Tiddles - deadly

[old.user4556]

and DMW - not a flame question here, but do you wear leather shoes?

Heh, I was going to put that point forward but I thought it was close to the bone .

I have come across someone in life who was very "pro-animal", yet had a suede handbag. Hypocracy . Drifting from topic tho, apologies.

G

 

[Lazarus]

like I said DMW - it WASNT a flame question.

Ive seen that SOOOO mny times - folk blubbering on about how proud they are to be vegetarians and thats its morally wrong o eat meat, as the pull on theuir leather gloves, tuck in their suede jacket and zip up their knee length boots.

As for me, its a similar choice as religion.

if you CHOOSE to be religious, then best of luck to you, just dont try forcing opinions on me or youll end up with a sore face.

Same goes for vegetarians. You CHOOSE to be a vegetarian, so enjoy your selection of food. Meanwhile leave me in peace to enjoy my steak since I CHOOSE to eat meat.

 

[Deadmanwalking]

like I said DMW - it WASNT a flame question.

Ive seen that SOOOO mny times - folk blubbering on about how proud they are to be vegetarians and thats its morally wrong o eat meat, as the pull on theuir leather gloves, tuck in their suede jacket and zip up their knee length boots.

As for me, its a similar choice as religion.

if you CHOOSE to be religious, then best of luck to you, just dont try forcing opinions on me or youll end up with a sore face.

Same goes for vegetarians. You CHOOSE to be a vegetarian, so enjoy your selection of food. Meanwhile leave me in peace to enjoy my steak since I CHOOSE to eat meat.

Like i said, i wasn't. And never have. I will however tell you to fuck right off if you start up with the whole "It's unatural, animals exist to be eaten - bad health etc etc yada yada" bullshit.

 

[Lazarus]

I will however tell you to fuck right off if you start up with the whole "It's unatural, animals exist to be eaten - bad health etc etc yada yada" bullshit.

Wouldnt even consider saying that m8 cos I know youve already said that :

But the point is we don't "NEED" to eat meat anymore. Someone earlier made a reference to cave men. They did need to eat meat for survival.

We are at the point now where we can live without the need for meat. And so killing the animal to eat becomes a "want".

Not to mention we breed animals purely to be killed for food anyway.

i eat meat cos I enjoy it.

 

[Deadmanwalking]

i eat meat cos I enjoy it.

Glad to hear it. Still only a want, rather then a need however.

But hey i WANT alot of things. Won't make em worng

 

[Stazbumpa]

Eating meat is a "need" as it contains all the shit we need to survive, fab source of protein etc etc. Also there are quite a few species that would be extinct if it wasn't for eating the meat they turn into when they die.
The only reason they exist is because they are farmed.

My beef (excuse the pun) is with hunting. IE: anyone who gains pleasure from killing something needs their head testing. And when the yanks go hunting, that pisses me off even more. They get drunk and think its hilarious to blow away something like a rabbit with a fucking elephant gun.
Hunting for food is fine, but we really don't need to do that these days do we. Lurking in the freezer section at Co-op is a survival of the fittest test in itself.

 

[throdgrain]

Staz - agreed .

This thread is now closed for me.

 

[Stazbumpa]

I still say me and you were separated at birth or something

 

[Lazarus]

yeah - and you got the looks........










































and the brains!!!!

 

[Trem]

Eating meat is a "need" as it contains all the shit we need to survive, fab source of protein etc etc.

Aye, thats why we have toothymegs.

 

[Damini]

Ok, I find alot of this stuff quite offensive, not just the it's ok to kill animals because they aren't sentient but also the view that people that disagree with that are arm chair protesters. I was vegetarian for eight years in total, and I'm not any more. That's my morals I have to come to terms with, my decisions. People that are vegetarian and wear leather shoes, well, they are doing their part towards a cause they feel about, and there's no reason why there should be any high defining morality, an overall EITHER DO OR DO NOT. You behave according to what sits comfortably with your moral and ethical code, and that's personal.

My personal view is that all animals have basic desires and needs. We all feel hunger, and if we kill to satisfy that hunger then that's nature, as long as you can understand these actions and can justify them to yourself. We are after all carnivores, and part of the food chain. We don't *need* meat to live, but we are designed to include meat in our diet.

