[chezlaw]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
The fact remains that like it or not, all people, regardless of all of their faults, have a right to pursue a rich and happy life, and are not obligated in any way to give back to the species.


[/ QUOTE ]

So the basis for moral obligation is that they are in our species and not intelligence? Most retarded people give nothing back to society and are only a burden (you mentioned Stephen Hawking who is wheelchair-bound but not mentally handicapped - big difference).

What is the difference between retarded people (or babies, vegetables, etc) and animals? A modern philosopher, I can't remember his name, said if we think it's okay to slaughter animals, it follows that it's equally okay to slaughter invalid human beings. The common denominator being that they lack intelligence. He meant of course to save animals, not kill humans.

In your statement above, how do you differentiate animals from unintelligent humans?

[/ QUOTE ]
I think its Peter Singer.

chez