Have you ever wondered why don’t you find baby curry, human soup or something like that in the menu of your favorite restaurant? It’s so simple, we have some government laws that prohibit human killing. Why then this government is so keen on protecting human lives not lives of chickens or goats? Oh wait, there some laws to protect tigers, lions and many other animals. Anyways, I am not trying to argue that if there was no law protecting human life, then people would have been killing each other to eat. Certainly not. In fact, most of the animals do not eat meat of their own species of animals.
Basically, I am trying to say that there are definitely some reasons behind these kind of laws dealing with rights of humans and animals. A nice example is religious/social sanction against cow killing in India. It is not so long that Indians have been worshiping cows. Even some people believe that Vedic people were eating cows (ref). May be, after the advent of agricultural techniques, and after finding vast amount of arable land people in Indian subcontinent reduced meat consumption. Cow became more useful alive than killed for meat. And not to forget that bullocks were used to plough agricultural field (still used widely in present days). I am not saying that people stopped eating cows only because cows offered them material incentives. Surely they could have eaten old and unproductive cows. It can be argued that the cultural consiousness, of being compassionate towards life in general, played a key role in protecting cows in India. But, no one ever talked about protecting rabbits or cocroaches, except few crazy animal rights activists .
Roughly before a century, tiger killers were being rewarded, but now tigers have got too many rights. Even, in some sense, more than what humans have. Only because tigers in jungle make lots of money in terms of tourism.
Human rights also evolved in the same way. Europeans killed native Americans for their gold. But when they needed people in agricultural land and industries, they started importing people from Africa as slaves. And when they realised that free people can be more useful than slaves, America became the land of freedom. It also took same amount of time for the European nations to realise that free countries can bring more prosperity to them than occupied colonies.
I am here trying to say that our rights are a result of interaction between complex social processes and materialism, not because we have some divine consciousness.
Basically, I am trying to say that there are definitely some reasons behind these kind of laws dealing with rights of humans and animals. A nice example is religious/social sanction against cow killing in India. It is not so long that Indians have been worshiping cows. Even some people believe that Vedic people were eating cows (ref). May be, after the advent of agricultural techniques, and after finding vast amount of arable land people in Indian subcontinent reduced meat consumption. Cow became more useful alive than killed for meat. And not to forget that bullocks were used to plough agricultural field (still used widely in present days). I am not saying that people stopped eating cows only because cows offered them material incentives. Surely they could have eaten old and unproductive cows. It can be argued that the cultural consiousness, of being compassionate towards life in general, played a key role in protecting cows in India. But, no one ever talked about protecting rabbits or cocroaches, except few crazy animal rights activists .
Roughly before a century, tiger killers were being rewarded, but now tigers have got too many rights. Even, in some sense, more than what humans have. Only because tigers in jungle make lots of money in terms of tourism.
Human rights also evolved in the same way. Europeans killed native Americans for their gold. But when they needed people in agricultural land and industries, they started importing people from Africa as slaves. And when they realised that free people can be more useful than slaves, America became the land of freedom. It also took same amount of time for the European nations to realise that free countries can bring more prosperity to them than occupied colonies.
I am here trying to say that our rights are a result of interaction between complex social processes and materialism, not because we have some divine consciousness.
