Plentyoffish dating forums are a place to meet singles and get dating advice or share dating experiences etc. Hopefully you will all have fun meeting singles and try out this online dating thing... Remember that we are the largest free online dating service, so you will never have to pay a dime to meet your soulmate.
     
Show ALL Forums  > Science/philosophy  >      Home login  
 AUTHOR
 gingerosity
Joined: 12/10/2011
Msg: 196
view profile
History
Do Animals Have Rights?Page 12 of 12    (1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12)
Michael and Mike raised some good points. I agree with most of them, but I would underline that eating crop-fed animals is a lot worse than simply eating crops. More than half of the world’s crops are used to feed livestock, not people, so it is not a trivial point.

Soft-hooved, native, low-methane rangeland meat like kangaroo is absolutely superior to feedlot meat on every ethical and environmental metric, and yes, superior to intensive monocrops too. Debating whether it is superior to things like organic/permaculature crops or more modern hydroponic/vertical/whatever farms would be a distraction from the most important and urgent task of shifting people to responsible sources of meat.
 drinkthesunwithmyface
Joined: 3/27/2012
Msg: 197
view profile
History
Do Animals Have Rights?
Posted: 8/19/2015 11:49:48 AM
Michelesq and Gingerosity...indeed.

I see within this dialogue the axiom that animal rights means not using animals at all for any resource. If that's the case, I didn't know that. But, I'd figure that treating animals as a resource is apart from being "humane" about it - I'd have thought that animal rights would be about how we treat them, not whether or not we use them as a resource.

Ultimately, it would make no sense to not treat animals as a resource. All life uses all life as resource. All species of plant and animal (and others etc) is actually part of one big community or family, the members of which support and rely upon each other. Also, I think that differentiating animal from plant in such a way that we worry about the animal's suffering but not the plant's...is a kind of animal-centric animal-chauvinism. We don't relate to the experience of a plant, so we assume that there is no feeling or experience for such an organism. And I think that would be incorrect.
 SunshineGirl__
Joined: 10/7/2014
Msg: 198
Do Animals Have Rights?
Posted: 8/19/2015 2:22:43 PM
^^^^^ PETA is often maliciously, politically misrepresented.


These people cannot be reasoned with.


But they can be deliberately misquoted and misrepresented. Right?


Peter Singer the godfather of the Animal Rights movement, points out the movement is not about love for animals:


Quoted out of context to make… what point?

The Singers’s English hostess at tea:

“But you are interested in animals, aren’t you, Mr. Singer?”

“We (he and his wife; not the entire animal rights movement) tried to explain that we were interested in the prevention of suffering and misery; that we were opposed to arbitrary discrimination; that we thought it wrong to inflict needless suffering on another being, even if that being were not a member of our own species; and that we believed animals were ruthlessly and cruelly exploited by humans, and we wanted this changed. Otherwise, we said, we (again: he and his wife, not the entire animal rights movement) were not especially ‘interested in’ animals.”

(Preface to the 1975 edition.)

I really hate it when people deliberately misrepresent others to try to make points.


Just Like Us?
Toward a Nation of Animal Rights"
(symposium), Harper's, August 1988,
p. 50.


You got a usable link for this article? I’m not paying for access to Harper’s archive.

Or is your source one of the anti-PETA blogs?
 HFX_RGB2
Joined: 4/14/2015
Msg: 199
Do Animals Have Rights?
Posted: 8/19/2015 7:46:24 PM

^^^^^ PETA is often maliciously, politically misrepresented.


https://www.petakillsanimals.com/
 drinkthesunwithmyface
Joined: 3/27/2012
Msg: 200
view profile
History
Do Animals Have Rights?
Posted: 8/20/2015 3:55:16 PM
Dam, there are so many things that I need to say in response, but I don't have enough time at the moment.
 JustinElle
Joined: 4/11/2015
Msg: 201
Do Animals Have Rights?
Posted: 9/8/2015 1:47:28 PM
Animals and the poor have one right to be killed and exploited they are lower life forms, although not spoken about, but just watch the news the last few years. We kill them, bomb them, poison them, force them to migrate in biblical numbers, to slowly starve and die of disease in specially created camps, administered by underfunded do-gooders to give it that humane gloss, while charity CEO's live it up in the material style of sheer utter contempt towards the people they obviously abhor, while bleating for more donations.

The right to live is at last being addressed, and the right to religious freedom too, its free for some and the rest can rot, and we can watch on TV the gradual death toll rise into the millions in a decade or so, at present rates.

We in the developed world are fans of exterminations having overseen so many since Hitler showed us how it NOT done, one must not to be seen guiding such events. Let the unequal in Gaza die slowly and painfully is how many desire the outcome to end, while in Yemen its just the extermination of an opposing religious sect, b while the illegal perpetrators of the war, watch weekly beheading on TV for free.

In the USA the CIA have treated sections of the population as laboratory rats, pumping them with drugs, disease, and not forgetting the electric shocks derived from slaughterhouse practices. Low life is expendable, as government prove their contempt for sections of society, not through words, but through actions. One has to admit that in many instances quadrupedal animals have a better time in many cased to the bipedal ones. But who is actually interested in evidence, facts.

Letting stuff happen suggests one is complicit, and we all just let it happen, so maybe its time to rejoice and celebrate the torturers, the death squads we train, the civilians that allow us target practice, as the anthropologists collect tears for future generations to revere. So Hitler was not all that bad, Nazism was compared to the carnage since WW2 and the hundreds of million the developed nations have systematically murdered for profit, all i all we have a lot to be grateful for as the NAZI's s held the light, paved the way, for our profit motivated civilization to charge down.
Show ALL Forums  > Science/philosophy  >