Total Posts:22|Showing Posts:1-22
Jump to topic:

Animal Rights

PotBelliedGeek
Posts: 4,298
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/6/2014 2:52:57 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
This is a forum to discuss Animal Rights in all incarnations, from extremities like poachers and PETA to marine mammal captivity and animal testing, and any other subjects that fall into this category.

I will make my own stance clear in summary here:

I am anti-PETA, pro-captivity. I have reservations on animal testing, but not entirely opposed. I hate poachers vehemently, and believe strongly in maintaining environmental health using public funds. I consider myself an animal lover.
Religion Forum Ambassador

HUFFLEPUFF FOR LIFE!!!!!!!!!!!!
vbaculum
Posts: 1,274
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/6/2014 4:16:37 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 1/6/2014 2:52:57 PM, PotBelliedGeek wrote:
This is a forum to discuss Animal Rights in all incarnations, from extremities like poachers and PETA to marine mammal captivity and animal testing, and any other subjects that fall into this category.

I will make my own stance clear in summary here:

I am anti-PETA, pro-captivity. I have reservations on animal testing, but not entirely opposed. I hate poachers vehemently, and believe strongly in maintaining environmental health using public funds. I consider myself an animal lover.

What do you mean when you say you are anti-PETA?
"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
PotBelliedGeek
Posts: 4,298
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/6/2014 4:20:10 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 1/6/2014 4:16:37 PM, vbaculum wrote:
At 1/6/2014 2:52:57 PM, PotBelliedGeek wrote:
This is a forum to discuss Animal Rights in all incarnations, from extremities like poachers and PETA to marine mammal captivity and animal testing, and any other subjects that fall into this category.

I will make my own stance clear in summary here:

I am anti-PETA, pro-captivity. I have reservations on animal testing, but not entirely opposed. I hate poachers vehemently, and believe strongly in maintaining environmental health using public funds. I consider myself an animal lover.

What do you mean when you say you are anti-PETA?

I think that PETA are a bunch of ignorant zealots who make other pro animal people look bad, kind of like the tea party is to moderate conservatives.
Religion Forum Ambassador

HUFFLEPUFF FOR LIFE!!!!!!!!!!!!
vbaculum
Posts: 1,274
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/6/2014 4:55:28 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 1/6/2014 4:20:10 PM, PotBelliedGeek wrote:
At 1/6/2014 4:16:37 PM, vbaculum wrote:
At 1/6/2014 2:52:57 PM, PotBelliedGeek wrote:
This is a forum to discuss Animal Rights in all incarnations, from extremities like poachers and PETA to marine mammal captivity and animal testing, and any other subjects that fall into this category.

I will make my own stance clear in summary here:

I am anti-PETA, pro-captivity. I have reservations on animal testing, but not entirely opposed. I hate poachers vehemently, and believe strongly in maintaining environmental health using public funds. I consider myself an animal lover.

What do you mean when you say you are anti-PETA?

I think that PETA are a bunch of ignorant zealots who make other pro animal people look bad, kind of like the tea party is to moderate conservatives.

I thought you meant that you were agains PETA's positions on animal rights.

For the most part, PETA is like most animal right/animal welfarist organizations such as Mercy for Animals and Compassion over Killing. They advocate for the abandonment of all animal use - particularly that of exploitive use. That would be their animal rights aspect. The welfarist aspect of PETA is that they advocate for the amelioration of the suffering that exploited animals endure. This is typical of many animal welfarist organizations like the ones I mentioned.

About half of the animal rights world (it would seem to me) detests this. These people call themselves abolitionists. They object to welfarist groups like PETA on the grounds that all animal exploitation is unacceptable. They also object to they single-issue campains (like the anti-fur campaigns you may be familiar with) as they are inconsistent with the overall goal of abolition. Many aren't at all happy with their objectification of women either.

