![]() |
|
#11
|
|||
|
|||
|
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] Why is it more "advanced" not to eat animals? "Advancing beyond our natural instincts" isn't a reason. You still haven't given a good reason not to. [/ QUOTE ] Here is the thing peope are missing: NEARLY ALL MORALITY IS SUBJECTIVE If paluka, or anyone else, feels it is morally wrong to eat meat, he is allowed to think that. Just like I am allowed to have no moral problems with it. Neither of us need to necessarily give reasons for those moral beliefs, nor are those beliefs the business of anyone else. The only time morality becomes the business of others is when those morals are affecting others (ie. rapists, racists, etc.) [/ QUOTE ] Sure, people can believe whatever they want. But they don't get a free pass to some sort of moral high ground without providing some sort of reasoning for their morality. And the morality of vegetarians presupposes a level of equivalence between humans and animals. "Cruelty" is a human concept, but vegetarians want to apply it to non-sentient beings like cows and chickens. I do not believe there is any sort of moral equivalence between humans and animals, so I don't agree with their morality arguments. But they can believe them if they want to. As for me, I'm going to go have some fried chicken. |
|
|