Really?


I'm all for ethical treatment, but come on...comparing concentration camps and racism to eating a hamburger? I'm not Jewish, but as a human, that's offensive.

And how far should we take it? Hey, let's not fight viruses because they are just innocent little beings trying to get along in this big scary world.

Aren't there more important things to consider? Starvation, child abuse, rape, racism, nuclear weapons, war...just to name a few

Get off your high horse and eat a steak
(free range, of course)

reply

I'd wager that most people who care about animal welfare care just as strongly about the other issues you mentioned.

reply

The animals involved (humans in concentration camps, cows, pigs and chickens in factory farms) are different, but this has no bearing on the point: whether human or non, the animals in question experience pain and our current agricultural system seems content to completely ignore this.


"Historically, man has expanded the reach of his ethical calculations, as ignorance and want have receded, first beyond family and tribe, later beyond religion, race, and nation.

To bring other species more fully into the range of these decisions may seem unthinkable to moderate opinion now. One day, decades or centuries hence, it may seem no more than ‘civilized’ behavior requires."
--“What Humans Owe to Animals,” The Economist, 8/19/95


Viruses cannot feel pain; the presented argument is a strawman: neither this movie nor veganism focus on "[protecting] innocent little beings trying to get along in this big scary world," but rather operate with a goal of conscientiously striving to reduce impact on the world, primarily in terms of subjective experiences of suffering--and that means all capable of such experiences, humans and non.

"[T]hose who claim to care about the well-being of human beings and the preservation of our environment should become vegetarians for that reason alone. They would thereby increase the amount of grain available to feed people elsewhere, reduce pollution, save water and energy, and cease contributing to the clearing of forests.…

[W]hen nonvegetarians say that ‘human problems come first’ I cannot help wondering what exactly it is that they are doing for human beings that compels them to continue to support the wasteful, ruthless exploitation of farm animals."

--Peter Singer, Animal Liberation, 1990

reply

So your entire case is based on what being can feel pain? Viruses can't feel pain so they're ok to hurt while a chicken is wrong to hurt? What about fish? They have no receptors in their skin to feel pain so it doesn't matter if we want to cut them up? What about insects? What about people who have lost their sense of touch due to spinal accidents?

Your logic is incredibly flawed. Not to mention the fact that animals CAN'T feel "pain" since "pain" is a human emotion. It doesn't actually exist. An animal can FEEL and if you hurt it the animal will react based on instinct but it can NOT start brooding about it and worry and feel mentally ill based on what you do to them. They're only instincts. Humans on the other hand are self-aware.

Or are you suggesting that animals can feel human emotions? Take your dog to an art gallery and let him run up to an exhibit... he'll pee on it. x.x

reply

[deleted]

Congratulations on failing to understand words. There's a difference between "feeling pain" and "reacting to a nerve stimuli". "Pain" as an emotion is a metaphorical concept, it does not exist. "Pain" as in your brain interpreting signals of extreme physical conditions is an instinctal response. I was obviously talking about the former. x.x

So if you fail to understand what one of the "dumbest things you've read on the internet" means then I guess that makes you dumber than the dumbest thing you've ever read.

reply

Humans are animals. You don't know if/what animals are self-aware. You're trolling.
- a carnivore

http://imdb.com/mymovies/list?l=12180629

reply

Actually, there's been tests done that prove that dolphins are self-aware.

Don't you believe in freedom of speech?

reply

Just wanted to agree with the other guy that you are indeed a *beep* idiot.

reply

I agree. Of course animals feel pain. How else would they survive? :/

reply

[deleted]

Wow. You are sad. Animals can't feel pain? Really? Ok, to make you happy, how about using the word 'experience' instead? Can animals 'experience' pain in your book? Can they experience fear? uh....... duh...... of course they can. I'd love to have you look into the eyes of any dog on death row minutes away form euthanasia and tell me that dog is not scared out of its mind, hoping for rescue, hoping for a chance to love and be loved. Go ahead, I dare you. Or go to a slaughter house and actually watch an cow killed just so you can have a steak, or a pig forced into a wire cage for months, suffering beyond belief just so you can have your greasy bacon. But I bet you won't. Instead you will just do what millions of uneducated or worse, unempathic people will do; turn your back and do f'n nothing.

reply

I resisted the urge to use a series of expletives in reply to this message because it's quite clear, seeing as a) you clearly cannot understand what 'pain' is and b) you don't seem to understand that humans are animals, you are a complete idiot.

