[-V-]

Humans are just one strand in the web of life

If the earth and everything on it was intended as our birthday present, then we were inexcusably late to the party. Even Christians must accept the fossil evidence that the time humans have occupied the earth is a mere fraction of other species. If a 6 hour documentary recounted life on earth humans would appear in the last minute. It has also been pointed out that:

- if insects disappeared the earth would die in 5 years.
- if people disappeared the earth would flourish in 5 years

[Badandy]

K. Let's kill all of the people then.

[-V-]

Let's kill all of the people then.

global warming should see to that.

[snowdog]

"Humans are just one strand in the web of life" .......hummmmm

guess that kinda knocks out the abortion argument huh?

[-V-]

guess that kinda knocks out the abortion argument huh?

I don't know what you're impying. Please clarify and I will be happy to set you straight.

[snowdog]

I don't know what you're impying. Please clarify and I will be happy to set you straight.

well, when it is said that "humans are just one strand in the web of life"
I am assuming you are talking about DNA strands. and since you mention
"web of life" I am taking it that you are referring that DNA is life. with that
said......A fetus has DNA and therefore it is life. Abortion is then MURDER.

[-V-]

A fetus has DNA and therefore it is life. Abortion is then MURDER

Using that logic, swatting a masquito is murder also. Here's the "set you straight" part as promised.

"Life" is not the measure of right and wrong here. Sentience (thinking/feeling) is the consideration, for it is that that gives us and all animals a quality of life and an elevated potential for suffering and anguish beyond that of a plant.

I agree that at some point in the human fetus' development it should be given more consideration than the complications it might cause for it's mother. Unfortunately we will as a society have to guess at when that is.

One thing, however, is certain. Cats, dogs, pigs, cows, chickens, etc., are sentient beings far more advanced in their development than a human embryo. Everyone who opposes all human abortions and abuses and murders animals is a hypocrite!

You've got one possible retort left and I will set you straight on that too.

[snowdog]

Using that logic, swatting a masquito is murder also. Here's the "set you straight" part as promised.

"Life" is not the measure of right and wrong here. Sentience (thinking/feeling) is the consideration, for it is that that gives us and all animals a quality of life and an elevated potential for suffering and anguish beyond that of a plant.

I agree that at some point in the human fetus' development it should be given more consideration than the complications it might cause for it's mother. Unfortunately we will as a society have to guess at when that is.

One thing, however, is certain. Cats, dogs, pigs, cows, chickens, etc., are sentient beings far more advanced in their development than a human embryo. Everyone who opposes all human abortions and abuses and murders animals is a hypocrite!

You've got one possible retort left and I will set you straight on that too.

actually there are several retorts left........ But I am still waiting for you to
"set me Straight" on the abortion thing. talking about cats, dogs, pigs, etc
is not the issue. And the next time you find an article about a farmer, up for
murder slaughtering his ANGUS Bovines. you set me straight then hows that?
I shot a fat forkhorn buck 2 weeks ago, stopped off at the deer check station,
2 sheriffs officers were that and a Dept of Wildlife official. No one mentioned
anything to me that I would be arrested for murder! correct me if I am wrong
but have not several posters mentioned that a Fetus isn't life? and therefore it
cannot be considered murder? yet the title of this thread would seem to
disqualify that......wouldn't it?

[-V-]

No one mentioned anything to me that I would be arrested for murder

your wasting time and space, snow. You know we are debating ethics not law. At this point in time our laws do not make it illegal to kill animals that taste good, but as surely as our society has redefined what is and isn't legal in the past (slavery for example) our intellectual evolution will eventually lead us to the illegality of killing animals based on ethics rather than taste.

"The time will come when men such as I will look on the murder of animals as they now look on the murder of men." - Leonardo Da Vinci

"I have no doubt that it is part of the destiny of the human race in it's gradual development to leave off the eating of animals, as surely as the savage tribes have left off eating each other when they came into contact with the more civilized." - Thoreau

several posters mentioned that a Fetus isn't life
I believe several posters mentioned that a fetus isn't human life (a human being) but I don't care to speak for anyone else.

yet the title of this thread would seem to disqualify that......wouldn't it? every strand in the web is connected and vital to the stability of the whole web.

Since you missed the opportunity to play the last card left to someone who is anti-abortion but pro-animal-killing I will deal it to you:

"But human embryos have a soul and animals do not"

Would you like to play that hand or simply concede to being a hypocrite?

[snowdog]

your wasting time and space, snow. You know we are debating ethics not law. At this point in time our laws do not make it illegal to kill animals that taste good, but as surely as our society has redefined what is and isn't legal in the past (slavery for example) our intellectual evolution will eventually lead us to the illegality of killing animals based on ethics rather than taste.

I believe several posters mentioned that a fetus isn't human life (a human being) but I don't care to speak for anyone else.

every strand in the web is connected and vital to the stability of the whole web.

Since you missed the opportunity to play the last card left to someone who is anti-abortion but pro-animal-killing I will deal it to you:

"But human embryos have a soul and animals do not"

Would you like to play that hand or simply concede to being a hypocrite?

But alas... read the bible as you are quick to take quotes from it. The part
about all the pigs sent over the cliff.........because of the evil spirits that had
entered their bodies. and where am I being a hypocrite? If you were to
re read previous post made by ME. perhaps you would see that I am basically
Pro-choice ( I hate that phrase). I do believe that it is killing a life, but I also
believe it is a necessary evil in todays world. So please inform me as to how
I am a hypocrite? So you see my-V-friend, the card game you refer to, has
just been played. umm.....I think you may want to re-shuffle the deck.

[-V-]

simple enough. If you are not anti-abortion you are indeed not hypocritical. You believe in killing across the board based entirely on satisfying your own needs or, more precisely, since no one needs to abuse/kill animals and only in rare cases does anyone need to abort a fetus, you kill and abuse to satisfy your desires.

Most conservative's in denial regarding the conflicts between the spirit of christianity and Republicanism would have played the "soul" card because it is a mystical card that does not require logic, reasoning, or morality.

Bravo. You are not a confused hypocrite. You are a true Republican consistently protecting your own interests at the expense of others and our society as a whole.

Clearly you are having trouble grasping the title of this thread because you percieve yourself as the web rather than a strand in it! May the winds of life never blow hard enough through your world for you to need to test that connectivity.

[snowdog]

simple enough. If you are not anti-abortion you are indeed not hypocritical. You believe in killing across the board based entirely on satisfying your own needs or, more precisely, since no one needs to abuse/kill animals and only in rare cases does anyone need to abort a fetus, you kill and abuse to satisfy your desires.

Most conservative's in denial regarding the conflicts between the spirit of christianity and Republicanism would have played the "soul" card because it is a mystical card that does not require logic, reasoning, or morality.

Bravo. You are not a confused hypocrite. You are a true Republican consistently protecting your own interests at the expense of others and our society as a whole.

Clearly you are having trouble grasping the title of this thread because you percieve yourself as the web rather than a strand in it! May the winds of life never blow hard enough through your world for you to need to test that connectivity.

Touche' I see your point there. however, We all abuse things in life for our
desires. as you type upsome pretty decent views..... look around your
home or office. when it was built, how many animals were displaced? to feed
your desires? we are ALL guilty of harming nature. I am pretty confident that
I do much more in giving back that I do taking. and that includes you tin.

[-V-]

I commend you for admitting to your crimes agains nature and I do indeed share that guilt. However, I think you would agree that it would not be a valid argument for a bank robber to justify continuing his behavior because "everyone who ever dowloaded a copywrited song without paying is also a thief".

There are degrees of immorality and there are ethical limits we put on ourselves everyday in our efforts to control our selfish impules to satisfy our own desires at the expense of others. For now, the abuse and killing of thinking, feeling creatures will remain a crime punishable by human conscience rather than human law.

Your Sentence:
Everytime you stroke your pet and your cat purrs or dog wags it's tail remember that the money you spent at McDonalds goes towards inflicting the opposite reaction in a helpless animal.

[snowdog]

I commend you for admitting to your crimes agains nature and I do indeed share that guilt. However, I think you would agree that it would not be a valid argument for a bank robber to justify continuing his behavior because "everyone who ever dowloaded a copywrited song without paying is a theif".

There are degrees of immorality and there are ethical limits we put on ourselves everyday in our efforts to control our selfish impules to satisfy our own desires at the expense of others. For now, the abuse and killing of thinking, feeling creatures will remain a crime punishable by human conscience rather than human law.

Your Sentence:
Everytime you stroke your pet and your cat purrs or dog wags it's tail remember that the money you spent at McDonalds goes towards inflicting the opposite reaction in a helpless animal.

Your point is taken. but the animal kingdom is overseen by humans for that
very reason, we are dominate over them due to (a questionable) intelligence.
Is it wrong to kill a thousand head herd of cattle, because of "mad-cow" disease
or what happens when not IF but when this "bird flu" virus mutates? If the
animals test positive for the virus and they are close to you.... would you not
want and expect those animals to be destroyed to protect YOUR survival? If
your on a fishing trip to Alaska and you are charged by a 1100 lb Kodiak Grizz.
would you not want to have a .500 S&W revolver at the very least to protect
you? You wouldn't hesitate to use it, would you? even though YOU are in the
Bears territory, its domain. If you are threatened you will protect yourself.
SURVIVAL among ALL animals, including humans is instinctive.

We ALL commit crimes against nature one way or another. ANY PETA idiot that
stands there and tells me that I am "bad" is a hyporcyte. You know it as do I.

[-V-]

you say that my point is taken but you follow that up with questions that demonstrate the opposite. If you "take" the point it is that all actions are not morally equal, e.g. downloading a copywrited song vs. robbing a bank, killing sperm cells by masterbating vs. having a late term abortion, etc..

