You are here: Home > Message Board > News & Politics > animal rights?
October 21 2019 3.54pm

animal rights?

Previous Topic | Next Topic


Page 2 of 5 < 1 2 3 4 5 >

 

View ASCPFC's Profile ASCPFC Flag Pro-Cathedral/caravan park 13 Aug 16 12.49pm Send a Private Message to ASCPFC Add ASCPFC as a friend

Originally posted by Hrolf The Ganger

Animals eat other animals every second of every day. They do not have morality. As much as I am appalled by human cruelty to animals, I accept that we are also animals and I do not see the consumption of meat as a "sin". It is part of the natural process. I am however, happy for people to choose what they eat on moral grounds, if it makes them feel better. I am also very much in support of improving conditions and treatment of farm animals.

I think these days a lot more people buy organic and/or free range which should entail better treatment for animals and, frankly, tastes a lot nicer, yummmmmmmm.
I've nothing against namby pamby vegetarians or vegans though - fair play to them for sticking to their convictions. I do get annoyed when 'vegetarians' start trying to eat my bacon though.

 


Red and Blue Army!

Alert Alert a moderator to this post Edit this post Quote this post in a reply
View sitdownstandup's Profile sitdownstandup Flag 22 Aug 16 12.33am Send a Private Message to sitdownstandup Add sitdownstandup as a friend

Originally posted by ASCPFC

Humanity Dick is the man behind the RSPCA. I believe it started with cruelty to donkeys in this area. Early to mid 19th Century. His townhouse is in Galway city next to the oldest pub in Galway - Naughtons.
If you're ever here I'll buy you a pint.


Cheers ascpfc... never knew who he was and just googled him... quite an interesting fella, survived shipwrecks, fought in duels and, yep, behind the start of the RSPCA... quite a fella!!!!


 


I never use a napkin on my lap at a restaurant... because I believe in myself.

Hannibal Burress

Alert Alert a moderator to this post Edit this post Quote this post in a reply
View sitdownstandup's Profile sitdownstandup Flag 22 Aug 16 12.40am Send a Private Message to sitdownstandup Add sitdownstandup as a friend

[Link]

I posted this ages ago... if only more people thought like this kid... too much politics gets in the way of the food we eat... I talk to christians/ muslims about the treatment of animals but they are the most difficult groups to convince to think about treatment of animals strangely enough.
I know a little about both religions too and understand that vegetarianism is compatible with both belief systems regardless of the fact that Mohammed and Jesus both ate meat (which is usually a justification for continuing to do so now).

 


I never use a napkin on my lap at a restaurant... because I believe in myself.

Hannibal Burress

Alert Alert a moderator to this post Edit this post Quote this post in a reply
jamiemartin721 Flag Reading 22 Aug 16 1.29pm

Originally posted by sitdownstandup

[Link]

I posted this ages ago... if only more people thought like this kid... too much politics gets in the way of the food we eat... I talk to christians/ muslims about the treatment of animals but they are the most difficult groups to convince to think about treatment of animals strangely enough.
I know a little about both religions too and understand that vegetarianism is compatible with both belief systems regardless of the fact that Mohammed and Jesus both ate meat (which is usually a justification for continuing to do so now).

I know that the Koran is very big on cats, and camels, but especially cats. Mohammed and the Imams definitely seemed to be cat people. Christians tend
to be more 'dog' in their preference - Where as hindu's are very pro-cow...

Odd as it seems, there is a surprising amount on cruelty to animals (as well as humans) in the Koran. For example, cruel treatment of cats is a damnable offence, and that any food on a plate from which a cat has eaten is considered halal. Animals in general are to be respected within their function (its ok to use a camel as a stead, but beating it is a no-no).

 


"One Nation Under God, has turned into One Nation Under the Influence of One Drug"
[Link]

Alert Alert a moderator to this post Quote this post in a reply
jamiemartin721 Flag Reading 22 Aug 16 1.34pm

Originally posted by Hrolf The Ganger

Animals eat other animals every second of every day. They do not have morality. As much as I am appalled by human cruelty to animals, I accept that we are also animals and I do not see the consumption of meat as a "sin". It is part of the natural process. I am however, happy for people to choose what they eat on moral grounds, if it makes them feel better. I am also very much in support of improving conditions and treatment of farm animals.

I think its unethical to eat animals, but I do it - Which maybe serves as a good example of the difference between morals and ethics. I don't think there are really any philosophical arguments that defend eating meat, unless you have to (except maybe for Pigs who would be extinct without people eating them).

Its certainly acceptable to eat animals, but realistically I would suggest that faced with a naked truth moment, of eating only vegetables and eating their pet cat/dog, people would likely turn to the carrots.

I suspect we'd also be a lot less willing to eat animals if we had to raise them and slaughter them ourselves.

Actually, probably not even the horror of the slaughter but the sheer amount of f**king effort involved would put most people off.

 


"One Nation Under God, has turned into One Nation Under the Influence of One Drug"
[Link]

Alert Alert a moderator to this post Quote this post in a reply
View Mapletree's Profile Mapletree Flag Croydon 22 Aug 16 1.36pm Send a Private Message to Mapletree Add Mapletree as a friend

Animals don't have rights. They aren't capable of exercising them.

