What gives us the right to eat other creatures?

[bigbadbrody]

The order of The Food Chain, bigger eats smaller. in my opinion

So, adults should be eating there children?

 

[Devout Pornist]

So, adults should be eating there children?

I didn't mean it like that, Example: Shark eats an smaller fish

 

[bigbadbrody]

I didn't mean it like that, Example: Shark eats an smaller fish

and an elephant eats a human? JK I new what you meant, twas just trying to be funny

 

[calpoon]

If aliens came and dominated earth and decided to start eating us, it would make them bad

why would that be bad? wouldn't they be perfectly defensible and justified in eating "lower" and "primative creatures" just like you do?that makes you a hypocrite.

Or maybe it is that animals don't want to be killed and eaten just as much as you don't.

If you want to make a lifestyle choice not to eat meat that's fine, but what gives you the right to criticise those who do?

Nice to know that you'd be a "Good German" when the nazis come. I have the moral and ethical obligation to do what is just and humane, and that supercedes anyone elses so-called right to do harm.

Here's what I want to know, why are all these people that claim to believe in "natural selection" and the "food chain" and all other such nonsense, always shitting a brick whenever an animal attacks a human? If they really believed that, then they would accept it as "the way things are" and not try and prevent it. But it only works one way.

See once again, that is hypocrisy. Sure you can believe whatever you want to, but if it's totally unfounded and based on circular and illogical reasoning, then it's bullshit.

 

[jk34]

come on,wath a bunch of crap,i mean vegetarians and vegans,
we need meat,period...our teeths proves it,canines you know wath thats for?

we dont need to rethink thi fact,
we need to rethink how to produce meat in an way
that it is environmentally friendly,thats it

 

[KBMster]

It's just a bad habit. I'm a third generation meat packer that got out of the business. People are used to it, comfortable with it, and it would be next to impossible to get people to back away and look at things differently. You ever think about eating chicken? They're a nasty ass bird! Cows walk around in their own shit all day! Same goes for pigs! and people eat pigs feat!! Yeah, it's a disgusting habit eating meat. Anyone else jonezin' for a Big Mac right now?

 

[plucap]

I was speaking of the here and now and I do see it as necessary. While I don't disagree with your take on the matter at all. Sorry but I do see the overall picture '2008' much differently than you. If we don't continue to hunt and control herds, flocks etc. They would become too large in number in no time overflowing into populated areas, towns, cities and resulting in chaos and even death. Unsanitary conditions everywhere would be imminent.

As for breeding them for human consumption, that is a necessity also. To control disease and protect the people. Times have changed my friend, yes its all messed up now. We have to however deal with it now for what it is not how we wish it was. IMHO

LL

Most of the animals that are problematic to us are here thanks to us. Partly because we're the ones who has spread them and partly because we've involuntary helped them reach success through our behavior (e.g. rats, raccoons, pigeons, Corvidae).
What we eat, we produce. If we would, harshly spoken, kill all the animals in every farm around the world, none of these animals would over-populate the Earth by themselves. The Bovid family of animals (Cattle) has been around for about 20 millions years (compared to the modern man, 200 000 years old) and have never over-populated the planet. Same goes for pigs that has been around for about as long time as cows.
And most of the animals that mean problems to us or heavily grow in numbers every mating season, we don't even eat. That's why I don't think that our meat-eating in any way can be defended by your argument.

But like I said I'm not a vegetarian and I don't feel guilty for eating animals, but from an objective stand point there's no way to defend our meat-eating as necessary. Using the "omnivore"-argument isn't viable either, as man kind has long since departed from being an animal without choices. Would you defend rape with the same argument?

 

[gunslingingbird]

I think it's the ultimate proof that brains will beat brawn any day. We as humans have no outstanding physical qualities, yet we still dominate the planet. We're slow runners, have no real natural defenses, no predatorial adaptations (claws, sharp teeth), can't fly, and are little better than pathetic in water, yet we have been able to impose our will over all the other species that are better suited for survival than us due to the fact that we're smarter than them.

 

[Chrism86354]

the opposable thumb.

 

[calpoon]

we need meat,period.

The world is flat, period.

Discounting arguement doesn't make one's point valid.

But like I said I'm not a vegetarian and I don't feel guilty for eating animals

thank you. I can respect that viewpoint, and I can't make criticism or arguement because that's your opinion and feeling.

My own opinion is just that, and I don't claim that it is fact. Although I do usually try and provide to the best of my abilites facts to support it. To do otherwise, that is what I don't respect.

People should be free to beleive whatever they want to, but that belief should be based on something, besides just "because I said so."

 

[plucap]

I think it's the ultimate proof that brains will beat brawn any day. We as humans have no outstanding physical qualities, yet we still dominate the planet. We're slow runners, have no real natural defenses, no predatorial adaptations (claws, sharp teeth), can't fly, and are little better than pathetic in water, yet we have been able to impose our will over all the other species that are better suited for survival than us due to the fact that we're smarter than them.

That's not entirely true. The difference is that most herbivores or carnivores are specialized. Humans have good sight, relatively good hearing, surprisingly good smell, excellent taste and we have one of the best senses of feeling (just think about how good you can feel small things on your fingers) amongst animals.

We have the ability to carry things while we are running which is a plus. We are good swimmers compared to other mammals, especially at short range. We can climb, dig, lift, pull and we're quite fast at short range too. The early men of Africa actually hunted animals to their death through exhaustion by tracking them for hours. Although that's more likely because we have a better cognition of our own capability and are probably more in control of the hunt than the prey - which makes us in a better position to judge how much fuel to blow so to say.

So whereas the brain is indeed our most powerful tool, the physiological factors aren't against us either. The difference is that we're not specialized, we're generalized.

