Animals have the right to be loved by humans and be eaten by humans.
Every animal has the right to be respected. No animal should EVER be abused or tortured. Food animals should be killed quickly and humanely. Until that moment they should be allowed to roam within boundaries large enough to allow them to feel physically unhindered. Anyone who keeps animals cruelly caged their entire lives is an evil disgusting inhumane devil. Free-range animals are not in constant misery.
i have no idea what the hell theyre arguing about. its supposed to be about animal rights but for the first hour ive listened to its about some hypothetical cow brain thing.
I don't really know if I care about this or not but if I think about this too much I'm going to have to consume another animal to fuel my brain.
atheists debating morality is insufferable
First obvious problem Stefan missed is if 51% became that handicapped, most would soon starve or otherwise die, so they would become 49% thus negating the conditions stated.
Worse, the distinction is between essence and accidents (I may have the terms wrong) where we see accidents (disability) slowly become essence (DNA damaged to form an un-human).
Why wouldn't the Egyptian cat-god just turn the humans into actual cows? Then it would be clear. What the opponent is trying to do is to keep enough accidents - superficial characteristics so the damaged human still APPEARS human like the statue, but doesn't have the essential characteristics, even in a potential form
The NAP doesn't apply to dead people. We don't like Donner Party scenarios.
What he is doing is trying to go from fully brain dead to fully functioal and finding some point where the human is only partially dead, dead enough to have trouble with moral reasoning, but not actually dead enough to be really dead.
Stefan observed the dying out later, but Dissenter keeps giving me 406.
I want to see Stefan play D&D or some other RPG, he would tear a new asshole in any GM's plot or ruling.
I love cows. Especially done medium-well with Heinz 57 sauce.
Beyond that, also note the NAP also confers no obligations, so what to do when the wolves violate the rights of the sheep? On can ask this of the human versions.
he said at the start "Im not here to win, just to find truth" yet everything he did was to win. why else would you set up an impossible hypothetical at every turn? really fucking retarded