Making animal rights and biocentrism a major political topic

[Katzndogz]

Many people are ignorant about the reasons to avoid gluten. Most who don't eat gluten are allergic to it.

"Nirvana" is baking one's own bread instead of gagging down the garbage sold by such places as WalMart.

BTW, the lovely brown color of factory-produced baked goods is the result of a substance made from the urine of dead animals. If bread says it has 'added fiber', it used be that sawdust was added. I believe that may be against "regulations" now but maybe not. I don't eat that crap so I haven't kept up with the regulations.

Good for you! Just don't want to pass laws regulating what other people can eat. After all, if women can take injections to lose weight made from the urine of pregnant women, people can certainly eat something made from animal urine if they so choose.

The liberal problem comes down to what is always the liberal problem. Equality. It's the idea that if they like it, everyone should like it, we're all equal and the force of law is necessary to achieve such equality. Equality and freedom are mutually exclusive terms.

 

[Katzndogz]

About animal "rights".

They don't have any.

Humans have "rights" because they fight for them. No one gives rights to humans. They only take away rights because that's the nature of "rights". (Pisses me off to see people saying that "god" gives us rights. That demeans the incredible sacrifice our soldiers, present and past, have made for the rights we argue about every day.)

That doesn't mean we should torture other living creatures for fun, profit or food. We are human beings and we SHOULD be better than that.

If consumers, as a block, said they would not buy what is produced by animal growers, transporters and slaughterhouses, the industry would change over night.

If we're going to eat dead animals, surely there is no reason why we can't demand that it be produced humanely and safely and that the end product is safe to feed our children.

On that we can agree. Except that I believe that when experimentation for medical purposes is necessary it should be done on prisoners not animals.

 

[syrenn]

What is the most effective way of making animal rights a real political and ethical focus in this country? In addition, what is the most effective way to influence the masses towards a biocentric focus towards life instead of the superiority of the human species?

Should people be shown the images of slaughterhouses and processing plants around the country in order to truly know how they got their pork chop? Should people be forced to help kill and gut their cow before they sit down for their steak at a restaurant? Should people be allowed to use animals as entertainment even when that animal has no concept of what it is that is it being exploited for? Should people be allowed to abuse or neglect an animal? Should people experience the same anguish that animals feel when experimented on in order for them to have empathy for that life?

This is not an attempt to change minds. I am genuinely curious what everybody simply thinks on the matter. I myself am a proud vegan and advocate of animal rights and biocentrism, but i am just wondering what your thoughts are.

How do i think about this matter.....

first... do you or anyone you know use prescription drugs? Would you be happy going through or watching a long painful death of yourself or anyone you know?

if you dont want to eat meat.... have at it. But stop pushing your peta agenda onto others.

 

[syrenn]

Why would one want to.

The same reason people want gun control laws, abortion laws, seat belt laws, healthcare, fishing laws, power usage rules, social programs, and other issues addressed and talked about...they care about the issue and see the importance of it. For example I would consider animal rights to be more important than spending billions of dollars on a new attack helicopter.

I consider people before i consider animals.

 

[syrenn]

What is the most effective way of making animal rights a real political and ethical focus in this country? In addition, what is the most effective way to influence the masses towards a biocentric focus towards life instead of the superiority of the human species?

Should people be shown the images of slaughterhouses and processing plants around the country in order to truly know how they got their pork chop? Should people be forced to help kill and gut their cow before they sit down for their steak at a restaurant? Should people be allowed to use animals as entertainment even when that animal has no concept of what it is that is it being exploited for? Should people be allowed to abuse or neglect an animal? Should people experience the same anguish that animals feel when experimented on in order for them to have empathy for that life?

This is not an attempt to change minds. I am genuinely curious what everybody simply thinks on the matter. I myself am a proud vegan and advocate of animal rights and biocentrism, but i am just wondering what your thoughts are.