1. Pain is not a 'human emotion'.
You talk about flawed logic, yet take a look at your second paragraph. Your argument makes no sense whatsoever. You talk about pain being a human emotion, yet you proceed to say that it doesn't exist. Do you mean that the vague concept of feeling an emotion? That we can't quite put our finger on what/where it is we are feeling? I understand this concept, but this is moving more into the philosophy of consciousness and away from that of pain itself.

2. You say that an animal can feel but that it will react based on instinct. Take a little gander at any of the major journal databases for 'pain' and you will find conclusive evidence that it is one of the more basic sensory experiences, experienced by all animals. That includes humans by the way, seeing as we are y'know, animals.

3. You then, quite erratically, jump to 'brooding', 'worry' and 'mental illness' - please explain to me what either of these concepts have to do with pain? And more generally, animals feeling pain?
If you are talking about fear, when you say 'worry' again, take a gander at some journal articles and you'll soon realise these are one of the more basic instincts found in all animals - including humans.

4. "Are you suggesting that animals can feel human emotions?" Please explain to me what 'human emotions' are and, again, what has this got to do with the sensory experience of pain? Additionally, if you are attempting to directly correlate an art gallery exhibition and human emotion, this is again quite flawed. I know many individuals who would feel absolutely no 'human emotion' when in an art gallery. Strangely enough, you seem like one of those people!

5. Oh also, with regard to your earlier post where you used the notion that 'fish can't feel pain' to support your illogical, idiotic argument. Take a little look at a paper by Chandroo, Duncan & Moccia (2004), who argue the complete opposite. They use science! And experimental methods! And facts! Not illogical, ill informed, idiotic ideas and views.

reply

One thing I'm sure now... my dogs and cats are more intelligent and sensitive than you... I would love to see YOU in a art gallery... LOLOL must be really funny. ;)

reply

Excuse me, but are you *beep* mentally challenged ? Animals can't feel pain or mentally ill because of what we do to them ? WTF? Based on your comment i see that you never experienced a real relationship with an animal. Hell, even online you can find thousands of examples that show that animals do indeed feel pain and can feel sad or mentally ill by what we do. Not all of them but some can.

reply

Funny, starvation is the first of the "more important things" you mention. Eating lower on the food chain is much more efficient, and we could most likely feed the entire world on a vegetarian diet.

Regardless, while comparing slaughterhouses and concentration camps might be a little extreme, so is your talk about viruses. More importantly, eating less meat is something that the vast majority of us can do, and relatively easily. It is an individual decision that we each can make, as opposed to ending war or child abuse.

I would argue that reducing meat intake is one of the more important things we can do to lessen starvation, environmental damage, water shortages, global climate change, and healthcare costs.

reply

get off our high horse ay?


first of all none of us are on our "high horse"



people that are aware that their clothes come from slaughtered cows , and their entertainment (bull fighting in spain, circuses) mean the suffering and death of millions of animals.. and that some questionable experiments go on in laboratories, still cling to vague belief that conditions cannot be too bad, or else the government or the animal welfare societies would of done something about it. But it is not the inability to find out what is going on as much as a desire not to know about facts that may lie heavily on ones concience that is responsible for this lack of awareness - after all the victims of whatever it is that goes on in these awful places are not members of ones own group.


that quote from earthlings pretty answers your whole opinion.

it is humans complete disrespect for animals that is pathetic
its not telling you to stop eating meat
or not to use animal products.
its up to yourself
and yes you have your opinion
but you need to understand that they are on this earth also
and are aware of it.

and that we should not taek advantage of them
just because we dominate the earth.


reply

I'm totally against animal cruelty, but to me the world is full of suffering - so shouldn't we try to alleviate the human suffering before that of animals? Don't get me wrong - like I said, I dislike seeing animals in needless pain - but it does annoy me a little when people become hysterical about it and begin calling humans "the same as" or even "worse" than animals. Sure, in some ways we probably are, but by the same token any animal that became our equal in intelligence would surely become our equal in cruelty. It's a sad fact of life.

reply

But we are more evolved and intelligent than other animals. We can make a decision to change our habits and it is surprisingly easy to do. I must have read the 'help humans before animals' argument a thousand times but the two aren't mutually exclusive. You can still help humans AND animals.

reply

seriously I felt the same way as the guy from the original post. The holocaust cannot be compared to a squirrel shot by a hunter.

