Quote:
Victus wrote
Going in the opposite direction, I'm not entirely sure a case could made that existing laws rule out cruelty towards humans. While some cruel behaviours towards other humans might be illegal, it's entirely possible to be mindbogglingly cruel towards other people without running afoul of the law. This means either that 1) the laws of basically every country I've ever skimmed over have huge, gaping holes in them that will never be filled, or 2) the law isn't "about" preventing cruelty per se, although some overlap with that outcome occurs.
I'm not sure they have one beyond satisfying voters' preferences*. I was simply illustrating that even if they did, it wouldn't obviously scale up to the national level.
*Even though, yes, animal cruelty deeply offends my own personal morality and preferences.
|
Cruelty is against my preferences through normal empathy but I am not at all sure it has any moral relevance hence my current question.
Wondering why it is a bad idea to put my fist through the TV screen is not the same as wanting to put my fist through the TV screen (which I easily might, but I don't).
