Originally posted by PalynkaShould all mentally challenged humans have a right to life?
No, of course not. But they shouldn't have exactly the same rights and responsibilites.
Mentally challenged people are not considered fit for deciding on many matters, so they are in fact not completely free in the sense other humans are.
As for your last question, I don't see how we are morally permitted to hunt any animals for sport. Humanism is not necessarily Speciesism.
What about those who are nearly anencephalic?
One thing not mentioned in all these posts: Neandertals fossils have been found nearby flutes dated about 40 thousand years old. That one fact strongly suggests they had music, therefore art. I would suggest any culture displaying some form of art is to be classified as sapiens. Art separates sapiens from primates by a huge degree. I think much more than, for instance, tool use. Even otters use tools. Birds use tools, Even the highest of the primates, Bonobos, show no artistic endevours.
One caveat here: Suppose you have a species extremely intelligent but ocean going. Blue Whales come to mind, or Dophins. How would you compare them to human intelligence? Suppose they were equal. What would we see as showing that equality? They by definition cannot master fire, they have no arms or fingers to manipulate objects but they are undeniably intelligent and have huge brains.
I would think the only thing that would prove culture amongst those folks would be song. There is plenty of evidence now for extremely complicated language going on in whale songs, cultural changes happening in those songs. We have been studying them for decades and have just begun to scratch the surface of that complexity. So what if we decide THEY are human or better in intelligence? Shouldn't we immediately ban all dolphin or whale hunting? There are bans now but they are subject to debate all the time. Wouldn't the proof of intelligence end that debate in the favor of whales immediately?
Originally posted by sonhouseIn the first place all sport-hunting, or hobby-hunting or whatever you want to call it, should be banned. That would constitute a first step in the right direction of treating animals better.
One thing not mentioned in all these posts: Neandertals fossils have been found nearby flutes dated about 40 thousand years old. That one fact strongly suggests they had music, therefore art. I would suggest any culture displaying some form of art is to be classified as sapiens. Art separates sapiens from primates by a huge degree. I think much more than, f ...[text shortened]... e time. Wouldn't the proof of intelligence end that debate in the favor of whales immediately?
Respect for wild animals is almost completely lacking in our culture.
It is about time animals receive Animal Rights.
Originally posted by ivanhoeMay Ted Nugent have mercy on your soul. 😀
In the first place all sport-hunting, or hobby-hunting or whatever you want to call it, should be banned. That would constitute a first step in the right direction of treating animals better.
Respect for wild animals is almost completely lacking in our culture.
It is about time animals receive Animal Rights.
Originally posted by ivanhoeThis is very true, animals should have much stronger advocates to protect them but why are you using my quote to support that stance? I was saying art is one very large indicator of what is human and what is not. That is a completely differant issue. No one here seems to want to comment on that.
In the first place all sport-hunting, or hobby-hunting or whatever you want to call it, should be banned. That would constitute a first step in the right direction of treating animals better.
Respect for wild animals is almost completely lacking in our culture.
It is about time animals receive Animal Rights.
Originally posted by sonhouseHow about those birds who lay out their own little gardens to attract the opposite sex ?
This is very true, animals should have much stronger advocates to protect them but why are you using my quote to support that stance? I was saying art is one very large indicator of what is human and what is not. That is a completely differant issue. No one here seems to want to comment on that.
How about structures built by animals (architecture) ?
How about birds singing ?
Originally posted by ivanhoeThere is no evidence that any of those things are as a result of concious thought, as human art is.
How about those birds who lay out their own little gardens to attract the opposite sex ?
How about structures built by animals (architecture) ?
How about birds singing ?
Originally posted by ivanhoeWell come back ten years later, and see the houses the birds built. Any changes? The birds song any more complex? The gardens any more imaginative? Those things are built in, they can no more stop doing it or changing it than the man in the moon. Art changes year by year, because of human imagination. Its not just instinct working there. Those 40,000 year old Neandertal flutes meant they were expressing themselves in a way that had not been done before, they had to understand the idea of differant pitches can be made by having holes at differant distances from the end and they knew how to manipulate tubes to make a musical note. That tells me they had to have human qualities about them.
How about those birds who lay out their own little gardens to attract the opposite sex ?
How about structures built by animals (architecture) ?
How about birds singing ?
