-
Justified wrote on 2010-10-04 03:20
Quote from Timexpo;174740:
No. Humans, are animals, except, we are on top. We are the ones with the power, we can wipe out entire species without even thinking about it. We kill OTHER HUMANS for trivial stupid reasons. The point is that a life is important, whether its a fellow man, a cat, or a parrot. A death is a death.
And the fact that these animals couldnt even put up a good fight makes it tragic and sad, they were innocent and didnt deserve it, now get off your idiotic high horse.
We're on top not because we have power, but because we have logic and reason.
It's stupid to value the life of an animal over the life of a human. I sure as hell hope that a fellow man would choose to save me instead of some cat should we both be in mortal peril.
The one's on the high horse here are the one's so passionately defending animals.
"I HAVE VALUES! PETS ARE LIVING BEINGS TOO!"
Yea okay. How many of you spewing these words are vegetarian? Because I don't see how you can so get so angry at this woman when you're eating animals that are bred in terrible living conditions, some even mutated, just for affordable food.
-
Mrlucky77 wrote on 2010-10-04 03:29
Quote from Justified;174860:
We're on top not because we have power, but because we have logic and reason.
It's stupid to value the life of an animal over the life of a human. I sure as hell hope that a fellow man would choose to save me instead of some cat should we both be in mortal peril.
The one's on the high horse here are the one's so passionately defending animals.
"I HAVE VALUES! PETS ARE LIVING BEINGS TOO!"
Yea okay. How many of you spewing these words are vegetarian? Because I don't see how you can so get so angry at this woman when you're eating animals that are bred in terrible living conditions, some even mutated, just for affordable food.
I agree. I think the only reason people that defend animals act that way is because of their point of view. What I mean by that is that people cannot see the impact of their daily actions directly, therefore not causing any thought on their actions and impacts and such.
There are extremes to defending animals however, like PETA. Total idiots with the belief that Animal > human. Like I read earlier on some other thread on here, they are just 'domestic' terrorists (horriblepun) and such. However, there is such a thing called moderation. (Was that even a pun earlier? I dunno) I mean, defending animals from cruelty is good and all, but we also need to remember that there are more serious actions going on at the moment, like wars and murders and stuff, so why save like, 8 cats or something when that time and money could be invested in saving a more intelligent being?
-
Alex wrote on 2010-10-04 03:32
There is no such thing as an intelligent being, only computers.
Humans are plain ol' stupid.
Like this retarted woman, who should obviously be burned and gouged... but thats a different thing all together.
-
Mrlucky77 wrote on 2010-10-04 03:34
Quote from Alex;174874:
There is no such thing as an intelligent being, only computers.
Humans are plain ol' stupid.
Like this retarted woman, who should obviously be burned and gouged... but thats a different thing all together.
Of course there are intelligent beings, it's just that of that(those) intelligent species, there are individuals that have the potential to be very stupid/moronic or very smart/wise.
-
Alex wrote on 2010-10-04 03:36
Even if they are smart in some sort of way, they make stupid choices.... thus making them completely stupid from the start. I find humans to be the most hopeless beings that there are, just because of the choices they tend to make in life.
-
Phunkie wrote on 2010-10-04 03:36
Quote from Justified;174860:
We're on top not because we have power, but because we have logic and reason.
It's stupid to value the life of an animal over the life of a human. I sure as hell hope that a fellow man would choose to save me instead of some cat should we both be in mortal peril.
The one's on the high horse here are the one's so passionately defending animals.
"I HAVE VALUES! PETS ARE LIVING BEINGS TOO!"
Yea okay. How many of you spewing these words are vegetarian? Because I don't see how you can so get so angry at this woman when you're eating animals that are bred in terrible living conditions, some even mutated, just for affordable food.
I guess we pick and choose which kinds of "torture" we're okay with.
We're more close (feelings-wise) to household pets, so seeing them tortured bothers us more.
