Have you ever seen this horror ?

[Dante]

What kind of nutcase reasoning is that?

[Anathema]

Sure, the children are the only ones beign able to earn money for the rest of the family. We think child prostitution and child labor is bad. They know it as the only way to servive as a family.

If you kept that statement to only child labour, I'd have agreed. Prostitution is worse and besides, most of the time it works differently. Children are either abducted or bought from their parents for a one time fee, then put in to unhygienic bordellos to be abused and raped till they're deemed to old, around 11-13, are then thrown out on the street and left to die.

And there's the cash-fat sex tourists coming from the Europe and America going there to have a good time with them, wich is the whole reason why child prostitution is so widespread. I'm against the death penalty, but if someone would line up all those f*cking child molesters against a wall ready to be shot, I just might forget that.

[lowzeewee]

What kind of nutcase reasoning is that?

I don't support animal cruelty at all but if we really want to condemn it, we shouldn't just use words but should also become activists for PETA and be vegetarians as well. It is not as if poultry are not being slaughtered. Oh, and is it only me or is this thread really going off-topic from animal cruelty into child labour and prostitution?

The practice of animal cruelty shall never end no matter how hard you try to stop it. Money is the end product of all the deaths and injuries caused to animals and money equates to power in this world so you will need much more than mere protestation to prevent it. You can only play your own part, no matter how minor it is, and if you really want to maximize your contribution to the cause, why not be vegetarian and save cows, chickens and pigs from being slaughtered?

I will state again: I don't support animal cruelty at all.

Where are the resident christians on this forum to educate us on the bible's verses on animals? I do know there is one verse in the first chapter of the bible saying something to the effect that man have control over animals.

[Dude_Doc]

And now when we have slaughtered these animals, nature has throwed the bird-flu on us to suffer from. How convinient...

[Dante]

It is possible to kill things without being cruel to them. I'm against animal cruelty, but I sure ain't giving up eating meat.

[erjin999]

But the point is, Dante, that most animals are not treated well. Those ones you so happily eat are kept lock up in tiny cages, totally sick...heck, we have all seen the documentaries, right ?

[Dante]

So reform the industry. Becoming a malnourished vegetarian in order to stop cruelty is like trying to raise sea levels by dropping pebbles in the water. The effect is so incredibly miniscule that nobody is going to notice. In other words, it ain't a good situation but vegetarianism won't help. Except perhaps to feed some inflated egos so that someone can say "Oh well I don't eat meat (I've got the moral high ground over you, you rabbit-snapping carnivorous monster)."

[d3m0nger]

Nah. Animals are far more important.

I agree with you there.

Why would humans be more important than animals? I don't see the difference, and as we're the dominating species and obliterating thousands of other animal species, we dont exactly have the right to call a human life more worth than an animal one.

I would feel sad if a forest fire would destroy thousands of animals, of course this is only natural, even if caused by humans right?

killing animals for food I can live with as it is only natural

In these days wearing their skin is another thing, and letting them left to die after they're skinned is insane.

These animals cant defend themselves at all, they don't have CNN broadcasting these horrors 24/7.

[d3m0nger]

So we torture them for our 5000 dollar coats?

[d3m0nger]

Well there is a difference, first of all they do not suffer as those <dont know the name> and monkeys in the link above suffered.

second of all its only natural to kill animals for food, ripping their f*cking skin off for some coat while they're still alive is a totally different thing.

Of course this does not change the fact that they indeed suffer, I guess the reason for why it is accepted is either because people dont know about it or dont care.

[lowzeewee]

Well then I think it is only right that if any animal exploitation is to be done, the animal must be killed first.

[gryphon]

I can't see why slaying animals outright is seen as less horrific than torturing them. The end result is the same. In both cases the animal is exploited by humans; humans that deem themselves superior to it.

Humans will die eventually. So is it not bad to first torture them, make them suffer and then murder them instead of just waithing untill they die from natural causes ?

As you claimed, the end result is the same. One however is called natural dieing, the other murder. You already answred your own question. Killing is not as bad a torturing. Torturing suggest unnessecery suffering on the behave of one of the two. Kiling them does not.

[d3m0nger]

Well then I think it is only right that if any animal exploitation is to be done, the animal must be killed first.

Not exactly, as baby seals get beaten to death with a baseball bat instead of getting shot so that the fur doesn't get ruined.

I never said humans aren't superior, I just said we shouldn't treat these animals the way we do.

Yes we exploit animals, again this is just nature but thats no reason to torture them, even if the end result is the same.

[TMA_1]

I dont want to watch the film, yet it sounds so sick that I am a bit curious by what was on that film. kinda morbid but yeesh what the heck is on it?

