Fur products - animal cruelty (1 Viewer)

[Lucy257]

im desensitised.. .battered babies its all a scare campaign.. why dun u stop child abuse first.. then ill deal with the animals..

tell me what the difference is between a child's life and that of an animal. seriously.

increased intelligence? hasn't been proven. pigs have, however, been shown to be smarter than three year olds, at the very least.

and how does a claim to greater intellectual capacity increase an individual's worth? it doesn't. we are all worth the same thing. it's just that we have a greater responsibilty to use our intelligence for good. ie, decreasing all suffering in the world. you can't claim to be compassionate if you limit this ethic to one species (human) alone.

gah. redneck meat eaters. i bet you're all guys, too.

 

[ladyknight]

You do realise bonzai kitten is a scam site don't you? Or are you really stupid enough to believe things like that? Eating babies? You really are an idiot. Therefore, alot of animal activists are tree hugging hippie beastiality oriented idiots.

Well YEAH I realize 'bonsai kitty' isn't reality. Likewise the story. It's called satire. I was merely trying to emphasize the eventual effects of certain ideals- isn't that why this thread exists?

And please explain to me how supposed individual stupidity automatically results in such a smartass assuption about animal activists? Jerk.

Don't be so rude. It's not nice.

 

[*wbg*]

animal cruelty.... do you not think that ANY life shoud be treated with respect? im not vegetarian.. i wear leather.. but i think its disgusting that animals are treated so cruely. animals, all living things!, feel pain and fear -- what right do we have (just because we're human?) to cause these creatures unecessary pain/suffering?

 

[Lucy257]

animal cruelty.... do you not think that ANY life shoud be treated with respect? im not vegetarian.. i wear leather.. but i think its disgusting that animals are treated so cruely. animals, all living things!, feel pain and fear -- what right do we have (just because we're human?) to cause these creatures unecessary pain/suffering?

I SECOND THAT! thank you!

i wouldn't mind meat-eaters so much if they actually cared about what was going on. as for those idiots who promote fur....J Lo, that bloody wintour woman....they deserve to be electrocuted up the anus at a low voltage (to save costs - but it only paralyses) and then be skinned alive!

meh, that's what they do to animals "bred" for fur. give them some of their own bloody medicine.

 

[Not-That-Bright]

tell me what the difference is between a child's life and that of an animal. seriously.

increased intelligence? hasn't been proven. pigs have, however, been shown to be smarter than three year olds, at the very least.

and how does a claim to greater intellectual capacity increase an individual's worth? it doesn't. we are all worth the same thing. it's just that we have a greater responsibilty to use our intelligence for good. ie, decreasing all suffering in the world. you can't claim to be compassionate if you limit this ethic to one species (human) alone.

gah. redneck meat eaters. i bet you're all guys, too

The difference is that humans are sentient beings (meaning that human beings are a creature capable of percieving the world around them and themselves...).. we also empathise with other humans as a part of our natural emotions.

and how does a claim to greater intellectual capacity increase an individual's worth? it doesn't. we are all worth the same thing. it's just that we have a greater responsibilty to use our intelligence for good. ie, decreasing all suffering in the world. you can't claim to be compassionate if you limit this ethic to one species (human) alone.

How do we have a responsibility? We don't, we do what we choose.
As for humans being worth the same as any other life, you must realise that worth is always a subjective thing... objectively it is impossible to say one creature is 'worth' more than the other.

I would however suggest that your inability to empathise with human beings over other animals is quite a serious problem that I think you should deal with.

 

[Lucy257]

sentient implies the ability to feel. and animals certainly do that. you've obviously had restricted contct with animals. research has shown that they form family groups, mourn their dead, love each other and recognise each other. if that's not natural emotion, then what is?

having superior intelligence does not entitle one human to abuse another human, so why should it entitle humans to abuse nonhumans? There are animals who are unquestionably more intelligent than some humans, as is the case when a chimpanzee is compared to a human infant or a person with a severe developmental disability.

worth certainly is objective. and applies equally to all.

i do empathise with humans: i empathise with all animals equally. although perhaps even more with non-humans because they can't stand up for themselves.
We should try to alleviate suffering wherever we can. Helping animals is not any more or less important than helping human beings—they are both important.

we do what we choose? gah. i won't even bother with that one.

 

[Not-That-Bright]

sentient implies the ability to feel. and animals certainly do that. you've obviously had restricted contct with animals. research has shown that they form family groups, mourn their dead, love each other and recognise each other. if that's not natural emotion, then what is?

Sentient does not imply just the ability to feel... it is the ability to percieve the world around you, which very few animals other than humans have.

having superior intelligence does not entitle one human to abuse another human, so why should it entitle humans to abuse nonhumans? There are animals who are unquestionably more intelligent than some humans, as is the case when a chimpanzee is compared to a human infant or a person with a severe developmental disability.

worth certainly is objective. and applies equally to all.

