- #71
mugaliens
- 197
- 1
Al68 said:Totally agree. The idea espoused by some that animals have rights comparable to those of humans is preposterous. But my point that animals could have rights, at least in principle, was in the context of determining the source of those rights, not a context of whether humans are obligated to recognize or protect those rights.
Yet while we may be the dominant species of animal on our planet, should not other animals have rights? If so, to what extent?
I didn't thump that cougar during my encounter with him, although I could have. As it was, it was an interesting encounter! Sort of a mutual understanding. Of what, I'm not quite sure! Still, he (she?) didn't attack, and we just sort of interacted.
Mutual respect? Perhaps the cougar and I were both sensing a mutual wariness. Perhaps the cougar was sensing more than I could. Their sense of smell is much better than ours. I'm sure they can smell fear (which I had in abundance), but can they also smell the fact that had it attacked me I'd have done some rather unspeakable things to in while defending myself? I was certainly thinking about it, just as I'm sure it was sizing me up, as well.
I think most animals can sense much more than most of us humans. We may have brains, but they have to rely on their instincts. We may not have teeth or claws, but even small women are not exactly informidable, and some have defeated mountain lions with their bare hands.
Back to being harmonius, whether between us humans or with our animal relatives, I think we'd all be much better off...
But wait? What about us meat-eaters? Cattle, horses and sheep are not. Dogs, wolves, and we humans, however, are.
Well, most of us. I enjoy a good steak from time to time...
Interestingly enough, we humans have one of the most diverse appetites on the planet, a factor I believe is just as responsible for our still being here as our brains.
So how do I reconcile this with being harmonius?
Hmm...