Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submitlogin

You're not holding much water to be honest. Pick one: a) animals are incapable of suffering b) we shouldn't care if animals suffer c) we should care and pass laws


My argument is the option you're omitting:

d) animals suffer, we should care, but we should not pass laws when their sole purpose is to prevent that suffering.

There is more to a society that what it compels at gunpoint. We can abhor behavior without proscribing it by law.


What is law if not the ability to arrest controversy?


Are you arguing that the solution to all controversy is to pass a law? You are proposing to solve all problems at gunpoint.

What space for different conceptions of the good, for diversity of values and preferences, could exist in such a society?

You must have limiting principles for when we should resort to the remedy of the law. Perhaps yours are different than mine, but I doubt that you have none at all.




Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: