Animal Rights

Discussion in 'Animal Welfare' started by Savitri Devi, Aug 31, 2012.

  1. Bondo

    Bondo Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 13, 2010
    Messages:
    2,768
    Likes Received:
    251
    Trophy Points:
    83
    Ayuh,.... Let's see,.... I allow my heifer to graze on grass all summer(Grass that I don't wanta call "Food"),....

    Then I slaughter the heifer in the fall, 'n eat excellent cuts of beef all winter,...

    Ayuh,... That's Wasteful alright...

    The only Waste I see is a few bone fragments......
     
  2. politicalcenter

    politicalcenter Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 10, 2011
    Messages:
    11,137
    Likes Received:
    6,823
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    Oh....how terrible...We had a hog butchered not too long ago that has supplied us bacon, pork chops, ham, liver for fish food, boston butt roast, fat for cooking etc.

    They were fed tomatoes, potatoes, squash, cucumbers,turnips, wheat crackers, rice, and many other things that would have been thrown away. The ones we are feeding now are eating much of same along with corn and flour tortillas...some of them gourmet tortillas.

    I think that food should have been thrown away...don't you?

    PS. we are also getting two cows ready for butcher this spring...grass fed...we even make silage out of our grass clippings.
     
  3. FFbat

    FFbat New Member

    Joined:
    Oct 10, 2012
    Messages:
    1,023
    Likes Received:
    11
    Trophy Points:
    0
    It won't matter, the 'civilized world' will just let the extra people go without like we've always done... and people will still throw away half their bigmac.
     
  4. Oh Yeah

    Oh Yeah Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Aug 17, 2010
    Messages:
    5,110
    Likes Received:
    2,646
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    I find nothing wrong with your choice to be a vegan. I have a daughter who is one. I myself am not. I have a hard time with most animal rights people because most of them put the animals ahead of human life. I have met many when asked "how do you feel about abortion" have no qualms saying it is perfectly OK because it is a "womans right to choose".

    Perhabs, you have a solution for the excessive deer populations around the country? Is it better to let them breed to the point they are dying of starvation or to cull the herd?
     
  5. JUDGEDREAD

    JUDGEDREAD New Member

    Joined:
    Jan 18, 2013
    Messages:
    3
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    As an ethical person, I believe human rights are far more important than the welfare of animals.

    I don't think humans should be worrying about animals until the human race is at peace and no human is starving.

    I don't understand where these ideas of animals having feelings comes to play...how many Disney animal movies does it take until people start to see animals as people? Are you looking at a cow right now, and thinking in your head that the cow is talking to you in some way? Is you're cat really like Garfield? Is your dog really thinking like Brian Griffin?

    I don't advocate people hurting animals for the hell of it...but I sure get mad when people prioritize animal welfare over human welfare. I hate hate hate ASPCA or whatever it is commercials..stupid sappy music with a sad looking cat and dog. SERIOUSLY? While kids starve in the USA, let alone the whole world there are buffoons donating money other buffoons wasting time and money on animals!

    I think it is very unethical to put animals before humans. I think it is ludicrous to believe animals have any human-like empathy or human likeness beyond natural mimicking. The animal activist fad is just that, a fad....making someone feel like they are doing something good by being so different than everyone else that it somehow makes them 'smarter'...more 'ethical' and/or 'enlightened'.

    Whatever makes you sleep better at night...do you really feel better about not eating a steak versus maybe feeding one child in a day? Sleep well.
     
  6. Albert Di Salvo

    Albert Di Salvo New Member

    Joined:
    Jan 25, 2011
    Messages:
    25,739
    Likes Received:
    684
    Trophy Points:
    0
    You have just admitted making a bold statement without justification. Remember that.

    Here's my justification. I believe in a hierarchy in nature based on evolution. Nature has no mercy for inferior beings. It forces them to adapt or be used by beings of greater strength or intellect.

    I consciously reject what I perceive to be a secular form of moralism that doesn't realize it is merely an outgrowth of Christianity. There are many cultures that don't try to imbue insects, vermin or other creatures with some sort of "right." They laugh at that nonsense. Look at Muslims and Chinese as examples.




    Pain is a sensation, not an emotion.
     
  7. pimptight

    pimptight Banned

    Joined:
    Aug 20, 2012
    Messages:
    5,513
    Likes Received:
    23
    Trophy Points:
    0
    I think your a piece of crap for advocating for animals, while children die all across this world!
     
  8. Sab

    Sab Active Member

    Joined:
    Jan 26, 2013
    Messages:
    3,414
    Likes Received:
    17
    Trophy Points:
    38
    I don't see you doing anything for dying children. If we didn't have meat production then grains would be vastly cheaperand food more easily available.
     
  9. septimine

    septimine New Member

    Joined:
    Feb 18, 2012
    Messages:
    1,425
    Likes Received:
    24
    Trophy Points:
    0
    I'll give you my reasons for being a basic welfarist.

