Newgrounds.com — Everything, By Everyone.

this means I have to stop raising dogs and selling them to Vietamesse and south Asian's for food?

damn how am I gonna make income?

At 4/11/09 06:23 PM, aninjaman wrote: One thing that always influence my opinion on animal rights is to remember that humans are animals to.
Believing otherwise is egotistical and thinking you are more than you are.

but like i said; its interesting to think that one animal is pretentious enough to give itself, and other animals, rights.

At 4/11/09 06:43 PM, SolInvictus wrote: but like i said; its interesting to think that one animal is pretentious enough to give itself, and other animals, rights.

So its either rights for all animals of no rights at all? I prefer the scenarion where I have rights obviously.

At 4/11/09 06:45 PM, aninjaman wrote:

At 4/11/09 06:43 PM, SolInvictus wrote: but like i said; its interesting to think that one animal is pretentious enough to give itself, and other animals, rights.

So its either rights for all animals of no rights at all? I prefer the scenarion where I have rights obviously.

no, i'm talking about the creating and declaring a concept inalienable when there is nothing to indicate that humans, let alone other animals, are in effect granted any of these rights.

ie; believing you're king of the world because you say so.

all right, not the best example but i think it gets my point across.

At 4/11/09 07:34 PM, SolInvictus wrote: no, i'm talking about the creating and declaring a concept inalienable when there is nothing to indicate that humans, let alone other animals, are in effect granted any of these rights.

What you're getting into is the idea that rights, since they are not physical objects, are only vague ideals.
Rights are one of those things that exist only because enough people agree they exist and a government is in place to enforce them. Humans can give and take rights because we can enforce them.

but thats not what this debate is about is it?

animals taste pretty good. i like chickens the most.

At 4/11/09 06:23 PM, aninjaman wrote: One thing that always influence my opinion on animal rights is to remember that humans are animals to.
Believing otherwise is egotistical and thinking you are more than you are.

Yes, but animals eat each other, don't develop technology or culture, and have a tendancy to drive similar species into extinction. If we are going to base our policies on our similarities, we're going to eat them.

Us humans have become a bit of decadency creatures. We eat other animals, but we barely kill them ourselves and of the meat, we only eat a fraction and move on to the next. People who boast eating meat for being on top of the foodchain, do you eat all the meat then? Eyes, guts, tongue, brains? I can admit that I don't.

On another note. People who claim that animals should have no rights, what rights are they referring to? Cause I can hardly imagine anyone fighting for them to be able to vote.

I'm no staunch defender of animal rights however I find it ridiculous to cry out against torture and killings of only specific amiable animals, while ignoring and considering bugs and other unappealing forms of life as inferior. This is hypocrisy and unfortunately it is practiced nearly world-wide and by many wanna-be organizations for animal rights.

At 4/11/09 07:48 PM, aninjaman wrote:

but thats not what this debate is about is it?

it was just intended to be a side note.

Maybe we should make it narrower. Like, something is considered to have a conscience if it has a vertrabrae, or something like that.

At 4/12/09 02:41 AM, KemCab wrote: This doesn't make us better, but we lose a lot less if we experiment on them and it's less morally taxing for our own psyches. If it serves to cure a disease, or even make a profit, well, the ends justify the means, regardless of morals. It's the consequences that matter.

This is just a question of necessities. Should we kill stuff if it is not necessary?
If progress requires sacrificing the life of a few animals, it's better to do so. Death of a few is life for the masses. In case of profit, it's not really clear if we have to sacrifice creatures to become wealthier. Well yeah, if people were starving. But if not, it's rather a case of superiority where a lesser being becomes victim of it. It's ranked the same, I feel, as debating whether you would fire people just to make more money, without the argument that by not firing them more people could end up jobless.

It's this necessity that is debated in the vegan/omnivore dispute. If a man can live without eating meat, should we still continue killing stuff? In the end, killing animals for unnecessary meat is almost the same as killing animals out of boredom.

I mean, they should have laws against neglect, but I think they went to far with Micahel Vick, while people like Chris Brown beat his Girlfriend, and barely anyting happened. Some people are like "Wow, he killed dogs, lets go attack him for every cent he is worth" I bet if Chris Brown beat his dog, their would be people wanting him to get the death penalty.

At 12/6/08 06:45 AM, Centurion-Ryan wrote: Tell me something.

Why do animals deserve rights?

They are inferior to human beings in many ways.

Yeah, I bet you were expecting about 4 paragraphs filled with reasons why.

But I'm utterly perplexed, I cannot fathom anybody being so stupid as to think that vastly less intelligent beings deserve rights equal to the human race.

You're sick. What you are saying is nearly as bad as what Hitler and the holocaust. In my opinion you should be very ashamed.

At 4/11/09 11:03 AM, Aughiris wrote: Animals do not deserve any rights but the right not to be tortured. Give me one good reason why I shouldn't allow animals to be killed so that I can eat some yummy meat. Every organism dies some day anyway. Besides, eating other organisms is the most common thing in nature.

With that being said, I would like to add that I want to taste dog and horse some day. I heard they taste rather good, actually.

You shouldn't eat other animals for the same reason you don't eat humans. Either you disagree with it from a moral perspective, in which case you should stop eating meat, or you only desist out of fear of the consequences (law, reputation etc..). Since there is no law against eating meat, and it is socially acceptable, I don't doubt you will continue to do so.

