Animal Cruelty

[All_In 0]

Oh my god, why does everything have to be us verses them? What do the conditions of chinese food production got a fcking thing to do with anything? Can't people make criticisms about the way things happen in America without so freaking jag off saying " Oh yeah.. well, if you don't like it, try see how you like it in Katmandu! You and all your pinko friends outta move there!" While I personally don't agree with the OP and don't give 2 craps about the humanity of food production, I think it's perfectly valid of him to see something he finds objectionable in American and strive to make a positive ( in his mind) change in it.

wow, honestly wasn't expecting u to say something like this. it's cool to know we can disagree, but still be somewhat civil.and man, katmandu! i'm canadian, but my background is nepalese! eerie...

[Miguel McHarris 0]

No, seriously.. what do the conditions of chinese food production have fck all to do with this conversation? Are you saying we should be trying to effect change in chinese food production, because it's worse there( because if effecting change in meat production in the US is hard, effecting it's change in China is next to impossible)? If not, what was the point you were trying to make?

The point that I'm trying to make is that it's largely ignored when this issue is brought up. Scroll through the entire thread, it hasn't even been mentioned, not once. We're arguing about killing chickens and cows yet nobody mentions dogs and cats being slaughtered for fur by Chinese and eastern European trade. China has an absolutely horrendous human and animal rights record. The only reason I called him out on that sentence was because well it was a dumb generalization. I could care less if somebody criticizes America, however you lessen the strength of your argument by making comments like that.

[BigDMcGee 3,352]

wow, honestly wasn't expecting u to say something like this. it's cool to know we can disagree, but still be somewhat civil.and man, katmandu! i'm canadian, but my background is nepalese! eerie...

Civility in my arguments isn't something I'm really known for.. I just find patriotic non sequitors more odious than anti meat arguments

[BigDMcGee 3,352]

The point that I'm trying to make is that it's largely ignored when this issue is brought up. Scroll through the entire thread, it hasn't even been mentioned, not once. We're arguing about killing chickens and cows yet nobody mentions dogs and cats being slaughtered for fur by Chinese and eastern European trade. China has an absolutely horrendous human and animal rights record. The only reason I called him out on that sentence was because well it was a dumb generalization. I could care less if somebody criticizes America, however you lessen the strength of your argument by making comments like that.

Cats and dogs being killed to me is the same thing as a pig or goat.. IE I don't care. Just because we think they are cute and cuddly doesn't make them in any meaningful way different than other mammals. Dogs are smarter than cows and dumber than pigs... we've just been conditioned to think of one as a companion and the other as bacon. China's human rights recond is a subject for another thread.. I in no way equate human rights abuses with animal rights abuses.

[Balloon guy 158]

Civility in my arguments isn't something I'm really known for.. I just find patriotic non sequitors more odious than anti meat arguments

Then move to Russia comrad

[Balloon guy 158]

What was that.. me recommending using market forces rather than government intervention to effect change? I've been reading too many Balloon guy posts before I go to bed, I think I'm getting hypnotized.

No..just growing upWHAMMY

[SilentSnow 1]

Cats and dogs being killed to me is the same thing as a pig or goat.. IE I don't care. Just because we think they are cute and cuddly doesn't make them in any meaningful way different than other mammals. Dogs are smarter than cows and dumber than pigs... we've just been conditioned to think of one as a companion and the other as bacon. China's human rights recond is a subject for another thread.. I in no way equate human rights abuses with animal rights abuses.

Unless you're just arguing for the sake of argument, I think it's well established that you dont care at all about animals. Just to get it on the record though, will you honestly answer this question- What price would you pay to know that the meat you eat has not been tortured or severely mistreated? I suppose you'd probably be tempted to say "not one penny" just to be consistent with the rest of your argument, but at least try to honestly think about it. Also, it is what you would pay, not what the theoretical American public might.Now for my real question- Why do you care about humans? Let's assume that it is just a random human, not someone you know.Yes, this is a serious question.

[chrozzo 19]

LOL...were you drunk?, or did you accidentally mix your meds?We were worried about you man!

lol...yeah i was a wee bit tipsy

[El Guapo 8]

lol...yeah i was a wee bit tipsy

Tipsy? Tipsy? You were typing in tounges, may when you get drunk you become a Pinacostle (SP?) reverend.

[chrozzo 19]

Tipsy? Tipsy? You were typing in tounges, may when you get drunk you become a Pinacostle (SP?) reverend.