Is it wrong to kill a thousand head herd of cattle, because of "mad-cow" disease yes, but it is a necessary evil

If the (birds) test positive for the virus and they are close to you.... would you not want and expect those animals to be destroyed to protect YOUR survival? yes, it is a necessary evil

you are charged by a 1100 lb Kodiak Grizz yes, I would kill it or you if you were coming at me with a knife

Now, that I've indulged you, you tell me,
WHAT DOES THAT HAVE TO DO WITH YOU MAKING THE ETHICAL DECISION TO HAVE A DISH OF PASTA INSTEAD OF A PIECE OF ANIMAL FLESH FOR DINNER TONIGHT!

Meat eating has nothing to do with necessity, protection, or survival. I was never more healthy than when I stopped eating animals.

And by the way, the solution regarding "mad cow" and the "bird flu" is not killing infected animals. It is US NOT INFECTING THEM to begin with (with our filthy, nasty, immoral, and inhuman animal farming practices).

ANY PETA idiot that stands there and tells me that I am "bad" is a hyporcyte.

you are "bad". I may be bad at times. But you are wayyyyyy badder. :cool:

[Lionhearted]

Just to put my two cents in here then I will leave you guys be to continue your discussion.
First, from reading tin's ealier posts, I doubt he would be on a fishing trip. :D
Second, though it is physically impossible for a human to outrun a grizzly, you actually would not need to. You would just need to outrun whoever was with you. :D
Sorry fellas, I couldn't resist, carry on gents.

[-V-]

indeed, I have discontinued sticking hooks through small fish in order to catch bigger fish. I used to enjoy crabbing too. Now if I pulled up a crab net I would keep the seaweed and throw back the crab.

[snowdog]

you say that my point is taken but you follow that up with questions that demonstrate the opposite. If you "take" the point it is that all actions are not morally equal, e.g. downloading a copywrited song vs. robbing a bank, killing sperm cells by masterbating vs. having a late term abortion, etc..

yes, but it is a necessary evil

yes, it is a necessary evil

yes, I would kill it or you if you were coming at me with a knife

Now, that I've indulged you, you tell me,
WHAT DOES THAT HAVE TO DO WITH YOU MAKING THE ETHICAL DECISION TO HAVE A DISH OF PASTA INSTEAD OF A PIECE OF ANIMAL FLESH FOR DINNER TONIGHT!

Meat eating has nothing to do with necessity, protection, or survival. I was never more healthy than when I stopped eating animals.

And by the way, the solution regarding "mad cow" and the "bird flu" is not killing infected animals. It is US NOT INFECTING THEM to begin with (with our filthy, nasty, immoral, and inhuman animal farming practices).



you are "bad". I may be bad at times. But you are wayyyyyy badder. :cool:

first of all GOOD Pun Lionhart... :) Now to answer your ridiculas blip about
it being more ethical to eat pasta than an animal. -V-, Could you kindly direct me
to the book on ethics that says its unethical to eat a steak. Don't come up
with the PETA cookbook either....I think you get your OPINION (which is cool)
confused with FACT. I would also direct you to John 21:15 there tin. Jesus
and his disciples had dined on the "FISH" which was provided by the "father".
Now.... how unethical do you feel Jesus was?

[-V-]

Could you kindly direct me to the book on ethics that says its unethical to eat a steak

Ethics are not facts you find in an encyclopedia or in a book of law (at one time, those books would have told you that it is illegal for women to vote). Ethics are philosophical truths that you can reference by seeking out the writings of some of the greatest minds our world has known or by simply by conducting a careful exploration of your own heart.

"The greatness of a nation can be judged by the way its animals are treated" - Mohandas Gandhi

"Teaching a child not to step on a caterpillar is as valuable to the child as it is to the caterpillar"
- Bradley Miller

"Man has an infinite capacity to rationalize his behavior, especially when it comes to something he wants to eat . . ." - Cleveland Amory

"They pity, and they eat the objects of their compassion." - Oliver Goldsmith

"Animals are my friends . . . and I Don't eat my friends." - George Bernard Shaw

"We ourselves are the living graves of murdered beasts . . ." - George Bernard Shaw

"I have no doubt that it is part of the destiny of the human race in it's gradual development to leave off the eating of animals, as surely as the savage tribes have left off eating each other when they came into contact with the more civilized." - Thoreau

"The time will come when men such as I will look on the murder of animals as they now look on the murder of men." - Leonardo Da Vinci

"We must never permit the voice of humanity within us to be silenced. It is man's sympathy with all creatures that first makes him truly a man." - Albert Schweitzer

[snowdog]

"And by the way, the solution regarding "mad cow" and the "bird flu" is not killing infected animals. It is US NOT INFECTING THEM to begin with (with our filthy, nasty, immoral, and inhuman animal farming practices)."


-V-......you have got to be kidding, please educate me, direct me to
where you got that "special" bit of info. Or again.... are you confusing your
opinion with fact again.......please enlighten me on that one. Scientist around
the world are in agreement that it is an act of nature, concerning the Bird
Flu virus. Chickens live in flocks naturally as do geese, ducks, etc.

[Lionhearted]

Once again, forgive me for butting in here.
Both the World Health Organization and Pesticide Action Netwrok Asia and the Pacific claim the avian flu is the result of farming pratices, but for entirely different reasons.
The WHO claims it is due to the prevelant practice in Asia of "backyard" poultry farms.
According to World Perspectives, Inc., a WHO official recently proclaimed that backyard livestock farmers pose the greatest threat to the global population. Shigeru Omi, Western Pacific regional director for the WHO, said that the world faces a global pandemic unless Asian governments change the way animals are raised in the region so as to minimize contact between animals and humans.

The WHO official specifically blamed backyard animal feeding operations where animals are allowed to run free and come into contact with wild animals and humans for the development of the H5N1 virus and its spread to humans. He advocated a shift toward the confinement farms that now dominate production in developed countries and which are so greatly criticized by animal welfare activists.

The WPI reports that over the last decade, the swine and poultry sectors of the U.S., Western Europe and other developed parts of the world have moved from small backyard farms to larger, confinement feeding farms were animals are raised in climate controlled surrounds and monitored daily for performance. To a large extent, the farms have been automated and require limited labor. The new farms have also minimized disease outbreak and the spread of diseases from one farm to another.

Despite these findings, activists continue to berate farmers that use confinement barns. Not long ago, Garry Klicker of Bloomfield said anyone raising hogs in confinement should be visited by the DHS (Department of Human Services) “because they probably have children in the closet.”

Experts said the WHO is correct in its criticism of backyard operations and support for confined animal feeding farms. In the last year, the U.S. has had only 2 outbreaks of avian influenza and both were in small farms where animals were allowed to roam outside. There were no outbreaks in modern confinement farms.

However, in most of Asia where backyard poultry operations are everywhere, avian influenza in Asia has spread quickly killing more than 30 people.

PAN AP has an entirely different view, which can be found here (http://www.croceviaterra.it/contadini/cpe/avion_flu.htm)

There is also a good deal of evidence linking "factory" farming practices to mad-cow, E. coli, salomonella. etc. One can google "factory farming practices disease" and get about 2.5 millions hits. For your perusal, an article that originally appeared in the San Francisco Chronicle may be accessed here (http://www.mindfully.org/Farm/Factory-Farm-Peter-Rosset.htm) and is as good a place as any to start researching the subject.
Growing up in and currently living in an area that is largely agricultural, I find factory farming abhorent because of what it does to independant farmers and ranchers, they are a dying breed. There does appear to be a consenses that penning tons of animals together and pumping them full of antibiotics is not a good idea. Having once upon a time lived near a corporate hog farm I can tell you from experience, those places are horrible.

[-V-]

Snow, to your credit you only inquired about the bird flu so I need not go into any detail on how we create mad cow desease.

Lion, thank you for the info but it is odd that you quoted one article but only linked to the other which I will qoute:

"The bird flu epidemic raging through Asia is symptomatic of a sick, unsustainable process by which we produce our food," stresses Dr. Meriel Watts, coordinator of PAN Aotearoa/New Zealand. "Cramming tens of thousands of birds into cramped sheds is not only cruel and inhumane, it is a human health disaster in waiting. Because of the stressful and unhygienic way in which these birds are kept, they have to be force fed antibiotics to manage the diseases that can so easily run rampant. The result is lowered levels of disease resistance, and increased risk to human health through resistance to antibiotics."

Popularly known as ‘factory farming’, the intensive methods used in industrial poultry farming are largely to be blamed for the recent avian flu outbreak. Chickens are often crammed in comparably smaller coops and cages, or long sheds that can house thousands of birds, and outbreaks of infections can easily spread. The accumulated decaying feces leave the chicken breathing ammoniac fumes day in and day out. Such rearing methods keep the birds in a constant state of misery and stress that weakens their natural immune system, making them highly susceptible to diseases. As a means of solving this problem, intensive farming methods use high doses of antibiotics in chicken feed, and growth hormones are used to increase the speed of the chickens’ growth. As noted by the World Watch 2003 report, chickens often cannot walk properly because they have been pumped full of growth-promoting antibiotics. Farmers often do not use these drugs due to illness in the animals but because drug companies and extension agencies have convinced them that the antibiotics will ensure the health of their birds and increase their weight. Since the chickens are kept in close contact with each other 24 hours a day in their cramped coops, this facilitates the easy spread of diseases.

The first article that Lion quoted mainly points out the obvious fact that the disease spreads if your animals roam loose rather than being confined. But I didn't need to do any research before I made my point. Common sense is that free, healthy animals are more likely to be disease free.

Snowdog, if your parents raised you in a cage where you sat in the dark in your own urine and feces and they fed you garbage and brains because it is cheap and chemicals to make you grow faster do you think you might be prone to health issues? You think???

[Lionhearted]

tin, in all honesty, I posted as I did out of pure laziness. I had intended to post a link to the WHO report but trying to find what you are looking for on their site is like working through a maze. So I chose to post a synopsis. But after reading your reply and feeling a bit chastised, I went back to the website and found what I was looking for here (http://www.wpro.who.int/NR/rdonlyres/23C21802-A0BE-42B9-825F-18977C05EE58/0/Advice30042004.pdf)
Sorry for butting in and for bringing other diseases into the fray.

