What gives us the right to eat other creatures?
- Thread starter Trigger1286
- Start date
Trigger, I don't know about you but I'm a vegan and therefore don't utilise anything which contains animal products. I made that choice because I used to work in the fringes of the farming industry, saw a lot of horrible things, and disagree with the way in which animals are reared just to be exploited.
All of this food chain stuff is pretty irrelevant as being human we have a choice whether to eat meat or otherwise and can grasp a concept of morals and ethical issues; animals don't possess that ability. Fact is that we no longer need to eat animals to survive.
For most people it seems a lot easier to simply stick with what they're used to rather than make the change. I don't know what it's like in the USA but in the UK it isn't too difficult to live as a vegan, you just need to shop around a bit more. For vegetarians it is even easier.
All of this food chain stuff is pretty irrelevant as being human we have a choice whether to eat meat or otherwise and can grasp a concept of morals and ethical issues; animals don't possess that ability. Fact is that we no longer need to eat animals to survive.
For most people it seems a lot easier to simply stick with what they're used to rather than make the change. I don't know what it's like in the USA but in the UK it isn't too difficult to live as a vegan, you just need to shop around a bit more. For vegetarians it is even easier.
So how do you manage without the essentials missing in plant foods?
Trigger1286,
Before asking such a rediculous question, perhaps you should do some research into the subject....
Try reading...."Eat Us, Sure, Why Not"...by Archibald "Sheepfucker" Dolittle, cousin of the famous Dr. Dolittle, and yes he can talk to animals also....
Archie did extensive research dealing with this exact subject. He asked animals on 6 continents ( He didn't wish to go to Antartica, He said it was too fucking cold just to talk to some fucking penguins).
He talked to the Birds, Animals and Fish and found out that they had no problem going to the dinner table of humans. They understood all that dominate species shit. They even went so far as to vote amongst themselves and nominated certain members to be the main course choices...
The following were the top vote getters in each category:
Birds...
1. chickens ( because they can't fly and they could never get revenge on the rest of the birds because of it)
2.turkeys ( because they are just so fucking ugly)
Animals:
1. Cows ( because they are so dumb and would never know a thing.....except in India, where there is a suspicion of ballot stuffing, even though it has never been proven)
2. Pigs (well, because they ARE pigs and are an embarassment to all the animals)
3.Sheep ( most think they were voted in out of jealousy)
Fish...
1. These guys were the wise asses of the animal world...they voted to pick anyone we could catch (this was before the time of fishing with nets, and they just figured that anyone of them stupid enough to be caught by a hook deserved it)
so you see, if you had done just a little research you would not have asked this question....
Bear
Before asking such a rediculous question, perhaps you should do some research into the subject....
Try reading...."Eat Us, Sure, Why Not"...by Archibald "Sheepfucker" Dolittle, cousin of the famous Dr. Dolittle, and yes he can talk to animals also....
Archie did extensive research dealing with this exact subject. He asked animals on 6 continents ( He didn't wish to go to Antartica, He said it was too fucking cold just to talk to some fucking penguins).
He talked to the Birds, Animals and Fish and found out that they had no problem going to the dinner table of humans. They understood all that dominate species shit. They even went so far as to vote amongst themselves and nominated certain members to be the main course choices...
The following were the top vote getters in each category:
Birds...
1. chickens ( because they can't fly and they could never get revenge on the rest of the birds because of it)
2.turkeys ( because they are just so fucking ugly)
Animals:
1. Cows ( because they are so dumb and would never know a thing.....except in India, where there is a suspicion of ballot stuffing, even though it has never been proven)
2. Pigs (well, because they ARE pigs and are an embarassment to all the animals)
3.Sheep ( most think they were voted in out of jealousy)
Fish...
1. These guys were the wise asses of the animal world...they voted to pick anyone we could catch (this was before the time of fishing with nets, and they just figured that anyone of them stupid enough to be caught by a hook deserved it)
so you see, if you had done just a little research you would not have asked this question....
