[Weatherlight]

There's a huge distinction between injustices caused by humans and those caused by nature.

Where did you get this attitude? Humans were created by God in His own image and therefore all their minds, thoughts, and actions are inherently specialer? Humans are of the supernatural world, not the natural?

So it's quite moral if it's out of sight, out of mind, and you're off the hook if you think it's not very easy to do the right thing? How, then, is anyone responsible for, uh, most things?

What if I'm on the other side of the street from the pond in which Mr. Pedophile is drowning the girl? Is that far enough for me to be judged clean? Or perhaps should I be 20 feet away, or 25? What if I'm late for work, so it would be difficult for me to deal with everything if I interfere? Or if I'm tired and my feet hurt, the nearest phone is quite out of my way--is that difficult enough for it to be ok for me to ignore?

And really, what does it matter for what purpose he's drowning her for, or who is drowning her at all? She's still drowning, isn't she? Try telling her corpse "It's fine that I didn't want to bother to pull you out earlier, because I figured no one would use your dead body for something like that," you think it can hear you?

I think it would be a lot more difficult to stop a murderer by yourself than to just pull out a drowning child.

The AW argument would have been more along the lines of putting the fish in bigger bowls or something inane and virtually meaningless like that.

Haha, I like it, good example.

You mean animal liberation? I'm not sure I see a huge distinction between AR and AL.

Rights theory assigns, well, rights to individuals that would be immoral to violate. I have the right to not be harvested for my organs. I also don't have the right to harvest others for their organs; everyone has the same right as I do. All else being equal, utilitarianism would say that there are no such rights, there is only the conclusion based on consequence, which would be that I ought to be harvested if each kidney and lung, liver, heart, etc saved the lives of many other people and made them happy.

By holding the entire human species accountable for the injustices committed by *most* but *not all* people, I'm generalizing against people in a way that I condemn others for generalizing against animals. I suppose this can be viewed as a form of affirmative action, but is it right or wrong?

I thought affirmative action was about giving extra help to those most likely to need it, in a simplistic but efficient way, not punishing people for being grouped with those who cause harm. Oh, I'd love the reaction if laws were passed directly taxing only Caucasian-Americans so the money could go to African-Americans. Even more if the former group were to all be lynched. Ahem...

I think my feelings are representative of many vegans, whether they're willing to admit it or not

Also of non-vegans. In some circles, it almost seems like it's "cool" for the "superior kids" to be speciesist against humans. Oooo. Easy to indulge in oversimplified, irrational blaming and hatred, perhaps requiring a bit more thought to look at reality a bit more objectively. No offense to any individual in particular :P

Humans are animals.

True and irrelevant, taken literally. I'm thinking the meaning was more like "Humans are sentient beings like the others"? I don't know about "despicable," since that's a subjective view I used to hold and no longer do, but many humans do end up causing a lot of harm.

So do wolves, bluejays, and African wild cats.

You can't have it both ways. Humans are biological beings, like all the others, just existing as themselves, watery sacks of chemicals, and they live and die. Or humans are superior and unique, in that they have souls, free will, and the image of God, unlike all the others, and they can be righteous or sinful and they get judged and sent to heaven or hell.

There is no inherent difference between the joy of a child, an adult, a dog, or a walrus. There is no inherent difference between the tool use of a human, an otter, a chimpanzee, or a vulture. There is no inherent difference between the pain of a wild rabbit, a captive wild rabbit, a domestic rabbit, or a feral domestic rabbit.

It can help with many things to accept your feelings and still think rationally, to think of how to change harmful behaviors without hoping that some deity tortures the guy who kicked his dog to death, the child who ordered a burger, the dog who bit your daughter, or the wolf who killed a rabbit.