[-V-]

link or synopsis your research is appreciated, lion, and don't hesitate to jump in.

[snowdog]

Hummm, well then that discounts the post one of the members here put
out about the US is behind the Bird-flu virus in order to control the Populations
of other countries for that demographics. So it is poor farming practices, and
not the US's doing. There -V-, once again, just because some idiot
wrote up his opinion doesn't make it fact or truth. Oh-V-man what about
that ethical thing you mentioned? where I pointed out that Jesus sat with
his desciples and ate FISH that "HIS Father" helped the deciples catch.
you seem to enjoy quoting the bible..... ummm, no comment huh?

[snowdog]

Snow, to your credit you only inquired about the bird flu so I need not go into any detail on how we create mad cow desease.

Lion, thank you for the info but it is odd that you quoted one article but only linked to the other which I will qoute:



The first article that Lion quoted mainly points out the obvious fact that the disease spreads if your animals roam loose rather than being confined. But I didn't need to do any research before I made my point. Common sense is that free, healthy animals are more likely to be disease free.

Snowdog, if your parents raised you in a cage where you sat in the dark in your own urine and feces and they fed you garbage and brains because it is cheap and chemicals to make you grow faster do you think you might be prone to health issues? You think???

Umm, then Dr. -V-.... could you please explain to me Blue-tlongue in deer?
or Chronic wasting disease in deer, or hair loss syndrom? I been working with
the Washington state Dep of Wildlife, for the past 3-4 years on the subject.
these illnesses have nothing to do with animal farming? I realize you have an
excuse for everything and you always straighten me out with your wisdom,
please correct me on that. one. Oh yea, and I am still waiting on your
responce to the Ethics of me eating meat, or Jesus eating meat. Please
enlighten me. Or just say "oops, my bad...I was WRONG. I have admitted
when I am wrong on more than one occasion on this forum. Is that beyond you?

[definitive]

I would also direct you to John 21:15 there tin. Jesus
and his disciples had dined on the "FISH" which was provided by the "father".
Now.... how unethical do you feel Jesus was?

Snowdog: Where in the heck are you getting fish?

John 21:15:

"So when they had broken their fast, Jesus saith to Simon Peter, Simon,'son of John, lovest thou me more than these? He saith unto him, Yea, Lord; thou knowest that I love thee. He saith unto him, Feed my lambs."

http://bible.cc/john/21-15.htm

I see no fish mentioned in any version of the bible according to this sight..

[snowdog]

Snowdog: Where in the heck are you getting fish?

John 21:15:

"So when they had broken their fast, Jesus saith to Simon Peter, Simon,'son of John, lovest thou me more than these? He saith unto him, Yea, Lord; thou knowest that I love thee. He saith unto him, Feed my lambs."

http://bible.cc/john/21-15.htm

I see no fish mentioned in any version of the bible according to this sight..Oh definitive...John 21:5 then Jesus saith unto them, (RED LETTERS)
"CHildren, have ye any meat? they answered him no.

verse 6 "and he said unto them.Cast the net on the right side of the ship, and ye shall. they cast therefore, and now they were not able to draw it for the multitude of fishes."


verse 13 Jesus then cometh and taketh bread and giveth them, and fish likewise.


a typo error it is 21:5 not 21.15 thank you for the correction. :D

thank you for the web site info...http://bible.cc/john/21-6.htm

or http://bible.cc/john/21-13.htm guess that about does it huh?

Where ya at-V-man? we seemed to have lost ya. :D tell me more about
the ethics of pasta vs meat. Oh please enlighten me.

[-V-]

snow, I appreciate that you are a frequent poster but I cannot make answering every (often irrelevant) question you have my part-time job. I'll indulge you one more time.

1. No, I don't believe the "US is behind the Bird-flu virus in order to control the Populations of other countries" and, again, I don't know why you feel I should answer for someone else's posts.

2. This is the 2nd time you've said that I like to quote from the Bible. I believe the Bible is the word of man, not God and it is embarrasing what some people will take literally from it, especially from the Old Testament. I do, however, have the uttmost admiration for the kindness, wisdom, humility, compassion, and love found in the stories of Jesus Christ and I believe we should all strive to be more like that (especially the religious right). Whether, the Bible says Jesus caught or ate fish in that place and time is irrelevant. If you know anything about the teachings of Jesus you would know without asking that if he walked the earth today he would not support the needless, souless abuse of any of God's (?) beautiful, thinking, feeling creatures. He'd walk through those factory farms and turn over those filthy, disease ridden cages. And perhaps God (?) herself would smote the land with a great plague (birdflu) as punishment for the people's blatant disreguard for life.

p.s. You'll note that my reference to Bible quotes in the other animal rights thread begins with "if you follow the Bible you might want to read these passages".

3. I have absolutely no clue as to what "Blue-tlongue in deer? or Chronic wasting disease in deer" is or what it has to do with not needlessly abusing animals. I do know what "hair loss syndrom" is but since I am not having that problem yet I can't offer any guidance.

Peace be with you brother.

[snowdog]

-V- I was only answering your question...

" Now, that I've indulged you, you tell me,
WHAT DOES THAT HAVE TO DO WITH YOU MAKING THE ETHICAL DECISION TO HAVE A DISH OF PASTA INSTEAD OF A PIECE OF ANIMAL FLESH FOR DINNER TONIGHT!"


Now as for the bible quotes So that you "remember....."

Consider these passages:

"It shall be a perpetual statute throughout your generations in all your dwellings, that ye shall eat neither fat nor blood"
(chap.Leviticus 3.17)

"Ye shall eat no fat, of ox, or sheep or goat. And the fat of that which dieth of itself, and the fat of that which is torn of beasts, may be used for any other service: but ye shall in no wise eat of it. . . Even the soul that eateth it shall be cut off from his people. And ye shall eat no manner of blood, whether it be of fowl or of beast"
(chap. Leviticus 7:26-27).

"He that killeth an ox is as he that slayeth a man."
(chap. Isaiah 66 verse 3).

"While the flesh was yet between their teeth, ere it was chewed the wrath of the Lord was kindled against the people, and the Lord smote the people with a very great plague."
(chap. 11, verses 20, 33).

"And God said: Behold I have given you every herb bearing seed which is upon the face of all the earth and every tree in which is the fruit of a tree yielding seed; to you it shall be for meat, and to every beast of the earth, . . . I have given every green herb for meat."
(chap. 1, verse 29).

umm I guess its only fair to point out that the quotes YOU used, were taken
from "the Old Testament"

"I believe the Bible is the word of man, not God and it is embarrasing what some people will take literally from it, especially from the Old Testament. I do, however, have the uttmost admiration for the kindness, wisdom, humility" (-V-)

while that is your quote....how come the above verses were taken from the
old testament by you? just curious. I am commenting as if you were to read
your previous post about "straightening me out" I don't understand how you
are doing that when you at least, in this forum keep contradicting yourself.

Oh and I do know about the Deer deseases I had mentioned. They are not
farmed or living in pens. they live in approx 2 deer per approx one acre. in the
wilds of N America.

[definitive]

So forget ethics for a moment, Snowdog and let's talk about empathy. Have you ever thought about the pain that these poor souls go through so that you can eat you steak that you've justified by reading scripture? Have you thought about spending your entire life with 4 or 5 others in a cage so tiny that you can't turn around and your nose (beak) gets cut off with no anesthesia so that you don't peck the living daylights out of the guy next to you?

How about spending your entire life in a cage and then getting your anus stuffed with a probe and electrocuted so that your skin can be worn by rich women as fashion statements?

How about being taken from your mother at birth and then spending your entire 6 months of life in a stall, shiting all over yourself and then being too weak to walk so that someone has to carry you to slaughter?

Does any of this mean anything to you? Have you seen animals who have died in snare traps? There are reasons why they call those animals "jellyheads."

Please view this short video and then go ahead and talk to me about ethics...

http://www.meetyourmeat.com

[snowdog]

So forget ethics for a moment, Snowdog and let's talk about empathy. Have you ever thought about the pain that these poor souls go through so that you can eat you steak that you've justified by reading scripture? Have you thought about spending your entire life with 4 or 5 others in a cage so tiny that you can't turn around and your nose (beak) gets cut off with no anesthesia so that you don't peck the living daylights out of the guy next to you?

How about spending your entire life in a cage and then getting your anus stuffed with a probe and electrocuted so that your skin can be worn by rich women as fashion statements?

How about being taken from your mother at birth and then spending your entire 6 months of life in a stall, shiting all over yourself and then being too weak to walk so that someone has to carry you to slaughter?

Does any of this mean anything to you? Have you seen animals who have died in snare traps? There are reasons why they call those animals "jellyheads."

Please view this short video and then go ahead and talk to me about ethics...

http://www.meetyourmeat.com

Umm you might want to address the Ethics towards -V- as he brought up
the ethics issue.

Now where were we? OH yea, I wanted to ask you, have you ever seen the
"Blob" of a human fetus after it has been sucked out of its mother? Talk to me about
ethics of animals when abortions are stopped. and make up your minds.. tin
man says animals have no souls you say they do. Have you ever seen a gut
shot deer run off for 100 yards so that I have to put a bullet in its brain?
Have you ever tried that ol technique of gutting a bunny by ripping its head
of and pushing the guts through its neck? Have you ever seen a Pike, or
Muskee attack a minnow on a hook and rip it to shreds? Have you ever seen
a raccon or Deer or dog or cat spinning in circles because it was hit by a vehicle
and its spine is sticking out of its back? Do you drive a vehicle Definitive?
then with all due respect....get the hell out of your glass house. Have you ever
noticed that where you live how many animals were displaced from the area so
that YOU could live there? don't tell me about mistreating animals until you stop. Don't preach to me about empathy. until abortions cease! the one big
difference between people like me and you is. Yes, I kill animals, Yes, My desires
in life have cost animals there lives and homes. at least I am honest, You kind
of people talk all day to "save the animals" and trash people like me. But your
just as guilty...... Hurts don't it? Again, when abortions cease then school me.
but until then put some wood over them glass walls!

funny how you want to forget Ethics for a moment? why didn't you want to
mention anything about Jesus being unethical? YOU provided the web site that
clearly said that Jesus helped them to catch a whole bunch of fish and then
they including Jesus dinned on them. Take up you ethics and empathy with
Jesus. and tell me what is the name of the book on ethics that says I am
unethical because I like Jesus enjoy eating Fish (meat) How bout them sheep
that Moses had herded up? then sheared them Your ethics are formed by
your personal opinion. that is your right. but don't come around me and try to
place your "opinion" on me. especially until you can tell me that you never
mistreat animals. Now let me enjoy the rest of my medium-rare rib-eye. while
you grab a handful of bean-sprouts or grass of whatever green stuff you
fill YOUR belly with. Oh by the way, how many animals are you starving because You like to eat bread, there for due to demand the Farmer has to plow more of
the grass to accomadate your desire for Bread, Salad, tomatoes etc. and that is that much less feed for the animals I put more into helping wildlife than you ever
have there definitive. when you do more, we can talk, but right now... I'm
not in the mood to listen to your BS hypocracy!

