Meat Eaters = Selfish (Steve & Bill)

[fallingblood]

Still doesn't make the answer any different. He was complaining that animals kill animals why can't we? I replied that we don't eat those kind and that still stands.

Actually it does make it different. Carnivores eat herbivores. They generally don't eat other carnivores. The reason being those that I already addressed.

 

[Willamena]

Well, possibly. I'm not that anthropocentric though

Why do you imagine it as anthropocentric and not animistic?

 

[fallingblood]

Why can't I compare humans to nonhumans in the sense of we both have consciousness and feelings.

Because you are doing it in a way that has nothing to do with what I say. You are purposely twisting what I said in order to make a point that simply could not be supported by what I have said.

 

[The Sum of Awe]

Actually it does make it different. Carnivores eat herbivores. They generally don't eat other carnivores. The reason being those that I already addressed.

Who cares, even if it has to be that way, my point was to make his complaint invalid, and even if it would be impossible for omnivores (you are for some reason calling us carnivores) to eat carnivores, that argument was invalid. My argument never said we could eat herbivores, it simply didn't matter.

 

[The Sum of Awe]

Because you are doing it in a way that has nothing to do with what I say. You are purposely twisting what I said in order to make a point that simply could not be supported by what I have said.

I've never twisted your words, I never said you claimed that we should kill humans, but simply asking why not because of the same exact reason you presented?

 

[Shadow Wolf]

Why though...

It's just how humans tend to think. Our "in" group can do no wrong, while the "out" group are barbaric savages. There are even instances of tribes that trade without any physical contract to avoid conflicts. And especially in Western and Industrialized and Post Industrialized societies our worldview tends to be we humans are supreme and everything else is below us.

 

[The Sum of Awe]

It's just how humans tend to think. Our "in" group can do no wrong, while the "out" group are barbaric savages. There are even instances of tribes that trade without any physical contract to avoid conflicts. And especially in Western and Industrialized and Post Industrialized societies our worldview tends to be we humans are supreme and everything else is below us.

Doesn't make sense though, we have had smaller groups before. We used to have whites supreme and everything is below them, we used to have men over women. Gender differences, racial differences, so why can't we accept specie differences?

 

[Drolefille]

I accept species differences as delicious. Seriously I'm not giving cows or dogs or chimps the right to vote, they aren't people and comparing slavery to eating meat is the offensive territory of PETA that makes me take you as seriously as I do them.

 

[The Sum of Awe]

I accept species differences as delicious. Seriously I'm not giving cows or dogs or chimps the right to vote, they aren't people and comparing slavery to eating meat is the offensive territory of PETA that makes me take you as seriously as I do them.

I said give them equality, rights... That doesn't mean the same rights humans have

And why aren't they people?

It may be offensive to you, but it's true.

I actually support PETA in some stances, so if it does that doesn't bother me any.

 

[fallingblood]

Doesn't make sense though, we have had smaller groups before. We used to have whites supreme and everything is below them, we used to have men over women. Gender differences, racial differences, so why can't we accept specie differences?

Would you support a cow for president? Would you want one leading the country in any way? Do you want to support the right of animals to marry whatever other animal they want?

Racial, gender, sexual, differences are all differences within the same species; humans.

Why can't we accept specie differences such as you are suggesting? Because I don't want a cow for a leader. A cow is not a human. There is a huge difference.

 

[fallingblood]

I said give them equality, rights... That doesn't mean the same rights humans have

Equality for what? Equality to vote? Don't you see a difference between other species and us?

And why aren't they people?

Because they aren't. Why does this even have to be asked?

It may be offensive to you, but it's true.

It's not true. It is your opinion.

 

[The Sum of Awe]

Would you support a cow for president?

How is that relevant to anything I've said?

Would you want one leading the country in any way? Do you want to support the right of animals to marry whatever other animal they want?

Racial, gender, sexual, differences are all differences within the same species; humans.