In the end, PETA isn't really that relevent to the animal rights movement. The reason anyone even know the acronym is because of they of their sensationalistic tactics.
"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
vbaculum
Posts: 1,274
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/6/2014 4:57:53 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
* The reason anyone even knows the acronym is because of their sensationalistic tactics.
"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
PotBelliedGeek
Posts: 4,298
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/6/2014 5:00:33 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 1/6/2014 4:55:28 PM, vbaculum wrote:
At 1/6/2014 4:20:10 PM, PotBelliedGeek wrote:
At 1/6/2014 4:16:37 PM, vbaculum wrote:
At 1/6/2014 2:52:57 PM, PotBelliedGeek wrote:
This is a forum to discuss Animal Rights in all incarnations, from extremities like poachers and PETA to marine mammal captivity and animal testing, and any other subjects that fall into this category.

I will make my own stance clear in summary here:

I am anti-PETA, pro-captivity. I have reservations on animal testing, but not entirely opposed. I hate poachers vehemently, and believe strongly in maintaining environmental health using public funds. I consider myself an animal lover.

What do you mean when you say you are anti-PETA?

I think that PETA are a bunch of ignorant zealots who make other pro animal people look bad, kind of like the tea party is to moderate conservatives.

I thought you meant that you were agains PETA's positions on animal rights.

For the most part, PETA is like most animal right/animal welfarist organizations such as Mercy for Animals and Compassion over Killing. They advocate for the abandonment of all animal use - particularly that of exploitive use. That would be their animal rights aspect. The welfarist aspect of PETA is that they advocate for the amelioration of the suffering that exploited animals endure. This is typical of many animal welfarist organizations like the ones I mentioned.

About half of the animal rights world (it would seem to me) detests this. These people call themselves abolitionists. They object to welfarist groups like PETA on the grounds that all animal exploitation is unacceptable. They also object to they single-issue campains (like the anti-fur campaigns you may be familiar with) as they are inconsistent with the overall goal of abolition. Many aren't at all happy with their objectification of women either.

In the end, PETA isn't really that relevent to the animal rights movement. The reason anyone even know the acronym is because of they of their sensationalistic tactics.

I really don't follow your post there. What do you mean by animal welfarist groups? Also, I really can't tell if yoy are condemning PETA or defending them?
PETA not relevant to animal rights? They are by far the loudest voice in that arena.
Religion Forum Ambassador

HUFFLEPUFF FOR LIFE!!!!!!!!!!!!
vbaculum
Posts: 1,274
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/6/2014 5:27:52 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 1/6/2014 5:00:33 PM, PotBelliedGeek wrote:
At 1/6/2014 4:55:28 PM, vbaculum wrote:
At 1/6/2014 4:20:10 PM, PotBelliedGeek wrote:
At 1/6/2014 4:16:37 PM, vbaculum wrote:
At 1/6/2014 2:52:57 PM, PotBelliedGeek wrote:
This is a forum to discuss Animal Rights in all incarnations, from extremities like poachers and PETA to marine mammal captivity and animal testing, and any other subjects that fall into this category.

I will make my own stance clear in summary here:

I am anti-PETA, pro-captivity. I have reservations on animal testing, but not entirely opposed. I hate poachers vehemently, and believe strongly in maintaining environmental health using public funds. I consider myself an animal lover.

What do you mean when you say you are anti-PETA?

I think that PETA are a bunch of ignorant zealots who make other pro animal people look bad, kind of like the tea party is to moderate conservatives.

I thought you meant that you were agains PETA's positions on animal rights.

For the most part, PETA is like most animal right/animal welfarist organizations such as Mercy for Animals and Compassion over Killing. They advocate for the abandonment of all animal use - particularly that of exploitive use. That would be their animal rights aspect. The welfarist aspect of PETA is that they advocate for the amelioration of the suffering that exploited animals endure. This is typical of many animal welfarist organizations like the ones I mentioned.

About half of the animal rights world (it would seem to me) detests this. These people call themselves abolitionists. They object to welfarist groups like PETA on the grounds that all animal exploitation is unacceptable. They also object to they single-issue campains (like the anti-fur campaigns you may be familiar with) as they are inconsistent with the overall goal of abolition. Many aren't at all happy with their objectification of women either.

