Sex & God & Rock & Roll
Hmmm. One had BETTER not eat (or otherwise kill) whales, dolphin or apes (and possibly elephants)---actually, I find that to be a Universal Truth!Brain size relative to body mass is a pretty objective distinction vis-a-vis all the others.Being a vegetarian is certainly a moral preference, but I wouldn't say it was an obligation (Unless you believe in the Vegetarian God, of course!)
Oh, for goodness sake! I think I should probably just post blank pages. Then you all could pretend they say whatever you want them to say. You certainly don't seem to take any notice of the words I write.
MP, or a cannibal. I suspect a fair number of atheists agree with your thought.FWIWjimB
I think you are a bit shortsighted. We are after all also related to the plants so no eating plants either or mushrooms. For that matter God didn't give humans permission to eat blood (see Genesis 9:4) so check any meat you eat even if you are Christian.btw I do know several vegetarian atheists.
Erp. It's only a book.
Oh, man. I'm staying outa this one. (But I want to follow the conversation if it continues - hence this comment!)
You mean the words that I believe I am reading at OCICBW... may not actually represent my own thoughts? I think I'm going to have a case of the vapors.
If predators evolve to become human beings they have a moral obligation to stop being predators?
In my opinion, if there is no God, there is no moral obligation to do anything. But if, like the new atheists, you insist that you can have a morality based on not causing harm/pain, then that should apply to all creatures that feel pain as, without God, there is no difference in worth between creatures. If you kill other animals to eat them then you can kill people to eat them. Giving special protections to humans would be just a sensible way of protecting the species. It would not be a moral choice. Without God there is no right or wrong.
If without God there is no right or wrong, then humane slaughter could be an equally moral choice compared with hounding prey down and then tearing it apart alive. Or in the case of cats, playing with it until it's dead and then just leaving it there.
If there is no God then "humane" is only what you want it to be and should apply to humans as well as animals as there is no difference in worth.
It's not about worth. When a lion kills a deer there is no difference in the absolute worth of either creature.Nature or evolution have decreed that one is prey the other one predator. Morals have nothing to do with it.Why would the respective moral status of lion or deer change if the lion suddenly evolved a reflective brain?
Erm. That's what the post says.
The post says that moral atheists would be vegetarian.Whereas moral atheists might just as easily conclude that if it is moral for non-reflective beings to eat meat it is equally moreal for reflective one to do so, provided they do what they can to minimise suffering during slaughter.
Agreed. So rape will be okay for humans.