|
| quote: | Originally posted by Enigmatik
I really don't get that.
Prove that an animal has a wide range of possible emotions, prove that they have a desire to live outside of instinct, prove that they have non-instinctual decision-making capabilities, etc.
It's simple.
If you had to choose one to be shot in the face, a healthy human baby or a healthy calf, which would you pick?
End of story, really. |
Really? It doesn't matter if they have a wide range of possible emotions in this instance, I was talking about actively harming another living thing. Killing is harmful as the previously living thing is kind of suddenly dead. Honestly, I don't understand your point in the slightest. I want to limit my participation as much as possible, so it really won't change my mind if it turns out animals can't do all that you mentioned. It's still killing something.
There is not going to be a situation where I have to make that decision so, no, not end of story. That is a completely ridiculous thing to say and adds nothing to the conversation.
Speaking of which, something that frustrates me is that people seem to assume an interest in animal rights cancels out an interest in human rights. It's utter bullshit.
|