I retract my apology!
You just want to make three posts in a row to beat my two posts in a row, admit it :wink:
You are making a moral statement! You do say how the world should be:
If you look carefully you'll see that that was talking to Ray. When I was talking to you I didn't make a statement of policy. I just described how the world was. With my conversation with Ray I said how the world was and what we should do about it.
It's okay if you still want to retract your apology. I'm just letting you know what I'm saying here.
So violence is bad? Why? Isn't it people's personal choice to fight? Or does "I just say" really mean "what I do is"?
Whoa, slow down. You're thinking that I'm saying something I'm not.
See, to me, everyone has their own point of view. You might like violence, you might not. Everyone bases their actions on their own point of view. That's going to happen like it or not.
Also society is made up out of each of us. It's all of us working together to make it what it is. The government can make whatever laws it wants, but without the police enforcing them, the courts trying them, the jails locking them up, construction workers building the jails, etc. Without all of those nothing is going to happen. Society depends on a lot of people all acting upon their own point of view.
Again, this is how the world is. You can like it or not, but that's how it works.
So, here's what I think we should do about it. If society depends on all these people acting on their moral code and we issue a law that everyone will agree on, then it will work well. If we issue a law that half the population doesn't agree with it will be chaos. Half the police will enforce it, half of them won't. Half the courts will be harsh on it, half of them won't. You see this with marijuana. Why do you think manditory sentencing exists.
So if there's something which the population is widely disagreed on then trying to restrict people based on it won't work (well) and will cause chaos. So we should focus on those things which are universal points of morality (or almost so) because those laws will work and keep society running smoothly.
This isn't a moral point of view, it's what I believe would be most efficient.
See what I mean?
And won't non-human animals care how they are treated?
To whatever degree their brains allow, yes. Differently for different animals.
P.S. You mentioned slavery and apartheid. Case in point, in both cases ending them caused what effectively ammounts to civil wars, chaos, destruction and death. (actual civil war in the case of slavery, just lots of chaos and anarchy over in africa).
watchmakers guidedog (love the name, by the way, what do you have planned for our evolutionary future?)
A guidedog doesn't decide where to go, just helps it get there... Actually to be honest I didn't put much thought into the name and it's not very apt. I just looked at my bookshelf for something to name myself after and saw, "the blind watchmaker"... plus I think puppies are cute.