View Single Post
  #173  
Old 11-12-2013, 05:52 AM
ColorsWolf's Avatar
ColorsWolf ColorsWolf is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2013
Location: CA, U.S.A.
Posts: 362
Default

Kevin, "It can certainly be argued that there should be "no laws about anything" since ethics and morals are so subjective, but I can at least understand why "society as a whole" feels that it needs to enforce certain things (Confining to either prison or at least a psychiatric institution someone who's just committed a series of violent rapes seems to me like a particularly understandable example).

Now socially pressuring (let alone physically forcing) people into cutting their hair, living monogamously, or even wearing clothes especially when illogical due to hot weather, stuff like that, in my opinion is certainly going overboard in the "mission to see that basic ethics/morals are carried out in society." Hair growth, polyamory, and public nudity are not ethical/moral issues in my eyes; they are merely matters of personal choice and preference.

Sooo ... where does one draw the line between stuff that "needs" enforcement (e.g. violent-rape prevention) and stuff that *doesn't need* enforcement (or even persuasion)? I don't precisely know, and I seeeriously doubt that anyone really knows. Again, as with the personal exercise of morals and ethics using one's best (hopefully educated) guess, the best I can expect any society to do is to try to conduct its affairs morally/ethically to the best of its (hopefully educated) collective understanding. Sucky state of affairs but there it is."


I actually meant a society reaching outside of its' boundries to those who do not currently live within it to force its' "ideals" upon all.~

But I like where you went with this subject.~ ^_^



ColorsWolf, "I know you like other humans may feel very 'protective' and 'caring' of other non-human creatures, but please don't let this 'protection' and 'caring' become 'discrimination' and 'patronizing.'"


Kevin, "Okay: as long as we're agreed that "protection," "caring," "discrimination," and "patronizing" are all ultimately subjective concepts -- just as I believe that *every* concept (as handled by the human mind) is ultimately subjective and the result of (hopefully educated) guesswork. What any one of those four quoted words means to one person, is certain to mean something somewhat different to someone else. Ain't it a rip-off to be a hopelessly subjective being living in a relentlessly objective world? Well, it is.

Oh by the way: can cats and dogs adapt themselves to (in essence reverting to their distant ancestors') life in the wilds? Well, it's been proven; many of them have done it. Thus it's possible, but I trust we can agree that there may (at least in theory and/or for argument's sake) be higher-priority considerations than whether something is possible."


I disagree with your conclusion here, I think it is very important.~

The state of affairs as far as the concept of "Pets as Property" is very dire indeed with facts being there are not nearly enough Humans willing to care for the sheer amount of these overly domesticated creatures yet more are bred every year, they overpopulate the cities and the "pounds" with many being killed (there is no pretty way to say it in my opinion) simply because "there isn't enough shelf space", and that's not even discussing the pure ramifications of domesticating them and treating them as "property" for trivial purposes in the first place, oh wait it is.~


Other than the parts of your posts I have already addressed, I love your way of thinking and I am so excited and happy that you understand exactly all of my points!~ ^_^

Love truly,

ColorsWolf
__________________
Love yourself, you are beautiful!~ ^_^

*Believe in yourself, you can do anything*!~ ^_^

Appreciate every thing, every thing is precious.~

Reply With Quote