People

 

Eat

 

Tasty

 

Animals

 

 

 

P.E.T.A

 

 

 

\ i rest my case

I don't believe animals have any rights. If a guy wants to chop up cats and feed them to his dogs, as long as he owns all animals involved then it shouldn't be against the law. I still think it's sick though.

I don't believe animals have any rights. If a guy wants to chop up cats and feed them to his dogs, as long as he owns all animals involved then it shouldn't be against the law. I still think it's sick though.

 

indeed, take a look at your nation's Constitution or whatever they have that's similar. Anything about animal rights? Not that I can find. In fact, I believe animals are considered property, and what property has rights?

I don't believe animals have any rights. If a guy wants to chop up cats and feed them to his dogs, as long as he owns all animals involved then it shouldn't be against the law. I still think it's sick though.

 

indeed, take a look at your nation's Constitution or whatever they have that's similar. Anything about animal rights? Not that I can find. In fact, I believe animals are considered property, and what property has rights?

 

 

 

There are animal cruelty laws in place in the US. Not part of the Constitution, but it's just a goddamned piece of paper anyways.

If needless animal cruelty can be avoided, great. If all animals could live a decent life and have a quick death so we can eat them, great. If not, tis sad but I'm not going to stop eating meat because of it.

 

 

 

Would a lion give you a quick merciful blow to the head to kill you humanely or would eat eat your legs first making you scream in agony and terror? It's nature. It's supposed to be brutal.

 

 

 

Having said that, we're the higher species. We have a consciousness, morals and altruism that extends beyond our species, hence why animal rights activists exist. As I said, if animal cruelty can at all be avoided, great, just don't expect me to join the cause when animals of our own species still go without medicine, food and water only to slowly succumb to disease and malnutrition to die.

 

 

 

As for testing medicine on animals and those of you who may be against it, would you rather your brother, sister, mother, or father die because of an experimental drug or would you rather an animal take thier place? The choice there is simple for me. Animal testing is a necessary evil.

Y'know, I see it this way. A Grizzly bear, for example..if it sees you at a distance maybe, it isn't going to walk right up, and slaughter you on the spot. However, if you approach, and you seem like a threat..then yeah, it won't give a care if it tears you limb by limb.

 

 

 

Another example..a shark. Normally, they'll just ignore humans or other species. If they are hungry, however..and it has reason to believe that the other is edible, it isn't going to hesitate to tear you apart and meet it's needs.

 

 

 

Y'know what else? Neither a bear nor a shark will willingly go out and give up meat for good to preserve human life.

 

 

 

So, humans..we have come out as the dominant species. Should we hesitate to meet our needs, of course, without unnecessary cruelty?

Y'know, I see it this way. A Grizzly bear, for example..if it sees you at a distance maybe, it isn't going to walk right up, and slaughter you on the spot. However, if you approach, and you seem like a threat..then yeah, it won't give a care if it tears you limb by limb.

 

 

 

Another example..a shark. Normally, they'll just ignore humans or other species. If they are hungry, however..and it has reason to believe that the other is edible, it isn't going to hesitate to tear you apart and meet it's needs.

 

 

 

Y'know what else? Neither a bear nor a shark will willingly go out and give up meat for good to preserve human life.

 

 

 

So, humans..we have come out as the dominant species. Should we hesitate to meet our needs, of course, without unnecessary cruelty?

 

Analogies like that are just fundamentally flawed. Sharks don't have a choice, it's eat meat or die. Humans do have a choice and brains capable of making informed conscious decisions. Given the availability of food in 1st world nations, people there don't need meat to survive.

I don't believe animals have any rights. If a guy wants to chop up cats and feed them to his dogs, as long as he owns all animals involved then it shouldn't be against the law. I still think it's sick though.

 

indeed, take a look at your nation's Constitution or whatever they have that's similar. Anything about animal rights? Not that I can find. In fact, I believe animals are considered property, and what property has rights?

 

 

 

There are animal cruelty laws in place in the US. Not part of the Constitution, but it's just a goddamned piece of paper anyways.

 

 

 

Those laws generally fall under property clauses. For example, slaughtering cats is illegal only because the cat is the property of an owner.

If I have to kill 500 dolphins, 30 whales, 80 dogs, 5000 cats, 120 chimpanzees, and a hippo to find the cures for AIDS and cancer, and possibly human stupidity, give me a knife and I'll get the job done.

 

 

 

Oh, ya, I hate cats. And whales are hard to kill single-handedly, so I gave myself a break.

