Quote:
Originally Posted by O.A.F.K.1.1
It has everything to do with rape in terms of rape being an absolutely valid counter example to use. Its not even debatable. That you cant see this just speaks volumes of your very small and limited intellectual ability.
Ill make it clearer and use another example seeing that one went wooooosh.
Person A is jerking off at home to pornhub.
Person B is at home torturing an animal.
One of those activities involves an entity other that than the person suffering severe pain and distress, the other does not. So thinking about them exactly the same way is retarluciom. A new word I came up with to mean really ****ing stupid.
Wanting to censor person A's behaviour is absolutely distinct as an issue from that of person B.
If you think otherwise, you are basically alone in the world of moral reasoning.
Again, you are finding a difference in A and B because of some arbitrary special intrinsic value you attribute to "entities suffering pain".
You also didn't answer (no wonder why) about animals being genetically modified, or drugged, not to feel pain.
But then again, let's follow your model, so that maybe not you (i have lost all hopes on you) but ohter readers can see why there is no difference between the examples you gave, if you allow for arbitrary intrinsic values to be added to the evaluation of those situations.
So you are , out of the blue, or out of some naturalistic worldview, adding an intrisic value element to "entities suffering pain", that in you mind changes the picture.
That's religious, in the sense that it is not objective at all that "non human entities suffering pain" should be given any special consideration. It's just your decision, following from your value scale.
Now we have the religious nut. He has a different value scale from you, and from me. Much closer to yours to be fair, as i don't put arbitrary intrisic value in anything that is not human beings.
So in his arbitrary, religious worldview, insulting god is terrible. There is a very big intrisic value in god, and insulting him is very very bad.
Jerking off , especially while looking at people doing sinful things, is insulting god, in his value scale.
And so he goes on and asks for votes and if enough people agree with him, his value scale prevails and jerking off is as bad , or worse, than torturing animals. Because that's his value scale, and you can't comment on it at all once you open the door to arbitrarly add intrisic value to things that are not human beings.
You can only hope you live in a country where enough people share YOUR value scale, and not enough people share HIS value scale, otherwise any behaviour they want to limit, they can, using the exactly same reasoning you used to ban the behaviours YOU wanted to ban.
And no, animals suffering is not different from insulting god. It's EXACTLY IDENTICAL. It's deciding something that is not a human being has intrisic value, and banning behaviour that affects that intrisic value in a negative way.
Now is this a recipe for an open society, where people with wildly different value scales can co-habit peacefully? HELL NO.
And this is not even hypothetical. There are countries right now where "god insulting behaviour" has the death penalty attached to it.
When you start superimposing your value scale to behaviour control, that's when you destroy any hope of an open society.
That's also when you make racists right. Because if you create a model for a country where people, if they are a majority, can invent intrisic value about anything and use it as a reason to ban behaviour, then people are right to say that they only want immigrants to come in if they share they identical value scale (which can almost never be true, so they ban all immigration).
Otherwise the risk of other value scales becoming dominant is too big.
But your naive (or evil, i hope it's naive) radical leftist approach only sees poor animals suffering and "wants to do something" to fix it. No matter the consequences. No matter you are paving the road to majority value scale oppression.
And this should have nothing to do with how bad you think animal torture is. Exactly as how bad a religious nut consider jerking off to be, it shouldn't ever matter.