The Animal Rights Thread

[Garvarg]

My dogs are property. I own them. If they had rights how could this be allowed?

If they had rights, shouldn't we heal the sick and injured instead of "putting them to sleep"?

If a dog has the right to food and shelter, why do we shoot wolves that want to live in our chicken coop? ( ok I don't have chickens but ya know what I mean)

"A dingo ate my baby" Thats ok mam, the dogs got a right to eat.

And do we protect one species of animal against another? Cats unite and picket until dogs give you the respect you desreve! !

We can't hurt 'em but we can eat 'em! !
Lobsters have a right to properly clarified butter!
Turkeys deserve 2 types of stuffing.
Lamb deserves real mint sauce, not that crappy american jelly.

These are true animal rights.

 

[Pillager]

"No, animals have no rights".

 

[MrPresident]

And to the insufferable Mr. President, insects are not animals.

I don't think I have been called that before, at least not within a few added words. Anyway if insects aren't animals then what the hell are they?

If they had rights, shouldn't we heal the sick and injured instead of "putting them to sleep"?...and the rest of what you said.

You know between two extremes there is a large grassy area known as the moderate zone. It is here that intelligent, reasonable dicussion takes place. I suggest you try and find another person who knows the way and ask them for directions.

If you can stand to watch the apparent pain, suffering and misery of those animals you find there

This sounds like you are personifying the animals. How do we know that animals suffer pain, and how do we know that if they do it affects them in the same way as us. Secondly, if you buy nike trainers should you go to the sweatshops to see them being made? If you use paper should you go see the destruction of the rainforest? If you drink water should you go into the sewage and see it being reprocessed? Thirdly, do plants have less rights than animals? If so, why? Fourthly, should we stop one animal eating another animal because of the "apparent pain, suffering and misery" or should only humans not inflict this on animals?

Rights are an invention of human compassion.

No they are not.

 

[WinstonJen]

Animals can feel pain because their brain structure is similar to ours, and they do have nerve endings so they can feel pain. Or are you just pretending to be hurt if you get shot? If animals get killed painlessly, that's fine by me.

 

[Maj]

How do we know that animals suffer pain, and how do we know that if they do it affects them in the same way as us.

Quick observations would tell you right away that an animal reacts to pain in similar ways as humans. The most common reactions to pain for animals are retaliation and and retreat. Now if you're asking if they "feel" pain in the same way we do, that's impossible to answer. How do know someone sees the colour blue in the same way as you?

Secondly, if you buy nike trainers should you go to the sweatshops to see them being made? If you use paper should you go see the destruction of the rainforest? If you drink water should you go into the sewage and see it being reprocessed?

Good point. I'll have to think on that one for a bit.

Thirdly, do plants have less rights than animals?

Like I said in my previous post, rights are value-based. Whether a plant should have rights or not cannot be given a scientific or objective response. There are some people out there, fruitopians(?), who feel no plant should be killed for any purpose. If the majority of people felt this way, then I'm quite certain plants would be treated quite differently and fall under some legal protection.

Fourthly, should we stop one animal eating another animal because of the "apparent pain, suffering and misery" or should only humans not inflict this on animals?

Value-based question again. And in terms of carnivore diet and ecological balance, of course not. I never implied that we stop all the pain, suffereing and misery in the world. I don't buy into impossible feats. Carnivores don't order out. They're doing what they MUST to survive, which means getting down and dirty with poor little Jack Rabbit.

Rights are an invention of human compassion.

No they are not.

Give me a good reason as to why they aren't and I'll probably turn around on that one. But as far as I could tell in my sleepy state last night...and even sleepier state this morning...it sounds sound to me.

Oh, and to whoever said insects are not animals, they are...from a taxonomical point of view.