LOL(i think its Pentecostal)

[BigDMcGee 3,352]

Unless you're just arguing for the sake of argument, I think it's well established that you dont care at all about animals. Just to get it on the record though, will you honestly answer this question- What price would you pay to know that the meat you eat has not been tortured or severely mistreated? I suppose you'd probably be tempted to say "not one penny" just to be consistent with the rest of your argument, but at least try to honestly think about it. Also, it is what you would pay, not what the theoretical American public might.Now for my real question- Why do you care about humans? Let's assume that it is just a random human, not someone you know.Yes, this is a serious question.

I would pay a little bit more, but it would have nothing to do with animal suffering. I often actually do buy organic and free range chickens, but it's because I think they taste better and for no other reason (well.. there could be other reasons too, like it being healthier, but I'm not convinced about all the organic meat being healthier hype yet) I think if you made food in a less industrial manner it would in general taste better and I am willing to pay more for taste, but the suffering of the animal is really incidental to me. If for some reason they came out with a chicken that tasted exquisite, but was made in a particularly cruel manner, I would eat that chicken up and sleep well at night. That's not how it currently works, how ever. The more industrial the chicken, the more tasteless the meat, unfortunately. I care about humanity in general because we think and reason, we are creative and imaginative. How much do I care about the suffering of a random guy who goes to a random job and does a random thing? Not much, to be honest. I think we should have laws to protect that random guy from suffering, because those laws also protect people I do care about, such as myself, friends and family. I think laws that protect people from suffering in general make the society a safer, happier place, and I'm all for that. I think people all the time lie about how much the suffering of others really matters to them. For example, Person Y might see a story on TV about Person X killed in some horrible manner and be shocked and disgusted... but the next minute Person Y is watching baseball and drinking a beer as if nothing happened. So really, in any real sense, Person X's suffering meant absolutely nothing to Person Y... Most people only care, only REALLY care ( as in willing to do something that snaps them out of their daily routine) about people whom they are close to. I'm just more honest about my apathy than most other people are.

[Zeatrix 0]

Your learning...there is hope for your yet. Give it a couple years and you will turn into a true capitalist.

And WHAM! I just realized that we have a liberal government now!!!You seem a little confused at times. There is nothing contradictory about being a capitalist in a socialist society. It's the same as being a capitalist in a conservative society or a liberal society. You are still a capitalist. When will you understand this simple fact?

[Zeatrix 0]

No..just growing upWHAMMY

Now what does growing up have to do with anything? Actually, I'd think growing up would make someone more mature, and more mature would probably mean that a person more and more realizes that greater things can be achieved together. Anyway, I still feel the market should be left alone as much as possible. There is just one glaring flaw with this system, the customers. If we lived in a world with perfect customers who make well thought out and responsible decisions a pure capitalistic society would be perfect. If people wouldn't buy goods that are harmful to both animals (incl humans) and the environment then the market would adjust appropriately. Now instead people prioritize money and entertainment over long term benefit and well being so the system doesn't work. This is exactly why government intervention is sometimes (far from always) warranted and sometimes necessary. Believing a pure free market is the best alternative is naive, as always, a compromise is preferable.Let me just present an example, since it matters to me a lot; CO2 emissions. Clearly a purely free market would not be able to solve this problem, if it was, we would have seen major changes a long time ago. Short term goals does not go well with long term problems. That's why it is necessary to enforce lower emissions worldwide instead of leaving it up to businesses.

[akoff 0]

There is nothing contradictory about being a capitalist in a socialist society.

[Petoria 0]

http://youtube.com/watch?v=XtWBuv9imxs

[Balloon guy 158]

Now what does growing up have to do with anything? Actually, I'd think growing up would make someone more mature, and more mature would probably mean that a person more and more realizes that greater things can be achieved together. Z, I hope it is just the fact that English is your 2nd language that makes you miss so many of these good jokes. Otherwise you are missing a funny gene in your DNA. Anyway, I still feel the market should be left alone as much as possible. There is just one glaring flaw with this system, the customers. If we lived in a world with perfect customers who make well thought out and responsible decisions a pure capitalistic society would be perfect. If people wouldn't buy goods that are harmful to both animals (incl humans) and the environment then the market would adjust appropriately. Now instead people prioritize money and entertainment over long term benefit and well being so the system doesn't work. This is exactly why government intervention is sometimes (far from always) warranted and sometimes necessary. Believing a pure free market is the best alternative is naive, as always, a compromise is preferable.You and I agree here, Aynny Rand was naive to think that pure capitalism is possible, just as Marx is about socialism. Unless you apply the sin nature of humans into the equation, your results will never meet your expectations. See how I stuck in a reference to God and the Bible there to make it seem you are in agreemant with Christianity, that there is a form of a joke also, designed to make you get defensive, but since we agreed, you can't get too defensive.Let me just present an example, since it matters to me a lot; CO2 emissions. Clearly a purely free market would not be able to solve this problem, if it was, we would have seen major changes a long time ago. Short term goals does not go well with long term problems. That's why it is necessary to enforce lower emissions worldwide instead of leaving it up to businesses.

