Animal Rights, Yes or No

I had a little prob with that as I was writing it, but I forged ahead regardless.
 
Why are there always some people who think we should be limited only to what we must have for survival?
/QUOTE]

might they be interested in oh i don't know...

hmmm.

what could it be...

hmm.

survival?
 
This thread brings back some fond memories of bowling cats in college.

Ask me about it sometime, it's a hoot!
 
don't be dishonest shogun.
you know i never said animals should have the same exact same rights as humans. i thought you'd matured...
i'm merely taking issue with the suggestion that animals rights are merely something we extend to them.
when it fact those rights are self evident.
again it is wrong to treat animals cruelly, not because of the law. but due to their sentience.



You implied that I suggested that a paraplegic, WITH A THUMB, not have the same human rights because of the Might makes Right argument. Shall I quote you?

animal perception is not self evident because we have no way of looking through a dogs eyes. Their rights are not the product of anything less than humans extending as much. which, again, i'll remind you halts at the slaughterhouse.

and no, it's wrong to abuse an animal LEGALLY because we have extended protections against such. It has nothing to do with their sentience. If you think so, then there are a lot of sentient creatures being killed for the sake of our daily meat consuption.. and yet we allow this to happen.
 
I think some animals recognize certain rights within their own species...though we don't know how that works.

Rights are meant to protect our own species from destroying itself. As such, we cannot extend them to other species.
 
Nobody is saying it is. The OP asked if we should treat animals that are raised to be eaten more humane, until they are ready for the old slaughter house.

My opinion is yes, they should be.

Then you can have a crueltry free steak!

You are talking about a subjective opinion though. What amounts to cruelty to you will differt han that from others without a fucking chicken stepping up to clarify the boundaries of their treatment. Im all for being humane with animals... but i really dont care to ban chicken meat when some asshole insists that each bird have 30 yards of farm space to live on until consumption.

Hell, do you think a slaughterhouse is like a club med for animals? Do you see sad chicken eyes and think< shit, if only i could get this bird a margarita? Like it or not, humans have to eat. Like it or not, our population dictates the volume of food necessary, and the production necessities thereof. Hiding behind some "cruelty" slogan doesn't belay these facts.
 
Is that what you tell him before you give him his kibble?

I dont talk to my dog as if he were a human being. He's a dog. He doesn't care weather or not I think he is a badass or not. Clearly, he is not a badass. Which is fine since my masculinity is not the product of what breed of dog I have. Perhaps you go for the dudes who need vicious dogs like a 45 year old man needs a sports car but....
 
My son has a big mean looking pit bull who is the biggest pansy in the world.

But you know, a scared dog is potentially a dangerous dog. I've seen him when he's spooked and he completely lost it.
 
That depends on the method chosen for raising them and slaughtering them. It may not exactly be sadism but it can be unnecessarily cruel.

again, you are talking about arbitrary concepts which vary from opinion to opinion.. especially when, in the end, the animal will be killed for consuption.


so, you tell me. How much field space should Tyson require each bird get. Go ahead and toss out a number. It wont match anyone else's opinion but go ahead and venture a guess on what will placate your empathy.
 
what i always find interesting about animal issues.

is how over protective people get when it comes to eating meat.

it's like they feel a little guilt that they refuse to admit to...

That's funny you said that.

I have been a vegetarian since I was 14. It's funny, when I meet new people they feel "guilty" for eating meat in front of me.

I tell them it's MY CHOICE to be a vegetarian, I would never try to change their way of eating. The only control I have of healthy eating habits is my 13 yo daughter's and myself.

(My fiancee loves his meat products btw)
 
The whole chicken thing is a little disturbing. But we need chicken. It's the cheapest meat out there.....that and pork.

They're cheaper because they don't require much for a huge output. Start building them mansions and ideal habitat, and suddenly they are no longer economical.
 
what i always find interesting about animal issues.

is how over protective people get when it comes to eating meat.

it's like they feel a little guilt that they refuse to admit to...

I have no guilt when eating, or hunting, animals. I think people react to the practice of being told how they MUST eat by some bastard whose opinion shouldn't matter. I know you are not a vegetarian, dude. and I know it's easier to take your position while shielded from the fact of the process it takes to get to you the hamburger you'll be grilling up this week.
 
ok, i've got time to tear into little allie...
:lol::lol::lol:
and perhaps animal cruelty?:lol:
seriously allie try it. take an animal downtown and beat it to death.
just tell folks it's your animal.
your property.
and your right.
:clap2::tongue:
:cuckoo:

So, are we going to focus on the topic of MEAT production for human consumption or just the act of killing animals? Who the hell in this thread says it's ok for a butcher to kick a cows ass before he slaughters it? Kinda disingenuous, dont you think?
 
I knew it was her, but this happens so often I get tired of pursuing the rabbit trails.
 
You implied that I suggested that a paraplegic, WITH A THUMB, not have the same human rights because of the Might makes Right argument. Shall I quote you?.

i'd rather you understood it first, but if quoting will help...


animal perception is not self evident because we have no way of looking through a dogs eyes. Their rights are not the product of anything less than humans extending as much. which, again, i'll remind you halts at the slaughterhouse.


uh, you have just about as much ability to look through a dog's eyes as you do another humans. if you want to get existential about it...



and no, it's wrong to abuse an animal LEGALLY because we have extended protections against such. It has nothing to do with their sentience. If you think so, then there are a lot of sentient creatures being killed for the sake of our daily meat consuption.. and yet we allow this to happen

and? isn't that the point here.

i mean personnally it cracks me up that people got so offended about the cool footplayer having fun with his dogs while they continue to eat quarter pounders...

i'm not the one with the consistency problem.
 
I think some animals recognize certain rights within their own species...though we don't know how that works.

Rights are meant to protect our own species from destroying itself. As such, we cannot extend them to other species.

id love to see some examples. Im pretty sure a pack heirarchy is not the product of "rights" so much as it is "im going to fucking kill you if you try to fuck that bitch over there"
 

Forum List

Back
Top