 

[CrazyScientist]

Of course animals feel pain. And I'm sure it's painful when they are slaughtered, but probably far less painful then being killed and eaten by any other animal would be. Plus, they taste so damn good.
I think pet animals should have the right not to be abused. If you take an animal into your care, treating it with cruelty is just plain wrong.
As to cows, sheep, pigs etc. Well, we're not exactly talking about products of natural selection here. These animals are for all intents and purposes a human invention, bred for the soul purpose of making good food. They have the right to be broiled and served with garlic mashed potatoes & asparagus.
As to scientific experimentation. Go with it. I think testing on chimps is unethical because, well, they're practically human, but other than that, if there are potential benefits to us, and the animals are not treated more cruelly than necessary to obtain the data......
The cute factor is hugely important as well, as far as whether people give a crap or not. I kill hundreds of fruit fly embryos daily in my lab. The lab down the hall kills countless fish and frogs, but nobody complains. But when the neuroscience department does its vivisections on cute rodent brains, the activists get all grumpy (at least until one of their relatives is diagnosed with Alzheimer's or other neurological disorder).

 

[gr8ful wes]

"Rights are an invention of human compassion. "
My thoughts too, Maj

Humans invented rights. Animals are certainly deserving of respect, and ethical treatment. And I include insects/snakes in this too. Everything has a niche to fill, everything has a purpose.

Animals are not as important as humans if measured my human standards, but as far as our role in nature, we are all equal. Nature doesnt really value one over the other.

As many of you know, much of my recreation involves "harvesting" animals. ( I also spend a great deal of time observing, studying and appreciating them.) I feel like I am simply filling my biological role as a predator, and a provider for my family. I still treat the animal with respect, just like I would if I was raising them.

Regarding intelligence, that is also a human creation. Is a dog smarter than a pig? well one rolls around in sh*t, the other eats it so who knows. Most wild animals know enough to Identify and run away from danger which is more than I can say for many humans.

 

[MrPresident]

"Rights are an invention of human compassion. "

In my opinion rights are like gravity or evolution, they were always there it is just that it took us a long time to discover them. And even when we have discovered them some people still don't believe they exist.

Is a dog smarter than a pig? well one rolls around in sh*t, the other eats it so who knows.

I agreed that intelligence is an incredibly hard thing to define. But from what I have seen pigs are more intelligent than dogs. And they roll around in sh*t to get clean.

How do know someone sees the colour blue in the same way as you?

I ask them.

from a taxonomical point of view.

The best point of view if you ask me.

 

[gr8ful wes]

LONDON, England (Reuters) -- A squirrel is spreading terror in a Cheshire town where it keeps attacking people.

Its latest victim was a two-year-old girl, British newspapers reported on Thursday.

Children have been attacked, grown men chased and residents of Knutsford, central England, are fearful of letting their kids out to play, the Times newspaper said.

The rogue squirrel's latest attack was on toddler Kelsi Morley who was bitten on the forehead.

"It was awful because she (Kelsi) was spinning around and we couldn't get it off," her mother told the newspaper.

"From the amount of blood there was, I thought it had taken Kelsi's eye out."

The squirrel eventually let go and the terrified youngster was rushed to a doctor.

Colin Booty, a senior scientific officer in the Royal Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals, said it was very unusual for a squirrel to behave like this.

Local resident Blanche Kellye said the problem was not funny. "Everyone round here is living in fear...it's a vicious little thing. I'll never trust squirrels again."



What is the Right thing to do here? Who has the most Rights?

Have fun.

 

[Switch625]

Originally posted by MrPresident
I don't think I have been called that before, at least not within a few added words.

I hope you realize the "insufferable" remark was meant in good fun, and not as an insult.

Originally posted by MrPresident
Anyway if insects aren't animals then what the hell are they?

Insects. Okay, fine, insects are animals. I knew that. I said that to frame the idea that insects deserve only death. In my opinion, of course.

 

[MrPresident]

I hope you realize the "insufferable" remark was meant in good fun, and not as an insult.

Don't worry, I don't take anything you say seriously.

 

[Hitro]

Originally posted by MrPresident
Germans and their efficiency.

Answering them all in one would have been much more efficient, just think about the time it took me to produce all the quotes.
This was rather related to German precision.

What about pure fun and gambling?

You obviously never gambled, otherwise you'd know that it is included in "pure fun".