The problem is that government's are just as flawed and capable of making the wrong choices, thereby resulting in worse results, take Freon for example. Big ozone hole scare, we switch from freon, to a more expensive less effective form of cooling, and only DOW chemical comes out ahead, because they no longer supply a cheap freon, now they suply the much more expensive alternative. And now the ozone hole theory is debunked for the most part. So government intervention only helped big business, and hurt the average man once again.

[BigDMcGee 3,352]

The problem is that government's are just as flawed and capable of making the wrong choices, thereby resulting in worse results, take Freon for example. Big ozone hole scare, we switch from freon, to a more expensive less effective form of cooling, and only DOW chemical comes out ahead, because they no longer supply a cheap freon, now they suply the much more expensive alternative. And now the ozone hole theory is debunked for the most part. So government intervention only helped big business, and hurt the average man once again.

Um.. it has? By whom?

[El Guapo 8]

Um.. it has? By whom?

Its been reported for years that the hole in the Ozone layer has always been there and that it is actually a vent to allow the earth to in essence "breathe".BTW I believe this, for the most part, since we can synthetically produce Ozone and use it for all types of stuff, like semiconductors and use it to purify drinking water.

[BigDMcGee 3,352]

Its been reported for years that the hole in the Ozone layer has always been there and that it is actually a vent to allow the earth to in essence "breathe".BTW I believe this, for the most part, since we can synthetically produce Ozone and use it for all types of stuff, like semiconductors and use it to purify drinking water.

As far as I know, the Ozone layer is continuing to be depleted, and CFC's ( IE Freon) are continuing to be the prime culprate

[SilentSnow 1]

I care about humanity in general because we think and reason, we are creative and imaginative. How much do I care about the suffering of a random guy who goes to a random job and does a random thing? Not much, to be honest. I think we should have laws to protect that random guy from suffering, because those laws also protect people I do care about, such as myself, friends and family. I think laws that protect people from suffering in general make the society a safer, happier place, and I'm all for that.I think people all the time lie about how much the suffering of others really matters to them. For example, Person Y might see a story on TV about Person X killed in some horrible manner and be shocked and disgusted... but the next minute Person Y is watching baseball and drinking a beer as if nothing happened. So really, in any real sense, Person X's suffering meant absolutely nothing to Person Y... Most people only care, only REALLY care ( as in willing to do something that snaps them out of their daily routine) about people whom they are close to. I'm just more honest about my apathy than most other people are.

So unless Im misinterpreting, the first paragraph is a roundabout way of saying "not one penny". The argument of the majority isnt valid, but it might be interesting to ask yourself why you are in all likelihood part of a tiny minority that would say this.So what about the people who dont think and arent creative? Is it ok to harm them? Also, I dont see how being smart makes your pain matter more than the pain of someone or something less intelligent. But unless you can prove that point, your whole argument falls apart. Also, is all morality just a protection racket to make sure that you yourself are protected? That doesnt sound very moral to me.I would say that much suffering is physiological. Anybody that ever tortures someone never bothers with any other sort of torture. Because of our neurological setup that still uses very primitive brain structures to experience pain, I think it is pretty well established that humans experience physiological pain in pretty similar ways to other mammals at least. So even if a cow isnt big on existential crisis', shouldnt we at least be concerned about it's physical pain that is in all likelihood very similar to ours?I pretty much agree with your third paragraph, although I should add that the general indifference hardly supports your assertion that humans should be treated on a separate moral plain than animals.I guess it's fortunate that a significant minority does better than the average person.

