Quote:
Prove it. (hint: the first clue to your obvious identity crisis is right there in the quote)
Lol. Why don't you answer my post, eh?
- Forums
- Cross Site
- The Asylum
- The Internet: 1 Cat Abuser: 0
The Internet: 1 Cat Abuser: 0Follow
Lol. Why don't you answer my post, eh?
Kavekk wrote:
Lol. Why don't you answer my post, eh?
2. I have to go have a mammogram now.
Alma wrote:
I lost my post
Elinda wrote:
2. I have to go have a mammogram now.
Just kidding. Could you imagine?
In response to Joph's prodding, I thought about it, and I would strangle infinite chimps to save a human life, assuming we had unlimited resources to produce infinite chimps. I care about chimps as a species, I don't care about an individual chimp. I guess that's the same way I feel about corn.
Really though, higher-order animals that exhibit sentience and self-awareness, I suppose I regard somewhat higher than, say, an ant. In the sense that while I walk around outside without regard for how many ants I'm incidentally stepping on, I would go out of my way to avoid stomping on baby chimp's heads. I guess that's more compassion than value.
trickybeck wrote:
I guess that's more compassion than value.
Alma wrote:
I lost my post
This post. Your replacement edit does not answer it in any way, so I can only assume it was not meant to.
I'm doing that, am I? All I seem to be doing to me is asking people for the reasons behind their beliefs. That is not unreasonable or stupid.
You keep talking about the way things are, not the rationale behind the way things are, which is what I am asking about. You are walking in circles, and it makes you look foolish. Let me help you. What is the reason you believe human life has inherent worth that puts it above slavery, and animal life does not?
Stop editing on me, Elinda.
Kavekk wrote:
Elinda wrote:
What's really stupid is you trying to get normally rational people to make an irrational statement about the worth of an animal.
I'm doing that, am I? All I seem to be doing to me is asking people for the reasons behind their beliefs. That is not unreasonable or stupid.
Elinda wrote:
Slavery is ownership. If I own something, I get to place the value on it. We have, however, recognized that just being a person gives you individual value and inherent rights, that you are not to be bought, sold, given or traded. We have outlawed ownership of human beings.
We have NOT however emancipated the animal kingdom.
We have NOT however emancipated the animal kingdom.
You keep talking about the way things are, not the rationale behind the way things are, which is what I am asking about. You are walking in circles, and it makes you look foolish. Let me help you. What is the reason you believe human life has inherent worth that puts it above slavery, and animal life does not?
Stop editing on me, Elinda.
Samira wrote:
Elinda wrote:
You're getting awfully worked up about this. Are you trying to marry your goat or something?
Why, that's about as lame as a ratebot.
Wouldn't it be cool though if a zoophile logged on to register his outrage? This absence is why I miss livejournal.
Turin wrote:
Seriously, what the f*ck nature?
trickybeck wrote:
I would strangle infinite chimps to save a human life, assuming we had unlimited resources to produce infinite chimps.
Belkira wrote:
Wow. Regular ol' Joph fan club in here.
Jophiel wrote:
trickybeck wrote:
I would strangle infinite chimps to save a human life, assuming we had unlimited resources to produce infinite chimps.
Katie wrote:
I'm equating the life of a cat or any pet for that reason to the life of a human. Both are just as valuable. You wouldn't give a kid away because you catch a cold every time they come back from daycare, you wouldn't throw the first kid outside to fend for itself because you just birthed your second. I don't think it's fair that you would do it to your pets.
Seriously? How many children do you know that can fend for themselves? Now how many animals can?
Jophiel wrote:
Are you seriously going to avoid the question forever by asserting that there's no possible way in Katie-Land for a pet dog to bite a child of yours?
There are no children in Katie-Land.
Kavekk wrote:
Red wrote:
As for Kavekk's question, my personal answer is level of consciousness.
Are we talking sentience vs non sentience here, as a kind of binary switch? Or is it more of a sliding scale based on intelligence?