 

 

 

I dunno, depends on how large a knife i have and how much time, a couple of hours worth of slashing should do the job.... but seriously, that guy must have serious issues, i could never bring myself to harm something that is no threat to me, much less injure cats and watch them get torn apart and he seems to enjoy it. IMO they should put him away for good, coz doing that to cats is one step away from doing it to kids. Its like the Saw (the movie) for animals.

Given the availability of food in 1st world nations, people there don't need meat to survive.

 

 

 

True. You can live perfectly healthy without eating meat. It would take some effort though. It didn't work out for me to be vegetarian. At some point i developed an intense yearning for meat. When i ate some meat loaves then, it felt soo good.

 

 

 

 

 

On testing drugs on animals: I do believe that developing all that drugs is the wrong direction medicine takes. From that point of view experimentation on animals is of course wrong to. Yet at present people don't seem to know any better. At least they don't hurt animals out of sadism. Still if i met a person telling me they are conducting animal experiments it would lessen my opinion on them. Also if i got the chance to free laboratory animals, i'd do so and i'd feel good about it. The argument that i might have killed people, who are in need of medication wouldn't have any impact on me at all.

Those laws generally fall under property clauses. For example, slaughtering cats is illegal only because the cat is the property of an owner.

 

 

 

But this guy owned all of the cats and dogs, and it was still illegal. If I own an object, say a stereo, I am allowed to destroy it in as mean of a way as possible and then feed it into a garbage disposal (although it wouldn't like it too much). It's illegal to kill cats and then feed them to dogs though apparently.

I think animal abusers should be given the death penalty.

 

 

 

I think it's only slightly less horrific than human torture...it's a living thing with emotions and it's not your place to hurt it for no reason.

 

 

 

I do, however, not give a crap about conditions in farms that raise food animals. They have not known any other life and their prupose does not merit a luxurious life.

 

 

 

 

 

If animals could speak and think logically, it would be equivalent of human torture. (well actually the animals would just be humans so it would be the same :? )

 

 

 

I agree with the stuff you say. But, to the food animals statement: Lets use cows as an example; if they were raised and grown under slightly improved conditions wouldn't their meat taste better? or be healthier of something of that sort. "Great milk comes from happy cows." So couldn't Great meat come from happy cows too?

 

 

 

 

 

Or is my logic just tripping over itself :wall:

 

 

 

Well yeah it does, there are some cows, I heard about it on the news. The farmers raises it on beer and hay and other goodies, and the meat apparently tastes really good, and goes for over $100 a kilo.

 

 

 

About cruelty to animals.. Depends what animal it is really.

 

 

 

Take a possum for example, they're a huge pest over here; In one night 70 million possums chomp their way through about 20,000 tonnes of vegetation. They devestate our native trees. So when ever I'm up at my uncles farm, we go and shoot them out of trees with rifles and shotguns, lol. On some nights we get over 100 possums too.

You got this off the PETA forums?

 

 

 

You PETA members are so hypocritical, your quick to stand up for the animals that everyone likes(i.e dogs, cats, dolphins, ect.) but you don't bat an eyelash when you kill a mosquito or cockroach...

 

 

 

 

 

Should I know what PETA is? :?

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

If your a "junkie" for preventing animal cruelty, then yes, you probably should know who they are.

One thing I always ask animal rights activists is if they spend an equal or greater amount of time campaigning for human rights. So, topic author, do you spend an equal or greater amount of time campaigning for human rights? If not, do you think animal rights are more important than human rights?

No one here is going to turn around and say, "Yes, I'm for cruelty to animals. We need to be cruel" so that's pretty much a giv'n.

 

 

 

Where the controversy lies is in the treatment of animals towards human gain. Taming animals was the first and probably most important step in distinguishing humans as the dominant species, so I'm not going to turn around and say "Oh we shouldn't use animals" otherwise, I, nor any of you, would not be sitting here today if our predecessors has.

 

 

 

Thr arguement on the treatment is hard to discuss rationally due to the elements of ambiguity and ignorance. One persons torture is another's acceptable behaviour and some issues, definately for me, anyway, people do not know enough about the behaviour or what actually happens to make a fair judgement. Speculation and propaganda doesn't help, tyvm PETA.

 

 

 

To put it this way, using animals is fine with me so long as it isn't used to excess. I think most people feel this way if I digress. If a cow is to be killed for food, then kill it in the quickest, most efficient and, importantly, humane way. Humane, we're humans after all, we know the boundaries so do it. Don't skin it alive or drain its blood or any of this bollocks, get it done with.