The dividing line between what can and cannot be eaten is entirely arbitrary. Drawing it at humans is subjective. Why should we draw it there? In the 19th century imperialists in Europe and the USA sought to treat other races as inferior in order to prop up their slave trade. So we marshall the claim that animals are 'inferior' and thus can legitimately be eaten/abused in order to prop up the agriculture industry.

In short the only good reason to stop eating meat is moral consistency, but that presupposes a certain minimum moral standard, which in my experience is sorely lacking in society at large.

Animals cannot have rights because they cannot comprehend responsibility.

We should be aware of our responsibility to the environment and the animals in the ecosystem, if for no other reason than our own survival, but animal rights is a whole other, stupider kettle of fish.

The amount of ignorance on this thread is just about to make me believe humans are among the most stupid of the creatures on our Earth.

In all, I believe in animal rights, and I believe that while humans are high up on the food chain, we aren't necessarily the top.

I'm not saying that animals should be involved in politics, and have a right to vote and the like, but I am saying that all creatures have three basic rights:
The right to live
The right to survive
and The right not to be tortured or maliciously treated.

Naturally, however, these rights are political only. If we were to get into a natural order view of it, then sure, I'm going to squish a bug if I think it's going to bite me, or if it refuses to fly away if I swat at it.

Animal testing for cosmetic purposes is, to a small extent, okay with me. This doesn't mean I want twenty puppies in tiny cages, starving, and mistreated so I can have freaking dandruff shampoo, though. I mean that if we need to make sure that that shampoo isn't going to make all my hair fall out, and turn my scalp green, so we very carefully test it on twenty apes, and those apes have plenty of room, food, and quality treatment, then I'm not going to go off on anyone. (Hell, this would maybe be size of a high-school gymnasium at most, really.)

And as for the food chain, that was invented by humans to make us feel big. We put ourselves on top because humans can't stand their own weakness. I'd like to see any one of you who claim that humans are naturally on top go up against a grizzly bear without a gun. Am I saying that because I believe this that I could take that bear? Hell no, and am I saying that that makes it okay to stab a kitten and eat it raw because we're bigger? No. I'm saying that when faced with nature, and not PETA, EPA, or any political organization, humans and animals have the same three rights, and it's up to themselves to defend them.

Humans just defend those three rights more adequately than animals, that doesn't mean that animals don't deserve to live freely, but it also doesn't mean that humans have to move out of the way because stray cats want to live in our alleyways.

At 4/11/09 08:18 PM, Ytaker wrote: Yes, but animals eat each other, don't develop technology or culture, and have a tendancy to drive similar species into extinction. If we are going to base our policies on our similarities, we're going to eat them.

Maybe you misinterpreted what I said. I like eating animals, Im just against senseless animal abuse.

At 12/6/08 06:45 AM, Centurion-Ryan wrote: Tell me something.

Why do animals deserve rights?

They are inferior to human beings in many ways.

Yeah, I bet you were expecting about 4 paragraphs filled with reasons why.

But I'm utterly perplexed, I cannot fathom anybody being so stupid as to think that vastly less intelligent beings deserve rights equal to the human race.

Animals deserve at least humane treatment and anyone who abuses animals deserves to be sent to jail for a couple of years.

Only a sadistic sick mind would hurt animals. If you do that, you have already crossed a line, and maybe one day you will cross another line and hurt a human.

those who inflict pain on animals should be punished severly.

At 12/6/08 06:45 AM, Centurion-Ryan wrote: Tell me something.

Why do animals deserve rights?

Well they most certaintly deserve the upmost respect since we eat animals and every animal down to the worms in the ground are apart of the balance of this world, n we wouldn't be able to survive without them, unless you have the idea that we're here to exploit the world n eventually destroy it, in which I don't even have a fitting comment about.

They are inferior to human beings in many ways.

Yeah, I bet you were expecting about 4 paragraphs filled with reasons why.

But I'm utterly perplexed, I cannot fathom anybody being so stupid as to think that vastly less intelligent beings deserve rights equal to the human race.

Maybe not human rights but again they deserve our respect and care, the Native Americans were pretty cool in that way, they used everything n every part of an animal they killed n even had ceremonies honoring the animals n nature in general....

So no, animals will surely never be able to do things we do n we will always be the ones here to manage them, but as I said animals are just as important to this world than we are.

im sorry what?

now in all seriousness animal do deserve to be treated humanely but they don't have rights they cant talk and tell us how they feel because they aren't on the same intelligence level as us (humans) and if they were they would most likely have rights.

I still don't know what it means when people say animals can't have rights.
Does that mean that no one should be arrested for mistreating an animal?

Well some people would say that animals should have rights and I totally agree with that. They are a living breathing thing that has intelligence, although low, it is still intelligent. It knows when it's hungry, when it's tired, when it feels pain and other things. So we should give them a right to live in a life free of physical pain because they are basically us, only a little furrier.

Animals DON'T deserve the same rights as people. They just don't have the same level of self-awareness. And animal does not know what will and won't kill it. An animal cannot make choices for itself in the same way a human can. And animals do not have the same kind of complex lifestyle built up like humans do. PETA and such groups are anti-human. They will trivialize human suffering by comparing things like chicken coops to Nazi concentration camps. But when an animal dies, their whole world comes crashing down. Don't be fooled by their propaganda. These animal rights groups are by and large not helping anybody and they are destroying animal testing facilities and holding back animal-based vaccines and medicines that could save millions of lives.

I do agree that animals should be treated humanely but at the same time this shouldn't be made into the thing the PETA and others have made it into.