Species, racial, gender, sexual, and category of species are all difference within the same organism; the conscious organisms.

Why can't we accept specie differences such as you are suggesting? Because I don't want a cow for a leader. A cow is not a human. There is a huge difference.[/QUOTE]

Why do you think I'm supporting a cow for president?

Why does it have to be human? That sounds selfish itself. "It has to be in MY species because MY species is the awesomest one, all the other ones I hate and can be slowly killed so I can eat it."

 

[The Sum of Awe]

Equality for what? Equality to vote? Don't you see a difference between other species and us?

To live an equally good life. Equality does not necessarily mean the same.

Because they aren't. Why does this even have to be asked?

That answers my question :sarcastic

It's not true. It is your opinion.

How isn't this slavery: Separating a living being from their family to work for their whole life, having little to no freedom, than die when they're no longer good enough or are fat enough to be fed. They sleep in small, dirty barns with all of the other species you kidnapped from their families (I'm not against keeping pets but these fellows can do well on their own).

 

[fallingblood]

To live an equally good life. Equality does not necessarily mean the same.

Equally good to humans? Or other species? If we let them live an equally good life to humans, then we have accomplished that, because many humans suffer and undergo much more than other animals do. If equal to other animals, we have accomplished that as well. Because many animals suffer for many different reasons.

That answers my question :sarcastic

Yes it does.

How isn't this slavery: Separating a living being from their family to work for their whole life, having little to no freedom, than die when they're no longer good enough or are fat enough to be fed. They sleep in small, dirty barns with all of the other species you kidnapped from their families (I'm not against keeping pets but these fellows can do well on their own).

Haha. You are really going to equate this to slavery? I'm simply done. You are showing very little respect to the suffering that humans have undergone, and then assuming that other animals have the same feelings and emotions that we do. Both are just ridiculous. Especially considering that many animals will eat their young, abandon their young, rape their young, etc.

 

[The Sum of Awe]

Equally good to humans? Or other species? If we let them live an equally good life to humans, then we have accomplished that, because many humans suffer and undergo much more than other animals do. If equal to other animals, we have accomplished that as well. Because many animals suffer for many different reasons.

What I meant was, they should have the right to get an equal amount of happiness and freedom.

How do humans suffer more than animals? They're being beaten, killed, watching their mothers or children get turned into food. It's been like this since the invention of farming animals.

Humans? We get to drink/eat whatever we want, walk wherever we want, do whatever we want... We get tons of entertainment.

Sure, the blacks may have suffered, along with women, and people in the military, all of our wars... We put those things on ourselves, animals didn't have a choice.

Yes it does.

It's exactly like: "Why isn't pepsi yellow?" "Because it isn't." That's not an answer, that's just repeating the statement I was questioning.

Haha. You are really going to equate this to slavery? I'm simply done. You are showing very little respect to the suffering that humans have undergone, and then assuming that other animals have the same feelings and emotions that we do. Both are just ridiculous. Especially considering that many animals will eat their young, abandon their young, rape their young, etc.

Because they don't have a strong sense reason means they don't have feelings?

Are you saying humans have been through worse than nonhumans?

 

[Madhuri]

Would you support a cow for president? Would you want one leading the country in any way? Do you want to support the right of animals to marry whatever other animal they want?

Racial, gender, sexual, differences are all differences within the same species; humans.

Why can't we accept specie differences such as you are suggesting? Because I don't want a cow for a leader. A cow is not a human. There is a huge difference.

I accept species differences as delicious. Seriously I'm not giving cows or dogs or chimps the right to vote, they aren't people and comparing slavery to eating meat is the offensive territory of PETA that makes me take you as seriously as I do them.

Quite clearly, the argument regarding animals rights comes down to moral consideration of sentient entities.
A lot of morality is based on the values of compassion and empathy, of reducing suffering or lessening evil.

