Does this only apply only to humans? If we were sufficiently advanced to roam the universe and happened to trip on some 'backward' species, would it be moral to exploit/enslave even consume them (if they tasted good :) for our means?
You are viewing a single comment's thread from:
Generally speaking this applies to any being who has moral agency; in simplest terms, this would mean that such a species would have to communicate that they are asserting ownership of their bodies, and thus can withhold consent.
I'm sorry but this is just twisting around to not go against your carnist addictive behaviour. Every animal owns his or her own body, you don't need to communicate that, a baby doesn't need to communicate that, a mentally disabled person doesn't need to communicate that. you inhabit and use the body and thus you own it.
This is just cultural addiction that people want to maintain. commodifying animals and claiming dominion over them, it's statism at it's peak and the only argument for it is that ownership only applies to humans, hence why i guess carbon7dna uses aliens as an example.
Bringing in moral agency degrades morality to be subjective rather then objective, you don't need to think, believe or whatever if a wrong action is wrong, it remains wrong no matter what you believe or how you act.
You're blog post is great though keep it up.
You know, you make a valid point. I suppose I never really gave it much thought except in passing. I'll have to ponder this some more and see where this leads me. Thank you for the input!