So the only thing stopping you from raping your own slaves would be that you think owning humans is wrong. Otherwise you would be ok with raping your own slaves, is that correct?
Again, I can’t answer the question, because I do not think owning slaves is ok and I can’t imagine how somebody that does think is ok, thinks about rape, because that person is not me.
If someone was accused of enslaving and raping a woman and you were in the jury, the defense says “it’s not rape, it’s artificial insemination of my property”.
You would verdit them as guilty of enslaving, but not rape because artificial insemination of his property is not rape. Did I get it right?
So artificially inseminating your property without consent is rape when it’s a human, but not when it’s a cow. What’s the difference between a cow and a human that grants this?
Tomorrow we discover there’s an amount of (what we thought were) human population that is not really human. There’s a vote and all countries decide to classify them as non-human animals, not part of our society anymore and now standard to farm them as food. Woud you classify artificially inseminating this human-simile without consent as rape?
If yes, what’s the difference between this human-simile and cows that grants considering one being raped and not the other?
Well, it would depend on how good the evidence for that classification is, but I find it quite hard to fathom how that could work out. How can they be a “human population” but than turn out not to be? Either they are humans or they aren’t. We have like taxonomic definitions backed up by DNA data for that.
But trying to just run with it, I’d say if a population can pass as fellow humans and we only single them out because of a technicality, then I’d probably still consider them human, so I wouldn’t agree with the governments decision. Passing a IRL turing test has to count for something.
I can’t really answer that because I’m apparently having different moral values in this hypothetical scenario.
So the only thing stopping you from raping your own slaves would be that you think owning humans is wrong. Otherwise you would be ok with raping your own slaves, is that correct?
Again, I can’t answer the question, because I do not think owning slaves is ok and I can’t imagine how somebody that does think is ok, thinks about rape, because that person is not me.
Just to make a bit more clear:
If someone was accused of enslaving and raping a woman and you were in the jury, the defense says “it’s not rape, it’s artificial insemination of my property”.
You would verdit them as guilty of enslaving, but not rape because artificial insemination of his property is not rape. Did I get it right?
Nope, guilty of both.
So artificially inseminating your property without consent is rape when it’s a human, but not when it’s a cow. What’s the difference between a cow and a human that grants this?
Yes. The difference is that we are humans in a human society and cows are our food.
Tomorrow we discover there’s an amount of (what we thought were) human population that is not really human. There’s a vote and all countries decide to classify them as non-human animals, not part of our society anymore and now standard to farm them as food. Woud you classify artificially inseminating this human-simile without consent as rape?
If yes, what’s the difference between this human-simile and cows that grants considering one being raped and not the other?
Well, it would depend on how good the evidence for that classification is, but I find it quite hard to fathom how that could work out. How can they be a “human population” but than turn out not to be? Either they are humans or they aren’t. We have like taxonomic definitions backed up by DNA data for that.
But trying to just run with it, I’d say if a population can pass as fellow humans and we only single them out because of a technicality, then I’d probably still consider them human, so I wouldn’t agree with the governments decision. Passing a IRL turing test has to count for something.