[definitive]

Snowdog: Please just watch the video.

Meet your Meat (http://www.petatv.com/tvpopup/Prefs.asp?video=mym2002)

[snowdog]

Snowdog: Please just watch the video.

Meet your Meat (http://www.petatv.com/tvpopup/Prefs.asp?video=mym2002)

how bout you answer MY questions.... Do you drive a vehicle? Do you live
in a house that displaced birds, or other animals. Do you use the roads that
are the infrastucture of this country that wiped out thousands of miles of
habitat for animals? Well, hell I will now watch the video, and You still
haven't answered my questions.

[snowdog]

Snowdog: Please just watch the video.

Meet your Meat (http://www.petatv.com/tvpopup/Prefs.asp?video=mym2002)


how bout you answer MY questions.... Do you drive a vehicle? Do you live
in a house that displaced birds, or other animals. Do you use the roads that
are the infrastucture of this country that wiped out thousands of miles of
habitat for animals? Well, hell I will now watch the video, and You still
haven't answered my questions.


MY GOD.... I am at a loss of words did you see that turkey Farmer disgard
that Turkey? what a waste of good meat. :D
Alec Baldwin narrates it.... Umm isn't he the one who proclaimed that If GWB
were elected president that he would leave the country and live elseware.
Yea. He has a lot of credibility don't he. Ya know I have to admit, about
3 months ago The wife and I went to a Church picnic. The Pastor's wife made
about the best Fried chicken I can ever remember eating! You take your
peta "ethics" and Shove them up yer A$$. as you people are about the biggest
hypocrites on the face of the planet. You idiots tell thousands of people in
AFRICA about how wrong it is to eat meat. LOL, bout 12 years ago my
wife son and daughter were in line wating to watch the B & B circus.... My son
at the time was about 6. a "PETA" person (He He wearing leather shoes) grabbed
my kid and told him how "bad" he was to watch and support the animal
cruelty of the circus. I hit the bastard twice for grabbing my son... cops came
and the peta bastard was arrested for assault on my son. Me... I had several
dozen witnesses tell the investigators of what happened. several approached
me and told me they would of done the Same thing. You wanna rile me... bring
up your F%^ed -UP PETA views and I'll tell you what I think about it. You
bunch of idiots! How many people have you threatened this past week? Now,
please excuse me while I finish cleaning my gun for the upcoming bear hunt.
the wife made some really good DEER sausage this morning for breakfast. they
really go great with the eggs and milk! You wanna live on bean sprouts fine,
thats your business but never even consider putting your views or opinion on
this subject to me. I ain't buying it. and at least get a creditible narrator.
LONG LIVE TED NUGENT! TOM SELLECK, etc lets not forget the memory
of the Colonel, or Mr. Ray Croc !!! remember peta freak ya gotta kill it befoe
you grill it!

[definitive]

how bout you answer MY questions.... Do you drive a vehicle? Do you live
in a house that displaced birds, or other animals. Do you use the roads that
are the infrastucture of this country that wiped out thousands of miles of
habitat for animals? Well, hell I will now watch the video, and You still
haven't answered my questions.


MY GOD.... I am at a loss of words did you see that turkey Farmer disgard
that Turkey? what a waste of good meat. :D
Alec Baldwin narrates it.... Umm isn't he the one who proclaimed that If GWB
were elected president that he would leave the country and live elseware.
Yea. He has a lot of credibility don't he. Ya know I have to admit, about
3 months ago The wife and I went to a Church picnic. The Pastor's wife made
about the best Fried chicken I can ever remember eating! You take your
peta "ethics" and Shove them up yer A$$. as you people are about the biggest
hypocrites on the face of the planet. You idiots tell thousands of people in
AFRICA about how wrong it is to eat meat. LOL, bout 12 years ago my
wife son and daughter were in line wating to watch the B & B circus.... My son
at the time was about 6. a "PETA" person (He He wearing leather shoes) grabbed
my kid and told him how "bad" he was to watch and support the animal
cruelty of the circus. I hit the bastard twice for grabbing my son... cops came
and the peta bastard was arrested for assault on my son. Me... I had several
dozen witnesses tell the investigators of what happened. several approached
me and told me they would of done the Same thing. You wanna rile me... bring
up your F%^ed -UP PETA views and I'll tell you what I think about it. You
bunch of idiots! How many people have you threatened this past week? Now,
please excuse me while I finish cleaning my gun for the upcoming bear hunt.
the wife made some really good DEER sausage this morning for breakfast. they
really go great with the eggs and milk! You wanna live on bean sprouts fine,
thats your business but never even consider putting your views or opinion on
this subject to me. I ain't buying it. and at least get a creditible narrator.
LONG LIVE TED NUGENT! TOM SELLECK, etc lets not forget the memory
of the Colonel, or Mr. Ray Croc !!! remember peta freak ya gotta kill it befoe
you grill it!


Ahhhhhh. Just like a Christian.
Jesus must be proud of all the venom you spew.

I have answers to all of your questions, but evidently you are so filled with hate that nothing I say will get through to you.
Forgive them father for they know not what they

[-V-]

while that is your quote....how come the above verses were taken from the old testament by you? just curious
I don't have to believe in Aesop's Fairy Tales either but I can suggest to someone else that if they do believe in them they should make sure to read the Tortoise And The Hare. Besides, I told you I'm through answering your circlular questions (which I already answered in #2 of my last post).

You say you're curious but that's bull because if you were you would contemplate what's already written in response to what you keep repeating.

You wanna rile me... bring up your F%^ed -UP PETA views and I'll tell you what I think about it. You bunch of idiots!
I take a day off and you took a dump in the middle of this beautiful thread with your nasty hate rant. You're hereby "excused" from this topic. This here's PETA territory cowboy. Mosey on down to another thread and make an effort not to stink that up too.

please excuse me while I finish cleaning my gun for the upcoming bear hunt. the wife made some really good DEER sausage this morning for breakfast. they really go great with the eggs and milk!
If there is justice in this universe, creatures will visit from another planet who are as "superior" to us as we are to pigs and they'll have a really good snowdog sausage for breakfast. They will really go great with your balls over easy and your wife's milk.

You wanna live on bean sprouts fine, thats your business but never even consider putting your views or opinion on this subject to me.
Right now even John Ashcroft and George Bush make it their business and will put you in jail if you tried to abuse and eat a dog or a cat. The same will be true for a pig and a cow one day.

[Lionhearted]

Great googley-moogely this thread has taken on a very nasty tone. Snow, very disappointed especially after you took me to task on another thread.
Taunting: "please excuse me while I finish cleaning my gun for the upcoming bear hunt. the wife made some really good DEER sausage this morning for breakfast. they really go great with the eggs and milk!"
Vilification: "You wanna rile me... bring up your F%^ed -UP PETA views and I'll tell you what I think about it. You bunch of idiots!"
And this: "OH yea, I wanted to ask you, have you ever seen the "Blob" of a human fetus after it has been sucked out of its mother? Talk to me about ethics of animals when abortions are stopped. and make up your minds.. " Which I totally do not understand. I mean honestly, would it not sound just as ridiculous for someone to turn that statement around on you as in, you feel that a human fetus that cannot live outside the womb on its own has more of a right to life than the creatues of the wild? Now doesn't that seem a bit ludicrous?
Now me, I have no problem with eating meat or hunting and fishing (though I personally do neither), but then again I am not a Christian so perhaps I am a poor model.
Even without doing the research, I also have no doubt that a meat-free or low meat diet is likely healthier for you. But I smoke like a chimney, so again, a poor model.
Ethically, now that is a much tougher question. History shows man to be an omnivore, our teeth are those of an omnivore but that doesn't really answer to ethics does it? Were I a Christian, I suppose I could answer that best by asking myself, Who Would Jesus Eat? I know, a bit flippant.
As for empathy, well empathy is why I gave up hunting and fishing, but it has not stopped me from eating meat. So I suppose I must try to live with being somewhat hypocritical, which I feel we all are to varying degrees, just my opinion though.
My actual problem is with corporate farmng practices, but that is a topic for another thread.
I feel that y'all have made your feelings quite clear to each other in regards to where you each stand on this issue. Now, before this gets any uglier, I feel it is time to give this thread the mercy-killing it is begging for. Oh crap, that is for another thread.

[snowdog]

Great googley-moogely this thread has taken on a very nasty tone. Snow, very disappointed especially after you took me to task on another thread.
Taunting: "please excuse me while I finish cleaning my gun for the upcoming bear hunt. the wife made some really good DEER sausage this morning for breakfast. they really go great with the eggs and milk!"
Vilification: "You wanna rile me... bring up your F%^ed -UP PETA views and I'll tell you what I think about it. You bunch of idiots!"
And this: "OH yea, I wanted to ask you, have you ever seen the "Blob" of a human fetus after it has been sucked out of its mother? Talk to me about ethics of animals when abortions are stopped. and make up your minds.. " Which I totally do not understand. I mean honestly, would it not sound just as ridiculous for someone to turn that statement around on you as in, you feel that a human fetus that cannot live outside the womb on its own has more of a right to life than the creatues of the wild? Now doesn't that seem a bit ludicrous?
Now me, I have no problem with eating meat or hunting and fishing (though I personally do neither), but then again I am not a Christian so perhaps I am a poor model.
Even without doing the research, I also have no doubt that a meat-free or low meat diet is likely healthier for you. But I smoke like a chimney, so again, a poor model.
Ethically, now that is a much tougher question. History shows man to be an omnivore, our teeth are those of an omnivore but that doesn't really answer to ethics does it? Were I a Christian, I suppose I could answer that best by asking myself, Who Would Jesus Eat? I know, a bit flippant.
As for empathy, well empathy is why I gave up hunting and fishing, but it has not stopped me from eating meat. So I suppose I must try to live with being somewhat hypocritical, which I feel we all are to varying degrees, just my opinion though.
I feel that y'all have made your feelings quite clear to each other in regards to where you each stand on this issue. Now, before this gets any uglier, I feel it is time to give this thread a mercy-killing. Oh crap, that is for another thread.

I am only replying to Lionhart. Yea, I got a bit riled. but why couldn't definitive
or -V- just answer my questions? -V-man had made it clear in post that
he was there to "straighten me out" Ok great, but when I pose questions
about it he gets a bit upset.

"So I suppose I must try to live with being somewhat hypocritical, which I feel we all are to varying degrees, just my opinion though." Lionhart.

You said it much better lionhart than I did I will be square with you about that
but as you see above in the quote I pulled out from your last post. That is all
I was trying to get across to both of them.

I will apologize for being unnessarily "mean" in my previous post. the matter is
in fact a dead issue. BUT.....I have to add with questions unanswered !

[definitive]

History shows man to be an omnivore, our teeth are those of an omnivore but that doesn't really answer to ethics does it?

I have to say that I dispute this. Yes...we have eaten animals...after they have been skinned, sliced, and most often, cooked.

But do you honestly think that you could walk up to a thick-skinned zebra with all of it's hair and take a bite out of it like a lion can?

How did man eat animals before the introduction of fire and weapons?

BTW - Thanks for your response, Lion Hearted

[Lionhearted]

You're welcome definitive
Okay humans as omnivores, well if you accept the first of the bipedal apes (Australopithecus) as the last homid before the evolution of Homo habilis and wish to use that as a starting point then we bipedal primates have been eating meat since the beginning.
Now please forgive me but I am not an archeologist/anthropologist type and I am relying on what I have read based on Sillen's [1992] analysis of something called the strontium/calcium ratios in Australopithecus fossils which he (and later so did Lee-Thorp [1994]), concluded the species had a more diverse diet than originally believed and almost certainly included animals.
Now to something I more fully comprehend, our closest relative in the animal kingdom, the chimpanzee, is known to eat animals and they do not use fire or weapons, they use a technique called flailing (I won't describe it as it ain't pretty) the point is if they can do it certainly early humans could as well. Now mind you this could only apply to small animals, not the zebra you used in your example, but the flaw in your example is to compare a true carnivore (a lion) to a human.
Not bustin' your chops here though.
Now for something you may find more compelling, the following is from a Dr. John McArdle, a vegetarian and advisor to The American Anti-Vivisection Society. It is posted on The Vegetarian Resource Group website. Definitely not a heathen animal eater like yours truly.

Humans are Omnivores (http://www.vrg.org/nutshell/omni.htm)

Good to make your acquaintance BTW

[definitive]

This from the site you referred me to:

"Humans are classic examples of omnivores in all relevant anatomical traits. There is no basis in anatomy or physiology for the assumption that humans are pre-adapted to the vegetarian diet. For that reason, the best arguments in support of a meat-free diet remain ecological, ethical, and health concerns. "

Why should we have health concerns if we are natural meat-eaters? If I consume meat from the family cow that was fed on organic grass, should I still be concerned about the health implications? What about deer and bear - should I be concerned about that as well? Is it not true that enough meat-eating contributes to heart disease?

You know...I've been searching on the Internet for someone to explain how the meat was consumed by homo-erectus (which by the way, in the appendix mentioned that they most likely were frugavores). And I am interested to know what the theory is on how they killed it. Did they cook it or was it eaten raw? Would it be safe for me to consume raw meat now, in the best of circumstances?

I see the points that the author has made, but I'm still not convinced. The old "It walks like a duck, squaks like a duck, smells like a duck, therefore it must be a duck" argument still doesn't prove it to me. We may share DNA but there are many things that we don't share with Chimapanzees. And pigs, well, when did they become domesticated? And are they natural predators?

Perhaps you could help me find answers to my questions, Lionhearted.
I appreciate the rapport.

[-V-]

Natural

What is a "natural" diet for any animal simply means what was available/attainable for them over time. Eat what you can find or catch and if it doesn't make you sick your ancestors will adapt and eventually thrive on that source. This "natural selection" evolves into the physical attributes to support that diet (canines, leaf cutters, etc..)

Originally, gathering/foraging was the "natural" diet for our human ancestors. As they acquired intellect and tool/weapon making abilitites they became enabled to kill for food. However, a vegetarian diet is still the most "natural" for our digestive system and overall health.

"Our ancestors probably turned to eating other animals about 25 million years ago, when the earth began drying out and the herbs and nuts on which most primates feed became less plentiful. The meat habit stuck. . ." Mark Gold
The true nature of the "food chain" is diet by default not diet by design. We acquire a desire for eating animal flesh because our parents raise us that way (you weren't born with a desire to drink coffee every morning either), but as of yet, the human animal hasn't developed an instinct for it.
"You put a baby in a crib with an apple and a rabbit. If it eats the rabbit and plays with the apple, I'll buy you a new car." - Harvey Diamond
It is, however, still part of our "nature" to compete and kill even other humans, for men to spread their seed indiscriminently, etc. but we resist because of ethical considerations.

Indeed, this thread and this forum is dedicated to the application of progressive thought rather than regressive clinging to the basic and crude survival instincts of Neanderthall Man (known as Republicanism in modern society).

It is interesting and helpful to explore our origins but in regards to all of our behavior the key question is what is "right". What is "natural" is simply relative to physical evolution. The survival of our species and planet now depends more on ntellectual evolution.

[Lionhearted]

Well quite frankly after tin's posting I do not feel that I have anything left to say. The only point I was trying to make in this thread that I feel humans are omnivores, wasn't trying to justify it, just attempting to explain why I feel this way.
I would also never, ever attempt to show that either of you (tin or definitive) are in any way wrong in your beliefs, nor would I try to show that I am correct as far as eating seared animal flesh goes.
I love animals, in fact prefer them to most people that I know, however I also enjoy all they provide (food, clothing) and (for reasons far too many to list here) I do what I can to support the individual farmer and rancher. This is part of the hypocracy in my life. Another part is that while I no longer partake of intentionally killing animals, I apparently have no problem allowing others to do it for me. I still have trouble coming to grips with the fact that I will never be perfect. On the brighter side, I have never had any children so I will not be passing on my carnivorous behavior to the next generation. Perhaps, dinosaurs like myself dying off, may be what is required for the world to evolve into a better place for all concerned.
I want to thank you two for your patience and politeness with this old unrepentant meat-eater. I look forward to conversing with you on other threads.

At the risk of appearing condescending, I am curious, I feel fairly comfortable in assuming that neither of you wear leather but how do you feel about things like wool, cheese, eggs, or milk? I know a couple of vegetarians, one uses the animal byproducts like the ones I mentioned, the other has nothing to do with any animal byproducts (I guess this is what is known as vegan?). I may be what I am, but I am also curious.

[-V-]

I have family members who eat animals. All that I can ask is that they understand the issue, like you do Lion, and live with their choices. If recreational drugs were legal I couldn't stop them from indulging in those either. (actually, drug abuse is less objectionable because one abuses themselves and it does not necessitate abusing others)

The people I distance myself from are those who try to justify their behaviors with self serving logic (right-wingers) instead of admitting to their weaknesses.

I eat eggs from cage-free hens but I should cut that out too since they are probably still abused.

[definitive]

It is, however, still part of our "nature" to compete and kill even other humans, for men to spread their seed indiscriminently, etc. but we resist because of ethical considerations.

There actually are non-violent cultures that don't kill. I believe that violence is learned.



Indeed, this thread and this forum is dedicated to the application of progressive thought rather than regressive clinging to the basic and crude survival instincts of Neanderthall Man (known as Republicanism in modern society).


It is interesting and helpful to explore our origins but in regards to all of our behavior the key question is what is "right". What is "natural" is simply relative to physical evolution. The survival of our species and planet now depends more on ntellectual evolution.



I actually think it's an arguement worth having and investigating. What is considered "right" is the last thing on most people's agenda when it comes to their own diets. We can sit and listen to everybody's rants about WMD's and the atrocities in IRAQ and the need for peace, but when you mention the torture of animals, people don't give a flying f*ck. That would mean self-evaluation and inventory! Hey now!...now you're getting personal! Stop that.

So if you can argue omnivore's justifications with logic, then perhaps they may take a second look.

I personally do not feel that the meat industry will ever go away. Ever. We're too selfish. What we do have the power to do is to regulate it! If we got meat eater's involved and said, "Hey ...this is what's happening. Let's change it and make everything free-range again, then at least the torture would be minimized.

Jesus ate fish? So what. I just want the misery to stop. PETA's effectiveness is questionable but worthy of some respect.

To answer your question Lion-Hearted...yes I wear no leather...pleather is actually quite stylish. I do eat eggs from chickens that I know personally. A guy that I work with has them and they roam on several acres(!).

I eat no fish, pork, beef, etc. Got rid of the down comforter some years ago and my only sin (to my knowledge)is half-n-half in my coffee, which I buy from Organic Valley.