All humans have a need for entertainment, and if they kill to satisfy that need then I find that disturbing. I honestly don't believe Tom can really believe what he says, comparing the death of a tree or a plant to the death of an animal. There is a marked emotional difference between snapping a branch and snapping the neck of a cat, and if there genuinely isn't an emotional difference then that indicates a psychopathic nature. And I very much doubt our Tom's a psychopath.

Edit:// I think this argument is very much like the old "if violence is acceptable in computer games, then should rape be too" thread. If you disagree, you do so intuitively and at such a level that it's hard to explain to someone who agrees why you feel this way, because it's so emotive and a core aspect of your personality. People are never going to be persuaded the other view point either way, because it's part of your moral make up which doesn't change after reading a single thread on a online forum.

 

[Rubber Bullets]

You behave according to what sits comfortably with your moral and ethical code, and that's personal.

We don't *need* meat to live, but we are designed to include meat in our diet.

All humans have a need for entertainment, and if they kill to satisfy that need then I find that disturbing. I honestly don't believe Tom can really believe what he says, comparing the death of a tree or a plant to the death of an animal. There is a marked emotional difference between snapping a branch and snapping the neck of a cat, and if there genuinely isn't an emotional difference then that indicates a psychopathic nature. And I very much doubt our Tom's a psychopath.

Well yes and no Damini, at least for me.

In the same way that you say we are designed to eat meat, but we can choose not to we could also say that we are historically designed as hunters and can also choose to do that, or not.

In reading this thread it has occured to me that I have certainly shot and killed more of gods creatures than the huge majority of people here. Before I get jumped all over I'll put that in perspective.

I grew up in the country, I owned an air rifle, and had occasional use of a 12-bore. I lived on a small holding where we kept chickens, ducks, goats etc. During that time I shot rooks and crows that took the animal feed, and rabbits that took crops on the surrounding farms as well as vegetables from our garden, (My parents went through a bit of a self-sufficiency thing in the 70's, very 'Good Life') I also shot the rats that took the eggs before we could.

This killing was out of necessity, but of course it was futile; it is impossible to kill enough rats to make a difference, and the same goes for the others really. There is also the undeniable fact that a well placed head shot, resulting in a clean kill gave me pleasure, does that make me a psychopath? Most people on this forum will have experienced the pleasure of a well aimed one shot kill, though most, clearly, only in simulation. It is however true that the satisfaction gained is very similar.

What it all comes down to is, as Damini says, whatever sits comfortably with your own moral and ethical code. A huge amount of it will come down to childhood experiences, what was considered right or wrong by your parents and peers during your most impressionable years.

As far as the video that started this all off, I didn't see it, but find the killing of creatures such as lions fro 'sport' abhorrent. I am also aware, for the reasons above, that this view is simply a cultural one, and probably very common in this country, but that around the world there will be many cultures who regard that sort of behavior as normal. We all want to believe that our views are correct, and that everyone who doesn't agree is a heathen, but I don't think we really have that right.

RB

 

[old.user4556]

Great post RB.

Damini, saying that we don't need meat, is like saying we don't need sex - whilst technically true, it's such an absurd situation to me to have no meat or sex that I'd have to say, sorry but i *do* need meat. Without eating meat, i'd be incredibly unhappy with my diet and I'd end up like these moaning people on the TV that have been unhappy all their lives because of their diet (you know the types, they can't eat certain things because it makes them obese etc).

G

 

[GekuL]

I've said it once already, but I've seen the same argument used afterwards. There is a lot of difference between killing an animal for pure enjoyment, in such a way that the animal is injured many times before finally dying, and just killing it. Like I said, it is not the killing that is the problem. If there is a need to kill the animal, then I don't mind - and if that's the case, it is normally done humanely.

