130
[Ethics] Why do people condemn Zoophilia on the basis of other animal's inability to consent but those same people kill animals without asking for their consent? Why such inconsistency? (lemmy.world)
submitted 1 month ago by to c/asklemmy@lemmy.ml
272 comments fedilink hide all child comments
 

Be civil and follow principle of charity in the comments.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[โ€“] 3 points 1 month ago (1 child)

Assisted suicide is suicide, performed by the dying individual. Assisting in a suicide is enabling a killing, but is not murder if done correctly. The one performing suicide is the active party, not simply granting consent to the actions of another.

To bring things back to the original point, rape and murder are covered by different ethical principles. Consent has no bearing on murder. Consent is definitive for rape.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [โ€“] [S] 0 points 1 month ago (1 child)

    In assisted suicide, people consent to die a dignified death on paper and after government's approval further medical procedures are performed by the professionals. I don't see any problem here. Similarly I would have no problem with humans killing animals if animals start consenting to be killed. That's not the case. Whole social acceptance of killing of innocent animals and condemnation of rape feels like a show were Murderers are pointing out fingers at the rapists with the sense of moral superiority.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [โ€“] 2 points 1 month ago

    Assisted suicides do not consent to die. They request to die. They initiate the process themselves rather than allow the desire of others to dictate events. There is a subtle but important distinction.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent