Log In
Register
3.35pm
5 November 2011
Offline
meanmistermustard said
Little Piggy Dragonguy said
What do you guys think about people saying that they hate zoos or circuses because they’re unethical, but then those same people pay others to torture and kill animals for them???If this is one of those arguments of you can have no regard for animals if you like eating bacon then the argument is bollocks. If not then you will have to clarify your post.
Why is it “bollocks”, mmm? The majority of zoos treat the animals better than the majority of farms and slaughterhouses do. Why is it not “bollocks” to pick and chose what is repulsive and what is not based off of how convenient it is for a person to hold up those beliefs? Anybody can think animal abuse is awful and avoid zoos because of it, but how does it make sense for that same person to eat beings that were treated way worse than any animal in a zoo they would have gone to? Honestly I’m not even sure there is an argument to explain that.
The following people thank Little Piggy Dragonguy for this post:
Dark OverlordAll living things must abide by the laws of the shape they inhabit
3.42pm
1 November 2013
Offline
Man (plural) is often presented as being above and separate from the animal kingdom. I am well aware we are animals at our core.
Yet you talk of animal territory as if human territory isn’t animal territory. The reason for why is because humans are elitists. More than core, we are biologically animals. Humans aren’t plants, robots or fungus.
Also, it’s a peeve of mine when humans are referred to as man/men.
The following people thank Starr Shine? for this post:
Little Piggy Dragonguy
3.55pm
9 March 2017
Offline Good point, however you have to put into consideration how meat is an important part of a healthy diet as us humans were designed as omnivores, people who are meant to consume both meat and plants, although to be fair it isn’t necessary to eat meat and there are other things that we are designed to be that people sometimes choose not to be and there’s nothing wrong with that. Actually, now that i think about it i feel bad for all of the animals that have been killed just so us humans can have something to eat and part of me wants to become a vegetarian.
If you're reading this, you are looking for something to do.
3.56pm
Reviewers
Moderators
1 May 2011
Offline Little Piggy Dragonguy said
meanmistermustard said
Little Piggy Dragonguy said
What do you guys think about people saying that they hate zoos or circuses because they’re unethical, but then those same people pay others to torture and kill animals for them???If this is one of those arguments of you can have no regard for animals if you like eating bacon then the argument is bollocks. If not then you will have to clarify your post.
Why is it “bollocks”, mmm? The majority of zoos treat the animals better than the majority of farms and slaughterhouses do. Why is it not “bollocks” to pick and chose what is repulsive and what is not based off of how convenient it is for a person to hold up those beliefs? Anybody can think animal abuse is awful and avoid zoos because of it, but how does it make sense for that same person to eat beings that were treated way worse than any animal in a zoo they would have gone to? Honestly I’m not even sure there is an argument to explain that.
That argument boils down to if I eat a bacon sandwich I therefore can have no opinion on animal cruelty and I might as well pick up a cane and start beating dogs. Furthermore, if we are going down the route of man = animal then I might as well be on the side of human cruelty too. Life, morals and beliefs are far too complicated to have it black and white where if you do x then that means y.
Therefore I come to the conclusion that the argument is “bollocks”.
Starr Shine? said
Man (plural) is often presented as being above and separate from the animal kingdom. I am well aware we are animals at our core.
Yet you talk of animal territory as if human territory isn’t animal territory. The reason for why is because humans are elitists. More than core, we are biologically animals. Humans aren’t plants, robots or fungus.
Also, it’s a peeve of mine when humans are referred to as man/men.
Human and animals (or whatever terms you wish to use) live on the earth and we cannot simply wander into parts of the world and encroach on animals and expect no consequences, yet if we do our action is kill the lion/bear/crocodile/chimpanze etc. I don’t get that and find such an action abhorrant.
As for the differences between humans and the rest of the animal kingdom I’m not getting involved in such a discussion as we will be here for weeks and I will bore myself senseless.
The following people thank meanmistermustard for this post:
Beatlebug"I told you everything I could about me, Told you everything I could" ('Before Believing' - Emmylou Harris)
4.07pm
15 May 2015
Offline Once in college, there was a guest lecturer in philosophy whose specialty was animal rights from a philosophical angle (he was an advocate of animal rights also). During the Q & A, I asked him something like, “Is a clam less worthy of being treated ethically than a fish or a porpoise? If yes, why?”
His answer, as I recall, was as incoherent and evasive as a Pentagon general testifying before Congress about military appropriations.
Then I fondly recall a skit by Marty Feldman, where in tight leotards he enacted the histrionic agony a carrot must go through when being viciously plucked from its home in the ground. I.e., vegetarians & vegans are torturing and killing millions of individual specimens of plant life daily.
A ginger sling with a pineapple heart,
a coffee dessert, yes you know it's good news...
