Slavery of humanoid

[Yunru]

Would you support or oppose humanoid slavery?

Now lets add a posible realistic scenario:
Henrik Bluberdorf creates a first humanoid animal in year 2085. He sells his work to industry.
In year 2089 the corporations start to produce a animal-human beings to work in industry for free. (cheaper than workers)
Their lifespan is araund 5-10 years and they cant reproduce.
They are intelegent just enogh to work the specific hard tasks that we humans tell them to do.
They are enginered to be scared of humans and they belive touching one will kill them (well they would die anyway if someone attacked a guard).
We give them one of the most hardest jobs in human world to do...from mining, to production and cleaning.

They are enginered for a specific tasks only.
For example:
Biber humanoids for cuting down trees.
Fish-like humanoid for underwater gold mining.
Cat-like humanoid in construction of a high buildings.
...And so on...

Everything would be programed into their minds how to do a job. (instinct)

Before you ask me..why not use robots?
Because some humans are scared of a too intelegent computer turning back on us and smart robot workers are banned.

So some organizations start to call on a ban, when they see how cruel we are to humanoids (please note we dont have laws for humanids, only for humans and animals). Would you be against or for it. (jobs are no problem..at least if you dont live in 3rd world country)


AND NO you cant use them as sex toys...they are genderless.

[Deleted]

I see a problem in enslaving creatures which are aware of their existence, and which ask where they come from and where they go to.

The best solution is to create machines without awareness, which help us without being conscious of themself, and which dont have to live in fear to work properly.

[Deleted]

How is this different to using horses or dogs?

[Deleted]

How is this different to using horses or dogs?

Horses are not aware of their existence. Dogs are, but they still have no consciousness.

[Mercadi]

Using domestic animals for the betterment of human life has many thousand years old history. Depending on how far you want to stretch the definition of domestic animal, you can do whatever you want.

[checking facts]

I'd support it if I could make a harem of them to please me, but since you said they are genderless and they think if you touch them they die, than I would oppose it, since slavery is bad.

[Arrashi]

Depends.
If they are catgirl type of animal humanoid (aka human with animal ears and tail) than its obviously sick and evil to enslave them.

But if we are talking about furries...... than just call inquisition and perform exterminatus.

[Yarathir]

Enslavement of sapient creatures is a no-no.

[Kraenen]

Horses are not aware of their existence. Dogs are, but they still have no consciousness.

what?.....really, what?

[Deleted]

Enslavement of sapient creatures is a no-no.

Do not believe in the me that believes in you? Not the you that believes in me? Believe in yourself?

OT; No.

[Deleted]

Horses are not aware of their existence. Dogs are, but they still have no consciousness.

You being sarcastic? Sarcasm doesn't work over the internet.

[Niteowl15]

All slavery-based morality aside... Isn't a big concern today that more and more companies are replacing workers with cheaper, more efficient types of production (Machines, Computers Etc.)? What would be different about these?

[Abbzow]

Horses are not aware of their existence. Dogs are, but they still have no consciousness.

I don't get this.

[Doctor Amadeus]

Just wrong on so many levels, you might as well ask how many people think rape is ok, or would support that. This is the 21st century, I am really pretty shocked and sad that this would even be a question "Would you support or oppose humanoid slavery?" The answer is NO, of course I wouldn't this is a sick and stupid question, and disturbing that anybody would entertain this as a real possibility, as if there isn't hundreds and hundreds or not thousands or years of written history as evidence of why SLAVERY is an extremely BAD idea.

And no it doesn't matter if you say NOT as sexual slaves, that doesn't make slavery OK or better. It is dehumanizing, cruel and barbaric, and it is an inexcusable act.

[Deleted]

Rym I really hope you were being sarcastic there.

[Deleted]

Are Gnomes aware of their existence?

Still people play them.

Think about it.

[Calfredd]

If they have the mental capacity to gain self-awareness, they'll question their existence. If they question their existence, they'll question what they are doing. If they question what they are doing, they'll rise up. If they rise up, they'll fight and overthrow humanity. If they overthrow humanity, we have just become Quarian. I'd rather not be like Quarians so I would not support humanoid slavery.

[Yunru]

Just wrong on so many levels, you might as well ask how many people think rape is ok, or would support that. This is the 21st century, I am really pretty shocked and sad that this would even be a question "Would you support or oppose humanoid slavery?" The answer is NO, of course I wouldn't this is a sick and stupid question, and disturbing that anybody would entertain this as a real possibility, as if there isn't hundreds and hundreds or not thousands or years of written history as evidence of why SLAVERY is an extremely BAD idea.

And no it doesn't matter if you say NOT as sexual slaves, that doesn't make slavery OK or better. It is dehumanizing, cruel and barbaric, and it is an inexcusable act.

Yeah...but humans. Not animal-humans.

We could say that we enslaved robots right now.

[Doctor Amadeus]

If they have the mental capacity to gain self-awareness, they'll question their existence. If they question their existence, they'll question what they are doing. If they question what they are doing, they'll rise up. If they rise up, they'll fight and overthrow humanity. If they overthrow humanity, we have just become Quarian. I'd rather not be like Quarians so I would not support humanoid slavery.

That is not why slavery is wrong, taking someone else's liberty away from them and putting them in captivity for no other purpose than to serve your own means is wrong.

[Deleted]

Just wrong on so many levels, you might as well ask how many people think rape is ok, or would support that. This is the 21st century, I am really pretty shocked and sad that this would even be a question "Would you support or oppose humanoid slavery?" The answer is NO, of course I wouldn't this is a sick and stupid question, and disturbing that anybody would entertain this as a real possibility, as if there isn't hundreds and hundreds or not thousands or years of written history as evidence of why SLAVERY is an extremely BAD idea.

And no it doesn't matter if you say NOT as sexual slaves, that doesn't make slavery OK or better. It is dehumanizing, cruel and barbaric, and it is an inexcusable act.

That's quite the strawman, he's not asking if people would support human enslavement and he didn't mention rape either so you shouldn't.

His argument would perhaps have more basis for you if you viewed the creature in question as a working animal similar to say dogs, horses and cattle.

A creature which could perform tasks that a human could do but doesn't have the same awareness of the world.

So for example:
A human can catch a ball, and you can train a dog to catch a ball.
A human can speak, and you can teach a parrot to speak.
If a human can clean a tabletop, then you could teach this creature to clean a tabletop and so on.

The question was, is this right?