Total Posts:39|Showing Posts:1-30|Last Page
Jump to topic:

Peta???

Rob1Billion
Posts: 1,338
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/4/2010 8:37:34 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
PETA is basically the sympathetic response to the parts of society who do not value non-human life. Unfortunately as humankind advances on the environment ("consumer" culture), it is getting harder to justify the fact that every whim of a person is infinitely more important than the wildlife they are supplanting. I won't defend anything particular about the group but I definitely am bothered that people weigh profit against nature and award profit the go-ahead on a consistent basis.
Master P is the end result of capitalism.
Ragnar_Rahl
Posts: 19,297
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/4/2010 8:43:10 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 6/4/2010 8:37:34 PM, Rob1Billion wrote:
it is getting harder to justify the fact that every whim of a person is infinitely more important than the wildlife they are supplanting
Anything is infinitely more important than zero, unless it is itself zero. So far as I know consuming goods generally isn't zero.
It came to be at its height. It was commanded to command. It was a capital before its first stone was laid. It was a monument to the spirit of man.
FREEDO
Posts: 21,057
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/4/2010 11:02:26 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 6/4/2010 11:01:06 PM, comoncents wrote:
At 6/4/2010 10:54:36 PM, FREEDO wrote:
I am definitely for animal rights though.

I am not.

Should we be able to torture animals?
GRAND POOBAH OF DDO

fnord
I-am-a-panda
Posts: 15,380
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/5/2010 2:52:58 AM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 6/4/2010 11:02:26 PM, FREEDO wrote:
At 6/4/2010 11:01:06 PM, comoncents wrote:
At 6/4/2010 10:54:36 PM, FREEDO wrote:
I am definitely for animal rights though.

I am not.

Should we be able to torture animals?

Torture an animal or we're going to torture a human. Your call, Freedo.
Pizza. I have enormous respect for Pizza.
Rob1Billion
Posts: 1,338
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/5/2010 8:20:17 AM
Posted: 6 years ago
what is peta going to draw profit from? selling Animal freedom? last i checked, animals dont hold middle to upper-class purchasing power. animals, as well as lower-class humans might as well just give it up now.
Master P is the end result of capitalism.
PoeJoe
Posts: 3,822
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/5/2010 8:21:12 AM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 6/5/2010 2:52:58 AM, I-am-a-panda wrote:
At 6/4/2010 11:02:26 PM, FREEDO wrote:
At 6/4/2010 11:01:06 PM, comoncents wrote:
At 6/4/2010 10:54:36 PM, FREEDO wrote:
I am definitely for animal rights though.

I am not.

Should we be able to torture animals?

Torture an animal or we're going to torture a human. Your call, Freedo.

What?!

When did this dichotomy formulate, that torture of some living thing is a must?
Television Rot: http://tvrot.com...
I-am-a-panda
Posts: 15,380
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/5/2010 9:11:50 AM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 6/5/2010 8:21:12 AM, PoeJoe wrote:
At 6/5/2010 2:52:58 AM, I-am-a-panda wrote:
At 6/4/2010 11:02:26 PM, FREEDO wrote:
At 6/4/2010 11:01:06 PM, comoncents wrote:
At 6/4/2010 10:54:36 PM, FREEDO wrote:
I am definitely for animal rights though.

I am not.

Should we be able to torture animals?

Torture an animal or we're going to torture a human. Your call, Freedo.

What?!

When did this dichotomy formulate, that torture of some living thing is a must?

I have a man pinned on my wall and red hot irons at the ready. I'm sure Freedo has some animals nearby. His move.
Pizza. I have enormous respect for Pizza.
Ragnar_Rahl
Posts: 19,297
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/5/2010 10:43:07 AM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 6/4/2010 9:23:15 PM, Rob1Billion wrote:
so you are admitting that wildlife has zero worth.

That's not a confession, that's an assertion.
It came to be at its height. It was commanded to command. It was a capital before its first stone was laid. It was a monument to the spirit of man.
Mirza
Posts: 16,992
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/5/2010 11:09:07 AM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 6/5/2010 8:21:12 AM, PoeJoe wrote:
What?!

When did this dichotomy formulate, that torture of some living thing is a must?
Plants are alive. Eating them is also harmful for them. If you also look at our teeth, you will see that we have some for vegetation, others for flesh. Throughout history, it has been normal for humankind to eat animals. If you speak against this, you are violating a human right, as much as you are violating the right of lions, because they also survive of the flesh they get of other animals.
Reasoning
Posts: 4,456
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/5/2010 11:11:00 AM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 6/4/2010 11:02:26 PM, FREEDO wrote:
Should we be able to torture animals?