In the end, PETA isn't really that relevent to the animal rights movement. The reason anyone even know the acronym is because of they of their sensationalistic tactics.

I really don't follow your post there. What do you mean by animal welfarist groups? Also, I really can't tell if yoy are condemning PETA or defending them?
PETA not relevant to animal rights? They are by far the loudest voice in that arena.

A welfarist group is distinct from a rights group in that they are for the amelioration of animal suffering by exploiters where as an animal rights group is for the elimination of animal exploitation all together. PETA, like many other organization, do both. This is a major irritant to a large number of people in the animal rights movement - abolitionist in particular.

I don't really have a strong view on groups like PETA.
"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
Caploxion
Posts: 454
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/7/2014 12:59:56 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
A word of warning for using the term 'animal rights': people love to play semantics off of this. Many people, in opposition to animal rights, will argue that animals (non-human animals) don't deserve rights because these animals are not capable of being responsible for their actions. It's like a human having the right to vote -- this entails responsibility also. Not that I agree with these word games, but I'm just warning you about what a reasonably large minority will likely argue.
"That's what people do. They breed, and then their children breed, and then their children do it, and their children do it. But, have you ever asked why we do it?" - Jim 'Metamorphhh' Crawford

"There is no doubt that life is given us, not to be enjoyed, but to be overcome; to be got over." - Arthur Schopenhauer

"It's like building a broken building, repairing it and then saying that now I have value in doing so...but it didn't need to be broken in the first place." -Gary 'Inmendham' Mosher
vbaculum
Posts: 1,274
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/7/2014 9:49:26 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 1/7/2014 12:59:56 AM, Caploxion wrote:
A word of warning for using the term 'animal rights': people love to play semantics off of this. Many people, in opposition to animal rights, will argue that animals (non-human animals) don't deserve rights because these animals are not capable of being responsible for their actions. It's like a human having the right to vote -- this entails responsibility also. Not that I agree with these word games, but I'm just warning you about what a reasonably large minority will likely argue.

That's true. I've never heard an animal rights advocate argue that any animal should have any right other than the right not to be exploited.
"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
islandkid24
Posts: 2
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/23/2014 6:32:10 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
Would you like it if the moment you were born someone planned your death? Animals are born to be murdered even though freedom is a birth right. Humans victimize animals so much we don't even consider animals victims. We think we care about animals just because we love and care about our domestic pets! We believe humans are more superior than animals which apparently gives us the right to enslave and kill any animal we chose. "There is a holocaust taking place right now, it is the worlds largest and longest running holocaust." - Gary Yourofsky. Female animals are constantly raped to become pregnant so we can steal their milk and their babies for our benefit. We steal their babies and murder them and sell their flesh, besides we wont get much milk if a baby cow is taking it all! Meat= blood, flesh, veins, muscle and tendons....... how does this sound appetizing?
TrasguTravieso
Posts: 93
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/29/2014 4:54:32 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
Just in case I can get any takers here, I have just posted a debate in which I will defend bullfighting as a legitimate form of art. Good clean fun.

http://www.debate.org...
Oryus
Posts: 8,280
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/1/2014 4:12:32 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 1/6/2014 4:57:53 PM, vbaculum wrote:
* The reason anyone even knows the acronym is because of their sensationalistic tactics.

Their sensationalist tactics are exactly why I don't like them.

I don't know- you've probably seen me make similar arguments on ddo before. We tend to run into each other in these animal rights threads lol
: : :Tulle: The fool, I purposely don't engage with you because you don't have proper command of the English language.
: :
: : The Fool: It's my English writing. Either way It's okay have a larger vocabulary then you, and a better grasp of language, and you're a woman.
:
: I'm just going to leave this precious struggle nugget right here.
bsh1
Posts: 27,504
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/2/2014 2:40:40 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
I mean, I am fairly certain that animals are the kinds of agents who can have rights, but that's not the same as saying that they do. I think, personally, animals do have some rights--the question is just: to what extent, and which rights?
Live Long and Prosper

I'm a Bish.


