"Would you support coercive legislation"
I haven't spoken anywhere about coercive legislation. The whole notion of
collectively solving ethical dilemmas through coercive legislation is one
tactic that is unfortunately widespread and pretty unthought. I do not support
coercive legislation.
I'm not sure where the issue of forcibly starving people comes from (?) ... if
we stopped the welfare system for meat-animals, the amount of food available
in the world would increase vastly ... the problem is one of political
distribution ...
Again, do you think questions of murder are "black and white"? If someone
spoke about the ethical problematic of murder, would you consider that
fanatical? I appreciate that your bullshit detector is on ; it's indispensable
for making sense of the world. But again, when it comes to Industrial Factory
Farming, there are very few shades of color. It's pretty damn clear within
those boundaries : institutionalized murder, brutality, torture, genetic
mistreatment, and enslavement of fellow beings. If you are interested in
discussing the colors of traditional farming, or hunting-gathering, we can
engage the complexity of our ethics there in a careful manner without ever
losing sight of the ethical value of other animal-persons, and the issue of
murder.
I'm not sure how abortion enters in here. Are you defining abortion as murder?
If I ask where we as a society condone murder and ask ourselves to reexamine
these as ethical beings, is there something wrong with this? Society condones
murder, for example, if you are "at war" with someone else. This entire
practice might be critiqued for example. If we Are going to respect murder in
particular cases, we better be damn sure we know what we're doing. I'm not
sure where abortion fits in to this dialectic, however, so you're going to
have to pursue this line, carefully and sensitively ...
(un)leash