Of course not. Should we use violence to stop others from torturing animals that they own? No.
"What we really ought to ask the liberal, before we even begin addressing his agenda, is this: In what kind of society would he be a conservative?" - Joseph Sobran
Korashk
Posts: 4,597
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/5/2010 11:27:23 AM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 6/5/2010 8:20:17 AM, Rob1Billion wrote:
what is peta going to draw profit from? selling Animal freedom? last i checked, animals dont hold middle to upper-class purchasing power. animals, as well as lower-class humans might as well just give it up now.

I think that you should watch the vodeos presented in this debate in round one. Especially since you seem to think that PETA is some great organiztion.

http://www.debate.org...
When large numbers of otherwise-law abiding people break specific laws en masse, it's usually a fault that lies with the law. - Unknown
Korashk
Posts: 4,597
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/5/2010 11:30:53 AM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 6/4/2010 11:02:26 PM, FREEDO wrote:
At 6/4/2010 11:01:06 PM, comoncents wrote:
At 6/4/2010 10:54:36 PM, FREEDO wrote:
I am definitely for animal rights though.

I am not.

Should we be able to torture animals?

I don't see a compelling reason to make animal abuse legally punishable.
When large numbers of otherwise-law abiding people break specific laws en masse, it's usually a fault that lies with the law. - Unknown
Ragnar_Rahl
Posts: 19,297
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/5/2010 5:16:06 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 6/5/2010 11:11:00 AM, Reasoning wrote:
At 6/4/2010 11:02:26 PM, FREEDO wrote:
Should we be able to torture animals?

Of course not. Should we use violence to stop others from torturing animals that they own? No.
Erm, I think you misunderstood the question, since if you are against stopping it you think we should be able to . Your "no" appears to be an answer to a different question: "Once able, should we torture animals?"
It came to be at its height. It was commanded to command. It was a capital before its first stone was laid. It was a monument to the spirit of man.
Rob1Billion
Posts: 1,338
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/5/2010 6:54:22 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 6/5/2010 11:27:23 AM, Korashk wrote:
At 6/5/2010 8:20:17 AM, Rob1Billion wrote:
what is peta going to draw profit from? selling Animal freedom? last i checked, animals dont hold middle to upper-class purchasing power. animals, as well as lower-class humans might as well just give it up now.

I think that you should watch the vodeos presented in this debate in round one. Especially since you seem to think that PETA is some great organiztion.

http://www.debate.org...

Just because some lunatics are running PETA doesn't mean that animals have no rights compared to our pocket books.
Master P is the end result of capitalism.
badger
Posts: 11,793
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/5/2010 7:08:22 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 6/5/2010 11:30:53 AM, Korashk wrote:
At 6/4/2010 11:02:26 PM, FREEDO wrote:
At 6/4/2010 11:01:06 PM, comoncents wrote:
At 6/4/2010 10:54:36 PM, FREEDO wrote:
I am definitely for animal rights though.

I am not.

Should we be able to torture animals?

I don't see a compelling reason to make animal abuse legally punishable.

nope, me neither. i reckon we should go so far as to encourage it. i'd love to see a polar bear fight a tiger.

enslave monkeys.
signature
Korashk
Posts: 4,597
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/5/2010 7:38:36 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 6/5/2010 7:08:22 PM, badger wrote:
At 6/5/2010 11:30:53 AM, Korashk wrote:
At 6/4/2010 11:02:26 PM, FREEDO wrote:
At 6/4/2010 11:01:06 PM, comoncents wrote:
At 6/4/2010 10:54:36 PM, FREEDO wrote:
I am definitely for animal rights though.

I am not.

Should we be able to torture animals?

I don't see a compelling reason to make animal abuse legally punishable.

nope, me neither. i reckon we should go so far as to encourage it. i'd love to see a polar bear fight a tiger.

enslave monkeys.

I would pay good money to see a Polar Bear fight a Tiger. That would be awesome.

@Rob:
I must've misunderstood your posts in this forum for being in support of PETA. If you want protection for animals then there are better organizations to support.

Though you misunderstand why I don't think animals deserve rights. It has nothing to do with money and everything to do with the lack of demonstrable high order thinking such as is described by Bloom's Taxonomy.
When large numbers of otherwise-law abiding people break specific laws en masse, it's usually a fault that lies with the law. - Unknown
Rob1Billion
Posts: 1,338
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/6/2010 7:51:22 AM
Posted: 6 years ago
Not for nothing, but geneticists are making breakthroughs every day. Other than computer science, which may give it a good run (or even combine with it), genetic engineering is the absolute best hope for technological advance in the future.

Us type-a humans may, by the time we die, may cease to be the top of the food chain. The humans of the future will be to us what we are to monkeys. At that time, you animal-rights deniers may just get a taste of your own medicine. Hopefully Stephen Hawking is wrong, and we won't simply be "ants" to be trampled without care.
Master P is the end result of capitalism.
Kinesis
Posts: 3,667
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/6/2010 9:11:16 AM
Posted: 6 years ago
I don't know much about the subject of animal rights, though it seems hypocritical to support human rights and not animal rights at least to a some degree. PETA seems like a highly dubious organisation to support, however.