Bear
Hi Crazy Nuts, I assume your question was for me?
It's pretty impossible to eat something which has not been living at some point but it's a question of drawing the line. Personally, I look at it like this: if I kill it, is it going to feel pain? For animals the answer is yes, for plants and the like no.
Sometimes some people have a problem with vegans and attempt to say 'well, you're eating something that's alive'. Fact is, meat eaters contribute to the consumption of more plants simply through the fact that their food, when alive, tends to eat plants. Take cows for example.
So what do I eat? A lot of veg, fruit, nuts, pulses, certain pasta, cereals and soya based products such as tofu. I also take daily supplements which are vegan friendly.
It's pretty impossible to eat something which has not been living at some point but it's a question of drawing the line. Personally, I look at it like this: if I kill it, is it going to feel pain? For animals the answer is yes, for plants and the like no.
Sometimes some people have a problem with vegans and attempt to say 'well, you're eating something that's alive'. Fact is, meat eaters contribute to the consumption of more plants simply through the fact that their food, when alive, tends to eat plants. Take cows for example.
So what do I eat? A lot of veg, fruit, nuts, pulses, certain pasta, cereals and soya based products such as tofu. I also take daily supplements which are vegan friendly.
Supplements eh? I take it that's for the mineral department?
Well, as long as you can keep it balanced, still not for me.
Well, as long as you can keep it balanced, still not for me.
in a few words, the answer to this simple question is : "the instinct of self-preservation"
maybe the question could be : "What gives us the right to kill other creatures without any purpose? :hatsoff:
maybe the question could be : "What gives us the right to kill other creatures without any purpose? :hatsoff:
The question is NOT "what gives us the right to kill other animals for food?"
As explained in the last 2 pages that would be a silly irrational question. I don't know if you are aware of it or not, but you actually did ask the right question, which no one has addressed yet.
the question is, "What gives us the right to devalue life and think of it in terms of a product?"
We give ourselves that right because we think that we are superior to animals and whatever we do is justified as long as it benefits us, and that everything in the world should exist soley to benefit us.
Animals kill other animals for food. Animals do not devalue life and think of it in terms of a product.
Animals will kill another animal in their territory that they perceive as a threat, even if it does not attack them. They will not kill another animal outside of their territory. Only we do this.
Animals will kill another animal that is trying to take it's food. They will not kill another animal that is not trying to take it's food, even if that animal lives off the same food supply, and will try to take it later. Only we do this.
Animals will kill another animal and eat it when they are hungry. They will not kill another animal when they are not hungry. Only we do this.
An animal will take food away from another animal when they are hungry. they will not try to take food away from another animal when they are not hungry. Only we do this.
An animal does not think that it is superior to any other animal. It lives in a balance among the other animals.
The reason for this is because they all obey the laws of competition. these are not laws like we have. our laws are just things that people made up and whether or not they are based on proven principles or whether or not they work is irrelevant. a natural law like the law of competition is a law because it was formed through trial and error over thousands or millions of years and it is followed because it is what works best.
The reason that this law works best is because it creates a lifestyle that is consistently sustainable.
Survival of the fittest is a cultural myth of ours. A lion can kill a gazelle, and in fact, among animals that live off of gazelles for food, no other animal can compete with the abilities of the lion. So the lion is obviously the most fit species ... so shouldn't that mean all the other creatures have a reduced chance of survival? there is no shortage of gazelle, they have no problem surviving, they are not going anywhere, and the other animals that compete with the lion for food, they are all thriving as well.
Survival is dependent on competition. Any animal that cease to obey the laws of competition reduces it's own chances of survival, because it creates a lifestyle that is not sustainable.
If lions did what we humans do and imaged that they were superior to all other animals and the laws of competition did not apply to them then two things would happen.
