|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 Posted: Sun Mar 04, 2007 10:32 pm
Not all infants; Infanticide is the killing of an infant; like murder, not like genocide.
|
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Mon Mar 05, 2007 6:54 am
Infanticide is the elective killing of a young child. Since these children do not hold the same constructs you and I do, if what you are saying shoudl be held as to what dictates human rights (IE: Consciousness) then a mother and father should then have every right to kill their child if the child is still below the age of three.
And its simple. Either all humans have the same rights, or we all have no rights at all. COnsciousness, since it is a philisophacle and umprovable and neither inprovable idea, should not be used a deciding factor. Cop out answers are just simply annoying.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Mon Mar 05, 2007 7:43 am
Tiger of the Fire Human life is important because it's alive. Once alive, it deserves the right to live untill it becomes a danger to the lives of others, if that happens that is. Since i refuse to accept constructs such as feelings, consciousness, sentience, etc, as an excuse as to how we're some how better then other beings, I cant see how human life is better then any other life. Eh? You clearly think human life is better, and not just because it's alive, because you don't have a problem with killing bacteria, sperm cells, or even animals for food.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Mon Mar 05, 2007 4:16 pm
I'm sorry. Are you me? No? Okay, that narrowed down. So, since oyu are not me, do you know what i think? No, you dont. How could you? Since you are not me, you have no right to dictate what it is I think. Thank you for trying though. But, in all honosty, quit it. My parents had been doing it for seventeen years, and its gotten annoying. End of subject, thank you.
And, actualy, I do have a problem with killing animals (youre right though, I have no proble killing harmful bacteria and sperm cells). I have a problem with killing animals for sport. If you have no intentions of actualy using the animal, or see the animal as a trophy, then i think you have a seious problem. Simply because i feel it necessary to kill to survive, dosn't mean i dont value life. It dosnt mean I dotn value life equally.
I wont argue with you further on this subject. I will restae though that you have no place in life to dictate to me what it is I do and do not think.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Mon Mar 05, 2007 4:44 pm
question- is cannibalism acceptable? this, as well, is a serious question...
if one is against killing for no purpose, but one intends to kill to eat, why not kill a human? they're plentiful enough, and you can find the damned things everywhere (sorry, had to throw that last bit in there)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Mon Mar 05, 2007 4:56 pm
Fine with me, seriously, so long as you're willing to face murder charges.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Mon Mar 05, 2007 4:58 pm
but should there BE murder charges, is the question
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Mon Mar 05, 2007 5:02 pm
Well, I think that human life is better, on an instinctual level at any rate. I'm taking antibiotics now. If it comes to me or the bacteria, I'm sorry, but I choose myself. I choose any human's life over the life of some bacteria. Even if it's hundreds of thousands of buggers dying, I'd choose the human's life.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Mon Mar 05, 2007 5:20 pm
I would still mourn the death of those little buggahs...Poor little feller...little feller...Mmmmm...Mmm...Mhmmm...
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Mon Mar 05, 2007 5:23 pm
divineseraph but should there BE murder charges, is the question Ohhh...good question...Hmmmm...It depends, are oyu eating that human because there is no other food source around, and they are going to die any way? Wait...this is waaaaaaay off topic really.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Mon Mar 05, 2007 5:35 pm
but i am truly interested- and eating animals isn't neccesary. you could eat salad instead. if you find animals more delicious, and animal life equal to human life, then what's the difference if someone finds human more delicious?
i think it's on subject with the objective morality thing.
i'm trying to see how far you'll go before you bend and admit that you value human life over animal
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Mon Mar 05, 2007 5:47 pm
Question: If Pyro values all life the same, then what's the difference between him eating salad, which was alive, and eating meat, which was alive?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Mon Mar 05, 2007 5:51 pm
You fail.
As i said and oyu seem to ignore: simply because I believe in killin gto survive, dosn't mean i value human life over that of an animal. I have the same respect for animals that my indian acesotrs did, in that I eat meat to survive and when I kill the animal my self I try to use every bit of it, and when an animals dies so i may live I give thanks and prayer for the life that was given.
No, I cant just eat a salad. I literally need meat. My body can not, I reapeat, can not process the chemicals the same way from plants the same way it can meat. I tried the vegan thing for awhile, and it nearly killed me.
Edited: Thank you Lyme. Since i do value all life the same, what is the diffrence? Try answerign wiht out using philosophical material.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Mon Mar 05, 2007 5:59 pm
but what about the rest of us who can eat salads? if meat is only an option for us, why can we not eat human as well, since they are all the same, all options?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Mon Mar 05, 2007 6:00 pm
divineseraph but what about the rest of us who can eat salads? if meat is only an option for us, why can we not eat human as well, since they are all the same, all options?   Because of the legal system?
Edit: This is getting way off topic. If you want to continue the philosophical debate, maybe it should be moved to the ED? 
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Reply