It's more a scale based on the perceived level of consciousness. Same reason why animal testing on mice is more acceptable than animal testing on chimps. Why people easily kill a mosquito but not a rabbit. The more "mechanic" the animal, the more acceptable it is to kill it.
In other news....
23 million chickens were killed by electrocution in the US yesterday , and 100,000 cows were slaughtered by having a pneumatic bolt fired into their heads. Apparently, most were then used as food for either humans or pets!
I would find the YouTube links for you but I'm being blocked by a 'Health' service that believes its ok to spend $20,000 dollars on a hip-joint replacement for useless old people, but budgets less than $2 a day to feed in-patients.
23 million chickens were killed by electrocution in the US yesterday , and 100,000 cows were slaughtered by having a pneumatic bolt fired into their heads. Apparently, most were then used as food for either humans or pets!
I would find the YouTube links for you but I'm being blocked by a 'Health' service that believes its ok to spend $20,000 dollars on a hip-joint replacement for useless old people, but budgets less than $2 a day to feed in-patients.
"If you have selfish, ignorant citizens, you're gonna get selfish, ignorant leaders". Carlin.
Quote:
You are making a fallacious argument. We have not emancipated pets to any extent. We can't. It's not our place. We use them, exploit them, care about them, eat them, wear them, learn from them, enjoy them. Are you really saying that we should rule them all as well. Tiger tiger go to jail, you've caught a emu by the tail.
Animals are free to make their own way in this world.
Animals are free to make their own way in this world.
I like how what you said, rather than pertaining to what you were responding, was a naturalistic rant against the existential status of animals.
Quote:
Any the degree of compassion that we are capable of, is one of the traits that sets us above other animals.
You're a fool if you believe that other animals can't feel emotions like this. There are degress of these things, and not all humans can feel compassion either.
The amount of generalized anthropocentricism in your petulant, self-centered appraisal of the worth of animals is somewhat sickening.
Edited, Feb 17th 2009 2:45pm by Pensive
Quote:
Seriously? How many children do you know that can fend for themselves? Now how many animals can?
If you put a 1 year old baby against my cat in a survival challenge, I'd bet on the baby every time.
Pensive wrote:
Quote:
Seriously? How many children do you know that can fend for themselves? Now how many animals can?
If you put a 1 year old baby against my cat in a survival challenge, I'd bet on the baby every time.
I believe the question was more a "if I turn my cat out it can survive on it's own, but a baby can't" type thing.
I could be wrong, of course.
paulsol wrote:
Apparently, most were then used as food for either humans or pets
Edited, Feb 17th 2009 1:54pm by Jophiel
Belkira wrote:
Wow. Regular ol' Joph fan club in here.
Pensive wrote:
Quote:
Seriously? How many children do you know that can fend for themselves? Now how many animals can?
If you put a 1 year old baby against my cat in a survival challenge, I'd bet on the baby every time.
Really?
Ok, now throw in a starving pitbull.... which do you think the pitbull would have an easier time catching and killing?
Yeah, but it's a stupid comparison. If I turned my cat out in the wilderness, she'd die in a day, same as a baby. He was comparing an ideal situation for the animal with one of the worst possible for the baby.
A better comparrison would be:
baby versus baby kitten - both probably die
8 year old versus geriatric dog - both probably die
child versus declawed adolescent cat - both might survive by hiding
I could compare an adolescent cat with claws who often goes outside to an adolescent athletic boyscout fairly. The results change pretty quick, with both probably surviving for a long *** time.
It's asinine to compare a relatively old animal raised to survive outside, like your common outdoor pets, to some infantile baby that chokes on his own spittle. It's just as asinine to ignore the fact that animals, like humans have individual chances of surviving on their own or not, and that a generalized comparison is simply doomed to fail.
A better comparrison would be:
baby versus baby kitten - both probably die
8 year old versus geriatric dog - both probably die
child versus declawed adolescent cat - both might survive by hiding
I could compare an adolescent cat with claws who often goes outside to an adolescent athletic boyscout fairly. The results change pretty quick, with both probably surviving for a long *** time.