    First off, the notion of rights is silly on anything that cannot make a moral choice. The computer on your desk cannot veto an order to injure or kill, it cannot decide to help, it acts as it's program directs. Animals really don't get much beyond this. A bear's instinctual programming tells it to eat fish, thus it eats fish. It won't decide to not eat fish because it's cruel to the fish, it won't set aside a region of the stream to not fish in. It also will never come to the rescue of a stranger. Humans see another human, even a stranger as a person in need of help and will give up resources to help them. Animals don't do that. They don't give another bear a fish because that bear is hungry -- unless that other bear is one of its cubs. Without moral agency, the concept of rights is meaningless -- the thing cannot make real choices, it's doing exactly what it was told, and therefore cannot be held responsible for a poor "choice". That doesn't mean that animals should be treated badly, it just means that the concept of "rights" makes no sense.
     
  10. Sab

    Sab Active Member

    Joined:
    Jan 26, 2013
    Messages:
    3,414
    Likes Received:
    17
    Trophy Points:
    38
    Its a common argument. Of course this argument always falls apart when confronted with a human who is so mentally handicapped as being also unable to exercise moral agency. Suddenly its not moral agency that was important at all.

    However I am also an 'ultra hard welfarist'. I don't really hold to the notion of rights at all. I just hold to the notion that inflicting suffering is bad.
     
  11. pimptight

    pimptight Banned

    Joined:
    Aug 20, 2012
    Messages:
    5,513
    Likes Received:
    23
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Gave 500$ to water wells being built in 3rd world countries.

    Advocate all you want for animals, but if you spend your time and effort on animals, when innocent people are suffering, then you have no right to the moral high ground!
     
  12. Sab

    Sab Active Member

    Joined:
    Jan 26, 2013
    Messages:
    3,414
    Likes Received:
    17
    Trophy Points:
    38
    I have every right to the moral high ground. You don't define what is morally right.
     
  13. pimptight

    pimptight Banned

    Joined:
    Aug 20, 2012
    Messages:
    5,513
    Likes Received:
    23
    Trophy Points:
    0
    No, but logic does.
     
  14. Sab

    Sab Active Member

    Joined:
    Jan 26, 2013
    Messages:
    3,414
    Likes Received:
    17
    Trophy Points:
    38
    really? Thats news to the world of Philosophy. But then you probably don't actually read philosophy at all.

    Pray tell us how 'logic' defines morality because if you can you will do what thousands have tried for centuries.
     
  15. pimptight

    pimptight Banned

    Joined:
    Aug 20, 2012
    Messages:
    5,513
    Likes Received:
    23
    Trophy Points:
    0
    The only part of the bible that has any value, the Golden rule.

    If we all treated others as we would want to be treated, the world would be a functioning system. This is logic.

    In my opinion the golden rule is the most supreme piece of logic in the history of mankind.
     
  16. Sab

    Sab Active Member

    Joined:
    Jan 26, 2013
    Messages:
    3,414
    Likes Received:
    17
    Trophy Points:
    38
    Please prove that the purpose of ethics is to make the world a functioning system?

    I beleive in the golden rule. I extend it to all sentient creatures.
     
  17. pimptight

    pimptight Banned

    Joined:
    Aug 20, 2012
    Messages:
    5,513
    Likes Received:
    23
    Trophy Points:
    0
    We aren't talking about ethics. To me that is one of those fluffy words people like to use.

    You asked me to descibe how logic defines morality. I responded by stating that the golden rule prevents immorality, and is logical because it creates a functional system.
     
  18. Sab

    Sab Active Member

    Joined:
    Jan 26, 2013
    Messages:
    3,414
    Likes Received:
    17
    Trophy Points:
    38
    So you don;t know what Ethics means so you call it 'fluffy'. We like to use all sorts of usefull terms

    So you have just used a circuluar argument. You said that The golden rule is moral because it prevents immoraility.

    You haven't claimed why having a 'functional system' is the objective of morality.

    I suppose you beleive that it is more moral to extend the golden rule only to people you are related to you or of your ethnic or national group.
     
  19. pimptight

    pimptight Banned

    Joined:
    Aug 20, 2012
    Messages:
    5,513
    Likes Received:
    23
    Trophy Points:
    0
    I can cite you the defintion of liberal or conservative, and if you ask 10 people to define them you will get 10 different answers. Ethics falls into this catagory as well. It is a fluffy word.

    Yes, yes I did use a circular argument. Most logic loops tend to be so.

    I have never claimed a functional system is the objective of morality. here I will quote my statement again for you:

    You don't suppose, you assume. Precise language is a wonderful thing.
     
  20. Sab

    Sab Active Member

    Joined:
    Jan 26, 2013
    Messages:
    3,414
    Likes Received:
    17
    Trophy Points:
    38
    and again

    Why should creating a functional system be the point of morality.

    I see you refuse to answer my charge that you extend the golden rule to your familly and national or ethnic group and ignore others.
     
  21. pimptight

    pimptight Banned

    Joined:
    Aug 20, 2012
    Messages:
    5,513
    Likes Received:
    23
    Trophy Points:
    0
    And again.......


    [video=youtube;etuPF1yJRzg]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=etuPF1yJRzg&feature=player_detailpage[/video]

    WTF, the racism on this board is amazing!
     
  22. Sab

    Sab Active Member

    Joined:
    Jan 26, 2013
    Messages:
    3,414
    Likes Received:
    17
    Trophy Points:
    38
    so you just make meaningless statements and refuse to back them up.
     

Share This Page