View Single Post
Old 09-30-2008, 07:38 PM   #58
jammies
Basement Chicken Choker
 
jammies's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: In a land without pants, or war, or want. But mostly we care about the pants.
Exp:
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Sowa View Post
I believe that any being with cognitive abilities should be afforded rights as they are aware they are alive and suffer.
That's a start, but that's more like a premise, not an argument. What do you mean by cognitive abilities? How do we determine how "aware" a being is? Exactly what "rights" do animals get - the same as humans, less than humans, completely different than humans, and why?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Sowa View Post
You don't explain why rights are defined by duty you just say they are.
Actually I said that rights are meaningless in the context of creatures that can't understand what rights are. As far as rights and duties being complementary (and not defined by, which I also never said) are, an example suffices: you cannot guarantee the right to own property without the complementary duty not to unjustly deprive others of their property. That isn't an assertion, that is a logical corollary of what rights are: a guarantee of freedom for one person which necessarily constrains the actions of anyone else interacting with that person.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Sowa View Post
Another contradiction that I didn't harp on is that you say infants have diminished rights. Why don't those diminished rights get applied to animals? A one day old baby is at least has the right to life, correct? Why can't that be applied to a 2 yr old dog with an almost equal understanding?
This is a true blurring of the divide between humans and animals, however I think the difference lies in a baby having the potential to become morally aware, which the dog does not.
__________________
Better educated sadness than oblivious joy.
jammies is offline   Reply With Quote