Total Posts:20|Showing Posts:1-20
Jump to topic:

Simone Reyes on animal rights

vbaculum
Posts: 1,274
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/3/2014 8:54:32 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
Great speech on animal rights and veganism. Very good for newbies.
"If you claim to value nonviolence and you consume animal products, you need to rethink your position on nonviolence." - Gary Francione

THE WORLD IS VEGAN! If you want it
MassiveDump
Posts: 3,423
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/3/2014 10:04:05 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
I guess now's a good time to start up the discussion. If carnivorous and omnivorous animals naturally eat other animals, why is it wrong for an omnivorous human to?
vbaculum
Posts: 1,274
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/5/2014 3:29:54 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 5/3/2014 10:04:05 PM, MassiveDump wrote:
I guess now's a good time to start up the discussion. If carnivorous and omnivorous animals naturally eat other animals, why is it wrong for an omnivorous human to?

Human's are non-obligate omnivorous. That means that we don't need to eat animals (or their byproducts) to survive. In fact, the dietetic science is very clear that the less animal products we eat, the less likely we are to get and die from cancer, heart disease and diabetes - some of the world's leading killers.

So, since we don't need to eat animals, it is obviously moraly wrong to do so since tremendous suffering is inflicted on animals in factory farms and slaughterhouses.
"If you claim to value nonviolence and you consume animal products, you need to rethink your position on nonviolence." - Gary Francione

THE WORLD IS VEGAN! If you want it
Blade-of-Truth
Posts: 5,020
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/5/2014 5:35:55 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 5/3/2014 10:04:05 PM, MassiveDump wrote:
I guess now's a good time to start up the discussion. If carnivorous and omnivorous animals naturally eat other animals, why is it wrong for an omnivorous human to?

It's not. In fact, I've got some steaks marinating in the fridge now. The only difference between now and the ancient past is that we don't have a need to hunt them ourselves anymore. It's nothing more than the cycle of life. If anything, just be appreciative of what you eat and try not to over-consume or leave unnecessary waste. That's how I look at it.
Debate.org Deputy Vote Moderator
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
DDO Voting Guide: http://www.debate.org...
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Need a judge on your debate? Nominate me! http://www.debate.org...
sadolite
Posts: 8,833
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/5/2014 6:35:29 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
Why do people bastardize the word right? Animals can't have rights. They don't even comprehend the meaning let alone acknowledge my rights. There can only be regulations regarding handling and care of animals. Animals are a commodity to be bought and sold like an ear of corn or a cow. There is no difference in the act of buying an ear of corn or a cute little puppy as a pet. The only difference is if you intend on keeping the cute little puppy you have to follow a minimum standard of care for it since it is a live animal like a cow. And yes you can even eat it like a cow so long as you practice human slaughter methods set out by code.
Please don't be willfully ignorant and pass it on to other people.
It's not your views that divide us, it's what you think my views should be that divides us.

If you think I will give up my rights and forsake social etiquette to make you "FEEL" better you are sadly mistaken

If liberal democrats would just stop shooting people gun violence would drop by 90%
Jonbonbon
Posts: 2,743
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/5/2014 7:30:05 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 5/5/2014 6:35:29 PM, sadolite wrote:
Why do people bastardize the word right?

When someone gets passionate about something they want to back it up with the word right because: Murica.
The Troll Queen.

I'm also the Troll Goddess of Reason. Sacrifices are appreciated but not necessary.

"I'm a vivacious sex fiend," SolonKR.

Go vote on one of my debates. I'm not that smart, so it'll probably be an easy decision.

Fite me m9
sadolite
Posts: 8,833
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/6/2014 8:47:18 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 5/5/2014 7:30:05 PM, Jonbonbon wrote:
At 5/5/2014 6:35:29 PM, sadolite wrote:
Why do people bastardize the word right?

When someone gets passionate about something they want to back it up with the word right because: Murica.

One can be passionate without being willfully ignorant.
It's not your views that divide us, it's what you think my views should be that divides us.

If you think I will give up my rights and forsake social etiquette to make you "FEEL" better you are sadly mistaken

If liberal democrats would just stop shooting people gun violence would drop by 90%
Jonbonbon
Posts: 2,743
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/6/2014 9:04:24 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 5/6/2014 8:47:18 AM, sadolite wrote:
At 5/5/2014 7:30:05 PM, Jonbonbon wrote:
At 5/5/2014 6:35:29 PM, sadolite wrote:
Why do people bastardize the word right?

When someone gets passionate about something they want to back it up with the word right because: Murica.

One can be passionate without being willfully ignorant.

I know. I'm just saying that's why I think some people do that.
The Troll Queen.

I'm also the Troll Goddess of Reason. Sacrifices are appreciated but not necessary.

"I'm a vivacious sex fiend," SolonKR.

Go vote on one of my debates. I'm not that smart, so it'll probably be an easy decision.

Fite me m9
sadolite
Posts: 8,833
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/6/2014 3:53:13 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 5/6/2014 9:04:24 AM, Jonbonbon wrote:
At 5/6/2014 8:47:18 AM, sadolite wrote:
At 5/5/2014 7:30:05 PM, Jonbonbon wrote:
At 5/5/2014 6:35:29 PM, sadolite wrote:
Why do people bastardize the word right?

When someone gets passionate about something they want to back it up with the word right because: Murica.

One can be passionate without being willfully ignorant.

I know. I'm just saying that's why I think some people do that.

Well then I guess the willfully ignorant love the willfully ignorant. Two peas in a pod.
It's not your views that divide us, it's what you think my views should be that divides us.

If you think I will give up my rights and forsake social etiquette to make you "FEEL" better you are sadly mistaken

If liberal democrats would just stop shooting people gun violence would drop by 90%
sadolite
Posts: 8,833
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/6/2014 3:53:13 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 5/6/2014 9:04:24 AM, Jonbonbon wrote:
At 5/6/2014 8:47:18 AM, sadolite wrote:
At 5/5/2014 7:30:05 PM, Jonbonbon wrote:
At 5/5/2014 6:35:29 PM, sadolite wrote:
Why do people bastardize the word right?

When someone gets passionate about something they want to back it up with the word right because: Murica.

One can be passionate without being willfully ignorant.

I know. I'm just saying that's why I think some people do that.

Well then I guess the willfully ignorant love the willfully ignorant. Two peas in a pod.
It's not your views that divide us, it's what you think my views should be that divides us.

If you think I will give up my rights and forsake social etiquette to make you "FEEL" better you are sadly mistaken

If liberal democrats would just stop shooting people gun violence would drop by 90%
Optimod
Posts: 26
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/6/2014 4:44:16 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 5/5/2014 6:35:29 PM, sadolite wrote:
Why do people bastardize the word right? Animals can't have rights. They don't even comprehend the meaning let alone acknowledge my rights. There can only be regulations regarding handling and care of animals. Animals are a commodity to be bought and sold like an ear of corn or a cow. There is no difference in the act of buying an ear of corn or a cute little puppy as a pet. The only difference is if you intend on keeping the cute little puppy you have to follow a minimum standard of care for it since it is a live animal like a cow. And yes you can even eat it like a cow so long as you practice human slaughter methods set out by code.
Please don't be willfully ignorant and pass it on to other people.

Not sure I would have put it quite like that but, in essence, inarguable.
Up yours!
Jonbonbon
Posts: 2,743
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/6/2014 4:47:55 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 5/6/2014 3:53:13 PM, sadolite wrote:
At 5/6/2014 9:04:24 AM, Jonbonbon wrote:
At 5/6/2014 8:47:18 AM, sadolite wrote:
At 5/5/2014 7:30:05 PM, Jonbonbon wrote:
At 5/5/2014 6:35:29 PM, sadolite wrote:
Why do people bastardize the word right?

