(no subject)
What a fine example of scientific discovery:
http://www.nature.com/news/hybrid-zoo-introducing-pig-human-embryos-and-a-rat-mouse-1.21378?WT.mc_id=TWT_NatureNews
No doubt, this is truly an astonishing breakthrough for all of mankind, whose brilliance I am not blinded by due to my regressive and backwards fixed moral code. Scientists, of course, are the gods; therefore, if they tell us it will be, at some later date, a miraculous breakthrough in medical science if we were to utilize several species of animals in the creation of a human/pig "hybrid", so that at a later date, this abomination could be harvested for organs, then I suppose it must be so.
Verily, I am merely too intelectually deficient and closed-minded to appreciate this revolutionary procedure.
Essentially, what this means is that we have a life not merely being exploited for organs that might possibly be compatible with our own, (please pay no never-mind to that man behind the curtain crying that this life must be extinguished in the propagation of those organs) we now have lives that contain human elements being deliberately created, tailor-made for slaughter.
I am not an animal rights advocate, and see vivisection as a necessary evil that must be used only in extenuating circumstances. However, this is not science, and it is in certain aspects merely an extension of the eugenics movement with its utilization of an "untermensch", in that we have the hybridization factor as an argument for this creature being not quite human, just as the untermensch were viewed as sub-human. Not-quite human things, of course, we are perfectly at liberty to destroy.
Fact of the matter is, we have underestimated the intelligence of animals as it stands, but what sort of human aspects, intelligence, or awareness will this animal have? Such as Hitler used the "inferior races" excuse for vivisection when he outlawed the practice on animals, the justification for breeding this "not-quite" human hybrid has traces of that mentality, of justifying the creation and taking of human life based on permutable concepts of what actually is human.
This is progress? Ensuring an animal bred for slaughter operates on a higher plane as the beasts, the lesser creatures who nonetheless feel fear and pain? And in time, making this creature more human, but still untermensch enough to be sacrificed for the "master race", i.e., the pure humans. Its death is as inconsequential as those "post-birth" abortions perpetrated on babies and children who are, of course, not old enough to be self-aware, and therefore, cannot be considered truly human. Thou shalt not kill becomes try not to kill unless you have a good enough reason.
If this is what science has become, it has descended to the level of Frankenstein, in both its ethics and methodology. Yet that, I suppose, is to be expected when you have a crew of staunch moral relativists navigating the ship.
*
http://www.nature.com/news/hybrid-zoo-introducing-pig-human-embryos-and-a-rat-mouse-1.21378?WT.mc_id=TWT_NatureNews
No doubt, this is truly an astonishing breakthrough for all of mankind, whose brilliance I am not blinded by due to my regressive and backwards fixed moral code. Scientists, of course, are the gods; therefore, if they tell us it will be, at some later date, a miraculous breakthrough in medical science if we were to utilize several species of animals in the creation of a human/pig "hybrid", so that at a later date, this abomination could be harvested for organs, then I suppose it must be so.
Verily, I am merely too intelectually deficient and closed-minded to appreciate this revolutionary procedure.
Essentially, what this means is that we have a life not merely being exploited for organs that might possibly be compatible with our own, (please pay no never-mind to that man behind the curtain crying that this life must be extinguished in the propagation of those organs) we now have lives that contain human elements being deliberately created, tailor-made for slaughter.
I am not an animal rights advocate, and see vivisection as a necessary evil that must be used only in extenuating circumstances. However, this is not science, and it is in certain aspects merely an extension of the eugenics movement with its utilization of an "untermensch", in that we have the hybridization factor as an argument for this creature being not quite human, just as the untermensch were viewed as sub-human. Not-quite human things, of course, we are perfectly at liberty to destroy.
Fact of the matter is, we have underestimated the intelligence of animals as it stands, but what sort of human aspects, intelligence, or awareness will this animal have? Such as Hitler used the "inferior races" excuse for vivisection when he outlawed the practice on animals, the justification for breeding this "not-quite" human hybrid has traces of that mentality, of justifying the creation and taking of human life based on permutable concepts of what actually is human.
This is progress? Ensuring an animal bred for slaughter operates on a higher plane as the beasts, the lesser creatures who nonetheless feel fear and pain? And in time, making this creature more human, but still untermensch enough to be sacrificed for the "master race", i.e., the pure humans. Its death is as inconsequential as those "post-birth" abortions perpetrated on babies and children who are, of course, not old enough to be self-aware, and therefore, cannot be considered truly human. Thou shalt not kill becomes try not to kill unless you have a good enough reason.
If this is what science has become, it has descended to the level of Frankenstein, in both its ethics and methodology. Yet that, I suppose, is to be expected when you have a crew of staunch moral relativists navigating the ship.
*