Veganism

[BrianSoddingBoru4]

Right? I've eaten women several times...

Just don't eat vegans.

They taste of tofu!

I'm one of those second-stage vegans - I only eat animals that only eat plants.

Boru

[Disagreeable]

Thanks for answering the original question!

Is being human still one of the required properties? Because, if not, then what if there was a human without these properties?

I wouldn't eat a human no matter their disabilities, so I guess being human is a hard pass for me. Mind you, that's entirely subjective and so not useful to your discussion. The varied reasons people resort to cannibalism speak to the moral relativism of the question. The raw hunger of a shipwreck survivor, the cultural norm of eating your enemies to garner their strength, those have different moral weights to me, but who am I? I just know what I wouldn't like to do.

This is a kind of anti-realism that I respect, even if I do disagree.

[Disagreeable]

Weirdly, it seems to me that you are the one offering a middle ground because you seem to be talking about something that is neither descriptive nor normative, or neither fully objective nor fully subjective, whereas I'm asking which is it, or if it's both then in which sense is it each.

I'll stop pressing you though as I don't think that I'm going to understand what you're saying. I can't comprehend what it means for something to be neither normative nor descriptive.

I can't be held responsible for your seemings. The "fact" describes our understanding of how the world is. The word "normative" describes our opinion of how the world ought to be. "Normative facts" are much like dry water, a lovely abuse of language and thinking.

I find your rejection of normative facts completely intelligible, it was your rejection of descriptive facts that I found odd.

[Disagreeable]

[...]there are no repercussions for their immoral behavior because it's not against the law.

Going back to slavery, as an analogy, again: This was once true of slavery.

[Thumpalumpacus]

I wouldn't eat a human no matter their disabilities, so I guess being human is a hard pass for me. Mind you, that's entirely subjective and so not useful to your discussion. The varied reasons people resort to cannibalism speak to the moral relativism of the question. The raw hunger of a shipwreck survivor, the cultural norm of eating your enemies to garner their strength, those have different moral weights to me, but who am I? I just know what I wouldn't like to do.

This is a kind of anti-realism that I respect, even if I do disagree.

"Anti-realism", eh? Be specific.

[Fake Messiah]

[...]there are no repercussions for their immoral behavior because it's not against the law.

Going back to slavery, as an analogy, again: This was once true of slavery.

Yeah, you are running in circles.

So, is your true subject in this thread "What happens when you are moral?" The answer is "not much." That's why there are laws, police, fines, and prisons so that people obey some moral standards.

[Ivan Denisovich]

[...]there are no repercussions for their immoral behavior because it's not against the law.

Going back to slavery, as an analogy, again: This was once true of slavery.

Legality is not morality. Law speaks what is permissible and what is not though obviously there are points (perhaps even many points) on which law and common morality agree like murder or rape. Mere illegality however is not enough to make something immoral as otherwise we would have to agree that for example interacial was immoral before it was made legal.

Whether something is immoral is judgment every person makes and it's influenced by host of factors. Whether something is illegal, well, it's certainly not up to single person to decide regardless of what said person think about morality of illegal act.

[BrianSoddingBoru4]

^The moral implications aside, I’ve always been eager and willing to break what I feel are unjust laws and accept the consequences.

Boru

[Disagreeable]

This is a kind of anti-realism that I respect, even if I do disagree.

"Anti-realism", eh? Be specific.

I'm not sure which form of anti-realism you accept specifically, but from what you've said it seems that you accept some form.

[Disagreeable]

Legality is not morality.

Yeah, that was the whole point. Just because slavery used to be legal doesn't mean that it has ever been moral. The same may be true of killing and eating non-human animals: and that's the analogy.

I'm not a practicing vegan. But it's a possibility.