When someone gets passionate about something they want to back it up with the word right because: Murica.

One can be passionate without being willfully ignorant.

I know. I'm just saying that's why I think some people do that.

Well then I guess the willfully ignorant love the willfully ignorant. Two peas in a pod.

Looks kinda lonely http://www.chrisvonada.com...

Who's the other pea by the way?
The Troll Queen.

I'm also the Troll Goddess of Reason. Sacrifices are appreciated but not necessary.

"I'm a vivacious sex fiend," SolonKR.

Go vote on one of my debates. I'm not that smart, so it'll probably be an easy decision.

Fite me m9
sadolite
Posts: 8,833
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/7/2014 1:50:47 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 5/6/2014 4:47:55 PM, Jonbonbon wrote:
At 5/6/2014 3:53:13 PM, sadolite wrote:
At 5/6/2014 9:04:24 AM, Jonbonbon wrote:
At 5/6/2014 8:47:18 AM, sadolite wrote:
At 5/5/2014 7:30:05 PM, Jonbonbon wrote:
At 5/5/2014 6:35:29 PM, sadolite wrote:
Why do people bastardize the word right?

When someone gets passionate about something they want to back it up with the word right because: Murica.

One can be passionate without being willfully ignorant.

I know. I'm just saying that's why I think some people do that.

Well then I guess the willfully ignorant love the willfully ignorant. Two peas in a pod.

Looks kinda lonely http://www.chrisvonada.com...

Who's the other pea by the way?

I am done with this thread, it' gave me cancer
It's not your views that divide us, it's what you think my views should be that divides us.

If you think I will give up my rights and forsake social etiquette to make you "FEEL" better you are sadly mistaken

If liberal democrats would just stop shooting people gun violence would drop by 90%
Jonbonbon
Posts: 2,743
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/7/2014 2:03:45 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 5/7/2014 1:50:47 PM, sadolite wrote:
At 5/6/2014 4:47:55 PM, Jonbonbon wrote:
At 5/6/2014 3:53:13 PM, sadolite wrote:
At 5/6/2014 9:04:24 AM, Jonbonbon wrote:
At 5/6/2014 8:47:18 AM, sadolite wrote:
At 5/5/2014 7:30:05 PM, Jonbonbon wrote:
At 5/5/2014 6:35:29 PM, sadolite wrote:
Why do people bastardize the word right?

When someone gets passionate about something they want to back it up with the word right because: Murica.

One can be passionate without being willfully ignorant.

I know. I'm just saying that's why I think some people do that.

Well then I guess the willfully ignorant love the willfully ignorant. Two peas in a pod.

Looks kinda lonely http://www.chrisvonada.com...

Who's the other pea by the way?

I am done with this thread, it' gave me cancer

http://2.bp.blogspot.com...
The Troll Queen.

I'm also the Troll Goddess of Reason. Sacrifices are appreciated but not necessary.

"I'm a vivacious sex fiend," SolonKR.

Go vote on one of my debates. I'm not that smart, so it'll probably be an easy decision.

Fite me m9
Wallstreetatheist
Posts: 7,132
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/8/2014 9:24:08 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
If anyone here thinks a vegan diet is the optimal diet, debate me.
DRUG HARM: http://imgur.com...
Primal Diet. Lifting. Reading. Psychedelics. Cold-Approach Pickup. Music.
MassiveDump
Posts: 3,423
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/9/2014 9:25:47 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 5/5/2014 3:29:54 PM, vbaculum wrote:
At 5/3/2014 10:04:05 PM, MassiveDump wrote:
I guess now's a good time to start up the discussion. If carnivorous and omnivorous animals naturally eat other animals, why is it wrong for an omnivorous human to?

Human's are non-obligate omnivorous. That means that we don't need to eat animals (or their byproducts) to survive. In fact, the dietetic science is very clear that the less animal products we eat, the less likely we are to get and die from cancer, heart disease and diabetes - some of the world's leading killers.

