Re: funky genetically-engineered chickens
Sun, 14 Mar 1999 17:35:14 EST

In a message dated 3/14/99 2:25:37 PM PST, writes:

> A good question, and here's my answer: when the chicken or pig or
> whatever, says. or communicates in any way, that it would prefer
> another. more "natural" bodily configuration, then this sort of
> activity is "immoral." Until then, as long as the animal in question
> keeps its snout/mouth/beak to the trough, this sort of activity is OK.

communiates in any way, huh... hm. what if we take decide to, in what-could- have-been-a-human, exclude the gene sequence that would be responsible for the creation of a mouth?

what about certain primates that dont really communicate with us untill we train em too?

id say that we can do anything to any organism that has no possiblity of caring. the trick, of course, is gonna be engineering the brains of these "meats" (ref to nevin and pournelle's "mote in gods eye" books) so that they have no way to feel pain; much less care about it.

does that sound close enough for jazz?

"Who will protect us from those who would protect us from ourselves?" -- Uncle Al Schwartz