 

 

 

If an animal is being tested for medicinal purposes because it's currently the best and most efficient way, again, fine by me. This of course is one of those issues I'm ignorant in, I don't know if there are better ways or what happens. I'd like to know the truth, but that's very unlikely.

 

 

 

If it was revealed, like 100% positive, that somewhere like Burger King electrocutes zebras to death for their quarter pounders, then yeah, I'd probably boycott out of principle. But I just don't know.

 

 

 

I was trying to think how to put what I thought into words, and this is exactly it.

 

 

 

Humans are the dominent species. As long as we are beinifiting I don't really see a problem. Its not something you can say is right or wrong, it just sort of is.

 

 

 

Ditto, couldn't have put it better myself.

 

 

 

One principle I try and live by is to do no harm as far as possible. I eat meat, to me that's part of me being a human being, but I'd much rather eat a cow that's been killed humanely than slaughtered brutally. I know that's not really the case all the time, but unnecessary cruelty is where my problem lays.

btw it's true that animals are property by law. Nevertheless there are laws against animal cruelity (at least in my country). So basically animals are a subcategory of property, like real estate. There are different laws for real estate then there are for idk CDs and a personal computer. For example: You aren't allowed to set your real estates on fire for some reasons, you aren't allowed to set an animal on fire for other reasons, but you are allowed to set a CD on fire (or coal for that matter).

 

 

 

 

 

 

Humans are the dominent species. As long as we are beinifiting I don't really see a problem. Its not something you can say is right or wrong, it just sort of is.

 

 

 

uh.. the logic is a bit flawed: By that reasoning it's completely fine to take advantage of say native tribes, because we are the dominant culture. "As long as we are beinifiting I don't really see a problem. Its not something you can say is right or wrong, it just sort of is." =P

 

Slavery of black people is also fine according to your reasoning, because we are the dominant race and we can also treat women as we please, because we are the dominant gender. It just sort of is....

I love animals, even flies, snails, toads, rats and so on. I don't exactly need slugs, but i wouldn't harm them either. Mosquitos i hate with a passion, but who doesn't?

 

 

 

Animal cruelity? Imagining a living being in pain causes me pain. People who are hurting something are basically hurting me. Sometimes i wish i could walk around and "panic gaze" (the power of ghost rider) people, so they could see what pain they are causing. They'd go mad. Fools.

 

 

 

"Why are we so blind to see that the ones we hurt are you and me." =P

 

 

 

A circle of suffering that causes more suffering. Yeah!

 

 

 

 

 

EDIT: I'm totally against animal testing of drugs, cosmetics or whatever. I believe the end doesn't justify the means. Period.

 

 

 

You've basically summed up my opinion on the concept. I believe that all living organisms (besides plants or anything of similarty, as they have no nervous system) are of the same importance and significance as another. From my perspective, animal cruelty is just as severe as exploitation or torture directed to a human(s).

 

Humans are the dominent species. As long as we are beinifiting I don't really see a problem. Its not something you can say is right or wrong, it just sort of is.

 

 

 

uh.. the logic is a bit flawed: By that reasoning it's completely fine to take advantage of say native tribes, because we are the dominant culture. "As long as we are beinifiting I don't really see a problem. Its not something you can say is right or wrong, it just sort of is." =P

 

Slavery of black people is also fine according to your reasoning, because we are the dominant race and we can also treat women as we please, because we are the dominant gender. It just sort of is....

 

 

 

It's not flawed, you're reasoning is incorrect. He said dominate species, and native tribes, or black people during the slavery period are all the same species as us. Race or gender has nothing to do with it.

 

Humans are the dominent species. As long as we are beinifiting I don't really see a problem. Its not something you can say is right or wrong, it just sort of is.

 

 

 

uh.. the logic is a bit flawed: By that reasoning it's completely fine to take advantage of say native tribes, because we are the dominant culture. "As long as we are beinifiting I don't really see a problem. Its not something you can say is right or wrong, it just sort of is." =P

 

Slavery of black people is also fine according to your reasoning, because we are the dominant race and we can also treat women as we please, because we are the dominant gender. It just sort of is....

 

 

 

It's not flawed, you're reasoning is incorrect. He said dominate species, and native tribes, or black people during the slavery period are all the same species as us. Race or gender has nothing to do with it.