As much as I find the images disturbing and the facade we create to hide the reality of animal exploitation, comparing those practices to the holocaust, where around six million human beings very systematically killed, is incredibly offensive and disgraceful.

Also to the guy who says we can feed the whole world with a vegan diet: We can already feed the entire world, as we produce enough food, just do not allocate it ideally and effectively.


Cheers

reply

The holocaust cannot be compared to a squirrel shot by a hunter.

Correct, but nobody is making any such retarded comparison. The comparison is for the *billions and billions* of animals each year which are systematically imprisoned, genetically experimented on, medicated, continually tortured until they are disrespectfully killed, for us humans.

In case you aren't aware, humans *are* animals. We are the species homosapien, which is a primate and a mammal, and we share genetics with all other species on Earth, from a housefly to a elephant. We most closely share the genetic code of chimpanzees and bonobos, our branching from them wasn't that long ago, with only small differences to be found (slightly improved memory capacity, less body hair, improved hand control, etc.).

Our society is the only thing that makes us "better" than the "animals". When they have tried immersing other primates into human society, they realised that they are highly adaptable and can learn to use complex language skills (sign-language) and even explain their feelings and desires and so forth. Even some birds have learned to use complex human language, coming up with new words and sentence structures and everything.

It is always pathetic hearing people try to claim that humans are somehow special compared to other animal species. We're all from the same genetic pool. We have no rights over any other lifeform. The Earth is an ecosystem, of which humans are currently the only participant which is destroying that ecosystem. Is that supposed to make us superior?

People like to separate themselves from "animals", because it makes them sleep well at night while exploiting them. Guess what? Nazi soldiers slept well at night because they believed that the Jewish and other groups they were exploiting were "animals" and "not human". I see no difference here at all. It's all about ignorance and pack mentality.

Re the food supply, you're wrong about producing enough food currently. Please go look up statistics on how much energy, land and water are required for meat production (especially beef). Much of the world's current food supply goes to feeding cattle. This is only getting worse by the year, as more and more meat is consumed, and more populations begin to follow the lead of the USA with a heavy meat diet.

reply

Normal is what your peers are doing, so it's very easy for groups of people to do incredibly sadistic and vile things, simply because their peers are also doing it. There is also a high level of ignorance built into instinct, which protects animals from harsh situations.

That said, I don't agree with your argument that "animals are less important than humans because if they had our intelligence they would be just as bad".

The point here is that while all animals have built in ignorance and will put up with or dish out high levels of abuse to others, humans are one of the few with a complex enough brain to actually analyse this behaviour and decide upon a better way of doing things. While it's true that most will never do this, it is at least a possibility for humans to do, which I think should be strived toward.

reply

Pretty sure the basic structure of our teeth is an evolutionary indicator that we are supposed to consume meat, albeit in small quantities.

We've just gotten greedy and gluttonous with it.

To liken animal slaughter to the inhumane treatment of the Jews of WWII is just nothing more than the usual Vegan Reich B.S. It's like their version of Reefer Madness. Grain of salt, people.

Do whatcha have to, to do whatcha want to.

reply

Exactly, in small quantities. Meat consumption has gone up drastically in the past few decades, and continues to skyrocket. There has never been a time like this in the history of Earth for meat consumption (and all other forms of consumption, we are all brainwashed to believe that consuming is equivalent to the pursuit of happiness), and it's only getting worse each year.

To liken animal slaughter to the inhumane treatment of the Jews of WWII is just nothing more than the usual Vegan Reich B.S. It's like their version of Reefer Madness.

To liken the systematic torture of billions and billions of animals each year to reefer madness is just stupid. Reefer madness is propaganda which suggests you will go insane if you smoke pot.

The comparison made is humans systematically imprisoning, torturing and killing millions of one species of animal to another species of animal. The fact that you deem us homosapiens to be more valuable than other species of animals does not make the comparison in any way far-fetched, it simply means you view your own species as "better" than other species.

