Page 3 of 19 FirstFirst
1
2
3
4
5
13
... LastLast
  1. #41
    Quote Originally Posted by Tikaru View Post
    Dog =/= Human

    If someone hits a dog by accident with their car, I don't think they should receive the same punishment as if they hit a person.
    I never said dogs were humans or even equal to humans. I just said they are no less entitled than we are to basic rights and having those rights protected. And an accident is an accident. I don't think you should be punished for hitting an animal or a person if you lose control of your car and accidentally kill or injure anything. Not everybody lives in the U.S. where everybody's first reaction is to sue (as that's the only punishment involved for hitting somebody accidentally, as long as no other crime was committed). You'd probably get sued for running over somebody's dog too, though. That has nothing to with rights, just the american mindset to sue.

  2. #42
    Breaking news, it turns out Humans are mammals, like cats and dogs. A college student who wishes to remain anonymous says "We're all animals, I'm of the party kind." Opposition opposes obviously unoriginal obstruction of dog slapping.

    "Sentience" comes with a bunch of things like morality, ethics, etc. I eat meat, I understand that if we didn't eat meat there would be no reason for us to have cows, pigs and such except as pets, wich might not be as popular as a kitten or puppy. But I find something wrong in killing animals so you have more money to spend on getting more animals that you can kill so you can save even more money etcetera etcetera.
    Last edited by Kristeas; 2011-02-02 at 12:28 PM.
    I rather be called a gay blood elf and get the girls, than be a straight worgen and only get my wolf.
    http://i650.photobucket.com/albums/u...teasAshals.jpg <-- this is how I chill.

  3. #43
    Quote Originally Posted by zorkuus View Post
    No it doesn't. You can live a perfectly normal life being a vegetarian. You may enjoy eating meat (I do too) but that doesn't mean your survival is dependant on it.
    I meant as a species, we're dependant on exploiting animals.
    Anyway would we put lions in jail for violating the right to life of a gazelle? It's just surreal.

  4. #44
    Warchief Tikaru's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    Earth
    Posts
    2,038
    Quote Originally Posted by unkn0wnerr0r View Post
    So is it cool for me to go rape the blond chick in a coma? I mean, sure she's human, but she will never learn physics. She's pretty much a vegetable.
    If you enjoy putting your junk in vegetables, you're clearly too insane to have a conversation like this. Just a tip: if you try to come off as morally superior to someone, you probably shouldn't start off with rape.

    Thanks for taking what I say out of context though. My point is that dogs are not humans. This is like comparing apples to peanuts.

  5. #45
    Quote Originally Posted by Tikaru View Post
    This is like comparing apples to peanuts.
    Both of which have the right to be delicious.

  6. #46
    I'm sorry, but I just couldn't resist.

    This Kaylynn person's posts, from my experience, tend to be full of extraordinary amounts of fail. Specifically, it would seem, when it comes to discussions on government.

    Though, after reading this, I'm not surprised. Skim through her post history for yourself if you want a chuckle or to make your brain hurt. I'm sure you'll find some genuinely absurd proclamations.


    OT: You'll certainly need more than some information from ONE source on the internet for anyone to take you remotely seriously.

  7. #47
    Stood in the Fire
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Posts
    440
    Quote Originally Posted by Fateofman View Post
    I'd prefer animal testing over thousands of people dying over a faulty batch of drugs or even cancer, think of the logical option.
    I can tell you aren't in medicine. I am. There is a reason animal testing is generally looked down on. That reason is that their chemistry is so different than the typical human the research is next to useless. That's why so many of our studies now are done with computer modeling. We discussed this in class, what do you think is the main reason for continued animal testing? The answer, people feel safer knowing it was tested on animals. Even though the medicines react so differently with their chemistry than our own. Further more human organs vary from slightly different to hugely different. Then there is the fact of dna complications etc. If you want an example of it, why do you think no matter what happens it has to go through a human trial phase before being put onto the market. (o.k. more than one but for this we will just use 1). If animal testing gave them the information, why do they need multiple phases of human testing? You got it, because animal testing doesn't give us half the information we need. Computer modeling gives us far more information than animal testing ever will.

    This sounds all like I'm going "oh if you kill an animal death to you". The reality is that most people are too uneducated to know what they are talking about.

  8. #48
    Quote Originally Posted by Twizzlers View Post
    Those obligations kind of give the animals a right to not be caused unnecessary suffering by humans.
    Kind of, but they do not. There's a huge difference is giving something rights and giving humans restrictions.

  9. #49
    Stood in the Fire Azanure's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Location
    City 17
    Posts
    400
    Quote Originally Posted by Diurdi View Post
    I meant as a species, we're dependant on exploiting animals.
    Anyway would we put lions in jail for violating the right to life of a gazelle? It's just surreal.
    A lion kill a gazelle for survival, they eat meat in case you don't know that.

    We as suposedly rational beeings have several examples of people beating the crap out of animals just because they find it fun. you even have people that consider it a sport.

    So yeah the diference is huge, from survival to plain stupidity disguised as "fun" and "sport".

  10. #50
    Quote Originally Posted by Twizzlers View Post
    I never said dogs were humans or even equal to humans. I just said they are no less entitled than we are to basic rights and having those rights protected. And an accident is an accident. I don't think you should be punished for hitting an animal or a person if you lose control of your car and accidentally kill or injure anything. Not everybody lives in the U.S. where everybody's first reaction is to sue (as that's the only punishment involved for hitting somebody accidentally, as long as no other crime was committed). You'd probably get sued for running over somebody's dog too, though. That has nothing to with rights, just the american mindset to sue.
    Personally if I'm driving along and see an animal run in front of my car, I'm not going to swerve or try to avoid it. I might hit another car, or a kid, or whatever and no animal is worth a human life. If someone losing control of their pet and it runs in front of me it is dead plain and simple. If you want to own pets, learn to care for them properly.

  11. #51
    Quote Originally Posted by Fateofman View Post
    I'd prefer animal testing over thousands of people dying over a faulty batch of drugs or even cancer, think of the logical option.

    what did any animal ever do wrong to warrant having drugs and all manner of other things tested on them.

    we have prison systems full of murderers rapists and all other scum of the earth why not test on them they warrant it more than a defensless animal

  12. #52
    Warchief Tikaru's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    Earth
    Posts
    2,038
    Quote Originally Posted by Azanure View Post
    A lion kill a gazelle for survival, they eat meat in case you don't know that.

    We as suposedly rational beeings have several examples of people beating the crap out of animals just because they find it fun. you even have people that consider it a sport.

    So yeah the diference is huge, from survival to plain stupidity disguised as "fun" and "sport".
    And depending the on country, those people can be punished.

  13. #53
    Stood in the Fire
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Posts
    440
    Quote Originally Posted by Tikaru View Post
    If you enjoy putting your junk in vegetables, you're clearly too insane to have a conversation like this. Just a tip: if you try to come off as morally superior to someone, you probably shouldn't start off with rape.

    Thanks for taking what I say out of context though. My point is that dogs are not humans. This is like comparing apples to peanuts.
    Well then, let's start with a simple question really.

    What is the difference to you between a dog and a human? It may seem basic, but please try to answer it.

    What will I do with that? If you choose to continue I will use your own words to prove you are wrong. It's just a little talent I have. What's more I will use nothing more than logic, mathematics, your own words, and a light sprinkling of philosophy to do it.

    Both of which have the right to be delicious.
    Twizzlers...you are so freaking right man. Mmm apples and peanuts. I want my coffee.

    Personally if I'm driving along and see an animal run in front of my car, I'm not going to swerve or try to avoid it. I might hit another car, or a kid, or whatever and no animal is worth a human life. If someone losing control of their pet and it runs in front of me it is dead plain and simple. If you want to own pets, learn to care for them properly.
    While I understand your view point, I will give you an example of how that can go wrong. That happened here recently. Now I don't give out too much personal information, but my family is heavily into law enforcement. We also live in the south. Anyway they hit an animal that belonged to the deputy Sheriff. The guy pulled over the car, and beat him to a pulp. We all watched. My official statement "the deputy pulled him over, he started trying to hit the deputy. The deputy fought back to try and subdue him". Why did I say that? It's simple if you are going to act like less than a human, you will get treated that way. The law of nature is the strongest get what they want. The deputy was stronger, so he got what he wanted. If I offended anyone by stating this, my apologies. I just think the guy got what he deserved.

    Moral of the story? Check the name of the street, if it's the same as the name on the mailboxes you better be damn careful how fast you drive.
    Last edited by unkn0wnerr0r; 2011-02-02 at 12:37 PM.