[lowzeewee]

Not exactly, as baby seals get beaten to death with a baseball bat instead of getting shot so that the fur doesn't get ruined.

I never said humans aren't superior, I just said we shouldn't treat these animals the way we do.

Yes we exploit animals, again this is just nature but thats no reason to torture them, even if the end result is the same.

Then the seals should be poisoned with cyanide before being skinned?

[erjin999]

Either that isnt economical or they are bastards, and want ot have fun before they skin them.

[Dante]

That is what makes them inferior.

Different yes. Inferior no. To judge something as inferior is to apply an arbitary value and scale.

I did not suggest that.

Even though I disagree with low about becoming vegetarian, he does have a point; animals suffer before slain for food. Why is this acceptable?

It is not.

I can't see why slaying animals outright is seen as less horrific than torturing them. The end result is the same. In both cases the animal is exploited by humans; humans that deem themselves superior to it.

To cause death is not so cruel as to cause suffering. The end result, a corpse, may be the same, but the process is different. And the process is just as important as the end result. Perhaps more so in this case, as death may come as a welcome release. Humans see themselves as superior to all things, even other humans. There is little difference in the regard the average human has for strangers than their regard for dogs.

I see your point; but in both cases you exploit animals. If you truly believe animals got rights and that humans are not superior (or even that they 're inferior) to them, then you shouldn't accept neither.

Exploitation is not the issue. There is no alternative to exploitation of other life forms in some form or another. We consume the bodies of other living things in order to survive. This is exploitation, using another for our own ends and goals. It is unavoidable, unless one is prepared to die for one's principles.

Animals have the right not to suffer, as do humans. But both have the right to die. It would be somewhat foolish to declare otherwise.

Going a little off-topic here, but I can't let this one. Yes indeed, more than 99% of our achievement directly harm someone else. But that doesn't reduce their greatness. And thare is that <1% to consider.

Everything than mankind has ever created has been used to harm. From the largst warhead to the smallest child, we abuse what we can take advantage of and poison what we cannot. I'm not saying that nothing good has resulted from the discoveries that humans have made, simply that there is no way to justify this against the overwhelming case against. Except one.

We're superior to every other known other species. If those extra abilities are misused, then we should be trying to control them, not hate humanity because it has them. It's like if you chop off your right arm for fear of firing a gun with it and killing someone. You should try and control it instead - the hand has many other brilliant uses.

Superior in what way exactly? As I said, to make such a judgement is arbitary, and depends upon a scale that does not truly exist.

The gun has already fired. What will you do with the hand now? Go on to create more, and to destroy more. That is the way of things. You cannot cut off the arm. You may hate it and attempt to ignore it but it will always be there. This is perhaps the most galling aspect.

Wouldn't starvation do? The cheapest option of all and doesn't affect the fur (at least from what I know).

Yes it does. Poison would be a better alternative, but there is a high likelihood of leakage into the enviroment.

[TMA_1]

what the heck happened!!!??? lol

[Dante]

We can herd other species, breed other species, educate other species, control other speciedes, kill other species, maim other species, use and abuse other species... And we can do all of these things to our own. Humans are not superior, they are merely in control. This control has come through virtue of an evolutionary mishap. To claim that this indicates superiority is, once again, to apply a scale that does not exist. Humans are inferior to one or another other species when measured by weight, height, reflexes, body mass, strength, speed, longevity, resilience, adaptability, defencibility... The only true category where humans might be judged 'superior' is intellience. And even that is a maybe. I would be more inclined to call it 'ingenuity.' One can argue on the exact definition and application of 'intelligence' to infinity, but it is indisputable that the human species is by far the most creative and destructive organism on the planet.

Whether this makes us 'superior' is open to debate.

There will never be more creation than destruction. One inevitably leads to the other, in a neverending loop.

[Nuvollari]

Wow....this is a great thread

[gunner154]

Wow....this is a great thread

Evolution from animal cruelty to... this.

Dante, your idea of superiority seems to be that of a philosophical/ideal one. Look at the practical aspects. Who has the guns to shoot down antelopes? The human intelligence is what gives us the upper hand. You can just call it control, but who else but the superior one has the control?

Can something that is genuinely inferior control something else?

[erjin999]

EA controlled Westwood. Argue that one.

[Dante]

Directed at thge previous question, not the EA one... How am I supposed to answer that when, as I said, inferiority and superiority are subjective concepts? There is no 'genuinely' inferior, unless you apply a specific value. Eg, "Something that is bigger is superior/something that is faster is superior/something that is greener is inferior." Guns don't equate to superiority, they equate to the ability to destroy things. Wow, back we are at destruction.