Godless Capitalist Posted October 20, 2004 Report Share Posted October 20, 2004 I'll give you a hint and I'm not trying to be snide here: when Miss Rand titled her article, "Man's Rights," she wasn't just writing about healthy adult male human beings. Well, yes, but the issue here is children. They cannot fully exercise their rights as adults can; the question is how are their rights limited and on what basis? I find this question especially interesting in regards to teenagers and the transition to adulthood. There is no clear point at which one can say that someone should be completely free of parental controls. Our society currently sets age limits for some things (drinking, voting, etc) and leaves some leeway for others (eg being tried as an adult). That seems rather arbitrary but I do not see any objective solution. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Inspector Posted October 20, 2004 Report Share Posted October 20, 2004 Dont think they would taste good Mmmmmm.... prions. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
the tortured one Posted October 20, 2004 Report Share Posted October 20, 2004 When a child doesnt want to go to the grocery store, can the mother throw the child in the car and take him against his or her will? Yes. Because the child does not have the same rights as a fully rational adult. Can you sign a mentally handicapped person into a institution if you are the gaurdian, against the person's will? Yes, because they do not have the same rights a FULLY rational adult. Do you see how rights stem from rationality? You only have as many rights as your rational capacity allows. I'm going to have to go with Betsy on this one. Just because their faculty of reason isn't fully developed doesn't make them property. If you believe that they are property, do you think we should have the right to kill, torture, or sexually abuse children? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nimble Posted October 21, 2004 Report Share Posted October 21, 2004 When a child doesnt want to go to the grocery store, can the mother throw the child in the car and take him against his or her will? Yes. Because the child does not have the same rights as a fully rational adult. Can you sign a mentally handicapped person into a institution if you are the gaurdian, against the person's will? Yes, because they do not have the same rights a FULLY rational adult. Do you see how rights stem from rationality? You only have as many rights as your rational capacity allows. I'm going to have to go with Betsy on this one. Just because their faculty of reason isn't fully developed doesn't make them property. If you believe that they are property, do you think we should have the right to kill, torture, or sexually abuse children? Okay, property is a poor word. But at the same time, you effectively evaded the issue. If a child has rights, how can it be forced to act against its will without any repercussions to the parents? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Betsy Posted October 21, 2004 Report Share Posted October 21, 2004 Okay, property is a poor word. But at the same time, you effectively evaded the issue. If a child has rights, how can it be forced to act against its will without any repercussions to the parents? How can ANY trustee, guardian, conservator, or other fiduciary buy, sell, or manage someone else's property, arrange for medical care, etc. without the knowledge or approval of the owner or rights-holder? That is the nature of a trusteeship or fiduciary relationship. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
green Posted October 21, 2004 Report Share Posted October 21, 2004 Animals are sentient beings - they have the ability to feel pain, to feel emotion.. they have self interest, and can be anthropomorphised. So.. why do we slaughter them? It's barbarous, unnecessary, and not justifiable. My first concern is in regards to the characteristics that you appoint to animals. The ability to feel pain is an undeniable no-brainer. You, DogmaticTrip, then proceed to "explain" that animals "feel emotion". Perhaps, I understand the obersavtion you are attempting to make, though I'm not entirely persuaded. First of all, what is emotion? Where do emotions come from? I find the subject of emotions to be very abstract. Basically, in order to feel emotions, one must be conscious of one's self and of one's surrounding, and I don't entirely know if animals, in a general sense, are aware of themselves. I digress, really, so let me get back on track... You then go on to say that they (the "animals") have self-interest. This is very perplexing to me because: a) how do you know and what are their self-interests? The only one that comes to mind is the collection of sustenance to stay alive. If I'm missing anything else, let me know...please. Your final attribute is anthropomorphization, which is ascribing human characteristics to something. What sort of human characteristics are you referring to? The fact some of them have hair, too? The fact they all reproduce? What other human characteristics, that can't be applied to any other mammal, any other ave, any other fish, any other animal doesn't have? What exclusive characteristics are you talking about? Then the question of why we slaughter them is posed. Well, why don't you ask our ancestors, who were doing the same thing over 8,000 years ago? Perhaps because the hunter-gatherer lifestyle just wasn't reliable enough to survive. Perhaps because domesticating docile cattle was much easier than spearing wild animals. Perhaps because we didn't want to succumb to the tenacious hands of Natural Selection. Barbarious? Unnecessary? Unjust? Go to East Africa, try to tell that to the Nuer people, whose status of class is BASED ON the accumulation of cattle. Who, without a flinch, will slit the throat of a baby goat for both spiritual and sustenance practices. The fact is, humans have been domesticating animals for over 8,000 years, and to say it is wrong is a contradiction. I think, DogmaticTrip, you should go back and check your premises. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DavidV Posted October 24, 2004 Report Share Posted October 24, 2004 I’m closing this thread to shift the conversation to more substantive and on-track topics. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts