My Neighbors Just Ate their Dog (Seriously). What is the libertarian stance on this?

WilliamC said:
Really? I suppose your knowledge of genetics is based on...what, the bible?
Click to expand...

You're barking up the wrong tree, Mr.C. To creationists, on one side: man; and on the other: dumb brutes. To them, man is as similar to a chimp as he is to a sea anemone, or a baked potato.
 
iGGz said:
Maybe we've all eaten dog at one point...


682623-bigthumbnail.jpg
Click to expand...

Thanks to pcosmar for turning me on to this song...lolz.

 
WilliamC said:
On the contrary, everyone uses internal logic to reach moral standards, they just start with different premises.

Unless all those who kill in the name of religion and god are lying about what they believe and what they are doing?

I don't care about your premises or your conclusions so long as you aren't trying to use government to force them on me, and I'll refrain from the same towards any who agree with me on this.

But I wonder why some of ya'll are so darn anti-science, yet only a vanishingly small number of those are willing to abandon the technology that science provides.

Well, some very very small minority of scientists do go out of their way to antagonize, but I neither apologize for nor defend what they do, they have the same free-will as you and I and if they want to make fools of themselves arguing with religious folks about their faith that's their business.

Just keep government out of science and religion and education and we won't have to fight about it, yes?
Click to expand...

Those who kill in the name of religion have forgotten any semblance to the authority of God. If they still had it, they would be able to read plainly that they are wrong in using their own internal assumptions to justify killing. You should know that what people do in the name of religion does not equal advocacy of said acts by that religion.

Everyone uses internal logic, but logic does not differentiate between right and wrong. You must derive morality from an absolute moral authority. It is inescapably true that, if people are only accountable to themselves and other humans, there can be no absolute laws binding on all human beings equally. If subjectivism is really the way you want to go, then you will never reach an ultimately right conclusion. What's more, this kind of thinking about morality is the justification used for all mass killings. Everything is relative and there are no absolutes because we are all just animals and some animals are better than others. That means some humans are better and more worthy than other. If that is really the basis for rights, then it is completely logical and morally fine to oppress people who seem inferior because, after all, who can tell you your internal logic for justifying it is wrong?

Absolutely yes on the last line. Keep the government out of science and religion. Right now, it is clearly involved in both. If it were not involved in the public indoctrination program and heavily pushing evolution onto kids currently, the theory of evolution wouldn't be nearly as widely accepted. It also wouldn't be outlandish to question it. People who so vigorously defend it are just victims of the propaganda. They belittle those who doubt because it has been drilled into their heads by the public school system that evolution is a "proven fact." It is far from proven, and it is anything but fact. Secular views of rights and morality also wouldn't be nearly as widespread as they are now if the government weren't involved in our public schools. Being a libertarian, you should know what government does when it gains control over the means of education. It should bother you greatly that the state is reinforcing your secular worldview in the minds of our young American children because it should make you wonder, 1) why the state has a vested interest in secularizing our kids, and 2) how would your worldview be accepted by the public if it were not taught in these public indoctrination camps?
 
WilliamC said:
Really? I suppose your knowledge of genetics is based on...what, the bible?

Please elaborate, this should be fun.
Click to expand...

This should be common sense. You can't quantify a comparison based on the percentage of similar genes because expression makes everything different. We share half our DNA with bananas, does that make us half banana? The very idea is absurd. You just can't go around claiming percentages are the be-all-end-all of genetic comparisons and give us a right to make such absolutist statements such as "I am such and such a percentage of such and such an animal." The fact is, even a very small percentage, less than one percent, equals millions of nucleutides of difference when a change of 3 nucleotides can be fatal. I'm not telling you what to believe. I'm telling you such broad generalizations of mathematical concepts in relation to genetics is an absurd way of thinking about it.
 
WilliamC said:
Advanced neurosensory systems and mobility come to mind.
Click to expand...

Is this a quality of all animals? I said, why does it make you proud to be an animal, not to be a human with the characteristics you just mentioned. Advanced neurosensory systems over what, a plant? You must be so proud...
 
I wouldn't do that to a dog unless I was starving and my life depended on it. The dog is there property and it was EATEN - mind your damn business.

If they were just torturing it for their own sadistic pleasure, I'd be prone to step in...but to eat it...I disagree with the act, but I'd mind my damn business.

If you think they slaughtered it in a shitty/rookie manner - teach them "cleaner" slaughter techniques - otherwise STFU.
 
WilliamC said:
Advanced neurosensory systems and mobility come to mind.
Click to expand...

I really want to hear the answer to my question because I think we are onto something. What is it about animals in general that makes you proud to be one? What is it about being an animal that makes you special? Special compared to what and in the eyes of whom? Other animals with the same characteristics as animals? Plants? What?
 
PaulConventionWV said:
Those who kill in the name of religion have forgotten any semblance to the authority of God. If they still had it, they would be able to read plainly that they are wrong in using their own internal assumptions to justify killing. You should know that what people do in the name of religion does not equal advocacy of said acts by that religion.

Everyone uses internal logic, but logic does not differentiate between right and wrong. You must derive morality from an absolute moral authority. It is inescapably true that, if people are only accountable to themselves and other humans, there can be no absolute laws binding on all human beings equally. If subjectivism is really the way you want to go, then you will never reach an ultimately right conclusion. What's more, this kind of thinking about morality is the justification used for all mass killings. Everything is relative and there are no absolutes because we are all just animals and some animals are better than others. That means some humans are better and more worthy than other. If that is really the basis for rights, then it is completely logical and morally fine to oppress people who seem inferior because, after all, who can tell you your internal logic for justifying it is wrong?
Click to expand...

I do. Just as you do for yours no matter what the reason. And there is nothing inside of me that has any desire for mass killings, and I am willing to believe that religious people who invoke their religious beliefs to justify mass killing are not always lying.

I could be wrong, maybe true religious people don't lie, I wouldn't know since I'm not one of them.

Now if there were some objective standard it would save a lot of heartache, but I don't see that in the real world myself, or at least not enough to make me believe in god.

But I don't claim there isn't one either, I just don't know. I make up my own rules as I go just like everyone else seems to.

PaulConventionWV said:
Absolutely yes on the last line. Keep the government out of science and religion. Right now, it is clearly involved in both. If it were not involved in the public indoctrination program and heavily pushing evolution onto kids currently, the theory of evolution wouldn't be nearly as widely accepted. It also wouldn't be outlandish to question it. People who so vigorously defend it are just victims of the propaganda. They belittle those who doubt because it has been drilled into their heads by the public school system that evolution is a "proven fact." It is far from proven, and it is anything but fact. Secular views of rights and morality also wouldn't be nearly as widespread as they are now if the government weren't involved in our public schools. Being a libertarian, you should know what government does when it gains control over the means of education. It should bother you greatly that the state is reinforcing your secular worldview in the minds of our young American children because it should make you wonder, 1) why the state has a vested interest in secularizing our kids, and 2) how would your worldview be accepted by the public if it were not taught in these public indoctrination camps?
Click to expand...

I really don't even remember much of my time in public schools and what little I do remember was being alternatively appalled and amused at how stupid most people were. My education comes from my own efforts, and the thousands upon thousands of free textbooks available through piratebay ;)

Again, I'm not out to antagonize anyone, and if I sometimes get a bit irate it's not personal but because I really do want to live in a world where I can find someone to talk about things that interest me, and they certainly don't exist much in this one. I don't go to churches and try to spread science, so it's strange to me that there do exist those who think their religious beliefs actually qualify them to comment on technical aspects of science. If someone wants to chose not to believe in science that's one thing, but to have to try and refute it from the outside just seems a waste of time to me.

Why are Christian Scientists wrong for believing in prayer over medical treatment? Seems if they were on to something they'd all be healthy and well, but that's obviously not the case. At least most folks lack of belief in science doesn't lead them to forgo the technological benefits it provides.
 
PaulConventionWV said:
I really want to hear the answer to my question because I think we are onto something. What is it about animals in general that makes you proud to be one? What is it about being an animal that makes you special? Special compared to what and in the eyes of whom? Other animals with the same characteristics as animals? Plants? What?
Click to expand...

Well again advanced neurosensory capacities and mobility are two biggies.

Seriously.

The capacity for curiosity and learning are pretty important too.
 
WilliamC said:
But I don't claim there isn't one either, I just don't know. I make up my own rules as I go just like everyone else seems to.
Click to expand...

This is very telling. Mass murderers make up their own rules as they go along, too. Who are you to tell them that what they are doing is morally wrong? You can say it violates logical principles, but that doesn't make it wrong.