To bring up issues of human behaviour such as slavery, racism, sexism etc. addresses the tendency for humans to ignore the suffering of others for our own selfish purposes.

Bringing up questions such as would you allow a cow to be president or giving them the right to vote is very arrogant and attempts only to confuse or steer the debate in another direction. It is entirely off the point.

And Drole: to deny that the meat industry is not a form of slavery is to deny animals moral consideration, compassion, sentience. It is heartless.

 

[Madhuri]

Haha. You are really going to equate this to slavery? I'm simply done. You are showing very little respect to the suffering that humans have undergone, and then assuming that other animals have the same feelings and emotions that we do. Both are just ridiculous. Especially considering that many animals will eat their young, abandon their young, rape their young, etc.

Talk about generalisation. So all animal species have the same nature? Maybe you think it's amusing when the farmer takes away the calf from the mother and they spend days calling one another and searching for one another. But that's fine because crocodiles have been known to eat their own babies.

Most animals quite evidently experience intense emotions and suffering. You have to be blind to not see this. Have you had much experience with animals? To say that animals are slaves is not disrespecting humans. What a strange conclusion to come to. Even if you can conclude that slavery of humans is far worse, that still does not make it all right to treat animals as objects or senseless machines.

 

[Drolefille]

Quite clearly, the argument regarding animals rights comes down to moral consideration of sentient entities.
A lot of morality is based on the values of compassion and empathy, of reducing suffering or lessening evil.

To bring up issues of human behaviour such as slavery, racism, sexism etc. addresses the tendency for humans to ignore the suffering of others for our own selfish purposes.

Bringing up questions such as would you allow a cow to be president or giving them the right to vote is very arrogant and attempts only to confuse or steer the debate in another direction. It is entirely off the point.

And Drole: to deny that the meat industry is not a form of slavery is to deny animals moral consideration, compassion, sentience. It is heartless.

No, I would like to reduce suffering and make slaughterhouses and factory farms safer and healthier places to be. I have compassion for animals. I grant that they feel pain and pleasure - ie sentinece. I'd rather they feel more of the latter and less of the former.

I grant them moral consideration. It is immoral to abuse an animal, to cause it pain for fun or due to carelessness.

But animals are not sapient. Animals are not people. And equating the suffering of an animal, however bad it may be, with the suffering of people who were mentally and physically enslaved, or to the Holocaust as PETA has done is ignorant in the extreme. We're particular about our domesticated animals. We've bred some to eat, some for companionship and some basically adopted us as convenient food sources (cats I'm looking at you) but we they are still animals.

I love my cat, and i have a responsibility to her to care for her, but I would save a human before saving her. She's bonded to me on her part as best as she can be, as a mother or littermate. But she can't love me and she isn't even aware that she can't. If you find humans and animals completely equal in value, then at least you can argue consistency, I suppose. But that's a rather weak argument overall.

 

[Drolefille]

Talk about generalisation. So all animal species have the same nature? Maybe you think it's amusing when the farmer takes away the calf from the mother and they spend days calling one another and searching for one another. But that's fine because crocodiles have been known to eat their own babies.

That's called instinct.

Most animals quite evidently experience intense emotions and suffering. You have to be blind to not see this. Have you had much experience with animals? To say that animals are slaves is not disrespecting humans. What a strange conclusion to come to. Even if you can conclude that slavery of humans is far worse, that still does not make it all right to treat animals as objects or senseless machines.

No it's pretty much disrespecting to human suffering. Have you read the diaries of slaves? Being an animal would have been a step up because at least they wouldn't have been aware that they were treated like property. It is beyond summarizing in less than a book.

Out of curiousity, is it, in your opinion, worse to live and die than it is to never have existed?

 

[Averroes]

Actually it does make it different. Carnivores eat herbivores. They generally don't eat other carnivores. The reason being those that I already addressed.

Well we eat sharks.....I mean our teeth is designed as omnivorous as we are, still, we eat other carnivores...or did I miss your point?