Comments by "PeterC" (@peterc4082) on "Wendigoon" channel.

  1. 7
  2. 4
  3. 2
  4. 2
  5. 2
  6. 1
  7. 1
  8. 1
  9. 1
  10. 1
  11. 1
  12. 1
  13. 1
  14. 1
  15.  @sinaiis957  Forgive me but I see an environmentalist agenda here. These people were seen as inferior because of racism but not even that. People of same race have been seen as inferior. To this day people from former Eastern Europe are seen as inferior by those from the rich countries. I think for lack of better use people were seen as animals because what else is there? There are human beings, animals and plants and inanimate objects. Man is the only rational animal. We are special because we think rationally and we are self aware and we make moral judgements. (other) animals don't. But that does not justify cruelty to animals. The sad thing is that here we had experiments on even children and obviously on people who could communicate that they suffered, similar to what the Germans did in the 30s and 40s. As for what's acceptable it is definitely acceptable to experiment on animals for important reasons but not cause them suffering. And it is definitely acceptable to un-alive animals to eat them or use their byproducts but only in the way that does not incur suffering on them. It is only acceptable to un-alive people either in self defense or defense of others against aggression and also try to do it with least pain and also in the case of capital punishment where that is judged to be moral. Both of these fall away in the matter of innocents. It's never permissible to harm innocents on purpose or by intention. The bombings of London, Warsaw, Tokyo, Berlin, Hiroshima were all immoral acts where the civilians were purposefully targeted. If military or factory objects were targeted and civilians unalived incidentally and unavoidably that was permissible. It is never morally acceptable to un-alive or harm an innocent by intent.
    1
  16. 1
  17. 1
  18. 1
  19. 1
  20. 1
  21. 1
  22. 1
  23. 1
  24. 1
  25. 1
  26. 1