"Twilight isn't just about obtuse metaphors between cannibalism and premarital sex, it also teaches us the futility of hope." - Raisor

"[Bsh1] is the Guinan of DDO." - ButterCatX

Follow the DDOlympics
: http://www.debate.org...

Open Debate Topics Project: http://www.debate.org...
vbaculum
Posts: 1,274
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/2/2014 8:22:01 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 9/2/2014 2:40:40 PM, bsh1 wrote:
I mean, I am fairly certain that animals are the kinds of agents who can have rights, but that's not the same as saying that they do. I think, personally, animals do have some rights--the question is just: to what extent, and which rights?

All animals, including humans, have negative rights, meaning they have a right to not be needlessly harmed.
"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
bsh1
Posts: 27,504
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/2/2014 8:30:18 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 9/2/2014 8:22:01 PM, vbaculum wrote:
At 9/2/2014 2:40:40 PM, bsh1 wrote:
I mean, I am fairly certain that animals are the kinds of agents who can have rights, but that's not the same as saying that they do. I think, personally, animals do have some rights--the question is just: to what extent, and which rights?

All animals, including humans, have negative rights, meaning they have a right to not be needlessly harmed.

But, do animals have all negative rights? And do all animals have negative rights?
Live Long and Prosper

I'm a Bish.


"Twilight isn't just about obtuse metaphors between cannibalism and premarital sex, it also teaches us the futility of hope." - Raisor

"[Bsh1] is the Guinan of DDO." - ButterCatX

Follow the DDOlympics
: http://www.debate.org...

Open Debate Topics Project: http://www.debate.org...
vbaculum
Posts: 1,274
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/2/2014 8:31:42 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 9/1/2014 4:12:32 PM, Oryus wrote:
At 1/6/2014 4:57:53 PM, vbaculum wrote:
* The reason anyone even knows the acronym is because of their sensationalistic tactics.

Their sensationalist tactics are exactly why I don't like them.

I don't know- you've probably seen me make similar arguments on ddo before. We tend to run into each other in these animal rights threads lol

If their tactics get you talking about them, I think that means they are working :)
Peta loves negative attention.
"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
vbaculum
Posts: 1,274
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/2/2014 8:37:11 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 9/2/2014 8:30:18 PM, bsh1 wrote:
At 9/2/2014 8:22:01 PM, vbaculum wrote:
At 9/2/2014 2:40:40 PM, bsh1 wrote:
I mean, I am fairly certain that animals are the kinds of agents who can have rights, but that's not the same as saying that they do. I think, personally, animals do have some rights--the question is just: to what extent, and which rights?

All animals, including humans, have negative rights, meaning they have a right to not be needlessly harmed.

But, do animals have all negative rights? And do all animals have negative rights?

To the extent that it's reasonable to consider an animal capable of pain, he or she has the right to not have pain needlessly inflicted on him/her by other sapient, sentient being.
"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
bsh1
Posts: 27,504
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/2/2014 8:40:39 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 9/2/2014 8:37:11 PM, vbaculum wrote:
At 9/2/2014 8:30:18 PM, bsh1 wrote:
At 9/2/2014 8:22:01 PM, vbaculum wrote:
At 9/2/2014 2:40:40 PM, bsh1 wrote:
I mean, I am fairly certain that animals are the kinds of agents who can have rights, but that's not the same as saying that they do. I think, personally, animals do have some rights--the question is just: to what extent, and which rights?

All animals, including humans, have negative rights, meaning they have a right to not be needlessly harmed.

But, do animals have all negative rights? And do all animals have negative rights?

To the extent that it's reasonable to consider an animal capable of pain, he or she has the right to not have pain needlessly inflicted on him/her by other sapient, sentient being.

But, that doesn't really address the full pantheon of negative rights out there. Does an animal have a right to property, to liberty, to freedom of expression? All of these are "negative" rights.