My son does eat cheese, however. He's a preschooler and I'm selfish: I want for him to stick around for a while and he does need fat in his diet. I'm just not organized enough to get him on a pure vegan diet.

[definitive]

New York Times, December 4, 2005
>
SECTION:* Section 4; Column 1; Editorial Desk; Pg. 12
>
BY NICHOLAS D. KRISTOF*
>
>
> Here's a quick quiz: Which large American mammal kills the most humans
> each year?
>
> It's not the bear, which kills about two people a year in North
> America. Nor is it the wolf, which in modern times hasn't killed
> anyone in this country. It's not the cougar, which kills one person
> every year or two.
>
> Rather, it's the deer. Unchecked by predators, deer populations are
> exploding in a way that is profoundly unnatural and that is destroying
> the ecosystem in many parts of the country. In a wilderness, there
> might be 10 deer per square mile; in parts of New Jersey, there are up
> to 200 per square mile.
>
> One result is ticks and Lyme disease, but deer also kill people more
> directly. A study for the insurance industry estimated that deer kill
> about 150 people a year in car crashes nationwide and cause $1 billion
> in damage. Granted, deer aren't stalking us, and they come out worse
> in these collisions -- but it's still true that in a typical year, an
> American is less likely to be killed by Osama bin Laden than by Bambi.
>
> If the symbol of the environment's being out of whack in the 1960's
> was the Cuyahoga River in Cleveland catching fire, one such symbol
> today is deer congregating around what they think of as salad bars and
> what we think of as suburbs.
>
> So what do we do? Let's bring back hunting.
>
> Now, you've probably just spilled your coffee. These days, among the
> university-educated crowd in the cities, hunting is viewed as barbaric.
>
> The upshot is that towns in New York and New Jersey are talking about
> using birth control to keep deer populations down. (Liberals
> presumably support free condoms, while conservatives back abstinence
> education.) Deer contraception hasn't been very successful, though.
>
> Meanwhile, the same population bomb has spread to bears. A bear hunt
> has been scheduled for this week in New Jersey -- prompting outrage
> from some animal rights groups (there's also talk of bear
> contraception: make love, not cubs).
>
> As for deer, partly because hunting is perceived as brutal and vaguely
> psychopathic, towns are taking out contracts on deer through discreet
> private companies. Greenwich, Conn., budgeted $47,000 this year to pay
> a company to shoot 80 deer from raised platforms over four nights --
> as well as $8,000 for deer birth control.
>
> Look, this is ridiculous.
>
> We have an environmental imbalance caused in part by the decline of
> hunting. Humans first wiped out certain predators -- like wolves and
> cougars -- but then expanded their own role as predators to sustain a
> rough ecological balance. These days, though, hunters are on the decline.
>
> According to ''Families Afield: An Initiative for the Future of
> Hunting,'' a report by an alliance of shooting organizations, for
> every 100 hunters who die or stop hunting, only 69 hunters take their
> place.
>
> I was raised on ''Bambi'' -- but also, as an Oregon farm boy, on
> venison and elk meat. But deer are not pets, and dead deer are as
> natural as live deer. To wring one's hands over them, perhaps after
> polishing off a hamburger, is soggy sentimentality.
>
> What's the alternative to hunting? Is it preferable that deer die of
> disease and hunger? Or, as the editor of Adirondack Explorer magazine
> suggested, do we introduce wolves into the burbs?
>
> To their credit, many environmentalists agree that hunting can be
> green. The New Jersey Audubon Society this year advocated deer hunting
> as an ecological necessity.
>
> There's another reason to encourage hunting: it connects people with
> the outdoors and creates a broader constituency for wilderness
> preservation. At a time when America's wilderness is being gobbled
> away for logging, mining or oil drilling, that's a huge boon.
>
> Granted, hunting isn't advisable in suburban backyards, and I don't
> expect many soccer moms to install gun racks in their minivans. But
> it's an abdication of environmental responsibility to eliminate other
> predators and then refuse to assume the job ourselves. In that case,
> the collisions with humans will simply get worse.
>
> In October, for example, Wayne Goldsberry was sitting in a home in
> northwestern Arkansas when he heard glass breaking in the next room.
> It was a home invasion -- by a buck.
>
> Mr. Goldsberry, who is six feet one inch and weighs 200 pounds,
> wrestled with the intruder for 40 minutes. Blood spattered the walls
> before he managed to break the buck's neck.
>
> So it's time to reestablish a balance in the natural world -- by
> accepting the idea that hunting is as natural as bird-watching.

[gratelady1]

When we first moved to the Country here in Texas, 6 years ago, there were dear everywhere, now you only see one- occassionally killed on the highway.

Your points are correct, but your estimates on total deer populations are so erroneous, you would have failed a basic statistics course!

Where do you find your stats, and please if you can find so many deer, catch them and come repopulate Texas! We would be glad to run over them here, aint nothing better when your starving to death (cause the current Admin's policies), than good-old road-kill stew.

[definitive]

Actually : gratelady: This was written by a Pulitzer Prize winning journalist - Nicholas Kristoff. He has written about human suffering in other parts of the world. I scratch my head on that one.

Where I live...in the Ozark Mountains of NW Arkansas, we have deer coming out of our ears! Although I love them and think they are so graceful, you have my permission to come and get some of them, because this town has threatened a !!bow hunt!! because of the over-population. And can you imagine re-introducing wolves or other predators 45 miles away from Walmart's headquarters?

Here is my question: because our presence has encrouached on and is destroying wildlife habitat and because the reintroduction of predators is, in many places, out of the question, then does it not make sense to responsibly hunt to keep the ecosystem in balance? Just a question and I'm very interested in alternative ideas. My mother gives an emphatic "NO!!!" to the idea.

Any other ideas?

[gratelady1]

Actually : gratelady: This was written by a Pulitzer Prize winning journalist - Nicholas Kristoff. He has written about human suffering in other parts of the world. I scratch my head on that one.

Where I live...in the Ozark Mountains of NW Arkansas, we have deer coming out of our ears! Although I love them and think they are so graceful, you have my permission to come and get some of them, because this town has threatened a !!bow hunt!! because of the over-population. And can you imagine re-introducing wolves or other predators 45 miles away from Walmart's headquarters?

Here is my question: because our presence has encrouached on and is destroying wildlife habitat and because the reintroduction of predators is, in many places, out of the question, then does it not make sense to responsibly hunt to keep the ecosystem in balance? Just a question and I'm very interested in alternative ideas. My mother gives an emphatic "NO!!!" to the idea.

Any other ideas?

OK, so what does an award winning journalist know about anything, that he does not research?

But as for your question, to hunt something for game, or sport, or fun, is wrong!!

If you have a population problem, I know many folks down here that would love to eat meat for a change, and I dont think it takes an award winning journalist to figure out how we can round them up and process them and make us some good old fashion fajitas.

As for hunters, strap a real uniform on thier butts and send them to Iraq to fight GWB's war for him, why waste all that skill?

[Jumpin Jupiter]

The editorial by NICHOLAS D. KRISTOF, shows he has never gotten out of the city, or away from his desk. Here in PA the Game Commission has made it so within the next 10 years, we will be taking our kids to the zoo to see a deer.

[-V-]

because hunting is perceived as brutal and vaguely psychopathic

the editorial got that part right.

[Wafflepudding]

You know V, I'm an atheist, but I do like some quotes from the bible, my particular favorite: "Judge not, lest ye be judged".

I think you're very passionate about your beliefs, and I respect that. But your words drip of self-righteousness, unsubstanciated by the way because unless you grow your own organic vegetables, every time you eat, you contributed to the slaughter of animals. That pasta plate did not only come from what used to be wildlife habitat, it implies the death of whatever animal got in the way of the combine that harvested that wheat field.

In short, judging others harshly (as murderers, etc) based on your own personal ethos (which you have NO RIGHT TO IMPOSE ON ANYONE) makes you little better than christian fundamentalists. That's my opinion and I'm sticking to it.

[-V-]

You know V, I'm an atheist, but I do like some quotes from the bible, my particular favorite: "Judge not, lest ye be judged".

I think you're very passionate about your beliefs, and I respect that. But your words drip of self-righteousness, unsubstanciated by the way because unless you grow your own organic vegetables, every time you eat, you contributed to the slaughter of animals. That pasta plate did not only come from what used to be wildlife habitat, it implies the death of whatever animal got in the way of the combine that harvested that wheat field.

In short, judging others harshly (as murderers, etc) based on your own personal ethos (which you have NO RIGHT TO IMPOSE ON ANYONE) makes you little better than christian fundamentalists.

you're an interesting case Waffle. You often impress and dissapoint in the same post, mixing good logic with bad.

Indirect "combine accidents" have no place in a discussion of judging those who directly abuse animals, period. Even if it did, it would not make the pig, cow, chicken, etc. factory farmer any less immoral or you any less immoral for paying them to do their dirty deeds for your culinary pleasure, -- again, period.

You know full well that there are acts in which we all should JUDGE and prepare to BE JUDGED. Otherwise Blacks would still be slaves, women would not be able to vote and (in case you choose to dismiss human analogies) no one in the U.S. would be punished for torturing cats and dogs, etc..

You are merely the latest progressive to drop by the Animal Sanctuary and be spanked with the truth regarding an issue you really don't want to know more about, lest your own conscience, not I, challenges you to stop your self-serving logic and honestly JUDGE THYNSELF on this issue.

[Wafflepudding]

I abstain from comparisons with humans because I don't draw the line at sentience, but at sapience and to a lesser extent, self-awareness. Few animals have shown these capacities, and believe me, I would NEVER eat a dolphin, a whale, a simian or any other animal capable of comparable feats. I wouldn't eat octopuss either.



