(August 18, 2012 at 7:05 pm)genkaus Wrote: Unless you have any evidence to show that two human beings with same rights are not equally autonomous, the question has already been answered.
Well that will be easy since people use evolution to justify inequality.
Stephen J. Gould, in Natural History (April 1980, p. 144), said that “Recapitulation [the evolutionary theory which postulates that a developing embryo in its mother’s womb goes through evolutionary stages, such as the fish stage, etc., until it becomes human] provided a convenient focus for the pervasive racism of white scientists; they looked to the activities of their own children for comparison with normal, adult behavior in lower races” (brackets mine). Gould also concludes that the term “mongoloid” became synonymous with mentally defective people because it was believed the Caucasian race was more highly developed than the Mongoloid. Therefore, some thought that a mentally defective child was really a throwback to a previous stage in evolution.
I also want to add:
You're still assuming rights are important to justify rights are important.
Also, evolution doesn't explain why we have autonomy. Being evolved from an accident would mean any actions such as murder, rape, pedophilia would just be the result of the same accident. The pedophile can then get away with "I was born like this" if you disagree then you deny what evolution caused him to do.
It's still you personal moral opinion over someone else.
James Holmes acted consistent with what evolution teaches. He evolved from an animal, and when he murdered those people, He acted like one. You can't say he's wrong since evolution made him that way.
