Channel beagles


Rights linked to

It all started with the upgrade error. And had brought an important part of the bad reputation for the animals. I do not speak of the serpent that offered the fruit to Eve. Is that the translation from the Greek, “irrational animals” brought indication that all animals are not politicians, not smart, or in another version, not with the soul. From pragmatism to consider all of them lower organisms is not very accurate. Aristotle wrote that animals and political (Zoon politikon) just because realizaríamos our nature to fill in while we are in constant contact with the Paul of the city. Animal policy we are in the assumption that we will take action with the bathroom with habitat in the consciousness of the morality of the philosopher, called the moral magna or great moral.

And what about other animals? It is not known whether Aristotle wanted to say that you don’t use them cause, or to be less endowed with intelligence. It would be illogical, irrational, stupid? Or just animals “not political”? Anyone who has a house knows that a lot of estimadevotada animals in the collusion. And of course the type of site illegal. As a general rule, animals are not in arguem, evil on free, malandragens his interpretation of the intelligence. Even offers on top of that, they obey always, or nearly so. The value of them is beyond the freshness of the bourgeoisie owning a pet. Is multi-purpose as drivers of the blind, inspiring heroism, the rescue of people lost, buried in the disaster, or just the company alone. Service even to legal reasons as important as the balcony of one of the genius in Sobral Pinto managed to get a fair treatment of the newly arrested Luis Carlos Prestes on the basis of Article 14 of the law of defense of animals.

Though it is banned in some countries (such as Iran), in the face of bullying here and there, pets and the company they are today objects increasingly appreciated being relational. The citizenship of the animal, the cause of the end of post-modernism, brought issues that do not yet know the answer. We must accept introduces them to the scientific test? Which borders? The establishment of slaughter for consumption. Regardless of the aporias, it is worth thinking about what is happening right in their snouts. What is going on with people? Makes a lot we twice seriously. We know this by the growth of obscurantism scientific + violent activity. Devotees of Animal Liberation, abuse and the threat of the risk of murder for the support to our partners in progress. From this point, we don’t have more than one reason, but the enormous problem of morality. It wasn’t good business for atrocities with the impossible. Desaguamos in fundamentalism. Check rates and self-criticism, you will soon be facing teams that pulverize mosquitoes and stoning men desratização.

The fault of evolution that we have considered the Masters of all other species. In the science of the psyche called the Anima Nobili animals (Noble). We were so we set the opposition that the animals are non-rational. Sincerely in the face of a lot of the paradoxes and brutality of Human against human is really tempting to reconsider this. But we don’t have to deal with the theories of Darwin to know that, fairly or unfairly, we are still in the leadership of the Evolution Series. And since this is still self-evident, it is worth considering that if the experiments in Anima vili (animals that are vulgar and not human) can be less aggressive in the future even in the future. But today pilot tests using animals can still be the difference between life and death for other human beings.

For five centuries we follow to the letter the boot of Francis Bacon who advocated “make yourself in nature” to the use of the juice of the progress. We are both sorry with all the juice collected. But if we want change, we must conduct ourselves with class. Not only legal-legal non-human animals that are in the game, but also the choice of priorities.

In democracy in all the related topics at the same time, but what about priorities? Issues that can precede the other? This consumption and waste production or injury to the biome? Sure why not save the other, but it’s always good to think of them in level of different and preferably contrasting them. The science in the world like a million famélicos, ,conditions of prisoners, drug addicts, those who have no shelter should not swim in the bounce house?

We can answer it! But we have to assume: we love less.

Seja o primeiro a comentar

Faça um comentário

Seu e-mail não será publicado.