What science? Meat doesn't have carbohydrates, so it can't have any effect on whether someone gets diabetes or not, so that makes me question the Ethos of the whole thing right there. But on top of that, it's the preservatives inside the meat that are linked to causing cancer, not the meat itself.

So, since we don't need to eat animals, it is obviously moraly wrong to do so...

Had you ended the sentence there, you would have ended up on the Weekly Stupid. But since you continued, I'll let it slide ;)

since tremendous suffering is inflicted on animals in factory farms and slaughterhouses.

Besides the fact that processing plants are becoming more and more humane every day, consider this: livestock animals are born, then they live, then they die. If we stop farming them, then we might as well release them into the wild. Since they're domesticated, they all die out. Since they all die out anyway, they might as well have gotten eaten. Circle of life.
sadolite
Posts: 8,833
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/9/2014 10:47:52 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 5/9/2014 9:25:47 PM, MassiveDump wrote:
At 5/5/2014 3:29:54 PM, vbaculum wrote:
At 5/3/2014 10:04:05 PM, MassiveDump wrote:
I guess now's a good time to start up the discussion. If carnivorous and omnivorous animals naturally eat other animals, why is it wrong for an omnivorous human to?

Human's are non-obligate omnivorous. That means that we don't need to eat animals (or their byproducts) to survive. In fact, the dietetic science is very clear that the less animal products we eat, the less likely we are to get and die from cancer, heart disease and diabetes - some of the world's leading killers.

What science? Meat doesn't have carbohydrates, so it can't have any effect on whether someone gets diabetes or not, so that makes me question the Ethos of the whole thing right there. But on top of that, it's the preservatives inside the meat that are linked to causing cancer, not the meat itself.

So, since we don't need to eat animals, it is obviously moraly wrong to do so...

Had you ended the sentence there, you would have ended up on the Weekly Stupid. But since you continued, I'll let it slide ;)

since tremendous suffering is inflicted on animals in factory farms and slaughterhouses.

Besides the fact that processing plants are becoming more and more humane every day, consider this: livestock animals are born, then they live, then they die. If we stop farming them, then we might as well release them into the wild. Since they're domesticated, they all die out. Since they all die out anyway, they might as well have gotten eaten. Circle of life.

Life without ones own simple desires and pleasures is no life at all. May as well let the animals make the choices for humanity by placing buttons on the ground and put regulations and rules for humans on them and see which ones they step on to dictate all of humanities future.
It's not your views that divide us, it's what you think my views should be that divides us.

If you think I will give up my rights and forsake social etiquette to make you "FEEL" better you are sadly mistaken

If liberal democrats would just stop shooting people gun violence would drop by 90%
vbaculum
Posts: 1,274
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/10/2014 11:43:03 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 5/9/2014 9:25:47 PM, MassiveDump wrote:
At 5/5/2014 3:29:54 PM, vbaculum wrote:
At 5/3/2014 10:04:05 PM, MassiveDump wrote:
I guess now's a good time to start up the discussion. If carnivorous and omnivorous animals naturally eat other animals, why is it wrong for an omnivorous human to?

Human's are non-obligate omnivorous. That means that we don't need to eat animals (or their byproducts) to survive. In fact, the dietetic science is very clear that the less animal products we eat, the less likely we are to get and die from cancer, heart disease and diabetes - some of the world's leading killers.

What science?
In the American Dietetic Association's position piece on vegan diet, over 200 studies are cited to support their contention that animal products are not required for optimal health.

http://www.eatright.org...

Meat doesn't have carbohydrates, so it can't have any effect on whether someone gets diabetes or not,

It's not well understood why some people develop type 2 diabetes. However, obesity is a primary risk factor. Either way, it's been shown that vegans have a one-half reduction in the risk of developing diabetes.

http://care.diabetesjournals.org...

so that makes me question the Ethos of the whole thing right there. But on top of that, it's the preservatives inside the meat that are linked to causing cancer, not the meat itself.

There are a number of reasons meat causes cancer.
http://www.askmen.com...

However, it's been long known that people who don't eat animal products are less likely to develop cancer.
http://news.bbc.co.uk...


So, since we don't need to eat animals, it is obviously moraly wrong to do so...

Had you ended the sentence there, you would have ended up on the Weekly Stupid. But since you continued, I'll let it slide ;)

since tremendous suffering is inflicted on animals in factory farms and slaughterhouses.

Besides the fact that processing plants are becoming more and more humane every day, consider this: livestock animals are born, then they live, then they die. If we stop farming them, then we might as well release them into the wild. Since they're domesticated, they all die out. Since they all die out anyway, they might as well have gotten eaten. Circle of life.

It's important for the meat industry that people think factory farms are becoming more humane since people are becoming more aware of how animals are treated in these places. However, even the so-called "humane" factory farms and slaughterhouses routinely burn and mutulate animals. For example, pigs are castrated with no pain killers in order to get rid of boars taint (https://en.wikipedia.org...). Then they are forced to live their lives in gestation crates that too small for them to turn around in. In the end, "humanely" raised or not, they end up in the same high-speed slaughterhouses.

Sadolite has had personal experience, though, so we should probably defer to him. Sadolite, are people still skinning rabbits alive on rabbit farms these days or has that been phased out? https://www.debate.org...
"If you claim to value nonviolence and you consume animal products, you need to rethink your position on nonviolence." - Gary Francione

THE WORLD IS VEGAN! If you want it
xXCryptoXx
Posts: 5,000
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/10/2014 12:08:13 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 5/3/2014 10:04:05 PM, MassiveDump wrote:
I guess now's a good time to start up the discussion. If carnivorous and omnivorous animals naturally eat other animals, why is it wrong for an omnivorous human to?

Although I disagree with this, you could also argue that since humans are rational, moral agents, only humans can commit moral acts. Since animals are not rational, moral agents they cannot commit moral acts. This means that only a human killing an animal and eating it would be immoral, as opposed to other animals doing it which would be amoral.
Nolite Timere
vbaculum
Posts: 1,274
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/8/2014 12:58:40 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 5/9/2014 9:25:47 PM, MassiveDump wrote:
At 5/5/2014 3:29:54 PM, vbaculum wrote:
At 5/3/2014 10:04:05 PM, MassiveDump wrote:
I guess now's a good time to start up the discussion. If carnivorous and omnivorous animals naturally eat other animals, why is it wrong for an omnivorous human to?

Human's are non-obligate omnivorous. That means that we don't need to eat animals (or their byproducts) to survive. In fact, the dietetic science is very clear that the less animal products we eat, the less likely we are to get and die from cancer, heart disease and diabetes - some of the world's leading killers.

What science? Meat doesn't have carbohydrates, so it can't have any effect on whether someone gets diabetes or not, so that makes me question the Ethos of the whole thing right there. But on top of that, it's the preservatives inside the meat that are linked to causing cancer, not the meat itself.

So, since we don't need to eat animals, it is obviously moraly wrong to do so...

Had you ended the sentence there, you would have ended up on the Weekly Stupid. But since you continued, I'll let it slide ;)

since tremendous suffering is inflicted on animals in factory farms and slaughterhouses.

Besides the fact that processing plants are becoming more and more humane every day, consider this: livestock animals are born, then they live, then they die. If we stop farming them, then we might as well release them into the wild. Since they're domesticated, they all die out. Since they all die out anyway, they might as well have gotten eaten. Circle of life.

Hmm, these slaughterhouses are apparently more humane than Sodolite's.

http://www.animalequality.net...
"If you claim to value nonviolence and you consume animal products, you need to rethink your position on nonviolence." - Gary Francione

THE WORLD IS VEGAN! If you want it