[BigDMcGee 3,352]

So unless Im misinterpreting, the first paragraph is a roundabout way of saying "not one penny". The argument of the majority isnt valid, but it might be interesting to ask yourself why you are in all likelihood part of a tiny minority that would say this.So what about the people who dont think and arent creative? Is it ok to harm them? Also, I dont see how being smart makes your pain matter more than the pain of someone or something less intelligent. But unless you can prove that point, your whole argument falls apart. Also, is all morality just a protection racket to make sure that you yourself are protected? That doesnt sound very moral to me.I would say that much suffering is physiological. Anybody that ever tortures someone never bothers with any other sort of torture. Because of our neurological setup that still uses very primitive brain structures to experience pain, I think it is pretty well established that humans experience physiological pain in pretty similar ways to other mammals at least. So even if a cow isnt big on existential crisis', shouldnt we at least be concerned about it's physical pain that is in all likelihood very similar to ours?I pretty much agree with your third paragraph, although I should add that the general indifference hardly supports your assertion that humans should be treated on a separate moral plain than animals.I guess it's fortunate that a significant minority does better than the average person.

Again, I'm not arguing that animals suffer a physical pain similar to ours, I'm merely saying I don't care about it's suffering. Is it "okay" to harm random people? It depends on what you mean by Okay. If you mean, is it "wrong" to hurt them, you're barking up the wrong tree with me there, because I don't really buy into an objective good and evil and right and wrong. Do you mean do you think it should be permitted to hurt some random US citizen? No, i don't think it should be permitted, but not really because I care specifically about that persons suffering, but because I do care about creating an atmostphere where I and people I do care about aren't made to suffer and that the society in general is a safe and stable one. Do you mean do I "care" about that person's pain? As I said before, not in any meaningful way.I'm not saying that being smart or creative makes your pain "matter" more.. I'm saying I personally care more about those people than other people, and seeming those people hurt and tourtured would be more likely to get me to act than the suffering of say, random Darfurians. I'm not arguing that mine is a "moral" way to view the world.. my philosophy is really very utilitarian and amoral. How ever, I think my out look is more in keeping with most people actions, if not what they purport to believe in.

[chrozzo 19]

you jsut love to argue dony you?

[BigDMcGee 3,352]

you jsut love to argue dony you?

about as much as you love to drink, buddy.

[BigDMcGee 3,352]

you jsut love to argue dony you?

To further expound on this, yes, I really, really do love to argue. Its how I test my beliefs and opinions.. if I get into a discussion with someone, defending or arguing one side of something, and I just get picked appart by someone, it makes me question the belief I had in the first place, and affects change in my opinions/beliefs. This is really how I became an atheist. I considered myself a christain all the way through college, but one of my best college friends was a recent atheist. He had been raised in a particularly loony branch of Xianity where you can't like to to the movies or what ever. His father was a minister in that church, so he'd grown up very religious. But towards the end of his high school career he had become very skeptical, and he decided to major in philosophy, in part to answer the question of god to himself. He became a very dyed in the wool, bitter towards xianity atheist, and we'd get into long, drawn out arguments about it.. where I really had nothing logical or reasonable to defend xianity with, only my faith. Eventually, faith in the supernatural just wasn't enough for me, and I became an atheist ( not a particularly happy conversion to me... existential atheism doesn't give you the comfort of life having meaning, and a better life after death that xianity does, and it's why It's probably such a tough sell to the masses of people). Though my realization was painful for me, in the end, I'm glad I opened my eyes and rejected faith in favor of reason, and it wouldn't have happened if I'd just told my friend " look, we'll have to just agree to disagree on this one".

[Zeatrix 0]

You still don't get it huh? You should read up on what socialism REALLY is, 'cause you really seem like you don't get it.

The problem is that government's are just as flawed and capable of making the wrong choices, thereby resulting in worse results, take Freon for example. Big ozone hole scare, we switch from freon, to a more expensive less effective form of cooling, and only DOW chemical comes out ahead, because they no longer supply a cheap freon, now they suply the much more expensive alternative. And now the ozone hole theory is debunked for the most part. So government intervention only helped big business, and hurt the average man once again.

About the jokes, it's a combination of two things, second language AND the fact that I've seen people write the most absurd things in here and be serious, so I just assume everyone is literate when they write something.I agree governments can make mistakes, every single entity can make mistakes. BUT, you are way off on the freon thing. The ozone whole has stopped expanding precisely for the reasons you bring up, a ban on CFCs is what stopped the hole from expanding further; just google it. The Montreal Protocol has been called "Perhaps the single most successful international agreement to date..."