Juberu#3LrT5NRVks at 21 Jun 2006: 23:10
Language is NOT the only form of communication.
Where does this keep coming from? We're claiming that the animal cannot understand, nor express consent. We didn't say anything about "language".
All parts of our society that rely on this idea of "consent" do not expect the initiating party to conduct a full-blown scientific study on whether the targeted party is able to consent or not.
Do you know what a straw man is? It's when one side in a debate distorts their opponent's argument into an easily defeatable form, usually by exagerrating[sp] a non-essential part of it. One then "defeats" the almost-entirely imaginary argument, and declares victory. Any claims your opponent makes of deliberate misrepresentation can be covered up by blaming their poor typing skills.
In this case, you're ignoring a basic set of language skills which most adults in several languages have for conveying consent, or lack thereof.
The initiating party is expected to pay attention to easily observable signals of the targeted party and read a "I consent" or "I do not consent" from that. I think it's dangerous to take away an entities' right expressing no-consent non-verbally because such entity lacks capacity of language.
No, it's largely about intelligence to understand consent, at least by human definition. If the animal cannot understand or give consent, then one must assume there is none. It may not be true, but until you can find conclusive evidence to the contrary, it's safer.
Basically, one side says animal can consent in there own way and that this low level consent can and should be obtained, while the other side says animal consent is unimportant because of the superiority of Man.
I've seen none of the latter here. Incidentally, I think it's because of the alleged "superiority" that we need consent. Our "consent" is much more complex than theirs. Why should ours go out the window? All the times I've asked this, I've gotten "because the animal can't understand it" back, or nothing at all. My response; that's exactly my bleeping point.