Animal Slavery

[Rampant.A.I.]

Can you support this? Things like barns and fences and cages obviously indicate that the enclosed animals are not just fine with sticking around.

What did the cow say to you when you asked it where it would like to travel on holiday?

Your stomach I bet.

Besides, doesn't your holy book basically say that animals are here just for us to fuck around with as we see fit?

You know, I've mentioned this twice now, and he just keeps ignoring it...

[Rahul]

Couldn't resist...

[bennyboy]

I don't see any non-anthropocentric and -arbitrary reason why this same standard of preknowledge of suffering shouldn't mean we should not force the existence of those animals.

Funny that you should preface this with "non-anthropocentric," without justification, because by insisting that it be so, you've pretty much made whatever rationale you adopt for your stance an arbitrary one.

X-centrism has often been used to exclude others from moral consideration. Why should I care about black people if I'm from a predominantly white country? Why should I care about women if I'm a man? Why should I care about Jews and gypseys if I'm a Christian?

Well, the people who were once so confident in asserting their X-centric dominance are now hated, exactly because X-centrism isn't sufficient reason to inflict suffering on others.

Is it arbitrary to say that black people should be free? Yes. Is it arbitrary to say that women should be considered equal? Yes. It's all arbitrary. However, given a moral rule that is accepted, it should be extended to all possible parties unless there's a moral reason why they should be excluded.

[My imaginary friend is GOD]

OP = alpha male

Me: *Not reading anything in this thread*

[Heywood]

What did the cow say to you when you asked it where it would like to travel on holiday?

Your stomach I bet.

Besides, doesn't your holy book basically say that animals are here just for us to fuck around with as we see fit?

You know, I've mentioned this twice now, and he just keeps ignoring it...

He should ignore it. This isn't a thread about his holy book.

[Fidel_Castronaut]

You know, I've mentioned this twice now, and he just keeps ignoring it...

He should ignore it. This isn't a thread about his holy book.

Every thread is about his holy book that he posts in.

Can you spell out cherry picking for me please in big, bold, red letters? Thanks.

[Heywood]

He should ignore it. This isn't a thread about his holy book.

Every thread is about his holy book that he posts in.

Can you spell out cherry picking for me please in big, bold, red letters? Thanks.

He ain't quoted it yet.

Also, when I read his argument. I don't think about pets but rather oxen, donkeys, horses, etc......beast of burden type animals.

[BrianSoddingBoru4]

Animals cannot be slaves, because 'slavery' specifically denotes human beings being held as property by other human beings (I think an earlier reply mentioned this, but I'm not sure and can't be arsed to scroll back and look for it).

If non-human organisms are to be classed as slaves, then we shouldn't stop at animals (either pets or agricultural). Why not plants? Clearly, the potted ficus in our sitting room is bemoaning its state of servile bondage. Clearly, it is just a matter of time until this plant, tired of the situation, makes a break for it.

I was digging in the garden a few days back (more enslaved plants, by the way). While I didn't see any, I'm sure that the soil round my house is positively teeming with protists. I've no doubt that at some point, they're going to organize, throw off the shackles which enslave, them, and rise up and demand their freedom from my oppressive tyranny.

C'mon, mate.

Boru

[Fidel_Castronaut]

Every thread is about his holy book that he posts in.

Can you spell out cherry picking for me please in big, bold, red letters? Thanks.

He ain't quoted it yet.

Also, when I read his argument. I don't think about pets but rather oxen, donkeys, horses, etc......beast of burden type animals.

So they've got to quote it before I can point out the inconsistency?

Meh, I think I'll just carry on.

So, John, could you clear up the confusion?

[Little Rik]

We have animal cruelty laws in place to prevent abuses, and in fact organizations in place that will take animals away from abusive owners.

I have to apologize.
As you guys know i always find a bit difficult to understand philosophical
concepts.
Are these ORGANIZATIONS that Esquilax talk about the abattoirs?
I think they are, do they?