Quote:
|
Survival of the fittest is dangerous. Apply it to humanity to achieve Hitler on a much, much broader scale.
|
Survival of the fittest has been applied to humanity since the beginning, and has gotten us this far. Survival of the fittest isn't dangerous, humanity is dangerous.
Quote:
|
We have destroyed and raped our way across the planet. Our countless acres of concrete and asphalt are paved over forests and flatlands where plants and animals used to live. Each human produces more waste, uses more resources, and takes up more space than any other animal on the planet. Medical testing on animals is the proverbial microscopic tip of the iceberg. We've already fucked this planet a million ways to sunday.
|
While this seems irrelevant to the topic, I think you give the human race too much credit. You make it sound as we could possibly destroy this planet. Regardless of whether this "homo sapiens" thing pans out, i can assure you the earth will be around long after we are gone. I agree that we are destroying the planet's ability to sustain us, but up to this point do you think it could've happened any other way? I think that right now, in many ways, we're acting like there is no tomorrow, because it is not in our nature to act any differently.
Quote:
|
- There can be no pretense about it. We have no moral high ground. We butcher millions of farm animals a year, test our cosmetics and medicines on animals, pollute, deforest, strip-mine, and otherwise rape the planet because we can. We do it because we are in a position of power to do so, and because it benefits us in the short-term (the long term is very much in debate). There isn't any way to argue that we are somehow morally 'right' in butchering animals so that 80 million families can have beef for dinner. That's just the way things are.
|
I think morality and the moral high ground is irrelevant. You could also argue that it is immoral to choose the lives of animals over humans. I'm not concerned with the morality right now, because discussions of morality usually just end up being a flamefest of self righteousness. I'm arguing that it is counter to the way nature seems to be set up for us not to kill animals to save humans when it suits us. I think regardless of morality, medical animal testing is ethically sound.
I agree with you that some of our actions in will probably prove to be unsustainable in the long run, but I doubt medical animal testing will be one of those things.