This statement means nothing... Prove to me that worth is an objective thing.

i do empathise with humans: i empathise with all animals equally. although perhaps even more with non-humans because they can't stand up for themselves. We should try to alleviate suffering wherever we can. Helping animals is not any more or less important than helping human beings—they are both important.

Who judges what is important? Every human judges this for themselves, most will decide that humans are more important because we have a natural empathy with each other.

You've come to the belief that all animals are equal... which I find hard to believe that you actually practice. I think you're a hypocritical person that likes to act morally superior.

 

[Lucy257]

And i'd guess that you're a morally devoid and uncompassionate prick. but i wasn't about to insult you. i'm not one for slinging around rudeness....but i suggest you grow a conscience.

Sentient does not imply just the ability to feel... it is the ability to percieve the world around you, which very few animals other than humans have.

Prove that. i can prove my side. if you'd like me to refer you to some websites that will help you understand this, please tell me.

This statement means nothing... Prove to me that worth is an objective thing.

What is worth anyway? why does "worth" entitle life?

Who judges what is important? Every human judges this for themselves, most will decide that humans are more important because we have a natural empathy with each other.

i think you'll find most animals have a natural empathy with each other, also. however that gives us no right to abuse something we don't "empathise" with as much.

You've come to the belief that all animals are equal... which I find hard to believe that you actually practice. I think you're a hypocritical person that likes to act morally superior.

hmmm. hypocrite? i don't know. i'm still wroking everything out as to who i think i am. but i hope it's not that.

at any rate, i'd prefer to be morally superior over ethically constipated any day.

 

[...]

erk, if people are so uptight about fur because of animal cruelty
they should think about ditching their wardrobe, after all, most of our clothing are made from cheap/slave labor..

i rate human slavery ahead of animal cruelty

 

[Not-That-Bright]

And i'd guess that you're a morally devoid and uncompassionate prick. but i wasn't about to insult you. i'm not one for slinging around rudeness....but i suggest you grow a conscience.

Wtf Morals?
Explain please how it is any less moral to eat a baby cow than to now eat a baby cow?

hmmm. hypocrite? i don't know. i'm still wroking everything out as to who i think i am. but i hope it's not that.

It is.

at any rate, i'd prefer to be morally superior over ethically constipated any day.

Ethically Constipated... ?

 

[Lucy257]

WTF, yourself! are you joking? about whether it's less moral to eat a baby cow than not eat it? i really hope you're joking. Do you consider the torture, abuse and slaughter of something somehow moral in any way? woah. i hope i never meet you...

and i'm not a hypocrite. i've just decided.

..., if you rate human slavery over animal cruelty...fine. i'm also a fervent human rightsist. but i think that cruelty should be opposed as a principle. full stop. whoever it applies to.

 

[Not-That-Bright]

about whether it's less moral to eat a baby cow than not eat it?

Why is it immoral to eat a baby cow?

..., if you rate human slavery over animal cruelty...fine. i'm also a fervent human rightsist. but i think that cruelty should be opposed as a principle. full stop. whoever it applies to.

What about a situation where a human needs to eat an animal to survive, and vice versa... should they both just die? or should the human eat the animal?

 

[Lucy257]

ok. i'll make it easy for you. lets start with this:

why is it immoral to eat a baby human?

 

[Lucy257]

What about a situation where a human needs to eat an animal to survive, and vice versa... should they both just die? or should the human eat the animal?

Come on, that's pathetic. Humans will go to extremes to save their own lives, even if it means hurting someone innocent. bloody hell, we've even killed and eaten other people in such situations.

 

[Not-That-Bright]

why is it immoral to eat a baby human?

There is no reason why it is immoral, that is a fiction.
My morals come from my beliefs, I consider it immoral to eat a baby human, because I have a deep empathy for other human beings... There is no objective immorality to it tho.

Come on, that's pathetic. Humans will go to extremes to save their own lives, even if it means hurting someone innocent. bloody hell, we've even killed and eaten other people in such situations.

I asked you should they both die, not what WILL happen under that circumstance.. I want to know what the moral solution to the problem is.

Here's another one... Real life scenario.

There are two babies conjoined at the head... you can save one but not the other, which one should you save?

 

[Lucy257]

ha ha - now i get what you're getting at....the whole constructed moral thing.

i suppose if i were to follow my own moral preaching, then both the human and the animal would have to die.

as your morals come from your beliefs, so do my morals come from mine. i think we'll have to agree to compromise with that.

as for the conjoined babies...i'd try and save them both equally, dammit! even if i knew one of them was going to die.

*yawn*....what uni do you go to out of interst? only, you seem to be a pretty good arguer and i'm always in need of an arguement....anyway. i'm going to have to go o bed because my eyes are swimming and i can hardly think...