It's asinine to compare a relatively old animal raised to survive outside, like your common outdoor pets, to some infantile baby that chokes on his own spittle. It's just as asinine to ignore the fact that animals, like humans have individual chances of surviving on their own or not, and that a generalized comparison is simply doomed to fail.
Quote:
Ok, now throw in a starving pitbull.... which do you think the pitbull would have an easier time catching and killing?
Okay idiot
Lets throw in a genius prodigy who can bullseye at 20 yards from the hip with a sidearm who was taken hunting by his father for 4 years.
Jophiel wrote:
paulsol wrote:
Apparently, most were then used as food for either humans or pets
Edited, Feb 17th 2009 1:54pm by Jophiel
Um./Whoosh. (Viz)
"If you have selfish, ignorant citizens, you're gonna get selfish, ignorant leaders". Carlin.
Pensive wrote:
Yeah, but it's a stupid comparison. If I turned my cat out in the wilderness, she'd die in a day, same as a baby. He was comparing an ideal situation for the animal with one of the worst possible for the baby.
A better comparrison would be:
baby versus baby kitten - both probably die
8 year old versus geriatric dog - both probably die
child versus declawed adolescent cat - both might survive by hiding
I could compare an adolescent cat with claws who often goes outside to an adolescent athletic boyscout fairly. The results change pretty quick, with both probably surviving for a long *** time.
It's asinine to compare a relatively old animal raised to survive outside, like your common outdoor pets, to some infantile baby that chokes on his own spittle. It's just as asinine to ignore the fact that animals, like humans have individual chances of surviving on their own or not, and that a generalized comparison is simply doomed to fail.
A better comparrison would be:
baby versus baby kitten - both probably die
8 year old versus geriatric dog - both probably die
child versus declawed adolescent cat - both might survive by hiding
I could compare an adolescent cat with claws who often goes outside to an adolescent athletic boyscout fairly. The results change pretty quick, with both probably surviving for a long *** time.
It's asinine to compare a relatively old animal raised to survive outside, like your common outdoor pets, to some infantile baby that chokes on his own spittle. It's just as asinine to ignore the fact that animals, like humans have individual chances of surviving on their own or not, and that a generalized comparison is simply doomed to fail.
It's kind of asinine to compare a human baby's worth to any animal, too, but that doesn't seem to stop you or Katie.
wut? Dubble.
Edited, Feb 17th 2009 8:04pm by paulsol
Edited, Feb 17th 2009 8:04pm by paulsol
"If you have selfish, ignorant citizens, you're gonna get selfish, ignorant leaders". Carlin.
Quote:
It's kind of asinine to compare a human baby's worth to any animal, too, but that doesn't seem to stop you or Katie.
All value that we put on humans or animals is subjective and arbitrary. My cat versus my mother is a hard choice. My cat versus some random @#%^er's child isn't. Why should I be forced to capitulate with someone else's wishes that their child should be held in higher regard when I get more enjoyment out of my animals?
It's not like I expect them to place MY cat over their OWN child's life. Fair's fair.
***
Beside's katie is emotional about this particular ethic. I've presented a consistent argument. I've hardly ever taken this tack to justify a decision; it reminds me of reading Anthem or something, and I much prefer universal compassion, but we're talking about hypothetical and necessarily difficult ethical thought experiments, where you -have- to pick something. It's very easy to simply go with the most valuable thing from your own perspective.
Edited, Feb 17th 2009 3:06pm by Pensive
paulsol wrote:
Um./Whoosh. (Viz)
Belkira wrote:
Wow. Regular ol' Joph fan club in here.
Deathwysh wrote:
Ok, now throw in a starving pitbull.... which do you think the pitbull would have an easier time catching and killing?
Belkira wrote:
Wow. Regular ol' Joph fan club in here.
Recent Visitors: 516
All times are in CST
Anonymous Guests (516)
- Forums
- Cross Site
- The Asylum
- The Internet: 1 Cat Abuser: 0
© 2024 Fanbyte LLC