[d0100]

> Maybe a little extreme but by the same logic we could breed humans for slavery and say that it's OK because they got bred for it.

The day an animal can articulate that, I'll agree with you.

Until then such comparison bears no meaning.

[goodrubyist]

That's wrong. What matters is the capacity to suffer. There are humans who do not have the mental capacity to articulate such a thing either. I'd highly recommend as it deals with such arguments in greater length. http://lockeanliberal.com/2014/11/02/what-a-conservative-col...

[d0100]

Suffering wasn't brought up. Just the comparison of being bred for food vs slavery.

[maxxxxx]

"The day an animal can articulate that, I'll agree with you."

They can if you keep your eyes open just a little.

[malloryerik]

So if I can't speak the language of my torturer, my suffering rightly has no meaning to them?

[option_greek]

We also don't make everyone who can't speak our language suffer.

[d0100]

Historically, we do. However, we are able to communicate even if we don't know a specific language.

[spraak]

So a retarded person would likely not be able to articulate that. Is it ok to murder them, then?