.
Viva.org estimates that around 9.8 million pigs were killed in the UK in 2013. That's ridiculous.
Dogs being raised in our homes is an act seeking a good end; we do not ask children for consent when we give them injections. The fact is, children and animals don't know what they want, and require our guidance. What isn't seeking a good end is dogs being bred continuously for money. It is vitally important that we focus on the dogs already here.
As for lions, man has deemed it our responsibility to preserve the species we have almost narrowed down to extinction. Of course, lions cannot give consent, but it can be confidently asserted that their numbers would drop to zero in a matter of years without our protection.
The question of responsibility is fundamental in this debate. If you believe that it is not our responsibility to look after animals, then that is your belief. I believe it's morally imperative.
Originally Posted by
Ele
Why? Because we innately understand that human life is more valuable than other animal life. You wouldn't burst into tears over accidently stepping on an ant, but if you accidently hit a pedestrian with your car you would certainly find yourself deeply emotionally affected.
I recognise the concept of moral categories. Stefan Molyneux did a video on it
here.
Originally Posted by
Ele
Clearly, there's a scale. It's not humans as #1 and all other animals as #2. For various reasons, we value some animals over others. A cute, cuddly cat means a lot more to us than some foul cockroach. Regardless of this scale, however, no other animal is #1. We don't treat other animals like humans or confer human rights to them - That would be ridiculous (fancy going to jail for screwing with the individual liberty of a bug).
You already made this point in your last paragraph, and I'm not arguing against it. Rights are generally given to creatures that can conceptualize our morality and laws, or have the potential too (which would then avoid the exclusion of babies and very small children). Animals generally cannot conceptualize, so I don't believe that they should be given the same rights as us. Going back to moral categories, some deserve more rights than others based on their mental capacity and capabilities. Right now we are deeming it appropriate to kill for pleasure; living beings with the ability to feel pain and emotion.
Originally Posted by
Ele
It's not morally wrong to test products on animals. The researchers and scientists are not some kind of moral monsters for doing what they do.
It's very dangerous to state objective standpoints in morality. We are constantly changing our perception of morality, and we have done for the last century (e.g. giving homosexuals and women equality)... If it's just your opinion that they're not morally wrong for doing what they do, then you're free to that opinion, but you did state it like a fact, which I'm just trying to clarify.
It is my belief that they are wrong on the conditions of whether we believe this to be for a good end. I'm not sure if curing every disease in the world is a good end in the long term, but that's a discussion for another time.
Originally Posted by
Ele
That said, keeping animals in horrible conditions or torturing animals is morally abhorrent. Why? Because inflicting unnecessary suffering on animals isn't moral. I think we could all agree that maximising happiness and minimising suffering are our two main moral imperatives.
Glad you agree, Ele.