Humans have inalienable rights that are given them upon birth.

Says who?

How dare you! Dumbo should be place upon a shrine and worshipped. All hail Dumbo, his big earness. [MrPresident bows before computer screen]

When the President bows before his mental image of a cartoon elephant, does that indicate serious trouble?
Or is it still nothing against J. Edgar Hoover?

Yes.

I figure you prefer "Lassie" movies over those featuring "Babe"?

 

[Switch625]

Originally posted by MrPresident

Don't worry, I don't take anything you seriously.

What a curious statement. It seems oddly incomplete. Perhaps when you return, you will finish your thought.

 

[gr8ful wes]

My guess is that it is a play on words. Compliment his wit.

 

[MrPresident]

What a curious statement. It seems oddly incomplete. Perhaps when you return, you will finish your thought.

I have this strange tendiency of missing out.

My guess is that it is a play on words.

Me? Doing a play on words. Never.

Answering them all in one would have been much more efficient

Exactly.

You obviously never gambled, otherwise you'd know that it is included in "pure fun".

It is because I have gambled I know that it is not included in pure fun.

Says who?

Considering you were quoting me I am going to have a shot in the dark, me?

When the President bows before his mental image of a cartoon elephant, does that indicate serious trouble?

Depends which President you are talking about.

I figure you prefer "Lassie" movies over those featuring "Babe"?

No. Babe is English.

 

[gr8ful wes]

Thursday, 7 November, 2002, 11:53 GMT
Granddad guns down terror squirrel


When squirrels attack: Knutsford has been living in fear

A vicious squirrel which terrorised a Cheshire town has been shot dead by a grandfather seeking vengeance.
The animal had already attacked a man mowing his lawn and woman walking down the street, in Knutsford.

But when it sank its teeth into Kelsi Morley's face, her grandfather Geoff Horth decided to act.

He went out and killed it.


Grey squirrels are usually shy

Two-year-old Kelsi was attacked as she took a morning stroll with her mother.

She stopped to admire the squirrel before it pounced on her face and sank its teeth into her forehead.

Kelsi's mother Karen had to pin the girl to the floor and pull the animal off her face.

The youngster was left bleeding heavily from a deep gash.

Mr Horth said he was unrepentant about his vigilante action.

On Thursday his wife said: "When Geoff saw what had happened, he just wanted to put a stop to it.

"He said if it had bitten a child's face this time, what would it do next? He didn't want any more children getting hurt."

Community terrorised

She said her husband was sometimes asked by farmers to shoot vermin and was a good shot.

Mrs Horth added: "This squirrel had been terrorising people around here for weeks.

"After the attack on Kelsi, my daughter phoned the environmental health and the RSPCA but they didn't want to know."

It is thought the animal, which had a distinctive bald patch on its tail, may have been taken in as a pet and had lost its fear of people.

A spokeswoman for the RSPCA said it was unable to help "because in this instance it was not an animal which was being harmed, it was a child".

She added: "We have never heard of a case like this before. Even those tamer squirrels which are fed regularly in urban areas remain cautious of people."

There is such Balance in Nature

 

[Hitro]

Originally posted by MrPresident
It is because I have gambled I know that it is not included in pure fun.

Then it's probably not that much a question of "if", but rather one of "how"...

Considering you were quoting me I am going to have a shot in the dark, me?

Name?

Depends which President you are talking about.

Please elaborate.

 

[Steve Winer]

Yes, animals do have rights. ( For example: the right to not be abused, etc)

 

[MrPresident]

Name?

MrPresident. Occupation?...wait this isn't Mastermind.

Please elaborate.

There are more than one President in the world. Therefore there is not "the" President but "a" President. I elaborate further but that would involve me insulting your intelligental capacity...further.

 

[Hitro]

Originally posted by MrPresident
There are more than one President in the world. Therefore there is not "the" President but "a" President. I elaborate further but that would involve me insulting your intelligental capacity...further.

Why not "the" President? Maybe it indicates serious trouble no matter which President does it?