Nothing wrong with you being a vegan...until you start to force your views about meat eating onto others. Then you start to sound like just another PETA extremist.

an extremist to one person is a well intentioned and ethical person to another. If forcing views on someone through media, guilt, or other forms of communication ends some of the obscenely cruel treatment many people and companies direct towards animals then that's a necessary evil in my opinion.

so i guess you are peta.

 

[Luddly Neddite]

In point of fact, our medical knowledge has been slowed by the use of animals.

Read Hans Reusch, among others. You'll learn that we use animals for reasons that have nothing at all to do with gaining medical knowledge.

 

[syrenn]

an extremist to one person is a well intentioned and ethical person to another. If forcing views on someone through media, guilt, or other forms of communication ends some of the obscenely cruel treatment many people and companies direct towards animals then that's a necessary evil in my opinion.

Terrorism isn't the answer.

I'm not doing any terrorist activities and neither does PETA. I do not agree with every single thing that PETA does and i am not even a paying member of PETA, but I do agree with many of their stances but that does not make me a terrorist nor does it make PETA a terrorist group. You are thinking of organizations like the animal liberation front.

i beg to differ... peta does participate in terrorist activities.

 

[nodoginnafight]

A wild animal will inflict damage and pain to a human when it serves its purpose. Many will even eat humans given the chance. And humans do the same to other species as well as to other humans if pushed far enough.

I don't think our ancestors scratched and clawed their way to the top of the food chain only to reliquish that position out of guilt. I don't want animals to be treat sadistically - they are for us to use, not abuse.

 

[Luddly Neddite]

Why would one want to.

The same reason people want gun control laws, abortion laws, seat belt laws, healthcare, fishing laws, power usage rules, social programs, and other issues addressed and talked about...they care about the issue and see the importance of it. For example I would consider animal rights to be more important than spending billions of dollars on a new attack helicopter.

I consider people before i consider animals.

Me too.

That's why my kids and g'kids will never eat dead animal in my home. If they choose otherwise, that's their decision but I love them way too much to feed them something I know is harmful to their health. So far none of them do eat dead animals.

 

[syrenn]

The same reason people want gun control laws, abortion laws, seat belt laws, healthcare, fishing laws, power usage rules, social programs, and other issues addressed and talked about...they care about the issue and see the importance of it. For example I would consider animal rights to be more important than spending billions of dollars on a new attack helicopter.

I consider people before i consider animals.

Me too.

That's why my kids and g'kids will never eat dead animal in my home. If they choose otherwise, that's their decision but I love them way too much to feed them something I know is harmful to their health. So far none of them do eat dead animals.

and i have zero issue with that.... I would though, if you were forcing your personal choices onto others.

 

[Colin]

an extremist to one person is a well intentioned and ethical person to another. If forcing views on someone through media, guilt, or other forms of communication ends some of the obscenely cruel treatment many people and companies direct towards animals then that's a necessary evil in my opinion.

Terrorism isn't the answer.

I'm not doing any terrorist activities and neither does PETA. I do not agree with every single thing that PETA does and i am not even a paying member of PETA, but I do agree with many of their stances but that does not make me a terrorist nor does it make PETA a terrorist group. You are thinking of organizations like the animal liberation front.

Seems you know little of the organisations you support! Peta DOES support terrorist actions...

PETA, or People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals, is the most well-known animal rights group in the world. For decades, PETA has labored for the well being and rights of animals, with an ultimate goal of "total animal liberation." Unfortunately for America, and the world, PETA has become something entirely un-American: a group dedicated to inflicting fear, terrorism, violence, and suffering upon humanity.

PETA directly provides funds and support to two groups, ALF and ELF. Those acronyms stand for Animal Liberation Front and Earth Liberation Front. These two groups make it their business to attack innocent people for wearing fur or leather, attack and burn research labs, harass and intimidate scientists and workers, and attack and burn people's new homes, just for having been built somewhere ALF and ELF disagree with! These people fit the definition of terrorists: persons who use fear, intimidation, and infliction of harm in order to achieve radical goals.

PETA: When Animal Rights Becomes Terrorism and Crime - Yahoo! Voices - voices.yahoo.com

Once again, thanks for confirming your support of terror tactics to force your views on others.

