:
I mean, how can you say (EXAMPLE) homosexuality is right / natural because the animals do it, but then turn around and say that eating meat from animals is wrong, EVEN THOUGH the animals do it.
|
You're missing an important point, Alcar. Sexual orientation has no effect on other people (taking all relationships as consenting). Eating meat has an effect on all the living organisms that have to be slaughtered to provide that meat. The point of morality is to ensure that societies, and in the bigger picture, life on Earth, can get along in the most constructive way.
Drawing parallels to the diets of other species is too limited in its scope. It's natural for a few female arthropods to eat their male mates after copulation, but I wouldn't accept that as a legitimate excuse for such behaviour in humans. Wild animals don't have the mental capacity to reconsider their diets, and probably not the body chemistry to allow it. We do (on the whole) in both cases. Wild animals are confined to their territories and climates. Technology allows us to have spread over the planet and also spread the crop we'd need to support a vegetarian climate.
Then there's the more environmental arguement, as Nate pointed out, which is a result of all that spreading.
:
Stupidity is slowly taking over the world, so you better be ready for it.
|
I've never thought about it before, but ponder this: people aren't getting more stupid. People on the whole are actually becoming more intelligent and wise, but they're trying to apply their knowledge and wisdom to many more things before they can. People in all walks of life are becoming versed in business, politics, ethics and the arts whereas before they'd all be farmers out on the field. Modern life expects this. We're just not becoming smarter at a fast enough rate. That's utterly unrelated to the topic, but the way, but I thought it would be much more poigniant and purposeful than debating food chains.