 

[kenshin123]

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.

well, if YOU kill it? How many of us have to kill the animal personally to get the meat we eat everyday? Not many.

So most of us are killing these animals passively am I correct? Because we pay for the meat, and the money goes to the people who kill it and sell it.

Ok, since we are killing them passively, then even vegans kill them passively even if they don't eat meat. The fact that we are human, and the way we live and use the earth's resources will kill animals. Just off the top of my head, destroying natural habitat for civilisation, polluting environment from cars etc will kill animals, using paper (since it clears a lot of the rainforest, and killing a lot of animals in the process)

So if you really use your theory to draw the line and be a vegan, you need to apply that theory everywhere. You can't drive, use power, use paper...etc Or else you are choosing to apply your theory only when it can keep your comfortable lifestyle. And by doing that, you are no different to meat eaters.

 

[member006]

Most of the animals that are problematic to us are here thanks to us. Partly because we're the ones who has spread them and partly because we've involuntary helped them reach success through our behavior (e.g. rats, raccoons, pigeons, Corvidae).
What we eat, we produce. If we would, harshly spoken, kill all the animals in every farm around the world, none of these animals would over-populate the Earth by themselves. The Bovid family of animals (Cattle) has been around for about 20 millions years (compared to the modern man, 200 000 years old) and have never over-populated the planet. Same goes for pigs that has been around for about as long time as cows.
And most of the animals that mean problems to us or heavily grow in numbers every mating season, we don't even eat. That's why I don't think that our meat-eating in any way can be defended by your argument.
But like I said I'm not a vegetarian and I don't feel guilty for eating animals, but from an objective stand point there's no way to defend our meat-eating as necessary. Using the "omnivore"-argument isn't viable either, as man kind has long since departed from being an animal without choices. Would you defend rape with the same argument?

Actually, sorry but I don't see your point. (see bold) It does reinforce mine though I think. Of course the Cattle and pigs have been around forever and didn't overpopulate . At least not since man because we ate them, herded them, sold them and controlled them as a food source. As well as deer and many forms of fowl. Had we not been doing this for centuries I am sure they would have overpopulated by now. As the human population got larger taking more space on the planet chaos would have been unavoidable had this not been the route that man chose. The point of my post.

Outlaw the hunting and eating of deer, birds, and see how fast you will have deer damaging your property and causing many more car accidents then we already see because of them and other human injury. A panicked deer in a population setting can be very deadly. How fast unsanitary conditions will be found in our cities and towns with so many birds. If fact they have problems with this now in some areas. Outlaw the hunting of the wild animals that aren't on the 'chance of being extinct' list (I don't want any species wiped out) they will eventually overpopulate and wonder into populated areas. IMHO.

LL

 

[stockfisch]

There´s no problem for me eating meat and fish, but i´ve a big problem if those creatures are handled like a piece of wood. I´m living in the country so there´s no problem for me getting meat from the farmer in the neighbourhood. Ok it´s much more cheaper to buy it on the supermarket but i´ll never do that. I will not support animaltranports over many miles and industrial slaughterhouses. If there´s a bottleneck with money i reduce buying meat. Before i´m going to buy meat in the supermarket i´ll stop eating meat. I´ve done this for 6 months a few years ago when i was hard pressed for money.

Another theme: Fur - What give us the right to treat animals like filmed on this PETA video. I´m not religious, but i hope there´ll be another life after this, and those animals can take revenge to all those humans which haven´t respect them like we had to respect creatures.

WARNING, it´s a really shocking video!!!
http://www.furisdead.com/feat/ChineseFurFarms/

 

[TrueSiN]

the same thing that gives a bear the right to eat a fish or a snake to eat a mouse.

 

[dave_rhino]

Circle of life.

One day, probably quite soon, humans will be extinct. And all the animals will continue to eat other animals. That's life.

Being alive and needing food is a "right" in itself.

 

[D-rock]

Even if it's not an absolute necessity that humans need to eat meat to survive in some way, the human body is optimized to have it as part of its diet though evolution. I don't see a legitimate reason to go though a round about way to get things in my diet just to keep from killing an animal. I don't believe in animal abuse or abusing natural resources, but I also recognize that they're animals (not a person) and don't feel bad when one has to die for our use.

There are things that meat can give people, even outside protein that it's harder to get, though even if it's not usually impossible, from other sources. Meat will also usually give off a more sustained intake of protein than plant sources. Meat has trace amounts of things that benefit the human body that plants don't have or at least it's harder to get from them. Meat is a more complete source of protein and amino acids than most plants. I will admit that a lot of people eat too much of it, but then again there are a lot of people that eat too much of almost everything they take in. That doesn't mean meat can't be a part of a proper diet for human health when eating in the right amounts.

None of that even takes into account other things that animals give us that we need to kill them for. Things like bone, down, and fur, but maybe the most important thing they give us besides meat is leather. I wonder how many people out there that don't like the eating of animals are wearing leather footwear at this moment. Shoes and boots among many other things made out of plastic wouldn't work out too well would they?

 

[angelfire1972]

it's just the evolution law

 

[L3ggy]

Evolution law my ass.

 

[calpoon]

So if you really use your theory to draw the line and be a vegan, you need to apply that theory everywhere. You can't drive, use power, use paper...etc Or else you are choosing to apply your theory only when it can keep your comfortable lifestyle. And by doing that, you are no different to meat eaters.

You are absolutely correct about those things, and I thank you for bringing that up. whether or not your POV is to call bullshit on those who claim to justify those things as right, I don't know... maybe we disagree on that.

But my point here is that I know that I am guilty of those things (if not directly, than at least complacantly) and I admit that. I'm not trying to be perfect, no one can. But I am trying to be BETTER. So I really don't think that someone who tries to make a difference to do what is right is the same as someone that choses to do nothing about it.