But you're right. It should be equal.
I eat cows, but I hate seeing dogs tortured. We're all hypocrites, really.
-
Tatsu wrote on 2010-10-04 03:40
Quote from Justified;174860:
Yea okay. How many of you spewing these words are vegetarian? Because I don't see how you can so get so angry at this woman when you're eating animals that are bred in terrible living conditions, some even mutated, just for affordable food.
A ridiculous argument to this is that meat is usually bought for more than a dollar, and that humans have been murdered for a dollar or less. Thus, the monetary value of a human is less than that of a steak. I think we should start murdering humans as cheap food, yes?
-
Justified wrote on 2010-10-04 03:44
Quote from Tatsu;174892:
A ridiculous argument to this is that meat is usually bought for more than a dollar, and that humans have been murdered for a dollar or less. Thus, the monetary value of a human is less than that of a steak. I think we should start murdering humans as cheap food, yes?
Except that I didn't mention the "value" of animal meat anywhere in that example. It was merely an allusion between the outrage of maltreatment towards animals from people who benefit off of animal abuse.
On the other hand, try breeding, slaughtering, and distributing human meat for less than chicken meat. Odds are, you can't. Even if I believed that murder can cost less than a dollar, killing is only one part of a long process.
-
Alex wrote on 2010-10-04 03:47
Actually.... humans would be a cheaper method, considering the ammount of them, locations, and care they need.
Isnt much, end world hunger?
-
Justified wrote on 2010-10-04 03:52
Quote from Alex;174904:
Actually.... humans would be a cheaper method, considering the ammount of them, locations, and care they need.
Isnt much, end world hunger?
If you think that it costs less to raise a human than an animal then...
Quote from Alex;174882:
Even if they are smart in some sort of way, they make stupid statements.... thus making them completely stupid from the start.
-
abc33kr wrote on 2010-10-04 03:57
The difference between humans and wild animals:
animals can only use instincts while humans can THINK FOR THEMSELVES.
While that freedom may not be always good, but it is not always bad.
It is that way because of the duality of mankind. Humans are angels and they are also devils. Humans love and they also hate. Humans cannot be distinguished as white or black.
And the power to decide has given humans the power to rule over other animals. This power may be abused in the hands of the dumb, but if it is in good hands, then such beautiful things may be created. It seems that humans are more destructive than helpful because it takes much more effort/time to create than destroying, thus in contrast, it seems as if humans are burdens to Earth, but in reality, it is the total opposite.
tldr; Some humans are worse than animals like the one in this article, but most humans actually know how to think and make Earth a better place.
-
Alex wrote on 2010-10-04 03:57
If you are suggesting me, I never pleaded as being smart in the first place. So, in that case, your point is irrelevant.
Not everyone is the same in the feeding factor, sure.... some are unhealthier than others and eat less. My friend takes pills for food (medical issue), had a baby, turned out perfectly healthy. Animals are smaller and their food is ground and smooshed up, but it has the same ammount as humans (fish, chicken, ect). So depending how you provide the food, is another story.
-
abc33kr wrote on 2010-10-04 03:59
Quote from Alex;174912:
If you are suggesting me, I never pleaded as being smart in the first place. So, in that case, your point is irrelevant.
Not everyone is the same in the feeding factor, sure.... some are unhealthier than others and eat less. My friend takes pills for food (medical issue), had a baby, turned out perfectly healthy. Animals are smaller and their food is ground and smooshed up, but it has the same ammount as humans (fish, chicken, ect). So depending how you provide the food, is another story.
okayyy Mr. Hitler, I would like to see you set up a company and actually beat other competing companies that raise animals.
-
Alex wrote on 2010-10-04 04:01
Cloning :/ ... and money.
On a side note, this is off-topic now.
-
abc33kr wrote on 2010-10-04 04:03
No, this news pretty much incited this interesting controversial conversation.
If this is rly that off-topic, I will make a thread on the library or something.