Words like “murder” and “rape” only apply to non-human animals because for much of history, taking those actions on animals were necessary evils for us to survive. Our species has learned to evolve over time, and we no longer take many of the horrible actions that were commonplace centuries ago. We need to evolve as a culture away from eating meat, and our language needs to evolve with us.
Humans still do most of all these “horrible” actions. We have not changed. Some of us just are more empathetic and compassionate. Like we have always been.
We decide whom murder and rape apply to. You may decide differently, but an argument based on them not applying is begging the question. This is not to say that the first poster’s argument was sound, but you didn’t really address the argument, just reaffirmed existing definitions where the first poster was looking to expand them.
It’s like if someone compared aspirin and cannabis, in that many people use them regularly without developing addictions, and the rebuttal was that cannabis is an illegal drug, so it’s a different kind of drug.
Assuming you live in a democracy, then yes, we have decided and do still decide. We can change the laws at any time (I know this is idealistic in a lot of countries) and use a new definition, or we can determine on a jury that something is or is not punished. I’m not comparing slavery to animal husbandry, but the US (I assume other slaveholding countries were similar, but I don’t know) has changed the definition to include or exclude slaves at various points. Murder is a social concept, not an immutable truth about the world.
The word “murder” only applies to human animals.
And cows are certainly not “raped” for dairy, when a farmer shoves his entire arm inside a cow to for her to become pregnant.
Why? Because the word “rape” only applies to human animals.
Words like “murder” and “rape” only apply to non-human animals because for much of history, taking those actions on animals were necessary evils for us to survive. Our species has learned to evolve over time, and we no longer take many of the horrible actions that were commonplace centuries ago. We need to evolve as a culture away from eating meat, and our language needs to evolve with us.
Nothing is horrible, but thinking makes it so.
Humans still do most of all these “horrible” actions. We have not changed. Some of us just are more empathetic and compassionate. Like we have always been.
We decide whom murder and rape apply to. You may decide differently, but an argument based on them not applying is begging the question. This is not to say that the first poster’s argument was sound, but you didn’t really address the argument, just reaffirmed existing definitions where the first poster was looking to expand them.
It’s like if someone compared aspirin and cannabis, in that many people use them regularly without developing addictions, and the rebuttal was that cannabis is an illegal drug, so it’s a different kind of drug.
Do we decide? We have already decided. That is my point. I reaffirm nothing. I only say, the word “murder” doesn’t apply.
The case has been decided, that non-human animal suffering is just not important. Not to the vast majority.
Hell, we can’t even agree that human suffering matters.
Assuming you live in a democracy, then yes, we have decided and do still decide. We can change the laws at any time (I know this is idealistic in a lot of countries) and use a new definition, or we can determine on a jury that something is or is not punished. I’m not comparing slavery to animal husbandry, but the US (I assume other slaveholding countries were similar, but I don’t know) has changed the definition to include or exclude slaves at various points. Murder is a social concept, not an immutable truth about the world.