Right, no argument that it's an act of malice. My question is, what difference does it make and why is that act of malice bad, practically speaking, when it's being done to ants?
i dunno if ants should have rights. i think ants think they should have rights. that's good enough for me, they are a hardworking lot and build great communities all over my yard. sometimes, they stop in for a visit and bring their entire family. we have a nice relationship. should ants have rights? it's such a loaded question. but yes, they have rights. i let them eat whatever they want. they come file into the kitchen very neatly and respectfully in single file formation never cutting in line and pick out what they like, i then take that item and put it outside for all to enjoy. it's nice and makes me happy they are happy. they are so adorable and cute.
Well, I draw a line somewhere between small insects and small mammals. I am utterly convinced that the trait that makes some creatures worthy of empathy is lacking in ants. This trait is something along the lines of self awareness, capacity for pain, ect. Their brains just aren't large enough. However, it is correct that zoosadism is a common premature warning that someone will be a psychopath. More specifically, the typical three childhood traits of psychopaths is fire starting, zoosadism, and bed wetting. Does this mean there is anything inherantly wrong with torturing ants? I'm not convinced, but I certainly don't.
There's nothing inherently evil about asserting your power of size over insignificant, unintelligent bugs. They are nothing to us. They do not matter. And squashing them is funny.
There's nothing inherently evil about asserting your power of size over insignificant, unintelligent Thrylix. You are nothing to me. You do not matter. And squashing you is funny. You should have been born 80 years ago so you could have joined the Nazi's..