I highly recommend you spend some time learning about evolution and the basics of genetics. There are remarkably few differences between species of animals, and far more similarities.

I view all species as valuable and worthy of respect. I can't see how this could be construed as being disrespectful to those who died in the holocaust.

reply

And how far should we take it? Hey, let's not fight viruses because they are just innocent little beings trying to get along in this big scary world.
Viruses aren't even alive, dumbass.

reply

The holocaust comparison is slightly more acceptable than many might think on the surface, though I'm sure no group out there is ACTUALLY pursuing the extinction of any single or group of animals. The comparison simply illustrates the complete lack of compassion that pervades an industry based on animals.

And just remember, we're simply animals with more power than any other. We deserve nothing more than any other living thing on this planet.

And yeah, viruses aren't alive. If anything they're super-evolved forms of life that have abandoned said life, and found the most efficient way to spread their numbers.

Luck has never been pushed as much...the sun felt good on your sweater.

reply

In my view they are life, just at the scale below what we normally observe as being life.

In the same way, I view the solar system as a life form in the scales above. They both follow a distinctive life cycle, growing and maturing and feeding and reproducing and dying. The galaxy above that, galactic strands above that. They are all complex ever-evolving systems comprised of smaller individual component parts, just as our own bodies are made up of individual living cells. Below that you have molecules made of atoms made of neutrons and protons made up of quarks and so on.

It's all a wonderfully complex ecosystem at every scale. The lower scales must cooperate to create something new in the scale above, e.g.:

atoms => molecules
molecules => cells
cells => animals
nebulae => stars
solar systems => galaxies
etc.

reply

Well, about the concentration camp and racism thing, animals don't suffer any less than humans when slaughtered, and speciesism is no better than racism; it still involves thinking that certain beings not part of a given group are not deserving of life and liberty.

There is no proof that viruses are sentient, but we do know that animals are sentient.

And haven't you ever heard the saying that "injustice anywhere is a threat to justice everywhere"?

The more people I meet, the more I get why Jane Goodall spends all of her time with chimps.....

reply

I think I made this point earlier or in a different thread, but what viruses appear to be, to me, are hyper-evolving and highly evolved forms of life that have taken a turn somewhere along the line of said evolution that has caused them to become parasitic, reproducing at any and all costs. Very machine-like but with a sinister undertone that reminds me FAR to closely of humanity and the possibilities of human/machine synergy, if it can be called synergy.

That said, all Life is equally sacred and expendable. If we must eat to survive, then things must die to sustain. Given that, why do people feel it's okay and even, in some sick cases, necessary to cause ANY kind of suffering, whatsoever? And there are different levels of suffering. Complex land animals and avians feel quite a bit of pain due to central nervous systems. Crustaceans have no such system, and at the very least do not feel pain the same way we do. That is not to say they do not suffer, which any sentient creature does when faced with death, but they don't feel localized, excruciating pain, nor do they suffer the resulting mental trauma (again, not to say they don't experience mental trauma, it's just that the complexity of the mind will indicate the complexity of the trauma).

In all, meat is only necessary in the absence of other food. Eating plants is possible without killing plants, and eating fruits is straight up beneficial to the fruit-bearing tree and the ground.


Debt and debt and debt and debt and debt and then All will be enslaved.

reply

Since the problem for vegans are that we cannot cause pain.
Would it be OK if I chopped off the foot of a tetraplegic? Or bully someone with autism? Or that boy that had the disease he could not feel pain?

reply

you clearly have no clue what autism is.

reply

There are lots of important issues to consider in the world. Becoming vegetarian is simply one of the easiest differences a person can make to one of those issues simply by eating foods other than meat. It's really, really easy compared to tackling issues like child abuse and nuclear weapons. It's not like we all have a handful of money and we're trying to figure out which cause to give it to.

People get so frustrated about animal suffering because so many of us contribute to it and encourage it with our behaviours, daily, so it should be easier for people to make a difference, yet so many people refuse to acknowledge that it's a problem. We're not as directly responsible for other big issues on an individual basis, so it's harder to make those changes. Being vegetarian or vegan does not inhibit anyone's ability to care or contribute to other solutions.

reply

Good post... And if you wanna find an honest politician, who is in fact vegan... Try this investigating one.. Dennis Kucinich..

http://youtu.be/cwUtxj6jID4

reply