Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Lebell
When a combine mows down a field of wheat, literally hundreds of creatures are slaughtered in the form of voles and mice.
How are these creatures any less deserving of life than a cow? Because of their relative size?
|
Yes, it is unfortunate that these creatures die. It is almost certainly unavoidable. However we should still make an effort to minimise the slaughter.
The majority of crops harvested are used as feed for farm animals. If we were to eat the crops directly, we would need to grow much less, and hence we would reduce the amount of sufferring in the world even more (by not slaughtering animals for meat, and not killing creatures living in crop fields.
Quote:
|
To live means to strive with your fellow creatures for precious resources and to deprive them of the same.
|
Could a similar argument be made to extend this from specisim to racism?
Does your ultimate moral philosophy boil down to 'let might make right'? Presumably not?
Quote:
Our cities and roads deprive them of habitat.
Our use vehicles means we hit them and kill millions every year.
But we are no different than any other species would be if they had risin to the top of the scrum.
|
This is similar to the "but it's natural" argument I wrote in the orignal post. Just because things are the way they are does not imply that this is right.
Quote:
|
Any morality I see has to do with the responsible use of our resources for all life and the minimizing of suffering whenever possible.
|
Indeed. We
should minimise sufferring. And we can take a major step in that direction by becoming vegetarians. Eating meat is not a necessity for us. It is a luxury.