Total Posts:13|Showing Posts:1-13
Jump to topic:

Idea for a debate

Doritosguy93
Posts: 3
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/25/2011 2:06:21 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
Hello, I have an idea for a debate that I think would be interesting to watch unfold. Dolphins should be considered non-human persons and should enjoy special rights and protections as such.
I'm not prepared to debate on either side of this topic, but I think it would be very interesting to see two experienced members debate this topic. My apologies if I posted this in the wrong category. Anyhow, just an idea, I hope someone takes action on it, I would like to see it, and if so, I'll be sure to vote on it.
Illegalcombatant
Posts: 4,008
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/25/2011 7:36:27 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 6/25/2011 7:30:57 PM, mongeese wrote:
I don't see how that would work until we are able to accurately communicate with dolphins.

I speak a bit of dolphin, but all they do is talk about fish.
"Seems like another attempt to insert God into areas our knowledge has yet to penetrate. You figure God would be bigger than the gaps of our ignorance." Drafterman 19/5/12
Doritosguy93
Posts: 3
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/25/2011 7:59:09 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
I understand we don't have objective, solid ways to judge the intelligence even of other humans, let alone dolphins, but there has to be something there. Otherwise, people wouldn't be questioning whether we should give them special rights (the thought isn't original if anyone thought it was, I heard about it on wikipedia, and then on askabiologist.com). As I said before, just a thought.
Justin_Chains
Posts: 623
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/25/2011 8:07:57 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 6/25/2011 7:59:09 PM, Doritosguy93 wrote:
I understand we don't have objective, solid ways to judge the intelligence even of other humans, let alone dolphins, but there has to be something there. Otherwise, people wouldn't be questioning whether we should give them special rights (the thought isn't original if anyone thought it was, I heard about it on wikipedia, and then on askabiologist.com). As I said before, just a thought.

Well, it raises the subject on what humans think of as an intelligent equal or an equal to the "right of life".

Dolphins are definitely our equal. They are the most intelligent living creature in the water and we are the most intelligent living creature on land. If everything is just a bunch of mechanical operations in our brain, then we should be able to figure out how to speak with dolphins and all animals. They communicate, so it must be a language. Are we so stupid that we can't figure out a mechanical language?

The difference is that life isn't mechanical. The only way you can tap into the language of dolphins is through the spirit, emotion, not mechanics.

All life should have rights.
Steelerman6794
Posts: 158
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/25/2011 9:25:56 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 6/25/2011 8:25:37 PM, mongeese wrote:
At 6/25/2011 8:07:57 PM, Justin_Chains wrote:

All life should have rights.

Anti-bacterial soap is immoral?

Inherently. By killing 99.99% of all germs, we are giving that 0.01% a natural right (the right to life) that is denied to the rest. This is discriminatory, immoral, and does not coincide with American values like "fairness" and "equality" (I'm reading off my ACLU pamphlet here).
Justin_Chains
Posts: 623
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/25/2011 9:51:23 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 6/25/2011 9:25:56 PM, Steelerman6794 wrote:
At 6/25/2011 8:25:37 PM, mongeese wrote:
At 6/25/2011 8:07:57 PM, Justin_Chains wrote:

All life should have rights.

Anti-bacterial soap is immoral?

Inherently. By killing 99.99% of all germs, we are giving that 0.01% a natural right (the right to life) that is denied to the rest. This is discriminatory, immoral, and does not coincide with American values like "fairness" and "equality" (I'm reading off my ACLU pamphlet here).

I guess we are just all destined to be murderers at heart. So how should we define what is right or when it is ok to kill life? Maybe acts of competition are ok, but acts of genocide or annihilation not. The jury should say that to kill for no good reason, is the basis for judgement? So whats a good reason? Cleanliness? Survival?

All good questions and ones to think on.
mongeese
Posts: 5,387
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/26/2011 10:10:54 AM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 6/25/2011 9:51:23 PM, Justin_Chains wrote:
At 6/25/2011 9:25:56 PM, Steelerman6794 wrote:
At 6/25/2011 8:25:37 PM, mongeese wrote:
At 6/25/2011 8:07:57 PM, Justin_Chains wrote:

All life should have rights.

Anti-bacterial soap is immoral?

Inherently. By killing 99.99% of all germs, we are giving that 0.01% a natural right (the right to life) that is denied to the rest. This is discriminatory, immoral, and does not coincide with American values like "fairness" and "equality" (I'm reading off my ACLU pamphlet here).

I guess we are just all destined to be murderers at heart. So how should we define what is right or when it is ok to kill life? Maybe acts of competition are ok, but acts of genocide or annihilation not. The jury should say that to kill for no good reason, is the basis for judgement? So whats a good reason? Cleanliness? Survival?

All good questions and ones to think on.

If the jury decides that cleanliness is not a defense, and a man uses the soap anyway, is he guilty of massacre? Does killing a bacterium carry equal weight to killing a human?
Steelerman6794
Posts: 158
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/26/2011 11:25:26 AM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 6/26/2011 10:10:54 AM, mongeese wrote:
At 6/25/2011 9:51:23 PM, Justin_Chains wrote:
At 6/25/2011 9:25:56 PM, Steelerman6794 wrote:
At 6/25/2011 8:25:37 PM, mongeese wrote:
At 6/25/2011 8:07:57 PM, Justin_Chains wrote:

All life should have rights.

Anti-bacterial soap is immoral?

Inherently. By killing 99.99% of all germs, we are giving that 0.01% a natural right (the right to life) that is denied to the rest. This is discriminatory, immoral, and does not coincide with American values like "fairness" and "equality" (I'm reading off my ACLU pamphlet here).

I guess we are just all destined to be murderers at heart. So how should we define what is right or when it is ok to kill life? Maybe acts of competition are ok, but acts of genocide or annihilation not. The jury should say that to kill for no good reason, is the basis for judgement? So whats a good reason? Cleanliness? Survival?

All good questions and ones to think on.

If the jury decides that cleanliness is not a defense, and a man uses the soap anyway, is he guilty of massacre? Does killing a bacterium carry equal weight to killing a human?

"A person's a person no matter how small."
-Dr. Seuss. "Horton Hear's a Who"

The only [sic] problem I can see here is that we all inadvertently kill trillions of bacteria every day without our knowledge. Trying to stop humanity's genocide against Domain Bacteria would be a bureaucratic mess.
darkkermit
Posts: 11,204
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/27/2011 10:22:44 AM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 6/27/2011 10:19:25 AM, Grape wrote:
Is anyone serious about bacteria or dolphins being equal to humans besides Justin_Chains?

The question is if Justin_Chains is serious about anything he says or is he just a troll.
Open borders debate:
http://www.debate.org...