The idea that we can actually have an impact on places more or less instantly, too, by responding in some way or not responding, I think, also makes it true.

Torturing a human being is almost always wrong, but it is not absolutely wrong.

What is there about the notion of a person, at law, that makes every living member of the species Homo sapiens a person, irrespective of their mental capacities, but excludes every nonhuman animal - again, irrespective of their mental capacities?

Cheats prosper until there are enough who bear grudges against them to make sure they do not prosper.

The Internet, like the steam engine, is a technological breakthrough that changed the world.

I don't think there's anything in the compromise that means that there's a clash of ethics.

I don't understand the notion that modern farming is anything do to with nature. It's a pretty gross interference with nature. I think it ought to be governed by the standards of how it affects the individual animals, just as we'd want to deal with institutions that deal with humans by how they affect individual humans.