The same happens in F1. So complaining about Hamilton aggresive manouvres also applies to this example.Pandamasque wrote:Just a point. Nature is a cruel system. Animals kill other animals to eat, just like the two-legged relatively more intelligent animals called humans.
No. F1 has written regulations. Everything else is BS.Belatti wrote:The same happens in F1. So complaining about Hamilton aggresive manouvres also applies to this example.
No, the biggest difference between humans and predators is that we think, while they only follow instincts. That is why we... sorry - some of us, care for the kids that are not our own, why we heal the ill instead of leaving them to die, why we give to charity, and why we have ethical barrier when it matters killing for food, clothing or medical experiments.Pandamasque wrote:Just a point. Nature is a cruel system. Animals kill other animals to eat, just like the two-legged relatively more intelligent animals called humans.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WYbjnPvk6uE
think about it for awhile.
If that's not explicit enough to imagine the pain they go through, you can find lots of cute cuddly baby animals being killed by predators on youtube.
The biggest difference between us and other predators is that most of us don't actually have to slaughter our food personally.
OK, this sounds right. I agree with it.manchild wrote: People are into constant evolution of their civilizational level, and vegetarianism is just a phase to veganism. Just compare animal rights and human rights evolution in the past half century. It is a parallel process.
Don't get me wrong. I'm not imposing, just preaching. I was also learned to eat meat, and I've enjoyed it for over 30 years before ethical reasons forced me to quit eating and wearing leather. It is absolutely pointless to force someone to become vegetarian or vegan. It has to be self-derived.Belatti wrote:OK, this sounds right. I agree with it.
However I will keep eating meat.
Tapeworm.manchild wrote:
I can't agree. Pick an apple, eat it, throw away the seed, and it will grow to another plant just as it would if it dropped from the branch all by itself. Same thing would happen if you'd digest the seed and poop on fertile soil. Name me one animal that you can eat and that it can continue life-cycle afterwards.
Since when did intelligence become the defining issue one whether something can be eaten or not?There also isn't any proof of intelligence within plants, as well as emotions, most of all the senses. On the other side, IQ of animals can be measured. Pigs you've mentioned, have greater IQ than 3 y.o. child.
My view is that the animal should be given a good life and a quick death so that suffering is minimised. That seems only fair to me, indeed, in my view it is part of the 'bargain' we make when we eat them.The fear, the pain and the agony they go trough when being killed by a butcher gun, or slaughtered to meet Halal, is therefore equal to what the child of that age would feel if it was being killed.
Think about what? 3 year old children?
That's problems in your analysis - you are self-centric. It is fair to you because it suits you. You don't think further than that. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MachiavellianismJust_a_fan wrote:That seems only fair to me...
MC, you cannot draw the same analogy here and that statement is not quite correct. They were obliged to sit at the back of the bus or give up their seat on demand by a white person.manchild wrote:Just compare animal rights and human rights evolution in the past half century. It is a parallel process. 50 years ago a black person had no right to drive in same bus with white in the US.
Also incorrect unless no one person had any right to abuse any other person, unless by 'blacks', you meant to imply they are not people (thats not to say it did not and does not happen)Nowadays, people go to jail if abusing animals, 50 years ago people had the right to abuse blacks if they wanted to...
I am not sure I agree with this because when this was not the case, there were fewer vegetarians than there are now. I have met adult human beings who have no idea where or how the meat they eat get to the supermarket or comes from the cow, goat or chicken the see when they happen to pass though or vist the country. I have no problems with people who eat meat or people who slaughter said meat. What I have a problem with is people would kill just for the sake of it, eg for sport.manchild wrote:If people were forced to slaughter and chop the animals all by themselves, most of them would not eat eat.
I agree with most of that, but this is quite different from the 'ethics' of one animal killing another for food.Industrial farming is killing the planet, also, if soil used for production of cattle food was used for rye for instance, there's be no hunger on planet.
Would that mean it's ok to eat predators?manchild wrote:
No, the biggest difference between humans and predators is that we think, while they only follow instincts.
Altruism for other humans is not the same as not eating animals. The reason we look after other humans is because they do the same for us. Try standing in front of a hungry lion and saying "I don't eat animals so don't eat me" and see how far it gets you.That is why we... sorry - some of us, care for the kids that are not our own, why we heal the ill instead of leaving them to die, why we give to charity, and why we have ethical barrier when it matters killing for food, clothing or medical experiments.
Sadly some people used to think of non-europeans as 'less than human'. Happily that is no longer the case.People are into constant evolution of their civilizational level, and vegetarianism is just a phase to veganism. Just compare animal rights and human rights evolution in the past half century. It is a parallel process. 50 years ago a black person had no right to drive in same bus with white in the US. Nowadays, people go to jail if abusing animals, 50 years ago people had the right to abuse blacks if they wanted to...
Now here I agree with you 100% - it is one of our society's great hypocracies in my view.manchild wrote: If people were forced to slaughter and chop the animals all by themselves, most of them would not eat meat. Industrialization is the biggest obstacle in human development, since the potential is there, 99% of people would puke if they'd ever seen how slaughter looks like, but they never did, since they by processed meat in the supermarkets.
