RE: Declawing Cats
July 28, 2019 at 8:11 pm
(This post was last modified: July 28, 2019 at 8:20 pm by Anomalocaris.)
[quote defaultattr='']
arewethereyet pid='1922056' dateline='1564358819']
How is removing a portion of the toes of an animal a matter of aesthetics.
Ear and tail docking are aesthetics but declawing is not.
[/quote]
It is a moral aesthetic. There is no fundamental moral principle that says modifying animals to suit humans is wrong. We breed animals into all sorts of exotic forms which are not conducive to the animal’s comfort or well being. Yet we say our particular squeamishness should trump the equanimity of others where de-clawing cats or bobbing tails of dogs is concerned because we feel strongly about it.
Laws should be based on general principles that can be widely agreed upon, and whose implementation can be persuasively represented as being necessary for greater social good. Law should not become a tool to legislate squeamishness.
arewethereyet pid='1922056' dateline='1564358819']
(July 28, 2019 at 8:03 pm)Anomalocaris Wrote: Because it is purely the imposition of aesthetic opinion.
How is removing a portion of the toes of an animal a matter of aesthetics.
Ear and tail docking are aesthetics but declawing is not.
[/quote]
It is a moral aesthetic. There is no fundamental moral principle that says modifying animals to suit humans is wrong. We breed animals into all sorts of exotic forms which are not conducive to the animal’s comfort or well being. Yet we say our particular squeamishness should trump the equanimity of others where de-clawing cats or bobbing tails of dogs is concerned because we feel strongly about it.
Laws should be based on general principles that can be widely agreed upon, and whose implementation can be persuasively represented as being necessary for greater social good. Law should not become a tool to legislate squeamishness.
