All animals created equal?

[SirBackBoobs]

Animal cruelty is a serious offense in most states. In some some states, you can get up to a 100,00 dollar fine or 10 years in prison. Not all animals are protected by these rights though. Animals raised for fur or livestock are offered very little to no legal protection (at least in California, I couldn't find any other information.

United States cruelty law
Livestock unprotected in California

Even if you support the slaughtering of animals for food, there is no reason why these animals shouldn't be protected by animal cruelty laws. There are no qualities that livestock animals have that domesticated animals don't have that would make a cow or pig less qualified for protection under law.

Pigs are at least as intelligent as dogs, and the other animals raised for livestock are as intelligent as the stupider animals protected by cruelty laws (cows are at least as smart as gerbils, same goes for any other sort of livestock)

Pig intelligence.

Any thoughts, newgrounds?

[hippl5]

Cruelty makes them taste better.

And they are not equal, some animals taste better than others.

[Kleinhans]

livestock animals are breed to be eaten. its how its been for many many many years and without them the world would literally starve to death. their are cruelty laws such as food and water standards along with "housing" for the livestock but they generally arent like domestic animals. livestock have no time to think or learn, as opposed to a pet cat or dog who are generally not eaten and are held as pets. livestock are more a food source and looked at like one, kind of like corn.

[SirBackBoobs]

At 5/22/08 10:12 PM, Kleinhans wrote: livestock animals are breed to be eaten. its how its been for many many many years and without them the world would literally starve to death.

It's a biological principle that as you go higher up in trophic levels (with carnivores at the top) you only retain about 10% of the energy from the previous trophic level. So, moving down in a trophic level wouldn't result in less food, but more.

their are cruelty laws such as food and water standards along with "housing" for the livestock but they generally arent like domestic animals. livestock have no time to think or learn, as opposed to a pet cat or dog who are generally not eaten and are held as pets.

Most animals learn everything they need to know when they are very young. It's not like it takes ten years for a dog to learn about the world.

livestock are more a food source and looked at like one, kind of like corn.

This actually makes sense as a reason the laws would be like they are.

Anyway, I'm not arguing for people not eating meat, I'm asking why there are cruelty laws for some animals, but not all.

[Kleinhans]

oh i wasnt here to argue haha just putting out why i think livestock are the way they are. you do your thing ill do mine and the world goes round

[Kleinhans]

"Livestock" is most commonly defined as animals kept or raised on a farm or ranch and used in a commercial enterprise. The raising of livestock is an agricultural endeavor that promotes the preservation of green space and a way of life many people desire in today's society.

yeah i found this and it kind of backs me alittle. just tjought u might be interested

[SirBackBoobs]

At 5/22/08 10:40 PM, Kleinhans wrote: "Livestock" is most commonly defined as animals kept or raised on a farm or ranch and used in a commercial enterprise. The raising of livestock is an agricultural endeavor that promotes the preservation of green space and a way of life many people desire in today's society.

yeah i found this and it kind of backs me alittle. just tjought u might be interested

You can link to the page you found that on.

I can't even tell what point you're backing with that info.

[Kleinhans]

http://www.ruralheritage.com/horse_paddo ck/horse_define.htm

yeah it was unclear sorry but it was that livestock are looked at as a food source. im not saying its right im just saying thats why the laws are the way they are. (the laws should be uped a bit more i agree with you on that)

[Cuppa-LettuceNog]

Well, all the animals are technically equal under the law. Some animals are just MORE equal then others.

You fucking communists.

[SirBackBoobs]

At 5/22/08 11:26 PM, Cuppa-LettuceNog wrote: Well, all the animals are technically equal under the law. Some animals are just MORE equal then others.

You fucking communists.

I love that book.

Russian revolution ftw!

[Cuppa-LettuceNog]

At 5/22/08 11:32 PM, SirBackBoobs wrote:

I love that book.

Yeah. Like, it doesn't actually ACCOMPLISH anything like 1984 or tell us anything about the Bolsheveik revolution or Stalinist purges that we don't already know, it just arbitrarily insults Communists. I love it.

[Kleinhans]

theres nothing wrong with true communism but thats another topic.

and the idea of all animals being equal and some more than others (from the book "Animal Farm") is actually based on an American view. Slaves and Women are the ones designated originally, they couldnt vote get property an so on so the book is kind of crossed into a past American idea that was bad and says its communism...alittle hypocritical yes but w/e.

all animals are created equal but people percieve some as lesser because of their use

[Earfetish]

I can't ever imagine us not viewing all animal as somewhat lesser. I don't think that detracts from the argument that uniquely Human qualities, like compassion and humanity and humaneness and empathy, can be extended over how we treat the animal kingdom.

[Earfetish]

And of course, is an ant an equal lifeform to an anteater? Maybe they can both feel pain, but maybe it upsets the anteater more; maybe the upset an anteater feels is comparable to Human upset, but less so for the ant.

[SirBackBoobs]

At 5/23/08 03:03 PM, Kleinhans wrote: theres nothing wrong with true communism but thats another topic.

and the idea of all animals being equal and some more than others (from the book "Animal Farm") is actually based on an American view. Slaves and Women are the ones designated originally, they couldnt vote get property an so on so the book is kind of crossed into a past American idea that was bad and says its communism...alittle hypocritical yes but w/e.

all animals are created equal but people percieve some as lesser because of their use

That books was about the russian revolution and had nothing to do with american concepts. It was about the heads of state in russia become what they original rebelled against, and placing themselves above the common man.

I can't ever imagine us not viewing all animal as somewhat lesser. I don't think that detracts from the argument that uniquely Human qualities, like compassion and humanity and humaneness and empathy, can be extended over how we treat the animal kingdom.

I was more talking about how some animals are treated better than animals of comparable intelligence. Not being equal to human beings.

[Cuppa-LettuceNog]

At 5/23/08 03:03 PM, Kleinhans wrote: theres nothing wrong with true communism but thats another topic.

Besides the fact that it fails.

[Ravariel]

At 5/22/08 10:11 PM, hippl5 wrote: Cruelty makes them taste better.

QFT

lolonewordpost

[Jizzlebang]

Cows arn't cute, so we don't really care. Seals on the other hand. And beavers who do little "people things" with their hands. That's worth saving.

criticism.