4.20pm
5 November 2011
Offline meanmistermustard said
That argument boils down to if I eat a bacon sandwich I therefore can have no opinion on animal cruelty and I might as well pick up a cane and start beating dogs. Furthermore, if we are going down the route of man = animal then I might as well be on the side of human cruelty too. Life, morals and beliefs are far too complicated to have it black and white where if you do x then that means y.
Therefore I come to the conclusion that the argument is “bollocks”.
That argument is not that black and white, mmm. I wouldn’t use that argument on a person who buys carcasses from a non-factory farm that treats the animals with respect or a person who hunts their own food. I’m not even saying that people who attest animal cruelty whilst fiscally supporting it are in favor of animal cruelty, because I don’t believe that in every case. I just wonder if they are living up to their own beliefs? Or how they can consider a zoo to be inhumane but not have the same feelings towards a factory farm. Nobody will ever even explain their mindset to me, either, because all they ever do is get butthurt and act like I’m calling them a horrible person when I’m not.
All living things must abide by the laws of the shape they inhabit
4.29pm
5 November 2011
Offline Pineapple Records said
Then I fondly recall a skit by Marty Feldman, where in tight leotards he enacted the histrionic agony a carrot must go through when being viciously plucked from its home in the ground. I.e., vegetarians & vegans are torturing and killing millions of individual specimens of plant life daily.
To be honest, I find this really offensive when people say this to me. Like how is somebody going to compare abusing a plant to abusing a sentient being? No reputable study has drawn the conclusion that plants feel pain or have emotions. I get that it’s a joke, but I find it to be really bad taste.
All living things must abide by the laws of the shape they inhabit
4.45pm
9 March 2017
Offline To be fair, plants are living things that breathe, grow, and need water and food to survive, although the line has to be drawn somewhere or people will start killing themselves of starvation, the question is where the line should be drawn, here are the points where you can draw the line and survive, since it mentions some unpleasant stuff, i placed it in spoilers.
1. Killing and consuming animals is wrong, consuming their unborn is also wrong, and consuming products from their mammary glands is also wrong, therefore i declare myself as vegan.
2. Killing and consuming animals is wrong, as well as consuming their unborn, but i have no problem consuming products from an animals mammary glands so i consider myself a lacto vegetarian.
3. Killing and consuming animals is wrong but i have no problem with consuming their unborn and mammary products, so therefore i am a vegetarian.
4. Killing and consuming land animals is wrong, therefore i am a pescetarian.
5. Killing and consuming mammals is wrong, therefore i am a poll-pescetarian.
6. I am your average person, i see no problem with eating an animal such as a cow or pig that’s commonly eaten but think that killing and consuming animals such as a dog or cat is wrong, call me an omnivore.
7. I see no problem with killing and consuming any animal, whether it be a cow or a dog, as long as it isn’t a human, i’d say i’m also an omnivore but call me an extremist omnivore.
8. I have no problem consuming human flesh, as if we can eat a cow then why not a person, so call me a cannibal.
If you're reading this, you are looking for something to do.
5.11pm
1 November 2013
Offline There are ways to live with out killing plants or animals, eat only plant and animal by-products.
expect no consequences, yet if we do our action is kill the lion/bear/crocodile/chimpanze etc. I don’t get that and find such an action abhorrant.
Though now a days, it is mostly human territory. you say it is fine if a bear kills a human if it walks into it’s territory but it really don’t own the territory. Humans do. So going by that, humans are justified.
5.12pm
1 November 2013
Offline Little Piggy Dragonguy said
To be honest, I find this really offensive when people say this to me. Like how is somebody going to compare abusing a plant to abusing a sentient being? No reputable study has drawn the conclusion that plants feel pain or have emotions. I get that it’s a joke, but I find it to be really bad taste.
So if an animal doesn’t feel pain, it doesn’t matter?
5.18pm
Reviewers
Moderators
1 May 2011
Offline Little Piggy Dragonguy said
To be honest, I find this really offensive when people say this to me. Like how is somebody going to compare abusing a plant to abusing a sentient being? No reputable study has drawn the conclusion that plants feel pain or have emotions. I get that it’s a joke, but I find it to be really bad taste.
It depends on your source and what side of the argument you want to be on.
Personally, I believe plants are alive and feel pain. It’s far more complicated than with animals but to throw aside that they feel when taken out of the earth is to make it easier for individuals to look at those who eat meat with disdain.
"I told you everything I could about me, Told you everything I could" ('Before Believing' - Emmylou Harris)
5.18pm
9 March 2017
Offline Starr Shine? said
There are ways to live with out killing plants or animals, eat only plant and animal by-products.
Now that i think of it, isn’t fruit plant byproduct whereas vegetables are plants themselves, it explains Jain vegetarianism which only eat fruit and dairy.
If you're reading this, you are looking for something to do.
