Quote (Skinned @ Oct 14 2014 11:32am)

I think our relationship with our nutrition is drastically going to change and very soon will be different than growing plants and raising livestock.  An end of food may happen.  Fucking is changing everyday, especially reproduction.  Think of the future of designer babies with improved genetics.  Dying has drastically changed over the past two centuries, and while people used to die in their homes surrounded by loved ones or drop over wherever they stood now people die in facilities designed for facilitating death, surrounded by technology and professional staff tending to the dying.  Even the process is different to us; it was the spirit leaving the body before, and now it is a process of organs shutting down until cognitive functioning is gone.  Working has definitely changed and will keep changing rapidly.  Sleeping?  Maybe we will figure out this dream thing and be able to do therapy in our sleep eventually.

While those fundamentals won't exactly be going anywhere, they will definitely change fundamentally from time to time.

As for duty, it is a moral duty to follow the moral law, not a legal duty.  The idea of sanctioning people who do not respect the rights of others is a legal idea and not a moral idea.  There needs to be a loosely agreed upon sanctioner for that to happen.  Kant talked about a City of Ends, where everybody followed the moral law and legal law was unnecessary.  His version of Utopia.

Quote (Voyaging @ 14 Oct 2014 21:08)

Yes that's correct, genome editing would eliminate instinctual predation and contraception would maintain ecological balance.



It would indeed require a very significant time and resource investment so global governmental cooperation would be necessary (which is why I say it's far-fetched; I think it's unlikely that we'll pass the ideological hurdles in creating a consensus to make it happen )



At least at first, this would likely be technologically out of reach. Micromanagement of the oceans would require pretty advanced nanotechnology, which of course is still in its infancy and what we can do with it is barely known.

This is not my original idea by the way. You can read more from what I think is the earliest outline of it, from David Pearce, here, if you're interested: http://www.abolitionist.com/reprogramming/index.html

Lots of good content on that group of sites in general, regardless if you agree with his ideas.

Quote (WidowMaKer_MK @ 15 Oct 2014 07:06)

...I am wondering if the " human " rights some wish to extend to lesser species includes the fetuses of those species ...in other words if we extend personhood to the chimpanzee can we legally abort the fetus of a chimp that was raped by another chimp...we know the chimp can't make that decision since a chimp wouldn't know the difference between chimp rape and normal chimp breeding habits...also , would we finally be able to make it illegal for one chimp to throw chimp poo at a fellow chimp without the other chimps consent and what about the embarrassing incidents of public chimp masturbation that occur in every man-made chimp habitat we provide for them...of course we have to recognize that when humans commit similar offenses we hold them accountable under our laws but are we suppose to let these " humanized " chimps act like a bunch of animals ?