I really don't even remember much of my time in public schools and what little I do remember was being alternatively appalled and amused at how stupid most people were. My education comes from my own efforts, and the thousands upon thousands of free textbooks available through piratebay ;)

Again, I'm not out to antagonize anyone, and if I sometimes get a bit irate it's not personal but because I really do want to live in a world where I can find someone to talk about things that interest me, and they certainly don't exist much in this one. I don't go to churches and try to spread science, so it's strange to me that there do exist those who think their religious beliefs actually qualify them to comment on technical aspects of science. If someone wants to chose not to believe in science that's one thing, but to have to try and refute it from the outside just seems a waste of time to me.
Click to expand...

I have never known anyone to use religion to give them authority on science. They may explain science through their worldview, but that's the same thing you do. Yours is a secular view, theirs is based on a higher moral authority, that's it. In the end, though, they usually trust science in the same way you do. They objectively confirm results and THEN interpret those results based on their worldview, which is really the only way you can interpret them. You can't have a neutral interpretation. It's always powered by something.

Why are Christian Scientists wrong for believing in prayer over medical treatment? Seems if they were on to something they'd all be healthy and well, but that's obviously not the case. At least most folks lack of belief in science doesn't lead them to forgo the technological benefits it provides.
Click to expand...

I really can't judge here because you are using generalizations. I don't know who you are talking about when you say "Christian Scientists." Prayer does stimulate certain autonomic responses in the body that can be useful in healing, but I would agree it's not the whole equation, and I haven't know anyone to make this claim like you seem to think all Christians do, regardless of who they are. It only matters that they are "Christian", and if they are "Christian", they must think the way you described. Am I getting this right?

Also, I went through high school with much the same mentality, but I like to think I grew out of it. I appreciate your honesty, however.
 
WilliamC said:
Well again advanced neurosensory capacities and mobility are two biggies.

Seriously.

The capacity for curiosity and learning are pretty important too.
Click to expand...

You didn't answer my question. What part of that makes you feel pride as an animal? Usually, when someone feels pride, they feel like they are different somehow. How do you feel pride if your fellow animals demonstrate the same characteristics? Do you feel pride for being better than a plant?
 
Last edited:
PaulConventionWV said:
This is very telling. Mass murderers make up their own rules as they go along, too. Who are you to tell them that what they are doing is morally wrong? You can say it violates logical principles, but that doesn't make it wrong.
Click to expand...
This is the reason some people support Paul ... No rules, unless they favor the individual who agrees with them ;)

This movement is full of on the edge anarchists, IMO.
 
azxd said:
This is the reason some people support Paul ... No rules, unless they favor the individual who agrees with them ;)

This movement is full of on the edge anarchists, IMO.
Click to expand...

Well, yes, but it would violate the principles that so many anarchists and Paul supporters in general believe in. If we are no better than serial killers and would just prefer to not let them do what they feel is right, then we are initiating unjust aggression on them. I mean, it's fine if you think morality is subjective, I just want you to realize that you are no better than anyone else if you really believe this. It completely justifies the use of government force. There is nothing wrong with it. It's just that we would prefer that society be made up of people like us. Sound familiar? Hitler thought the same thing. It's not that we don't want authoritarian government, it's just that we want authoritarian government to display our moral principles. In your worldview, everyone is right. It's just that we would prefer our subjective moral standards be enforced and others not enforced.
 
PaulConventionWV said:
It has nothing to do with "special genes." We are special because we are made different. We are made of the same material, but only man was made aware of himself. A small percentage difference of DNA makes millions of nucleotides of difference, so be careful what you say and make sure you have perspective on it. The popular argument that we are just "a small percentage different" from ANY animal is pure bunk. We are way different from anything on the planet, despite having similar DNA. It is how the DNA is arranged that makes all the difference. To say a small percentage equals similarity is incredibly naive and simplistic.
Click to expand...

We are not way different than a Bonobo chimpanze (our closet living relative). They have distinct personalities, heightened emotions... happiness, sadness, even known to commit suicide... They have sex for pleasure and for conflict resolution, this was once thought a human only trait. They have the intelligence of a approximately a four year old or higher.

Bonobo's are very aware of themselves... there are many good documentary on the Bonobo chimp which are different than regular chimpanze.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

PAF
The First Cause of Modern War is the Modern State
Replies
0
Views
92
PAF
PAF
susano
Kristi Noem is a dog (and goat) killer
3 4 5
Replies
86
Views
6K
acptulsa
acptulsa
susano
OMG, Thomas Massie just "liked" my post on X
Replies
1
Views
47
unknown
unknown
PAF
This Is How It Begins: The Deep State Wants To Terminate the Constitution
Replies
9
Views
2K
PAF
PAF
PAF
My Debate against Walter Block on Libertarianism and Israel
Replies
0
Views
282
PAF
PAF
Back
Top