A very selfish attitude

Umm, yes...

Humans > Other mammals > Insects

I think most people would agree with that. Furthermore, I doubt very many people agree with your assessment that infectious bacteria have the right to life.

Intelligence of a species is the best way to determine its right to life. The average laptop today is about as intelligent as a fish. If you don't see any moral harm in destroying your own computer, I fail to see how catching a fish would be any worse.

I'm not talking about eating something to extinction. Why is it that you think an individual cow has the right to life, but an individual potato does not?

That doesn't answer my question. Do you have the right to use antibiotics because the specific bacteria in your body have the right to life?

I think it would be a bad idea to cause the extinction of something that can be studied. I don't think it would be immoral in the sense of the bacteria's right to life.

There are water shortages in some spots of the world. That hardly is a valid argument against my eating a hamburger here on the East coast of America.

 

"Most people" may agree that there is a rank in intelligence (duh!) but most people do not suggest that that is the basis for determining the right to exist.

I do not think that. I think in terms of species when it comes to the questions you are raising. Obviously a cow has feelings and can sense pain whereas a plant cannot, so that is a factor, but as far as a species of plant and a species of animal, they are equal and have equal right to exist. As one becomes more rare, its value is raised, for example a squirrel is less valuable than a panda or tiger because the latter are endangered.

Yes so long as it is not causing the extinction of that bacteria, which in most every case it obviously would not be.

The world as a whole and right here in the good ol' U.S. of A. C'mon over to the western U.S. and you might get a better idea of the problems. But that might mean opening your mind to new info. Better stay in your little section of the "world". Small mind, small world.

 

Untrue. Everyone in a recent class I took agreed with this. These were very smart and highly evolved people though, no one you would know.

Now you are comparing inanimate objects with living organisms?! This is ridiculous. Stop wasting my time.

 

Well your profile says you're an atheist, so I assume you don't believe in any kind of mystical life force. What is it that makes destroying life worse than destroying inanimate objects, if not for the complexity (intelligence)?

Comparing a laptop to a fish is a fair comparison, as both of their "brains" can process approximately the same amount of information.

 

I think they do, at least subconsciously. Most people have no qualms about eating cows or pigs, but detest the murder of humans.

You're making judgments based on intelligence, which you claim should not be a factor in determining right to life.

Why don't those bacteria have the right to life? How is your abstract criteria of "feelings" or "pain" any better than my objective criterion of intelligence?

Pass the ketchup, I need a burger.

 

I do not need to believe in a God to have compassion for other living things. Only humans would place such importance on inanimate objects (of our creation of course). Humans are not the most important species. I do not elevate our species to the point where we can "play God" and decide what other life is allowed to exist on Earth. The simple fact that people like me can recognize the importance and intrinsic value of every single species is evidence enough that we should use that given charity to help preserve all life on earth regardless of its use or service to us.

 

Whatever. Get out more. I know lots of people who don't eat dead animals.

Only in terms of species did I fail to impose that standard.

Individuals do not have the same rights as entire species.

 

Your post contains a lot of emotion, but not much reason. You didn't answer my question: Since you don't believe in any kind of mystical life force, what is it (if not intelligence/complexity) that gives something an inherent right to exist?

 

Among the other 95% of us that aren't vegetarians, I think you'll find a fair number of people who are opposed to the murder of humans.

So I ask you again: what's wrong with eating a cow? Cows aren't endangered.

EDIT: I made a thread on the Politics forum to consolidate this topic into a single thread. Let's resume the discussion there.

 

Plants do have feelings.
http://hipforums.com/forums/showthread.php?t=22226&highlight=plants+feelings

Maybe you should work on a market garden that grows rockmelons.Any unsalable ones are chucked under the wheels of the slowly moving tractor.You can hear the melons screeming as they are being squashed flat.