Pyrrho

Let me suggest that we be consistent in our thoughts on these matters, and propose that we begin the raising of stupid people for food, soap, and other useful products. (I, of course, do not propose this to vegans who also do not believe in slaughtering animals for leather and other products, as they would automatically be consistent by rejecting this proposal.) After all, what is the difference between humans and other animals? Merely a slight advantage in intelligence, in some cases (or at least humans say this of themselves). We could, for example, give everyone a test, and those who fall below a certain score are then slaughtered for consumption by those who pass the test. (As far as I am concerned, we can use a standard IQ test, and kill everyone who scores 100 or below [which would still leave plenty of idiots alive in the world], but others may wish for a different standard, and I am willing to listen to alternative suggestions.) We also, of course, can keep some of them alive for breeding, for more meat later on (as well as for other products). We would, of course, want to eat them while they are young and tender, which also would mean we would not be so wasteful in feeding them for too many years.

We could also have special reserves kept, in which some stupid people could be released, and we could then hunt them for sport. Could there be any finer trophy than a human head over the mantle?

So, do any of you object to this proposal? If so, why?

If any of you distinguish between humans and other animals based upon something other than intelligence, then, of course, you should let us know, and we may be able to adapt the plan to accommodate your suggestion.

Viti

Pyrrho, animals kill other animals all the time...we are simply at the top of the food chain.

Pyrrho

Are you suggesting that we should use the behavior of other animals as a model for our own? If so, then cannibalism is permissible, so I take it that you have no objections to my proposal. So we are off to a good start for reaching consensus.

mike_decock

Well, we've traced certain diseases to cannibalism (like mad cow disease). We could probably use them for fertilizer or food for other cattle instead.

Using the <100 IQ would be a good start. Perhaps we should include violent criminals to that list?

Other than that, where can I sign your petition?

-Mike...

Pyrrho

We need not let such concerns prevent us from enjoying the consumption of human flesh. They can be tested for disease before consumption, as well as before breeding. Those unfit for consumption could be used for fertilizer, unless, of course, there were something so wrong with them that they would be unfit for that purpose, in which case they would be hazardous waste.

I do, of course, agree that we would need to be careful about such things.

Most, though, of course, not all, violent criminals (who are caught) don't have high IQs, so I think we would take care of most of them anyway. But to apply it to all violent criminals appears to not be consistent with the way we deal with our other sources of meat. After all, we don't merely eat animals that do violent things, so why apply a different standard for humans?

mike_decock

We often hunt and kill animals that harm humans (rabid dogs, man-eating tigers, etc.) although they aren't necessarily killed for consumption.

-Mike...

Viti

So, Pyrrho, if I understand correctly your answer on the poll was "it is wrong to use eat or wear any animal products", so you would be a vegan.

We get your point so you can stop with the stupid strawmen now

Thalia

Perhaps more precisely, Pyrro is pointing out that there is no characteristic, other than being human, that all humans have, that no animals have. This is the basis for the argument Peter Singer makes for his definition of speciesism.

themistocles

Besides, eating other people is not only just creepy, but the meat is a bit too stringy. Not even the magic of worcestire sauce can provide a tasty improvement.

You know, vegan arguments could never account for "taste-factor". There really is no logical counter argument, really.

Viti

What is the criteria for us to not discriminate against non-human life? Do vegans also disagree with the killing of insects, fish, crustaceans, and living plants?