 

[jillian]

What is the most effective way of making animal rights a real political and ethical focus in this country? In addition, what is the most effective way to influence the masses towards a biocentric focus towards life instead of the superiority of the human species?

Should people be shown the images of slaughterhouses and processing plants around the country in order to truly know how they got their pork chop? Should people be forced to help kill and gut their cow before they sit down for their steak at a restaurant? Should people be allowed to use animals as entertainment even when that animal has no concept of what it is that is it being exploited for? Should people be allowed to abuse or neglect an animal? Should people experience the same anguish that animals feel when experimented on in order for them to have empathy for that life?

This is not an attempt to change minds. I am genuinely curious what everybody simply thinks on the matter. I myself am a proud vegan and advocate of animal rights and biocentrism, but i am just wondering what your thoughts are.

i love animals. we should be kind to animals. anti- animal cruelty laws are a good thing b/c they're the right thing morally.

but animals have no "rights".... and most PETA types are loons.

thanks

 

[jillian]

Terrorism isn't the answer.

I'm not doing any terrorist activities and neither does PETA. I do not agree with every single thing that PETA does and i am not even a paying member of PETA, but I do agree with many of their stances but that does not make me a terrorist nor does it make PETA a terrorist group. You are thinking of organizations like the animal liberation front.

Seems you know little of the organisations you support! Peta DOES support terrorist actions...

PETA, or People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals, is the most well-known animal rights group in the world. For decades, PETA has labored for the well being and rights of animals, with an ultimate goal of "total animal liberation." Unfortunately for America, and the world, PETA has become something entirely un-American: a group dedicated to inflicting fear, terrorism, violence, and suffering upon humanity.

PETA directly provides funds and support to two groups, ALF and ELF. Those acronyms stand for Animal Liberation Front and Earth Liberation Front. These two groups make it their business to attack innocent people for wearing fur or leather, attack and burn research labs, harass and intimidate scientists and workers, and attack and burn people's new homes, just for having been built somewhere ALF and ELF disagree with! These people fit the definition of terrorists: persons who use fear, intimidation, and infliction of harm in order to achieve radical goals.

PETA: When Animal Rights Becomes Terrorism and Crime - Yahoo! Voices - voices.yahoo.com

Once again, thanks for confirming your support of terror tactics to force your views on others.

PETA also supports lying if it suits their agenda. if you look at the book Animal Liberation, by Peter Singer, it discusses how lies are justified if it advances the cause.

personally, i think if you have to prevaricate, maybe you have nothing to say.

 

[Connery]

To afford animals various rights is to ascribe a level of intelligence and reason they simply do not have. Children are not afforded various rights for the same reason they simply cannot reason certain situation until they reach a particular age. Nevertheless, animals have the right not to be abused and be well cared for by their owners.

For example, Animal Welfare Act | Animal Welfare Information Center and ASPCA | State Animal Cruelty Laws

Legislating what people should eat, compelling people to learn about nutrition or forcing them to witness what occurs at a slaughter house would be a failed experiment and borders on a fascist type of government intervention.

 

[Luddly Neddite]

Terrorism isn't the answer.

I'm not doing any terrorist activities and neither does PETA. I do not agree with every single thing that PETA does and i am not even a paying member of PETA, but I do agree with many of their stances but that does not make me a terrorist nor does it make PETA a terrorist group. You are thinking of organizations like the animal liberation front.

Seems you know little of the organisations you support! Peta DOES support terrorist actions...

PETA, or People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals, is the most well-known animal rights group in the world. For decades, PETA has labored for the well being and rights of animals, with an ultimate goal of "total animal liberation." Unfortunately for America, and the world, PETA has become something entirely un-American: a group dedicated to inflicting fear, terrorism, violence, and suffering upon humanity.

PETA directly provides funds and support to two groups, ALF and ELF. Those acronyms stand for Animal Liberation Front and Earth Liberation Front. These two groups make it their business to attack innocent people for wearing fur or leather, attack and burn research labs, harass and intimidate scientists and workers, and attack and burn people's new homes, just for having been built somewhere ALF and ELF disagree with! These people fit the definition of terrorists: persons who use fear, intimidation, and infliction of harm in order to achieve radical goals.

