Ethics of non-Killing ! ! !

[2810712]

yeah Bleh this is very important point, and as ERS says ethics are moral laws and our governments shoukld also aquire them .

hrushikesh

[biostudent84]

Should. But not necessarily so.

Remember? Hitler passed laws that made the Holocaust legal.

[2810712]

Yeah, what should happen and what does happen may differ greately.
See, in biology forum we should not discuss ethics , but we do discuss that .
Ok , discusing ethics is good [ i think so ] , not bad , but still it is different than what is expected from pure science forums.

____________________________________
I'm the driver of my cycle
I'm the writer of my bible
I turn the handle of my scooter
But what i can't control is my own computer ! ! !


hrushikesh

[Poison]

I think we should discuss ethics. all biologists do that. I mean, if you are doing an experiment, first of all you must think of ethics. and thats why we are not doing experiments on human, but we do experiments on rats.

PS: 2810712, I liked your signature...

[mith]

They are too intertwined,
my analogy is how studying history always includes some religious texts even though technically you shouldn't mix them up.

[2810712]

Yeah , its right ,practical-science includes ethics [but theoritical science doesn't]. And as this forum is not limited to theoritical science , and ethics is also required practically we should discuss that.

PS: Thanks Poison, its my own poem.

____________________________________
I'm the driver of my cycle
I'm the writer of my bible
I turn the handle of my scooter
But what i can't control is my own computer ! ! !


hrushikesh

[Charlene]

When you tell girls to not use cosmetics... Why don't you ask yourself... Why do girls use cosmetics? Girls use cosmetics to attract guys. If all the guys do not enjoy watching girls "with" cosmetics... girls wouldn't be using cosmetics~~~

[Poison]

girls use cosmetics not to just attract guys but to feel good.

[abstemious_entity]

in biology, the purpose in life is to eat, grow and reproduce. you have to be attractive to find a mate ("only the attractive survive") that's one of the main reason of cosmetics. and they need to be tested. if we can't test them on animals, then what should we test them on? which is more important a thinking being or lower organisms? animal testing, IMO, is a 'better' substitute compared to human testing...unless if cloning technology can catch up with our needs of the present. But wouldn't it be better if we were not made to think that cosmetics are necessary for you to be attractive? if media were only more responsible in their broadcasting?