To answer the tree/animal question; some of you are getting in to the soul question that I don't think has been answered by anyone - what makes us sentient? That we are just chemical processes is hard to believe, but what I believe is true.
On a biological level, when the average person observes pain in another (even in an abstract way), the same emotional regions that are involved when we experience pain ourselves are used. It's called empathy. I assume the same applies to animals, the more we can relate to them, the more we are affected. Our relationship with the animal would also have an effect, I think Tom would care a lot more about the death of an animal if I found his cat shitting in my garden and shot it.
This would explain why we instictively put more significance to animals (mammals most of all), but doesn't give any logical reasoning to our value of life.
To suggest that we are just a group of chemical processes and therefore not much different to trees is taking a very simple approach to the argument. The biggest difference is how an animal interacts. The lion in the video clearly showed survival instinct, they have social groups, personalities. Yes, these are governed by biological processes also, but a much more complicated series of them. Does these mean it deserves life more? It's as good a reason as any. The legalities are irrelevant, as I can say everyone here is goverened by a complicated set of processes, and therefore no more deserving of life than a tree, but I would expect you to disagree.

As to whether I am allowed an opinion; am I to join a daily mail style lynch mob against peodophiles in order to think molesting children is bad?

 

[Damini]

I wasn't saying the killing makes you a psychopath RB, but if you make no differentiation between breaking a stick or killing a dog, then that does. Tom's post made it seem like if he had the choice between burning a puppy or a bundle of wood to keep warm, the only deciding factors would be which would burn longest and warmest, because the life is irrelevent.

 

[Tom]

No I'm not a psychopath. My cat's deaths would matter hugely to me, because I've formed a personal relationship with them, and would miss them terribly should anything happen to them. If I saw somebody else's cat being mistreated, then I'd ring the RSPCA and tell them about it, because that person would most likely be a danger to others. Hunting normally takes place within a more controlled environment.

I don't have a problem with hunting, like I've said, I couldn't give a stuff. I do find it a bit distasteful, but if my neighbour invited me out one night to shoot rabbits, I'd probably have a go, just for the experience. I don't know if I'd enjoy it, probably not, I've fired air rifles on a target range and it didn't really do anything for me. If the hunt was for food, then I'd definitely be up for it.

On the same note, I know what goes on in abattoirs, and again, I really don't care. I just want my meat, and thats that. So what if the Cows don't like it, they're there to provide me with food, which I enjoy, and I'm perfectly happy with my morals on that point.

As for the whole tree/animal thing, well I think you need to discuss the principles and try and draw a line in the sand before you start debating the finer points of who has the right to do what to each other, which is why I brought it up. Somebody raised a valid point about need vs want, well, we don't need to spray fly spray on insects that annoy us, but we certainly want to. We don't need to hunt animals, but other people want to. If what they do harms no other, than I say let them do it.

So far as the fox hunting debate goes, I don't live in the country, and I don't fully understand how foxes interact with livestock and wildlife, so I'm not going to critisise them for doing something which has been going on for quite a few centuries now.

 

[Tom]

PS if it was a life threatening choice between burning wood, or a puppy, then I'd burn the puppy, because otherwise I'd have to feed it, which would mean less food for me. Also, I could eat the puppy, which would let me live longer.

 

[Damini]

Such lies.

 

[old.user4556]

nice one

 

[Tom]

Such lies.

Sorry

 

[Gumbo]

RB's background sounds a lot like mine, however my parents were never really into the good life thing.

I have, however, done a lot of shooting in my life. Not so much pheasants as that is purely a sport thing, but often pigeon culls when they get out of hand in the area, and more recently rabbits as the immunity to myxamatosis has increased.

I've held a shotgun license for many years, and have been using one since I believe I was about 8 years old. Maybe this is why, whilst I wasn't impressed by the lack of skill and general unprofessionalism shown in the video. I wasn't so much shocked by the barbarity of it as so many here seem to have been. Having said that I would never even consider going on that sort of a hunt for one second.

I do find a certain satisfaction in making a good shot, and after 20 years I like to think that if the shot is not a good one, I won't take it. So hopefully that helps with the, 'if you have to kill, do it humanely' arguments.

Nowadays I do very little, mainly an early morning of rabbits a few times a year in mine or a neighbours garden, when they start to decimate the vegetable plots. I do remember however shooting in excess of a hundred pigeons one winter morning a few years ago. These were then sold to a local game dealer at 15p a bird, just enough to cover the cartridges. This might cover the 'killing to eat' arguments, maybe.

In this example, you need to understand the decimation 100 pigeons can cause to a wheat field, with my tongue firmly held in my cheek here, I'll point out that if the birds eat all the vegetables, what are the veggies going to eat?