PETA: When Animal Rights Becomes Terrorism and Crime - Yahoo! Voices - voices.yahoo.com

Once again, thanks for confirming your support of terror tactics to force your views on others.

Just to be clear ...

Alexa very clearly stated that she does not support everything PETA does.

Saying that she supports "terror tactics" is not in keeping with what she has written.

Further, I didn't see that she said she wants to force others to agree with her on this issue.

Even so, none of this addresses the issues that she and I wrote about. Interestingly, no one has really addressed those issues other than to say they believe we should not be cruel to animals while also saying they "support" cruelty by eating meat and other animal-use activities.

You can't have it both ways.

 

[AlexWA]

I'm not doing any terrorist activities and neither does PETA. I do not agree with every single thing that PETA does and i am not even a paying member of PETA, but I do agree with many of their stances but that does not make me a terrorist nor does it make PETA a terrorist group. You are thinking of organizations like the animal liberation front.

Seems you know little of the organisations you support! Peta DOES support terrorist actions...

PETA, or People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals, is the most well-known animal rights group in the world. For decades, PETA has labored for the well being and rights of animals, with an ultimate goal of "total animal liberation." Unfortunately for America, and the world, PETA has become something entirely un-American: a group dedicated to inflicting fear, terrorism, violence, and suffering upon humanity.

PETA directly provides funds and support to two groups, ALF and ELF. Those acronyms stand for Animal Liberation Front and Earth Liberation Front. These two groups make it their business to attack innocent people for wearing fur or leather, attack and burn research labs, harass and intimidate scientists and workers, and attack and burn people's new homes, just for having been built somewhere ALF and ELF disagree with! These people fit the definition of terrorists: persons who use fear, intimidation, and infliction of harm in order to achieve radical goals.

PETA: When Animal Rights Becomes Terrorism and Crime - Yahoo! Voices - voices.yahoo.com

Once again, thanks for confirming your support of terror tactics to force your views on others.

Just to be clear ...

Alexa very clearly stated that she does not support everything PETA does.

Saying that she supports "terror tactics" is not in keeping with what she has written.

Further, I didn't see that she said she wants to force others to agree with her on this issue.

Even so, none of this addresses the issues that she and I wrote about. Interestingly, no one has really addressed those issues other than to say they believe we should not be cruel to animals while also saying they "support" cruelty by eating meat and other animal-use activities.

You can't have it both ways.

thanks I was just about to mention some of those points

 

[AlexWA]

Terrorism isn't the answer.

I'm not doing any terrorist activities and neither does PETA. I do not agree with every single thing that PETA does and i am not even a paying member of PETA, but I do agree with many of their stances but that does not make me a terrorist nor does it make PETA a terrorist group. You are thinking of organizations like the animal liberation front.

Seems you know little of the organisations you support! Peta DOES support terrorist actions...

PETA, or People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals, is the most well-known animal rights group in the world. For decades, PETA has labored for the well being and rights of animals, with an ultimate goal of "total animal liberation." Unfortunately for America, and the world, PETA has become something entirely un-American: a group dedicated to inflicting fear, terrorism, violence, and suffering upon humanity.

PETA directly provides funds and support to two groups, ALF and ELF. Those acronyms stand for Animal Liberation Front and Earth Liberation Front. These two groups make it their business to attack innocent people for wearing fur or leather, attack and burn research labs, harass and intimidate scientists and workers, and attack and burn people's new homes, just for having been built somewhere ALF and ELF disagree with! These people fit the definition of terrorists: persons who use fear, intimidation, and infliction of harm in order to achieve radical goals.

PETA: When Animal Rights Becomes Terrorism and Crime - Yahoo! Voices - voices.yahoo.com

Once again, thanks for confirming your support of terror tactics to force your views on others.