Indirect "combine accidents" have no place in a discussion of judging those who directly abuse animals, period. Even if it did, it would not make the pig, cow, chicken, etc. factory farmer any less immoral or you any less immoral for paying them to do their dirty deeds for your culinary pleasure, -- again, period.
The thing is, you KNOW that thousands, potentially millions of animals are killed by combines every harvest season. From the moment you accept that as "collateral damage" you're weaking your point, that all sentient life is precious and worthy of saving. You didn't operate that combine, and chances are the combine operator is not playing a sick "harvest the bunnies" game while on the clock, but YOU KNOW that's killing animals, and you don't care. Why? because you kill less animals? so every sentient life is precious until it gets unpractical with your lifestyle? Under your logic you're a murderer, just like any of us, you just kill "less animals", and that hardly gives you the piety with which you have conducted yourself here thus far. What's more, if humans and animals have equivalent rights (cause they can't have equal rights), then they are the same ethically, and no person I know (outside of ultra conservatives) accept the rutinary death of millions as acceptable collateral damage for products they consume.


You know full well that there are acts in which we all should JUDGE and prepare to BE JUDGED. Otherwise Blacks would still be slaves, women would not be able to vote and (in case you choose to dismiss human analogies) no one in the U.S. would be punished for torturing cats and dogs, etc..
Well when cats and dogs get linguistic skills, the ability to do conscious acts of compassion and are able to demand their own rights like the people you mention did, I'll be standing right there next to you demanding full citizenship for them. Also, I can't believe you just compared black people and women to animals, if that's not incredibly detrimental to your point, nothing is. There's a huge difference between torturing an animal for the hell of it and killing an animal because you're gonna eat it.


You are merely the latest progressive to drop by the Animal Sanctuary and be spanked with the truth regarding an issue you really don't want to know more about, lest your own conscience, not I, challenges you to stop your self-serving logic and honestly JUDGE THYNSELF on this issue.
Kinky :p . The problem with your assesment is I worked at a slaughterhouse for a couple of summers, and I used to help my grandfather fix farm machinery (incluiding poultry farms and cattle ranches). I had pet chickens and roosters, I KNOW ABOUT IT, I JUST DON'T SEE IT THE WAY YOU DO.

I wouldn't mind paying a couple of extra bucks for poultry, beef, pork or beal if that meant wider cages, more humane treatment and decent food, but I'm not about to stop eating chicken. You can yell, judge, and obsess about it as much as you want to but most of the world will continue to eat meat. You can either learn to voice your opinion on a polite manner, agree to disagree and live by your own ethics; Or you can keep judging and insulting every carnivore, which is not exactly an effective way to get your point across, until you annoy everyone who doesn't share your ethics. Either way, it doesn't affect me much and trust me, I can eat a bowl full of beef stew and still sleep soundly at night.

[-V-]

though I made sure to set aside my own reference to human suffering knowing you would object to the comparison, you went ahead anyway with that argument and understandably ignored my analogy to torturing cats and dogs. It is irrefutable. And it is fascinating that you constructed a whole new category of rational for animal abuse based on measuring "sapience/self-awareness". What does a pig recognizing himself in the mirror have to do with its ability to suffer like your cat or dog? Suffering is the issue, not intelligence, "sapience" or what some people might call "cuddliness".

======
I have written thousands of words here on "animal rights" but none of them imply that they are the same rights as should be alloted to humans. All the pig needs is the basic right to "life and the pursuit of happiness". Nor did I ever imply they are "the same ethically". Animals don't have ethics. Only humans have ethics, and are obligated to apply them to all things, including their treatment animals.

======
Even if my "piety" is based on killing LESS animals, I still lay claim to it with pride. I also share the guilt of using a gas-driven car but am partially comforted with the fact that it is a Geo Metro. Instead of trying to bring down to my level those who sacrifice more than me, I applaude them louder. If someone wants a medal for using less energy or killing less animals I'll give it them, though I owe them much more.

And I fully accept the blame and personal weakness for buying non-animal products that may inadvertantly be connected to animal deaths. I hadn't considered the "collateral damage" of combines and I thank you for bringing that to my attention. Yet I will not try to justify my consumption of "combine" harvested vegetables. I promise to begin my campaign for more responsible "combining" immediately after I help put an end to intentional exploitation and abuse of animals. Now that you brought it up, can I count on your support?

=======
No, I won't "agree to disagree" on animal abuse, no more than I would agree to disagree with slavers if this forum existed 200 years ago. I know egos are sensitive when it comes to this "inconvenient truth" but I am not shy about stepping on a few human toes if it may lead to less pickled pig's feet.

This topic is sacred to me. This sub-forum is hallowed ground. It is called the "Animal Sanctuary". If animals can't be protected without compromise here in this virtual world what hope do they have in the real one?

At the same time I know that you and all of the people who participate in either side of this debate here or just read these threads have an above average concern for animal welfare or they wouldn't waste their time here at all. I appreciate that. And if you want a medal for that, my reply is "silver or gold?"

[Wafflepudding]

I never told you what the issue here was. I was merely explaining I don't have any of the ethical issues you mention, and with all due respect, I think it was presumptuous and condescending of you to go that far.

You missed my point. Under your logic, the way I understand it, killing animals is murder, and murder (even less murder) is not acceptable.

Just in case you're being serious about the combines: you could just avoid cereals, but "May" is an understatement. It's fairly certain that, even if the operator KNEW (and they do) that animals inhabit the field, he's not gonna start shooing them away before harvesting. BTW I'm not sure if you're being sarcastic or if you don't know what a combine is. You'll never get my support to take away my chicken wings, but if you campaign for the protection of wild range animals, yeah you bet you got my support.

Finally, the problem is stepping on toes more often results in a punch in the face that a civilized debate and persuasion. Ever heard the expression "You can catch more flies with honey"?

[-V-]

Under your logic, the way I understand it, killing animals is murder
the "murder" of animals is not my debate. If you were stranded on an island with no other source of food except for a wild pig even PETA would not brand you a "murderer".

Also, combine killings is not the issue here considering that the animals are free and most have the chance to get out of the way.

You'll never get my support to take away my chicken wings

"Chicken wings" however, is precisely the animal issue of our lifetime, but there aren't two sides to every issue and this is one of them. Again, like human slavery, there is only right on one side, wrong on the other. Our laws support your dirty little addiction to the wings of abused baby birds for now, but though it will take many more lifetimes, human laws will eventually require that even non-human animals who don't make good pets are treated humanely, regardless of how they taste in hot sauce.

Ever heard the expression "You can catch more flies with honey"?
unfortunately, a kinder, gentler me or PETA is simply more easily ignored. Besides, honey is an exploitation of bees ;)

[Jennifer_SFBA]

I share a special affinity with animals, both wild and domestic. In the way of native American Indian spiritual hunting practices - a spiritually acknowledged offering, and only out of need for food, clothing, etc. would I personally take any animal's life. Fruits and nuts and grains would be my first choice of foods for sustenace. I could very happily live from fruits alone, sooooo good!

Maybe its' people who are over populated. The New World Order is convinced of it and do they ever have plans for us!

[Wafflepudding]

Are you saying we might see human mcnuggets soon Jen? Hmm... Do you think people taste good? I bet it's kinda like pork... :p Just remember, soylent green is made from the finest of the earth: People!

http://www.sjc.com/manbeef/

People: The other White (and black, yellow and brown) meat.

(Sorry, I just couldn't help it, the temptation was too strong)

[Lionhearted]

WP,

Manbeef indeed! No call to be flippant! (geez I wish there was a sarcastic font) We progressives (or liberals if you prefer) are extremely tolerant of others beliefs. At least in your case, being young there is likely "hope" for you. Me? I'm gonna have myself a burger. :twisted: :D
Afterwards, a cigarette or two.

[-V-]

Are you saying we might see human mcnuggets soon Jen?

Manbeef indeed!...Me? I'm gonna have myself a burger.

if the earth is visited by a species that is as "advanced" over us as we currently are to chickens, and they share your ethical positions on what constitutes food, the only other question will be...

"would you like a side order of LionHeart with
your WafflePudding, Mr. Plutoniun?"
:eek:

[Lionhearted]

if the earth is visited by a species that is as "advanced" over us as we currently are to chickens, and they share your ethical positions on what constitutes food, the only other question will be...

"would you like a side order of LionHeart with
your WafflePudding, Mr. Plutoniun?"
:eek:


Were that to be the case, then oh well. Mr. P would actually be doing me a favor.

[Wafflepudding]

if the earth is visited by a species that is as "advanced" over us as we currently are to chickens, and they share your ethical positions on what constitutes food, the only other question will be...

"would you like a side order of LionHeart with
your WafflePudding, Mr. Plutoniun?"
:eek:


For the sake of analysis, lets review my ethical position:

"I abstain from comparisons with humans because I don't draw the line at sentience, but at sapience and to a lesser extent, self-awareness. Few animals have shown these capacities, and believe me, I would NEVER eat a dolphin, a whale, a simian or any other animal capable of comparable feats. I wouldn't eat octopuss either."

Are LionHeart and I sapient? Yes
Are we self-aware? Yes
Are we therefore edible under my own ethic position? No

It's very easy to defeat an extremist position you assign.

the "murder" of animals is not my debate.

Then what is your debate? that we should avoid complicity in killing animals? perfect, start eating only organic hand-picked vegetables. Oh but you said it's different because it's accidental. It's NOT ACCIDENTAL IF YOU KNOW IT'S GONNA HAPPEN. Oh I forgot, you said "unintentional", not accidental. So unintentional suffering (as in being torn apart in the blades of a combine harvester, cotton harvester, etc) is alright because it wasn't intended. This logic would also make organic meat or meat from hunted or free range animals alright too, as long as the death was relatively painless. In fact it would be MORE ETHICAL because putting a bullet through a rabbit causes less suffering than slicing and dicing it to death.

[-V-]

Then what is your debate?

the following 3 questions speak to the heart of this debate. Can you answer them?

1. why do you pay someone to abuse an animal their whole life then slaughter them for your meal when you don't need their flesh and it is healthier for you to not eat their flesh? (and there are plenty of healthy foods that do not directly or indirectly kill animals)

2. since dogs and cats are also not sapient (wise) would you pay someone to abuse them their whole life and slaughter them also?

3. if yes, would you abuse a cat or dog their whole life and slaughter them yourself if no one would do it for you?