I understand both points of view, and I wouldn't try to ram my thoughts down anyones throats, I just hope I can point out why some people shoot the fluffy bunny rabbits etc.

There are alternatives to controlling the rabbit population, an animal, I might point out that is not indigenous to these shores. But myxxie is a horrible way to go, and cyanide down the rabbit holes holds so many other dangers, it would not be my weapon of choice either.

There we go, I've rambled long enough.

edit:// indigeous???? I usually take such care with my spellnig too.

 

[Doomy]

Myxamatosis was a god awful thing that humans did. I remember caring for a rabbit when i was little that we found in the garden, eyes all puffed out, heavy breathing pussy (pussee) face. We kep it in a cardboard box in the garage till it died. After 3 days of not moving and feeding it milk and rabbit food. Parents never told me what it was. Was awful.

And also, i still dont understand why hunting is considered sport as usually both parties involved in sports know what is going on and its meant to be competitive . I dont have any real beliefs on what should and shouldnt die but as far as i am concerned, if its cute, rare, impressive or fluffy, killing it bad. Common sense to me.

Hunting by animals is instinct, hunting for humans is hobby. I dont believe it is ok for us to do as we can descriminate. We have the choice.

 

[GekuL]

...with my tongue firmly held in my cheek here, I'll point out that if the birds eat all the vegetables, what are the veggies going to eat?

lol

 

[Scouse]

Sorry

I'm sorry but you people have waaayyyyyyy too much time on your hands..



Fucking ROFL tho

 

[Bullitt]

Ok i haven't read all of the posts but got a general idea, basically i wouldn't say hunting for vaild reasons is wrong. The definitions of those 'valid reasons' however is subjective and you can argue about them until your blue in the face.

I think what's so disturbing in the clip is that 1) they seem to take so much pleasure in killing the thing and 2) the possibility that they'll have taken flights, paid money and trained in firing a weapon just to shoot this giant cat. I mean ffs go buy a hooker and have more fun with that tbh (just shooting different loads at them afaik)

Furthermore, if you can't distinguish between flies, lions and monkeys then you should add humans into the mix too. Afterall we're probably the worst animal of all and some actually might deserve to be hunted...simply because we have the intelligence to know better.

 

[Mazling]

The latest posts on this thread have *merely* been the worry that people who hunt animals for fun - sport - might just end up treating humans the same way. Sadly, it's been glaringly obvious in this thread people have shown great differences in what they consider right and wrong and as such validates the threat. I doubt the existence of empirical/divine right and wrong, and I'm only really worried about people making rational and not totally unfeeling choices, and am resigned to the fact that lots of different people are going to experience very different things from either end of the scale.

I also believe that there should be FAR LESS B****Y PUPPY BURNING PICTURES ON THE FORUM!! Only the an argument about cruelty had via the internet could end up generating this kind of madness.

 

[xane]

I find it amazing the implication that vegetarianism is not cruel to animals, as opposed to meat-eating.

All food is grown on cultivated land nowdays, whether its vegetables or cattle, and that land has been taken away from the natural habitat of animals for the purposes of agriculture, this applies to everything from the dawn of civilization, from the homestead farmer in Africa to the big multinational agri-business.

We don't even need to stop at food, the same applies to tobacco (and dope), cotton, coffee and tea of all herbal kinds. Even the cities we build and the road inbetween them have vast environmental impacts that cause animal suffering at some level.

Agriculture is the biggest single environmental disaster driven by human need, all this stuff about animal cruelty is meaningless, it's just a line in sand drawn appropriate to political concerns. Hunting or a slaughterhouse is only a slightly elevated form of "cruelty" and very direct one, but animals can be killed in many indirect ways and it's cruel all the same.

Animals suffer and die when their habitat is taken from them, they eventually go extinct when it all dissappears, it might not be as quick and easy as a bullet in the head, but it kills all the same.

If you really want to think about it, just being born human is "being cruel to animals"

 

[leggy]

A well put post there xane. A breath of fresh air from the usual broken down record around here.

*bumps reputation*

 

[Deadmanwalking]

Free Humans!

 

[Panda On Smack]

So, what we talking about? Tiddlywinks?