Humans have controls over what they can or should do relating to animals.

 

Alert Alert a moderator to this post Edit this post Quote this post in a reply
View Mapletree's Profile Mapletree Flag Croydon 22 Aug 16 1.39pm Send a Private Message to Mapletree Add Mapletree as a friend

Originally posted by jamiemartin721

I think its unethical to eat animals, but I do it - Which maybe serves as a good example of the difference between morals and ethics. I don't think there are really any philosophical arguments that defend eating meat, unless you have to (except maybe for Pigs who would be extinct without people eating them).

Its certainly acceptable to eat animals, but realistically I would suggest that faced with a naked truth moment, of eating only vegetables and eating their pet cat/dog, people would likely turn to the carrots.

I suspect we'd also be a lot less willing to eat animals if we had to raise them and slaughter them ourselves.

Actually, probably not even the horror of the slaughter but the sheer amount of f**king effort involved would put most people off.

Farmers look after their animals well in the main. They also show them genuine affection. They then kill them or have them killed and eat them. What a farmer can do we all can do, it's just we aren't used to doing it.

 

Alert Alert a moderator to this post Edit this post Quote this post in a reply
View SurreyEagle16's Profile SurreyEagle16 Flag Next Door 22 Aug 16 1.40pm Send a Private Message to SurreyEagle16 Add SurreyEagle16 as a friend

One thing that always baffles me regarding animal rights is where individuals draw the line at what makes an "animal" and therefore deserves rights. It seems to me we as a species adopt this approach:

Rare and fierce lion = goggle in awe, save them
Cute, doe-eyed lamb = save and cuddle them
Next doors cat = don't want them in my garden but would not kick it in the head
Spider = die by blunt force trauma to the head via either a book or a shoe.

For the record, i eat meat and am not a huge lover of pets in general (never had any as a kid). But i never understand when i am shouted at for not buying free range chickens by someone wiping insect guts off their furniture.

 

Alert Alert a moderator to this post Edit this post Quote this post in a reply
jamiemartin721 Flag Reading 22 Aug 16 2.33pm

Originally posted by Mapletree

Animals don't have rights. They aren't capable of exercising them.

Humans have controls over what they can or should do relating to animals.

I think that's the point of assigning legal rights, that those who have no power are protected from abuse of those who do.

 


"One Nation Under God, has turned into One Nation Under the Influence of One Drug"
[Link]

Alert Alert a moderator to this post Quote this post in a reply
View Mapletree's Profile Mapletree Flag Croydon 22 Aug 16 2.47pm Send a Private Message to Mapletree Add Mapletree as a friend

Originally posted by jamiemartin721

I think that's the point of assigning legal rights, that those who have no power are protected from abuse of those who do.

Animals have no more legal rights than a shoe or a car.

 

Alert Alert a moderator to this post Edit this post Quote this post in a reply
jamiemartin721 Flag Reading 22 Aug 16 3.08pm

Originally posted by Mapletree

Animals have no more legal rights than a shoe or a car.

Actually they do, there are all manner of UK laws governing the treatment of animals. Cruelty to animals is a criminal offence, and a number of laws have existed since 1911 with regards to establishing the legal rights of animals, which were expanded in 2006.

These definite requirements upon human owners for the treatment of animals. The maximum prison sentence under the Animal welfare act is 51 weeks and 20,000 fine.

Whilst an animal is regarded as property in law, it has specific requirements in legislation to provide protection beyond that of non-sentient objects, even when testing and farming are concerned (causing undue suffering is a crime).

 


"One Nation Under God, has turned into One Nation Under the Influence of One Drug"
[Link]

Alert Alert a moderator to this post Quote this post in a reply
jamiemartin721 Flag Reading 22 Aug 16 3.10pm

Originally posted by SurreyEagle16

One thing that always baffles me regarding animal rights is where individuals draw the line at what makes an "animal" and therefore deserves rights. It seems to me we as a species adopt this approach:

Rare and fierce lion = goggle in awe, save them
Cute, doe-eyed lamb = save and cuddle them
Next doors cat = don't want them in my garden but would not kick it in the head
Spider = die by blunt force trauma to the head via either a book or a shoe.

For the record, i eat meat and am not a huge lover of pets in general (never had any as a kid). But i never understand when i am shouted at for not buying free range chickens by someone wiping insect guts off their furniture.

I draw the line at wasps. Paradoxically, I'll go out of my way and put a lot of effort in removing a spider from the house, but happily eat cheap chicken. Although I do have cats, which means I've had to mercy kill some mice.

Wasps are fair game though. F**k those c**ts. F**k them right up.

 


"One Nation Under God, has turned into One Nation Under the Influence of One Drug"
[Link]

Alert Alert a moderator to this post Quote this post in a reply

 

Page 2 of 5 < 1 2 3 4 5 >

Previous Topic | Next Topic

You are here: Home > Message Board > News & Politics > animal rights?