From: Sayke@aol.com
Date: Sun Mar 14 1999 - 15:35:55 MST
In a message dated 3/14/99 2:25:37 PM PST, cryon@mindspring.com writes:
> A good question, and here's my answer: when the chicken or pig or
> whatever, says. or communicates in any way, that it would prefer
> another. more "natural" bodily configuration, then this sort of
> activity is "immoral." Until then, as long as the animal in question
> keeps its snout/mouth/beak to the trough, this sort of activity is OK.
communiates in any way, huh... hm. what if we take decide to, in a what-
could-have-been-a-human, exclude the gene sequence that would be responsible
for the creation of a mouth?
what about certain primates that dont really communicate with us untill we
train em too?
id say that we can do anything to any organism that has no possiblity of
caring. the trick, of course, is gonna be engineering the brains of these
"meats" (ref to nevin and pournelle's "mote in gods eye" books) so that they
have no way to feel pain; much less care about it.
does that sound close enough for jazz?
"who will protect us from those who would protect us from ourselves?" -- uncle
al schwartz
sayke
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Fri Nov 01 2002 - 15:03:18 MST