 

 

 

Took the words out of my mouth.

 

Humans are the dominent species. As long as we are beinifiting I don't really see a problem. Its not something you can say is right or wrong, it just sort of is.

 

 

 

uh.. the logic is a bit flawed: By that reasoning it's completely fine to take advantage of say native tribes, because we are the dominant culture. "As long as we are beinifiting I don't really see a problem. Its not something you can say is right or wrong, it just sort of is." =P

 

Slavery of black people is also fine according to your reasoning, because we are the dominant race and we can also treat women as we please, because we are the dominant gender. It just sort of is....

 

 

 

It's not flawed, you're reasoning is incorrect. He said dominate species, and native tribes, or black people during the slavery period are all the same species as us. Race or gender has nothing to do with it.

 

 

 

Took the words out of my mouth.

 

 

 

Likewise.

 

Humans are the dominent species. As long as we are beinifiting I don't really see a problem. Its not something you can say is right or wrong, it just sort of is.

 

 

 

uh.. the logic is a bit flawed: By that reasoning it's completely fine to take advantage of say native tribes, because we are the dominant culture. "As long as we are beinifiting I don't really see a problem. Its not something you can say is right or wrong, it just sort of is." =P

 

Slavery of black people is also fine according to your reasoning, because we are the dominant race and we can also treat women as we please, because we are the dominant gender. It just sort of is....

 

 

 

It's not flawed, you're reasoning is incorrect. He said dominate species, and native tribes, or black people during the slavery period are all the same species as us. Race or gender has nothing to do with it.

 

 

 

Took the words out of my mouth.

 

 

 

Likewise.

 

 

 

+3

 

 

 

 

 

Sorry for not responding for a while...I just had 3 tests for school to take....blech

 

 

 

I'm going to start off with what Bubsa said....you pretty much summed up what most of us were thinking. You have now proven that even bubsa can be serious :wink:

 

 

 

 

 

To Nadril: Just because humans are the "dominant" species doesn't mean we have to treat the "lesser" species under us like crap; which millions of people do.

 

 

 

To Indy500fan: How can you possibly say that? Because I definently can't say that myself. The guy HURTS THEM, then FEEDS THEM to his bloody dogs, which probably torture the cats before they die(not necessarily on purpose)

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

I want to clarify one more thing. This thread is NOT a "everyone should be a vegetarian" thread. Thats for idiots like PETA(When I said I didn't know what PETA was, I was lying...I just forgot about it :oops: ). I believe in eating the animals that were put on the earth for us to eat. But not mistreating them to literal hell.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

*gasps*

 

 

 

 

 

~Brs

To Nadril: Just because humans are the "dominant" species doesn't mean we have to treat the "lesser" species under us like crap; which millions of people do.

 

 

 

I didn't say we necessarily have to treat them like crap. What I said is that if the by product is an animal(s) dying to help humans than I am for it. I do think that you shouldn't go out of your way to harm them for when it doesn't have a purpose.

 

 

 

 

 

Hunting wise I'm fine with, mostly because there are rules and it does help control population of them.

To Nadril: Just because humans are the "dominant" species doesn't mean we have to treat the "lesser" species under us like crap; which millions of people do.

 

 

 

I didn't say we necessarily have to treat them like crap. What I said is that if the by product is an animal(s) dying to help humans than I am for it. I do think that you shouldn't go out of your way to harm them for when it doesn't have a purpose.

 

 

 

 

 

Hunting wise I'm fine with, mostly because there are rules and it does help control population of them.

 

 

 

 

 

Got it....sorry misunderstood you :)

 

 

 

 

 

I'm not a big fan of hunting........its ok if its controlling the population and if the hunter isn't just taking the horns and leaving the body to rot. Its good when the hunter uses all of the parts, just like the American Indians used too.

 

 

 

Where hunting goes to far is when the hunters(like I just said above) just take the antlers and leave the rest of the body to rot. Also its bad when the hunters go even farther and hunt illegal species

 

 

 

 

 

*gasps again*

 

 

 

 

 

~Brs

Bloodredsword, did you miss my post? I was wondering what your answer to my question was.

One thing I can't really stand is bloodsports, game shooting, fox hunting, bull rings and the like. The first couple are particularly common living the north of England.

 

 

 

In the past, when you needed to hunt to feed your family fine, but when you get rich sorts going out there and killing stuff for fun, that's when I have problems. It's the mentality of it, not that there's one less pheasant flapping around.