Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Lestat Again the fallacy of comparing extremely exceptional cases amongst humans with run of the mill animals. If I cut of the legs and arms of a human, and damage his brain good so he can only eat and digest food, he will have to crawl & feed like a worm, does that mean I should consider worms as equal to man? |
I do not think that is a fair characterisation of the argument, at least as far as I understand it. The thrust and the danger runs in the other direction. In those circumstances it is not a question of whether you should consider worms as equal to man: it is that in some states the society will consider such a person as equal to a worm. The status of worms is important in such circumstances, and the reasons for granting human rights on an irrational but absolutist basis lie there too