Non-human animals have no moral worth. Only humans have rights.
Would that mean that, for example, torturing animals for fun would be morally acceptable?
It's undesirable, but it's morally acceptable.
17 comments
"it's morally acceptable"
Your morals aren't much, then, pizzabear.
"Only humans have rights."
And corporations.
"It's undesirable, but it's morally acceptable. "
Says the member of the psychopath party.
No, it's not. Only sick, demented people torture animals for fun. You know, like serial killers, who often have a history of torturing animals.
A number of international conventions give rights to animals, as beings with the potential for sentience and as beings capable of sensations and feelings.
It is not morally acceptable to enjoy or tolerate the suffering of creatures that can feel pain for no other reason than "I don't care".
Being human is not a license for being a dick to the rest of the living creatures.
While I don't think animals should have the same rights as humans (due to being intrinsically different in psychology and all that) they should still have some rights. After all they are still sentient and able to have emotions and feelings. Just because they aren't sapient like us does not mean they aren't deserving of basic compassion.
I mean, I believe that as the superior lifeform on this planet, it's our responsibility to care for the others. Even if it's only to make sure the ecosystem we stand at the top of doesn't collapse beneath us.
I could go on and on about this topic, but I'm going to keep it to just this.
Also torturing animals for fun is something only sadistic psychopaths would do, and no sane person would consider it morally acceptable. So good to know how you identify, you sick fuck.
morality by blatant assertion. even a two-year-old knows better than to accept such "reasoning".
it's possible, in theory, that non-human animals have indeed no moral worth; but if so, this position wants supporting arguments. quite a few of them. get to it.
i'll have to second #2022526; i would have thought the equivocation between "sentience" and "sapience" was a mistake made chiefly in vernacular English, and that anybody writing for a professional journal would not elide the distinction so carelessly, but that article proved me wrong. very sloppy work, i am not impressed.
that said, pretty much all animals ARE sentient beings, in the strict technical sense of "sentience"; they're capable of sensing the world around them and putting this sensory input to some practical use. they also, generally, sense internal and subjective emotions, or at least that's the easiest explanation for a number of observed behavior patterns on their behalf. a number of ethicists have used this as basis for an argument that animals should have at least some rights, most famously Singer; it may or may not be a good argument, but it certainly can not be blatantly ignored.
Stay far, far away from my cat, you worthless sadistic asswipe.
Also, since animals are incapable of discerning what is moral behavior from what is not, it falls upon those who are to determine what that means . You, me, every other person. Causing an innocent creature needless pain or death is not only undesirable it is absolutely and without question morally unacceptable.
What the fuck is wrong with you?
Humans have rights because we gave them to ourselves, something animals aren't capable of (at least as far as we know). And what is moral worth? If I use Kants categorial imperative, I can imagine a world in which it is a natural law to kill or torture animals just because. Since this would lead to human extinction after a while (since we are dependent on a functioning ecosystem and are VERY successfull in driving other species to extinction as has been shown in the past) it can't be ethical to kill animals for no apparent reason. Therefore they should at least have the right not to be killed for no practical reason. And that's just the start, we can deduce (and at least in some countries did so already) that animals actually should have quite a few rights too. But it is our responsibility to actually give those to them.
Confused?
So were we! You can find all of this, and more, on Fundies Say the Darndest Things!
To post a comment, you'll need to Sign in or Register . Making an account also allows you to claim credit for submitting quotes, and to vote on quotes and comments. You don't even need to give us your email address.
