Freethought & Rationalism Archive

Hedwig · 03-23-2002, 07:41 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by spin:
<strong>Hedwig:
-------------
I just stepped out of lurk mode to make a snide comment. I see no reason to defend the fact that I like steak.
-------------

Thanks. I guess you see no reason for anyone to defend the fact that they like raping either.</strong>

Actually, no. They'll go to jail regardless of their defense or lack of it.

spin · 03-23-2002, 07:45 PM

Hedwig,

How many rapes are never recorded? How many rapists are never brought to trial?

People who cause animals to be slaughtered for their appetites are never brought to trial.

spin · 03-23-2002, 07:47 PM

By the way Hedwig,

The big difference between slaughtering an animal for one's appetite and raping a person for one's appetite is the fact that the rape victim usually survives.

tronvillain · 03-23-2002, 07:47 PM

spin:

Quote:

As you don't have anything to measure your moral position against. I don't think you have constructed a moral position at all.

Perhaps I haven't, but then perhaps constructing a moral position amounts to nothing more than rationalization. It seems to me that I have constructed a moral position based on my preferences and the state of the world. What did you do?

Quote:

I have stated my moral position a number of times.

So copy and paste it.

tronvillain · 03-23-2002, 07:49 PM

spin:

Quote:

The big difference between slaughtering an animal for one's appetite and raping a person for one's appetite is the fact that the rape victim usually survives.

So your position is that a woman being raped isn't as bad as a cow being slaughtered? I suspect not many people around here will agree with that position - I find it disgusting myself.

Tom Piper · 03-23-2002, 07:50 PM

Spin,

I would like to know if the following has the proper form (by your lights) of a defence of eating meat. I find the phrasing a bit awkward, but I have tried to model this on your defence of your anti-meat-eating position.

Morality involves the benefit and protection of the most possible beings who are members of species whose members are typically (though not always) capable of making moral assessments. Where conflicts arise morality involves resolving them with the least damage to members of these species.

As eating meat in no way violates morality, there is nothing morally wrong with eating meat, nor with raising animals not members of the described species for food, for research, or for other uses.

The second paragraph could be phrased in the following way: As one has no moral obligations to benefit or protect beings that are not members of the above described species, there is nothing morally wrong with eating meat, or using animals that are not members of the 'morality-capable' species.

Once again, my question at this point is 'Does this defence of meat-eating have the appropriate form for a defence of the sort you have requested?'

Tom

spin · 03-23-2002, 07:51 PM

tronvillain:
---------------
morality is involved in the protection and benefit of sentient lives; where the system fails, morality involves repairing the damage with the least loss of protection and benefit of sentient lives.

spin · 03-23-2002, 07:53 PM

tronvillain:
---------------
So your position is that a woman being raped isn't as bad as a cow being slaughtered? I suspect not many people around here will agree with that position - I find it disgusting myself.
---------------

While I abhore rape, you talk as someone who doesn't belong to a species which is liable to end up on a plate.

tronvillain · 03-23-2002, 07:53 PM

spin:

Quote:

morality is involved in the protection and benefit of sentient lives; where the system fails, morality involves repairing the damage with the least loss of protection and benefit of sentient lives.

I see. How did you "objectively" arive at this position? I see no reason to adopt it myself.

spin · 03-23-2002, 07:54 PM

Incidentally, tronvillain, why do you of all people find it disgusting??

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
Show Printable Version	Search this Thread: Advanced Search

03-23-2002, 07:45 PM	#362
spin Contributor Join Date: Mar 2002 Location: nowhere Posts: 15,747	Hedwig, How many rapes are never recorded? How many rapists are never brought to trial? People who cause animals to be slaughtered for their appetites are never brought to trial.

03-23-2002, 07:47 PM	#363
spin Contributor Join Date: Mar 2002 Location: nowhere Posts: 15,747	By the way Hedwig, The big difference between slaughtering an animal for one's appetite and raping a person for one's appetite is the fact that the rape victim usually survives.

03-23-2002, 07:50 PM	#366
Tom Piper Junior Member Join Date: Feb 2002 Posts: 78	Spin, I would like to know if the following has the proper form (by your lights) of a defence of eating meat. I find the phrasing a bit awkward, but I have tried to model this on your defence of your anti-meat-eating position. Morality involves the benefit and protection of the most possible beings who are members of species whose members are typically (though not always) capable of making moral assessments. Where conflicts arise morality involves resolving them with the least damage to members of these species. As eating meat in no way violates morality, there is nothing morally wrong with eating meat, nor with raising animals not members of the described species for food, for research, or for other uses. The second paragraph could be phrased in the following way: As one has no moral obligations to benefit or protect beings that are not members of the above described species, there is nothing morally wrong with eating meat, or using animals that are not members of the 'morality-capable' species. Once again, my question at this point is 'Does this defence of meat-eating have the appropriate form for a defence of the sort you have requested?' Tom

03-23-2002, 07:51 PM	#367
spin Contributor Join Date: Mar 2002 Location: nowhere Posts: 15,747	tronvillain: --------------- morality is involved in the protection and benefit of sentient lives; where the system fails, morality involves repairing the damage with the least loss of protection and benefit of sentient lives.

03-23-2002, 07:53 PM	#368
spin Contributor Join Date: Mar 2002 Location: nowhere Posts: 15,747	tronvillain: --------------- So your position is that a woman being raped isn't as bad as a cow being slaughtered? I suspect not many people around here will agree with that position - I find it disgusting myself. --------------- While I abhore rape, you talk as someone who doesn't belong to a species which is liable to end up on a plate.

03-23-2002, 07:54 PM	#370
spin Contributor Join Date: Mar 2002 Location: nowhere Posts: 15,747	Incidentally, tronvillain, why do you of all people find it disgusting??

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.