And, as for pain, I think this is a poor way to assess rights--ants, for example, don't have rights--the very notion seems intuitively absurd.
Live Long and Prosper

I'm a Bish.


"Twilight isn't just about obtuse metaphors between cannibalism and premarital sex, it also teaches us the futility of hope." - Raisor

"[Bsh1] is the Guinan of DDO." - ButterCatX

Follow the DDOlympics
: http://www.debate.org...

Open Debate Topics Project: http://www.debate.org...
Osiris_Rosenthorne
Posts: 82
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/3/2014 12:47:31 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
I don't believe animals have rights. Hence, why I support the caging of conderpatives to be fattened for meat during the apocalypse! Mwahahaha xP In all seriousness though, I don't believe any life should be ended needlessly, and by need, I mean, in self defence,....or if the apocalypse does come and we have to fatten liberal tree huggers for meat xD
I probably hate everything you stand for - and on.
Stupidape
Posts: 171
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/31/2015 5:41:59 AM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 1/6/2014 2:52:57 PM, PotBelliedGeek wrote:
This is a forum to discuss Animal Rights in all incarnations, from extremities like poachers and PETA to marine mammal captivity and animal testing, and any other subjects that fall into this category.

I will make my own stance clear in summary here:

I am anti-PETA, pro-captivity. I have reservations on animal testing, but not entirely opposed. I hate poachers vehemently, and believe strongly in maintaining environmental health using public funds. I consider myself an animal lover.

Animals should have the same rights as a cardboard box. They are personal property, no different from a potted house plant. I'm of the opinion animals have too many rights as it is. Therefore, I am trying to reduce animal rights.

Social justice works incrementally. So, animal rights must be reduced slowly. The best way to do so is to get cats and dogs being served on the dinner table. Cats and dogs have too many rights in 1st world countries. Now I just need a way to figure out that goal.

Why am I against animal rights?

Simple a Star Trek episode called the Measure of a Man. Data, the inferior android of the two brothers, was asked to be dismantled. The episode revolved around if Data had the right to say no.

Anyways, nobody likes Data after they seen Lore. So we were all hoping Data would get dismantled. No, of course some how the inferior brother was saved in the dumbest court ruling I've ever heard.

Now think about it, if Data had been allowed to be dismantled and his brain uploaded a whole bunch of androids could have been created. Star Fleet would have been able to use these androids to finally rid their selves of the annoying Romulans.

But, nooooooooo Picard had to get too clever for his own good.

Now think of animals. If we give animal rights we will be lowering our human freedom. We will be limited in our animal testing capacity. We couldn't receive DHA and EPA omega-3s from fish. To top it off human pleasure seeking would be reduced.

No pigeon shoots, eating a juicy burger, fishing, etc. As I see it we would have nothing to gain and only lose freedom by giving rights to animals. Just as giving Data the right to choose deprived the Federation.

https://en.wikipedia.org...
bootsandjeans
Posts: 6
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/3/2015 12:34:25 AM
Posted: 1 year ago
I believe that animals should be treated as humanely as possible depending on the situation but I don't believe that they should have equal rights to that of human beings. For example, I grew up on my family's ranch and we had and still have cattle, horses, chickens, goats, and such on the ranch. It provided food for me growing up and income for my parents and still does. I grew up hunting and fishing and learned to respect wildlife but also appreciate when we take a life to feed ourselves. I've been riding horses and competing in rodeo since I was little girl and if left to some people every aspect of my upbringing and the things that i've grown to love would be banned.

There are obviously areas of factory farming and the like that needs to have more oversight and be ran more responsibly sure, but to give animals equal rights would cause a lot of human starvation, overpopulation of wildlife, and other negative impacts. It's ok if you want to live your life without eating meat and treating animals as equals to humans but by no means should it be forced onto others that depend on those animals for survival.
Let's go on down to the quick stop. Wear your yellow shades and i'll put on my tight jeans. And we'll just spend the weekend burnin' rubber, and we'll let em point and stare in disbelief.