about animal rights...

Post Reply New Topic

Simple, the logic that human societies are built upon legal structures meant for mutual protection and that stabbing me in the face would be harmful towards your desires, think of Hobbes when reading this argument and no, not from the cartoon. You seem to lack an understanding of the entire argument or of the nature of the societal structure and how the nature of laws

Derive this line. The very fact is that the line argument has no meaning. There is NO line, there is logic and illogic and the fact that you don't realize the illogic of allowing senseless killing leads me to conclude that you really haven't thought out these issues as there are plenty of reasons without referring to morality to not have the war of all against all, sheer self-interest argues against that. We already have animal instincts anyway, would the legalization of this really change that? We like violence, we like sex, we like lots and lots of animalistic things and the real question has nothing to do with animalistic desire but rather whether or not it allowing these animalistic things is acceptable from a utilitarian view of society. As well, one does not have to be a Vulcan to claim that a personal belief should not be enforced upon society. The relative nature of morality can allow for individual moral characteristics to go against the norm, the question comes down to why you should force other people to accept your morality and I sense that few people really get that. It is like I am arguing whether or not homosexuality should be allowed and you claim that my arguments allow child-rape when I make no reference and even statements that would go contrary to such.

I don't get why you are saying what is the animals purpose. Shouldn't their purpose be the same as ours, to procreate and survive? Why do people keep mentioning dogs, because the animal shows empathy toward humans it should be held in higher regard than a pig?

Yeah, that is why they mention them. There is no better way to pull on the heartstrings than to mention Rover. If we started talking about rats instead then we would get less empathy despite the fact that both animals are not human but still hold enough in common to be covered by the same arguments.

I just love animals. In fact, I just had some for supper.

(Okay, it was a portion of a cow. But the principle remains.)

I said I completely understand those who eat meat. In other countries, dogs are livestock, and yet in others, cows are sacred. I said animals kept as livestock, no matter what animals should still be entitled to decent living conditions and a quick painless death. What would you suggest to do with the livestock? As I said, send them BACK to the wild to be hunted by predators? Oh, I know, we can give them away as pets. lol. Riiiiiighhht.

I don't see why sending them back to the wild is not more humane, and I also eat meat.

Number one, they've been bred in captivity so long, they would survive all of two seconds. They no longer have the same survival instincts. At least we have the potential for some compassion, other than them being ripped to shreds by a friggin cougar or whatever. And some of them (DEFINITELY not all) live pretty decent lives.

That's their problem.

How can you know their lives are decent?

Either way, they're being killed. What's the difference, really, if it's us or another animal? BESIDES your personal ideals of consciousness?

I said some. Just because I live in the southern states and I know that there are many cattle owners who give them acres and acres of land to roam free. However, I recognize branding and things like that, and how many are mistreated. Actually, most. I'm against that completely. I'm actually more in favor of some reform in these areas, rather than doing away with eating meat, altogether.

I'm mostly just playing devil's advocate here. Still the question arises; do animals have a right to personal freedom? How do many of you feel about foie gras?

nasty bastards, thats how i feel about it.

I already said where I stand. I think they should live in conditions suited to their nature and needs, if they are to be used as livestock. ie: Plenty of room to roam, wellfed, well-treated,etc. Foie gras is f*****g disgusting. Until recently, I hadn't even heard of it, though it doesn't surprise me.

You guys then seem more sympathetic to animals than I. I can totally see why people despise foie gras, and I think if most people knew how it was made, they would find it sickening. Nevertheless, I feel I can accept torture to animals that are not self aware.

I could hug you for this post.

I have no further comments.

ha, did you all know lonelysoul is my older brother? Anyhow, yeah good comment dude (I won't give your name out online either;))
But I'll be honest though, some of the comments I've seen on here from a certain viking lol, have reminded me of secular humanism and the dangers it can represent if it becomes too powerful. MrMark put a thread up there a few weeks ago as a matter of fact about this.

Yes, because you have objectively proven that my ideas will lead to the death of man. After all, if an idea comes up to challenge pre-existing beliefs, obviously the pre-existing belief must be conserved no matter what the intellectual cost! Screw logic and rather use ad hominems and complete distortions of the argument to win the day.