Cosmic Marvel >> View Post
Post By
D. Strange

Member Since: Tue Sep 19, 2017
Posts: 272
In Reply To

Member Since: Sat May 17, 2008
Subj: Re: Infinity Countdown #4
Posted: Thu Jun 21, 2018 at 07:26:44 am EDT (Viewed 733 times)
Reply Subj: Re: Infinity Countdown #4
Posted: Tue Jun 19, 2018 at 02:15:42 pm EDT (Viewed 963 times)

    That is immoral too. You honestly have no problem with wiping out an entire species? No wonder you have no problem with Galactus.

IF it means me or my species continuing to exist? Would you? If it were you, everyone you care about, your whole species (remember Galactus is a species of one) would you really care?

Don't just state it is "immoral," make a case. If the animals are being genuinely used as part of the food process, and sustaining other life. No waste.

How is that immoral? Animals eat animals to survive.

Just killing them willy nilly is one thing, but doing it for survival (as Galactus does) is another.

    Interesting that you make this moral judgment about what we've done to cows but somehow it doesn't extend to wiping them out as a species. Why?

Actually, slick, my point was that human standards of morality don't apply to animals.

WHen humans were (and sadly in many places in the world still are) used and viewed as live sock, I find it horrifying.

I don't feel that way about cows.

    Biological behaviors aren't necessarily moral. Rape occurs in numerous species. That doesn't make rape moral.

Rape, unlike eating, is not a biological imperative. At least not for me. Sex is, but eating requires something to be converted into energy. Fruit is potential life, meat is dead animals, potatoes are roots that get a plant water.

Rape is a thing because humans evolved to the point where we have a concept of individual rights and consent.

Rape is not a "biological behavior" it is a choice someone makes. A Horrible one, but still a choice.

ut even if you look at the bare bones of sex, a human can survive without it... it would just be terrible.

Animals don't have morality. Humans do. Humans have morality MOSTLY applied to each otehr, with human life usually superseding animal life.

Would you put a squirrel on trial for rape? No? Its almost like more evolved beings don't view lesser as being on the same level as themselves. Like... Galactus maybe would?

    Higher in what sense? Might makes right?

Evolutionary. Obviously. Any being that is perceived by different species in different ways, just by them gazing upon them is higher on the voilutionary ladder.

No not, "might makes right." Needing to survive.

If GAlactus were real, I would want the military, superheroes, whatever to stop him. I would not want my planet sacrificed to feed him.

That does not mean it is immoral. Galactus is just doing what Galactus does... to live.

    People don't have to be great in order for them to have a right to life. Based on your standards, why can't I go around killing people who have Down Syndrome or are in comas? There are laws against abusing or killing pets. Do you think it's fine for a person to kill their dog because we are "higher" up on the food chain?

Wow, that is not even remotely accurate, and I am pretty sure you know that.

For starters, your quite frankly disgusting implication about people with Down Syndrome.

A person with Down Syndrome is still a person (or do you not realize that?) we are on the same level of the food chain.

Yes, I have a higher belief in the sanctity of life for people than animals. And I don't apologize for that.

And AGAIN, Galactus is not human. He's only really humanoid depending on who is viewing him.

As for harming Dos (or the like), I don't think it is good. I think it makes the person an asshole.

But I don't think say puppy mills are as bad as say the slave trade. I don't think raising chickens in a coup is as bad as the Holocaust.

Even your point on laws makes no sense, there are states with the death penalty. No state kills you for killing cat... to a lot of cats.

That is the whole point, different concepts for those lower on the evolutionary... just go back and read all the times I types it already.

    Because life is special and amazing and fleeting enough as it is, even life forms "lower" than humans.

ON the exact same level? Then go punish an ant-eater for eating ants. It snuffed out a lot of life.

Life is beautiful. It is also brutal. Life is amazing. It is also horrifying.

But, one could argue that "beauty" is a human concept, that exists only in higher brain functions.

So, is it?

It is enjoyable, on most levels of the animal kingdom. That doesn't mean much to someone who only gets to enjoy life longer by eating a lower spot on the food chain.

    And I'd find anyone who singlehandedly wiped out all spiders on Earth to be morally repugnant.

Even if it was for survival?

No, lets taking eating out of the equation. Lets get to some thing else.

What if they found a cure for cancer. The only thing that did it was something in a spider, and taking it out kills it. The amounts are so low that it would take every Spider on Earth.

More than cure cancer, this will help humans develop an ability to avoid cancer as a species.

Would that still be morally repugnant?

    But you haven't explained exactly why Galactus is so far "above" us, whatever that means, enough to justify he can kill us with no regard.

Higher on the evolutionary scale. A higher consciousness.

For the same reason bears don't have to think about killing salmon with no regard.

Why didn't you consider the trees and wild life that were there before your house was there? About if your dinner wanted to be on your plate?

It isn't about whether he should, it is about if there is any expectation that he would think about it.

Why would he. Not should, but would, that is the word to think about.

Why WOULD Galactus care about a group he refers to as insects.

Why Would you care about the bugs that want to eat your fruits and vegetables before you get a chance? That farmers work to keep off of them... leading many to starve when it is successful.

That's all we are to him. The bugs in the orchard.

BY the way... your genocide point is just factually inaccurate.

This is the definition of genocide...

"The deliberate killing of a large group of people, especially those of a particular ethnic group or nation."

Deliberate, that is the operative word. It doesn't matter to Galactus if sentient beings are on the planet or not. If they are all teleported off the planet the minute his ship arrives, he doesn't care.

He doesn't hunt down Species if they are off world and finish the job.

With very rare exceptions he doesn't care what world he comes to, it is just about food.

And if it is just about the food, there is no reason why he should have to be any more moral than we are as a species with ours.

We eat food to survive. We put our continued existence above that of other species. We place ourselves as a higher priority, you yourself pointed out that the law does this.

Why wouldn't Galactus?

Applying morality, even given he is a fictional creature, is like trying to apply morality to a bear for killing bees when it gets honey. Or person for swatting a bug for coming towards their picnic.