I won't ask if you have a cat or dog and if you would abuse and eat your own because we all know people would never treat their own pets that way, just like war hawks would never send their own kids to war.

[Wafflepudding]

1.- Because I like eating meat and there's no place where I can buy meat from animals treated humanely. I pay them to provide me with meat (which is already dead and will only spoil on the shelf if not bought by someone else), not to stuff the animal in a small cage and feed him parts of other animals. As I said before, if I could ensure the animal had a nicer life at the exchange of a higher price I'd pay it. It's also damn impractical to eat only vegan.

2.- I already said my part on the abuse bit. Yeah, sure, I'd buy cat McNuggets or hot dogs if they had good taste.

3.- Again, abuse, already explained. Yeah.

And last but not least, between the possible guilt I could feel or having to eat only vegetables and plant matter day, after day, after day, hell I choose whatever guilt you want to toss on me to make yourself feel nobler.

[-V-]

thank you for answering #1 and #2 honestly Wafflepudding.

[Wafflepudding]

Thank you for answering in a civil manner. As I said before, I will not agree with you taking meat from my diet. But if it's about wild animals and habitats, yeah, sure, count me in.

[Jane of Arc]

Let's go back to the idea of an alien race on Earth that consumes humans. (Ever wonder where all those millions of missing people go?) I can guarantee both Lion and Pudding would beg for their lives profusely as they were herded into a room of humans. I can guarantee they would watch in horror as person after person got a meat hook in the eye and was lifted up by a chain. I'm sure they would let out terrifying screams as they saw their family members begging for mercy as they were skinned alive and loaded onto a conveyor belt that fed them into a giant meat grinder. (Ever go to a slaughter house/ meat processing plant?)

Would Lion and Pudding want their lives to be respected? Would they want this species to view them as something other than a food source? Would they want this species to treat them with compassion? You bet your sweet bippy they would.

I use to eat meat. I use to make fun of vegetarians. I use to get into playing head games with them. I didn't have a clue. I was an arrogant, yuppy bitch. It wasn't until I was put in the position of selecting a living pig to roast on a spit who begged, I meaned screamed for his life, that I woke the hell up. I defended the pig. Nobody ate pig on the beach that night in the Caribbean. Now, I'm a vegetarian and I'm still an arrogant, yuppy bitch, but with a bit more understanding, compassion and respect for those beings amongst us who can't defend themselves. These living beings you eat really want to live their lives and not be your dinner.

Just food for thought. :)

[Lionhearted]

Let's go back to the idea of an alien race on Earth that consumes humans. (Ever wonder where all those millions of missing people go?) I can guarantee both Lion and Pudding would beg for their lives profusely as they were herded into a room of humans. I can guarantee they would watch in horror as person after person got a meat hook in the eye and was lifted up by a chain. I'm sure they would let out terrifying screams as they saw their family members begging for mercy as they were skinned alive and loaded onto a conveyor belt that fed them into a giant meat grinder. (Ever go to a slaughter house/ meat processing plant?)

I can practically guarantee that I would not. In order to beg for one's life, one must care, and quite frankly I am beyond caring about anything any more. And for the record, I worked on the killfloor at a slaughterhouse one summer, (though I did not actually kill) if that did not turn me into a vegan, nothing will.

[-V-]

thank you both for your testimonials. both add clarity to this issue and both are chilling

[Wafflepudding]

Perhaps Joan, but under that logic I qualify more under a "free range animal" than cattle, and I don't eat free range animals. If it was more akin to the practices done in a slaughterhouse (That is, you kill the animal BEFORE you start involving meat hooks and slicing) I would be dead by that point and thus beyond caring, suffering or fearing. you can bet that if that ever happens I won't beg for mercy, I'll ask for a quick death.

Also, for that analogy to be accurate, I'd have to have no self-awareness, thus no capability to foresee my impending doom, and that would certainly take a lot of the suffering out of the equation.

By the way this is not the discussion here but: Let's go back to the idea of an alien race on Earth that consumes humans. (Ever wonder where all those millions of missing people go?)
Those ideas about aliens and earth of yours (and Jen's) remind me of the movie "The messenger" (your avatar did the rest), the scene where Joan is imprisoned and the robed man asks her about the sword she found on the field. Not that I dismiss the possibility of alien lifeforms (indeed it is statistically certain that we're not alone in the universe), I just don't believe all the outlandish claims of alien influence in earth, if we have other more simple explanations of the phenomena attributed to aliens.

[Jennifer_SFBA]

Where Have All the Flowers Gone - When will they ever learn? Oh, when will they ever learn?

wp, human history is filled with alien beings and alien craft. Aliens (recognized as being non-human) and UFOs are described in ALL the ancient religious texts. There are pictographs of aliens and alien craft in caves and on rocks from the Stone Age. There are thousands of autobiographical books worldwide about people's contacts with alien beings. Noted scientists have been studying and continue to study UFOs and aliens - NIDS most notoriously. There is an interdimensional aspect of life that relates to aliens and UFOs that String Theory supports.

You might google "gravity A" to gain at least some insight into how aliens and alien craft might be capable of traveling in what we humans think of as light years in hours, days, weeks and months.

Aliens are not only involved with the government of the United States. They are involved with ALL major governments of Earth. What might be the implications of that?

[Jane of Arc]

The issue of eating "lower" life forms touches the core of our humanity. And I usually don't preach my position. God knows I was a big time meat-eater myself for much of my life. And I don't want to make anyone uncomfortable. But, at the same time animals can't defend themselves and I feel the need to stand up for them.

Jen ~ You are my soul sister. Someone I have great respect for. You have a developed consciousness I admire.

Lion ~ I also think highly of you. You're an incredibly sensitive, thoughtful man. Your post was sad. Almost depressed. And I wonder why you've stopped caring? My heart goes out to you.

Puddin' ~ You're new and we're just getting to know you. But you're really growing on me. I think you're smart beyond your years. What I was asking you to do in my last post was to not rationalize the experience, but rather search your own humanity. And Puddin' ... it's Jane, not Joan. :sunny:

And ~V~ You're simply the best. Always. Thank you once again for providing this service for us all. None of us should forget the wonderful work you do everyday.

[Wafflepudding]

No, actually I meant Joan, as in "Joan of arc". Remember the explanations they offer for the sword she found on the field. "...human influence (two robbers kill a man and drop the sword), or even the inexplicable (a man wanders into the field and drops the sword for no reason). But out of all the possibilities, you had to choose this one (the sky opens and god lowers the sword slowly into the ground)." I believe it went like that.

[Jennifer_SFBA]

Doesn't it make you wonder, though, that with periodic alien genetic manipulation from a "lower life form" rose Homo Sapiens Sapiens? What does that say about "lower life forms," and what humanity may next become in the presence of continuing alien genetic manipulation of human beings?

[Jennifer_SFBA]

Jane, Jane of Arc, I love your heart. I love your spirit. I love your mind, a cosmic human expansion of immense wonder, beauty and awe!

[Michael DeM]

I wish I had gotten here sooner. I've been especially busy in the last few weeks. I want to address the combine issue for a minute. Just based on what I've heard from people who live on farms, incidents of animals getting killed by combines are indeed pretty rare. Even if I were to go along with the idea that animals get killed by combines on a regular basis, the ethics of the situation would be somewhat similar to the ethics of driving a car. I'm not sure what the exact statistic is, but a great many people die each year from car accidents. Yet, we still drive our cars knowing that sooner or later someone is going to get killed or seriously injured. It may not necessarily be you or me, but someone is going to get hurt with all the cars out there on the road. Every time we get in our cars, we take a risk with somebody's life, whether it's ourselves, the passengers, the other drivers, or pedestrians. Does that make us unethical? Not necessarily. Cars have become a regular part of civilization and our way of life. Humans would probably be a lot worse off without them (leaving out the emissions factor). By all means, precautions should be taken to ensure safety, but there is always a little risk involved. The same could be said of using combines or any other form of large equipment for that matter.

Likewise, growing organics in your backyard could be compared to riding a bicycle to work.

[Hokon Cazalet]

The issue of eating animals is difficult, but it seems increasing more difficult to justify.

Utilitarianism (produce the greatest pleasure possible)
Clearly the pleasure of eating food is far less than the pleasure that the animal could have had in its life (remember pleasure from food is of the lowest quality, so it can be easily overruled by even the lowest forms of animals).

Kantian Deontology (Act always under universal laws)
This is more difficult, on one hand it seems quite clear, animals cannot even think of duty, so morality seems totally out of place to them. Yet when one reads eariler works of Kant, rationality seems distinctly something animals can do (animals can understand things at a very basic level). So morality might extend to animals (although probably not insects, I doubt they understand much of anything at all).

However to state "if we don't include animals, might humans get excluded?" is a gross simplification of the issue. The issue with aliens also can be easily avoided. Human beings can have abstract rational thoughts, which seems to be where "ought" does indeed come from (if it exists objectively at all). However there may indeed be a very human way to include animals.

David Hume mentioned that morality was merely "sentiment", if morality is simply our feelings of affection for another, many animals do the same, so they rightly should be included in this ethic of sentiment (this is to the moral subjectivists out there).

[Hokon Cazalet]

Final point, to say animals were made for human use makes the "naturalistic fallacy" (is-ought gap). Human genocide is quite natural (chimpanzees do it also), that doesn't make it right.

Morality, by definition, imposes on what is via oughtness. A simple example:

"You ought to use your car, if you want to be at work on time"

Such an imperative's obligation has nothing to do with wether you use your car or not, it imposes upon your actions, your nature.

Is-ought gap discovered by David Hume =)

[Jennifer_SFBA]

Great food for ought, Hokon! Welcome to POL, and thank you for your contributions here. Hokon, I look forward to contemplating your thoughts about what mystics know and how mystics know what mystics know.

[seekingaction]

They are for human use, not to be abused.

[-V-]

They are for human use, not to be abused.

well, at least you're half right.

[KRITER]

Animals arent here for us to use.