They would kill all the animals that competed with them for food, so that they were the only one's that had food. And then they would kill all the competitors of their food's food. they would make a world with only grass and gazelles and lions. Sounds pretty good for the lions right?
The problem is that they have reduced their chances of survival down to virtually zero. Any change at all in this system will wipe them out. If there is a famine or a drought and the grass dies, the gazelle die, the lions die. end of story.
Also with no competition their reproduction rate goes through the roof. They made more lions which eat more gazelle, until there is not enough gazelle to feed the lions. they will not stop at this point because they believe that they are superior, that the laws of competition do not apply to them.
As it stands for us right now the number one cause of death worldwide amonst humans is starvation. The process through which we produce our food and subsequently through which the same attitude is applied to all other facts of our existence, we kill everything else that is not our food. Since the laws of competition apply to us and our food, even if we think they don't, eventually we will have wiped out all the other species and conditions that are necessary for the growth of plants, which means our food dies, which means we die.
As explained in the last 2 pages that would be a silly irrational question. I don't know if you are aware of it or not, but you actually did ask the right question, which no one has addressed yet.
the question is, "What gives us the right to devalue life and think of it in terms of a product?"
We give ourselves that right because we think that we are superior to animals and whatever we do is justified as long as it benefits us, and that everything in the world should exist soley to benefit us.
Animals kill other animals for food. Animals do not devalue life and think of it in terms of a product.
Animals will kill another animal in their territory that they perceive as a threat, even if it does not attack them. They will not kill another animal outside of their territory. Only we do this.
Animals will kill another animal that is trying to take it's food. They will not kill another animal that is not trying to take it's food, even if that animal lives off the same food supply, and will try to take it later. Only we do this.
Animals will kill another animal and eat it when they are hungry. They will not kill another animal when they are not hungry. Only we do this.
An animal will take food away from another animal when they are hungry. they will not try to take food away from another animal when they are not hungry. Only we do this.
An animal does not think that it is superior to any other animal. It lives in a balance among the other animals.
The reason for this is because they all obey the laws of competition. these are not laws like we have. our laws are just things that people made up and whether or not they are based on proven principles or whether or not they work is irrelevant. a natural law like the law of competition is a law because it was formed through trial and error over thousands or millions of years and it is followed because it is what works best.
The reason that this law works best is because it creates a lifestyle that is consistently sustainable.
Survival of the fittest is a cultural myth of ours. A lion can kill a gazelle, and in fact, among animals that live off of gazelles for food, no other animal can compete with the abilities of the lion. So the lion is obviously the most fit species ... so shouldn't that mean all the other creatures have a reduced chance of survival? there is no shortage of gazelle, they have no problem surviving, they are not going anywhere, and the other animals that compete with the lion for food, they are all thriving as well.
Survival is dependent on competition. Any animal that cease to obey the laws of competition reduces it's own chances of survival, because it creates a lifestyle that is not sustainable.
If lions did what we humans do and imaged that they were superior to all other animals and the laws of competition did not apply to them then two things would happen.
They would kill all the animals that competed with them for food, so that they were the only one's that had food. And then they would kill all the competitors of their food's food. they would make a world with only grass and gazelles and lions. Sounds pretty good for the lions right?
The problem is that they have reduced their chances of survival down to virtually zero. Any change at all in this system will wipe them out. If there is a famine or a drought and the grass dies, the gazelle die, the lions die. end of story.
Also with no competition their reproduction rate goes through the roof. They made more lions which eat more gazelle, until there is not enough gazelle to feed the lions. they will not stop at this point because they believe that they are superior, that the laws of competition do not apply to them.
As it stands for us right now the number one cause of death worldwide amonst humans is starvation. The process through which we produce our food and subsequently through which the same attitude is applied to all other facts of our existence, we kill everything else that is not our food. Since the laws of competition apply to us and our food, even if we think they don't, eventually we will have wiped out all the other species and conditions that are necessary for the growth of plants, which means our food dies, which means we die.