I don't support terror tactics

 

[AlexWA]

To afford animals various rights is to ascribe a level of intelligence and reason they simply do not have. Children are not afforded various rights for the same reason they simply cannot reason certain situation until they reach a particular age. Nevertheless, animals have the right not to be abused and be well cared for by their owners.

For example, Animal Welfare Act | Animal Welfare Information Center and ASPCA | State Animal Cruelty Laws

Legislating what people should eat, compelling people to learn about nutrition or forcing them to witness what occurs at a slaughter house would be a failed experiment and borders on a fascist type of government intervention.

We are all species of animal with various skills and deficiencies. What we describe as being "smart" is relative. What we consider to be smart for humans does not always translate accurately to other animal species. Just because a black bear can't build a two story home does not mean it is entitled to treatment that is less than what we would want for ourselves, friends, or family. Put a human in the wilderness and that human is far dumber than the animals that call that specific wilderness home. FYI humans are not that smart. Humans destroy their own planet knowing full well what they are doing....not smart.

I am not calling for legislation that says you can't eat meat, although I would be happy to see that legislation happen. It would never pass though. People SHOULD be knowledgable about how they get their meat however. If a nine year old eating her hamburger knew that a cow was killed to make that burger and if the child witnessed that slaughter then that child would probably not be so thrilled anymore to eat that burger after seeing the cruelty involved.

 

[AlexWA]

What is the most effective way of making animal rights a real political and ethical focus in this country? In addition, what is the most effective way to influence the masses towards a biocentric focus towards life instead of the superiority of the human species?

Should people be shown the images of slaughterhouses and processing plants around the country in order to truly know how they got their pork chop? Should people be forced to help kill and gut their cow before they sit down for their steak at a restaurant? Should people be allowed to use animals as entertainment even when that animal has no concept of what it is that is it being exploited for? Should people be allowed to abuse or neglect an animal? Should people experience the same anguish that animals feel when experimented on in order for them to have empathy for that life?

This is not an attempt to change minds. I am genuinely curious what everybody simply thinks on the matter. I myself am a proud vegan and advocate of animal rights and biocentrism, but i am just wondering what your thoughts are.

i love animals. we should be kind to animals. anti- animal cruelty laws are a good thing b/c they're the right thing morally.

but animals have no "rights".... and most PETA types are loons.

thanks

Being kind to animals is more than helping a turtle cross the road. When you sit down on thursday to have your turkey remember that it was raised to be killed.

 

[Montrovant]

To afford animals various rights is to ascribe a level of intelligence and reason they simply do not have. Children are not afforded various rights for the same reason they simply cannot reason certain situation until they reach a particular age. Nevertheless, animals have the right not to be abused and be well cared for by their owners.

For example, Animal Welfare Act | Animal Welfare Information Center and ASPCA | State Animal Cruelty Laws

Legislating what people should eat, compelling people to learn about nutrition or forcing them to witness what occurs at a slaughter house would be a failed experiment and borders on a fascist type of government intervention.

We are all species of animal with various skills and deficiencies. What we describe as being "smart" is relative. What we consider to be smart for humans does not always translate accurately to other animal species. Just because a black bear can't build a two story home does not mean it is entitled to treatment that is less than what we would want for ourselves, friends, or family. Put a human in the wilderness and that human is far dumber than the animals that call that specific wilderness home. FYI humans are not that smart. Humans destroy their own planet knowing full well what they are doing....not smart.

I am not calling for legislation that says you can't eat meat, although I would be happy to see that legislation happen. It would never pass though. People SHOULD be knowledgable about how they get their meat however. If a nine year old eating her hamburger knew that a cow was killed to make that burger and if the child witnessed that slaughter then that child would probably not be so thrilled anymore to eat that burger after seeing the cruelty involved.

There is a difference between making bad decisions and lack of intelligence. Do you believe that animals, faced with the possibility that they were destroying the planet, would either understand what that meant or care? Or do most animals simply live with no real understanding of the world?

This is not to say animals should be looked at as unworthy of protection, rather it is just to argue against the idea that humanity is not more intelligent than most or all animal species.