Concepts like rape don’t exist in the animal kingdom
Did you forget humans are animals? If you don’t like using the word rape to describe sexually violating an animal, there’s another one we’ve come up with… bestiality.
Same for the thing about taking children away
Are you seriously trying to say humans are the only species who should have a right not to be sexually violated or have their children taken from them and killed? Since we know that cows are thinking, feeling, emotional creatures capable of forming strong family bonds… what exactly is it about humans that makes them special in that way?
Did you forget humans are animals? If you don’t like using the word rape to describe sexually violating an animal, there’s another one we’ve come up with… bestiality.
Humans are special in more than one characteristic. One of them is that humans have consensual intercourse and have a word for and laws against intercouse that isn’t.
Cows don’t have that. Animals in general don’t have that. You wouldn’t say one shark is raping another. Or lions are raping each other. Unless you are really missing the point at least
Bestiality is another term you don’t seem to understand. Artifical insemination does not involve the performance of sexual acts from the human’s point of view.
It’s a human term from a human’s perspective.
You wouldn’t call it Bestiality when a dog humps your leg. the animal’s perspective does not matter here. It should be that way because animals cannot in a meaningful way consent.
Are you seriously trying to say humans are the only species who should have a right not to be sexually violated or have their children taken from them and killed?
I don’t agree with the term sexual violation.
In a perfect way no animal would ever die, but nature is eat or be eaten most of the time. Cows usually are the ones that will be eaten.
You don’t need to get anthropomorphic to argue the ethical case. Besides, I have given many more arguments than the ethical aspects, while you only point to “nature”, so I will not engage in this discussion any further.
Thank you for the exchange though, and I’d be happy if you would reflect on your views one day and consider the perspective of other beings.
If the description above is not dramatic the idk.
Concepts like rape just don’t exist in the animal kingdom. It’s like the standard way of having offspring.
Same for the thing about taking children away.
Did you forget humans are animals? If you don’t like using the word rape to describe sexually violating an animal, there’s another one we’ve come up with… bestiality.
Are you seriously trying to say humans are the only species who should have a right not to be sexually violated or have their children taken from them and killed? Since we know that cows are thinking, feeling, emotional creatures capable of forming strong family bonds… what exactly is it about humans that makes them special in that way?
Humans are special in more than one characteristic. One of them is that humans have consensual intercourse and have a word for and laws against intercouse that isn’t.
Cows don’t have that. Animals in general don’t have that. You wouldn’t say one shark is raping another. Or lions are raping each other. Unless you are really missing the point at least
Bestiality is another term you don’t seem to understand. Artifical insemination does not involve the performance of sexual acts from the human’s point of view.
It’s a human term from a human’s perspective.
You wouldn’t call it Bestiality when a dog humps your leg. the animal’s perspective does not matter here. It should be that way because animals cannot in a meaningful way consent.
I don’t agree with the term sexual violation.
In a perfect way no animal would ever die, but nature is eat or be eaten most of the time. Cows usually are the ones that will be eaten.
Choose one
I didn’t say all characteristics so I don’t think I have to
Yep, totally natural way of having offspring
CW: faecal matter
Not what I said. Something being unnatural doesn’t make it rape though.
In vitro insemination in humans also isn’t rape.
No, but you keep arguing by applying naturalistic fallacy.
You keep arguing by anthropomorphic fallacy
You don’t need to get anthropomorphic to argue the ethical case. Besides, I have given many more arguments than the ethical aspects, while you only point to “nature”, so I will not engage in this discussion any further.
Thank you for the exchange though, and I’d be happy if you would reflect on your views one day and consider the perspective of other beings.