Last edited:
If we didn't eat them they would eat us.
The same guy who gave a great white shark the right to eat me if I go into shark infested waters.
The day animals develop their ability to think and talk and speak out for their right not to be eaten, I'll respect that. Now if an alien race came over and tried to eat all of us, I think we humans won't go down without a fight, personally I wouldn't. Now stop feeling so guilty for being human, dude.
The day animals develop their ability to think and talk and speak out for their right not to be eaten, I'll respect that. Now if an alien race came over and tried to eat all of us, I think we humans won't go down without a fight, personally I wouldn't. Now stop feeling so guilty for being human, dude.
metaphorx said:
Yes. but what makes you think that plants don't feel pain? They certainly have feelings, as they are able to react to stimuli, so is it simply their inability to express their feelings in a conventional way that we appreciate that makes people think that they have none? One only needs to see a tightly curled flower slowly open and blossom as the rays of the early morning sun settle upon it to know that a plant can feel, and is capable of responding to those feelings. Yes, their feelings might be primitive, their feelings might not be complex, and their feelings may not be bound by anything other than immediate sensory input, but their are plenty of animals whose feelings are limited in this same way, yet they are recorded respect and protection, while plants are treated just as brutishly and brutally as if they were in no way living. Plants may not spill blood like we do (though they 'bleed' in their own fashion when wounded), they may not cry out like we do (though perhaps they do, just not in way that apreciable to human senses) but they are living things with feelings. To say that animals (which humans tend to anthropomorphize to a great deal - lending them great sympathy) are living things and we have a moral obligation not to harm living things is fine, but to then continue harming plants simply because their suffering doesn't bother you (or you cannot 'relate' to the feelings of a plant) is to be guilty of a hypocrisy that shows that selective cruelty is a trait that not only carnivores posses.
Bear said:
That's fucking classic dude. I'm sick of these "what gives us/you/him/her/them the right" questions. It doesn't take a whole lot of observation to notice that when the lion eats the rhino/the bird eats the worm/the man eats the cow/the CEO buys the Gulfstream; it is not the case of someone "giving them the right". They've gone out and taken what they want without waiting around for someone to allow them to do so. In the simple act of doing, they have implicitly created the right for themselves.
I think the more important question is "What/who is going to take that right away?". Even more important is the question of "What gives anyone the right to give anyone the right to do anything?" i.e. Who's the boss?
It's a circular argument and carnivores and vegans alike should not worry about it too much and get back to work and give themselves the right to go to the grocery store tonight and buy some food.
********** said:
I completely agree. We're able to make these sophisticated stealth bombers that look like U.F.Os designed for war but we can't find a way to survive without eating other creatures?
Trigger1286 said:
What are your ideas? Or are you just hoping someone else comes up with it?
Trigger1286 said:
What exactly do those two things have to do with the other? I can't eat titanium or radar absorbent material.
Morals are totally arbitrary, random, pretentious bullshit. To say you have values to which you think everyone should adhere is self righteous bullshit. It's pretty much coincidence that most people agree that things like killing people and stealing are wrong, so I guess I'll give you those two. Beyond that, morals are a totally contrived set of rules. Just because humans are sentient means we can't kill stuff? :wtf: :thefinger :thefinger
Terrorists have morals. Radical firebombing tree huggers have morals. Vigilantes have morals.
Trigger1286 said:
Ok, how does building an aircraft IN ANY WAY relate to totally altering the entire biological mechanism of every man, woman and child on the planet?!?!?
Do you seriously think that we can somehow convert everybody on the planet from being heterotrophs to being autotrophs? For fucks sake, people are protesting and getting freaked out by the simplest of genetic modifications to plants, what makes you think that they'd sit idley by as the physical mechanisms that fuel life as we know it are tinkered and fiddled with?
I supose what all this boils down to is : Trigger, what color is the sky on the world you live on ?
Similar threads
- Locked