Incidentally, a litter of puppies has just been born at my house.
Ragnar_Rahl
Posts: 19,297
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/6/2010 9:37:13 AM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 6/6/2010 7:51:22 AM, Rob1Billion wrote:
Not for nothing, but geneticists are making breakthroughs every day. Other than computer science, which may give it a good run (or even combine with it), genetic engineering is the absolute best hope for technological advance in the future.

Us type-a humans may, by the time we die, may cease to be the top of the food chain. The humans of the future will be to us what we are to monkeys.
How precisely is that? It's reason versus no reason. What, are you going to argue there exists some sort of "hyperreasoning" to be had?
It came to be at its height. It was commanded to command. It was a capital before its first stone was laid. It was a monument to the spirit of man.
Rob1Billion
Posts: 1,338
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/6/2010 10:05:14 AM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 6/6/2010 9:11:16 AM, Kinesis wrote:
I don't know much about the subject of animal rights, though it seems hypocritical to support human rights and not animal rights at least to a some degree. PETA seems like a highly dubious organisation to support, however.

Incidentally, a litter of puppies has just been born at my house.

Let's play with animal's rights and use your puppies as examples.

What are the implications of

- cutting the puppies up right away and eating them (not uncommon in many cultures)?

- giving them away as pets? How many of them will be given to pet owners who do not exercise them enough or don't give them as full a life as they would have in the wild?

- using them for experimentation, with the possible results of curing human-diseases?
Master P is the end result of capitalism.
Kinesis
Posts: 3,667
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/6/2010 10:52:45 AM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 6/6/2010 10:05:14 AM, Rob1Billion wrote:
At 6/6/2010 9:11:16 AM, Kinesis wrote:
I don't know much about the subject of animal rights, though it seems hypocritical to support human rights and not animal rights at least to a some degree. PETA seems like a highly dubious organisation to support, however.

Incidentally, a litter of puppies has just been born at my house.

Let's play with animal's rights and use your puppies as examples.

What are the implications of

- cutting the puppies up right away and eating them (not uncommon in many cultures)?


Not much. In fact, three died still in the mother's womb. They can't see or hear, though they can feel pain. I doubt they have many thought processes. I would say it isn't that cruel to kill puppies only a few days old. Although, killing them painlessly would be preferable, and not killing them at all even more so. If we required food, killing them would be preferable to starvation.

- giving them away as pets? How many of them will be given to pet owners who do not exercise them enough or don't give them as full a life as they would have in the wild?


They're domesticated beagles. They wouldn't last a week in the wild.

- using them for experimentation, with the possible results of curing human-diseases?

If the research could lead to important advances in the medical industry, sure. My understanding is that animal experimentation is becoming less and less required now that research technology is advancing, however.
Rob1Billion
Posts: 1,338
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/6/2010 2:15:10 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 6/6/2010 9:37:13 AM, Ragnar_Rahl wrote:
At 6/6/2010 7:51:22 AM, Rob1Billion wrote:
Not for nothing, but geneticists are making breakthroughs every day. Other than computer science, which may give it a good run (or even combine with it), genetic engineering is the absolute best hope for technological advance in the future.

Us type-a humans may, by the time we die, may cease to be the top of the food chain. The humans of the future will be to us what we are to monkeys.

How precisely is that? It's reason versus no reason. What, are you going to argue there exists some sort of "hyperreasoning" to be had?

Perhaps "reason" will not be the benchmark for the next wave of evolution. A higher order being would likely have a higher moral sense than us and consider us brutes. Hell, we pretty much consider each other brutes half the time. It doesn't even take a new generation of brain-design to see the problems we have...
Master P is the end result of capitalism.
Ragnar_Rahl
Posts: 19,297
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/6/2010 3:05:27 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 6/6/2010 2:15:10 PM, Rob1Billion wrote:
At 6/6/2010 9:37:13 AM, Ragnar_Rahl wrote:
At 6/6/2010 7:51:22 AM, Rob1Billion wrote:
Not for nothing, but geneticists are making breakthroughs every day. Other than computer science, which may give it a good run (or even combine with it), genetic engineering is the absolute best hope for technological advance in the future.

Us type-a humans may, by the time we die, may cease to be the top of the food chain. The humans of the future will be to us what we are to monkeys.

How precisely is that? It's reason versus no reason. What, are you going to argue there exists some sort of "hyperreasoning" to be had?

Perhaps "reason" will not be the benchmark for the next wave of evolution. A higher order being would likely have a higher moral sense than us
Morality isn't a sense. It's reasoned out. We have 5 senses: Taste, touch, smell, hearing, sight. Some people are missing some of those. I don't see morality on that list do you?
It came to be at its height. It was commanded to command. It was a capital before its first stone was laid. It was a monument to the spirit of man.