10.46pm
9 March 2017
Offline What are your thoughts on copyright, i think it’s gone way too far and here’s how i think copyright should work. First, it should only last for 40 years from the day of it’s release, that’s more than enough time for the artist to make money. Next, i think that people should be able to post copyrighted media on the internet and should also be able to sell it as long as the artist gets all of the money. Also, if the artist dies, the copyright is cancelled and the work immediately enters the public domain. Finally, if someone is caught selling copyrighted material and keeping the money for themselves, the person gets life with the possibility of parole once the media they illegally sold enters the public domain and the person who catches them gets $500, the absurd prison sentence is to make up for the lenient law and the cash incentive is to convince these people to rat out sellers who aren’t mailing the money to the artist.
If you're reading this, you are looking for something to do.
12.02am
11 November 2010
Offline I don’t really have much of an opinion. I’m aware of the arguments against the current system, but I think that it’s ultimately a non-issue.
The following people thank Necko for this post:
Dark OverlordI'm Necko. I'm like Ringo except I wear necklaces.
I'm also ewe2 on weekends.
Most likely to post things that make you go hmm... 2015, 2016, 2017. 
3.44am
Reviewers
Moderators
1 May 2011
Offline Starr Shine? said
There are ways to live with out killing plants or animals, eat only plant and animal by-products.expect no consequences, yet if we do our action is kill the lion/bear/crocodile/chimpanze etc. I don’t get that and find such an action abhorrant.
Though now a days, it is mostly human territory. you say it is fine if a bear kills a human if it walks into it’s territory but it really don’t own the territory. Humans do. So going by that, humans are justified.
If humans drive bears out of their habitat or destroy their source of food why do we own the territory?
The following people thank meanmistermustard for this post:
Flyingbrians"I told you everything I could about me, Told you everything I could" ('Before Believing' - Emmylou Harris)
4.03am
19 January 2017
Offline 
Copyright law is a bit of a non-issue for me but I do disagree with some of your points @Dark Overlord.
I’m actually strongly in favour of copyright law.
1. 40 years – Why 40 years? I could be any binary year. In fact I wouldn’t be bothered if said music remained copywrited either by the artist or their estate. Like with any art, they should receive the full fruits of their work.
2. Publishing copyrighted material online – This is fine in principal but it be would be extremely hard to police. People will always try and get away without giving money to the copyright holder.
3. If the artist dies – I don’t really agree with this but I see where you are coming from. I think this is should be the decision of the artist. I wouldn’t want people trashing my work after i’d died though.
4. Punishment – Yes the punishment may be harsh for infringing copyright, but there’s a simple solution. Don’t break the law.
The following people thank Flyingbrians for this post:
Beatlebug"And life flows on within you and without you" - George Harrison
4.07am
19 January 2017
Offline meanmistermustard said
If humans drive bears out of their habitat or destroy their source of food why do we own the territory?
Also, I think it’s a dangerous fallacy to think that us ‘superior’ humans own territory. Nobody owns anything, the world is the world. Territory is merely a construct in the minds of those who want to exploit resources.
It’s like countries. The only reason why they are defined as countries, aside from a bit of cultural heritage, is because they are slapped with a name and imaginary borders.
In my ideal world, all life on earth would live in harmony. But alas, that is a utopian dream.
"And life flows on within you and without you" - George Harrison
6.33am
1 November 2013
Offline If humans drive bears out of their habitat or destroy their source of food why do we own the territory?
Because we drove the bear out. Though our claim is just like the bears since we are able to fight off others to keep it.
Also, I think it’s a dangerous fallacy to think that us ‘superior’ humans own territory.
Yet the bear and other species is talked about owning terratory. Why not human?
To treat humans doffrently in this regard makes them ‘superior’. We are animals. We act just like any other animals. If a lion pride leader is weak. A new one invades and takes over the lion pride.
6.42am
1 November 2013
Offline When artist dies is a bad way to do it.
People will just kill the artist.
The following people thank Starr Shine? for this post:
The Hole Got Fixed, Necko, WeepingAtlasCedars6.43am
19 January 2017
Offline Starr Shine? said
If humans drive bears out of their habitat or destroy their source of food why do we own the territory?
Because we drove the bear out. Though our claim is just like the bears since we are able to fight off others to keep it.
Also, I think it’s a dangerous fallacy to think that us ‘superior’ humans own territory.
Yet the bear and other species is talked about owning terratory. Why not human?
To treat humans doffrently in this regard makes them ‘superior’. We are animals. We act just like any other animals. If a lion pride leader is weak. A new one invades and takes over the lion pride.
The whole concept of territory is very abstract. The territorial claims of animals, such as bears, are very different to humans since they have innate instincts to survive. This is where the darwinist survival of the fittest idea comes into play.
Early humans were the same and it’s true that we still have that built in need to survive to an extent. However, I think in modern times we should be advanced enough to recognise that other animals have a right to their habitats.
Starr Shine? said
When artist dies is a bad way to do it.
People will just kill the artist.
Well that’s an interesting way of looking at it 
"And life flows on within you and without you" - George Harrison
3 Guest(s)