  14. #54
    Quote Originally Posted by unkn0wnerr0r View Post
    I can tell you aren't in medicine. I am. There is a reason animal testing is generally looked down on. That reason is that their chemistry is so different than the typical human the research is next to useless. That's why so many of our studies now are done with computer modeling. We discussed this in class, what do you think is the main reason for continued animal testing? The answer, people feel safer knowing it was tested on animals. Even though the medicines react so differently with their chemistry than our own. Further more human organs vary from slightly different to hugely different. Then there is the fact of dna complications etc. If you want an example of it, why do you think no matter what happens it has to go through a human trial phase before being put onto the market. (o.k. more than one but for this we will just use 1). If animal testing gave them the information, why do they need multiple phases of human testing? You got it, because animal testing doesn't give us half the information we need. Computer modeling gives us far more information than animal testing ever will.

    This sounds all like I'm going "oh if you kill an animal death to you". The reality is that most people are too uneducated to know what they are talking about.
    I did bio mechanics and while irealise you process information via computers you do not go strait from the first batch to trial on humans instantly incase it causes adverse effects, you test with a wider genetic gap incase there is something fudementally wrong with your formula.

  15. #55
    Quote Originally Posted by Evassac View Post
    And after watching countless documentaries on discovery. I believe that indeed.
    Oy vay, watch Peta is Bullshit and Conspiracies are Bullshit immediately. Penn and Teller make you sound less stupid on the internet. Discovery Channel has turned from fun science entertainment to mouth-breathing slop-feed for 'nerdy' high school drop-outs.

  16. #56
    Quote Originally Posted by Azanure View Post
    A lion kill a gazelle for survival, they eat meat in case you don't know that.

    We as suposedly rational beeings have several examples of people beating the crap out of animals just because they find it fun. you even have people that consider it a sport.

    So yeah the diference is huge, from survival to plain stupidity disguised as "fun" and "sport".
    That's why in many laws there is this obligation for humans not to involve in unnecessary animal suffering. Dogfights etc usually meet that criteria.

    But giving them rights would mean any killing of an animal would be taking away their right to life. You would commit murder/"animalslaughter"? many times a day.

  17. #57
    Herald of the Titans Tuvok's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Location
    West Sussex, England.
    Posts
    2,709
    Quote Originally Posted by Rennard View Post
    I'm sorry, but I just couldn't resist.

    This Kaylynn person's posts, from my experience, tend to be full of extraordinary amounts of fail. Specifically, it would seem, when it comes to discussions on government.

    Though, after reading this, I'm not surprised. Skim through her post history for yourself if you want a chuckle or to make your brain hurt. I'm sure you'll find some genuinely absurd proclamations.


    OT: You'll certainly need more than some information from ONE source on the internet for anyone to take you remotely seriously.
    While I completely and utterly disagree with nearly everything he says, and I personally don't like how nationalist he is, he's well-mannered and tries to post constructively from what I've seen, so I don't really see a good reason to condemn him. It's people who post "cool story bro" every chance they get that should be condemned.

    As for PETA, I think they're a bit on the insane side. Nature allows and even depends on species exploiting lesser ones. We've just taken that a step further, with things like farms and medical research.
    I do think that it's part of being human to be merciful, and as such we should endeavour to make sure their deaths are painless, and their lives up until slaughter comfortable. In other words, while I think PETA is a joke, I still hate things such as battery farms, and unscrupolous slaughterhouses.

    As for medical research, that's justified by survival. It's a fair trade to make, in my opinion, the experimentation on a few lab rats in the hunt for a cure for cancer. I'd love for someone who's against it to go up to someone who's been cured by medicine that was tested on animals, and tell them they have no right to be alive right now, and that the rats that were experimented on deserve to live more.
    "The truth, my goal."

  18. #58
    Quote Originally Posted by unkn0wnerr0r View Post
    I can tell you aren't in medicine. I am. There is a reason animal testing is generally looked down on. That reason is that their chemistry is so different than the typical human the research is next to useless. That's why so many of our studies now are done with computer modeling. We discussed this in class, what do you think is the main reason for continued animal testing? The answer, people feel safer knowing it was tested on animals. Even though the medicines react so differently with their chemistry than our own. Further more human organs vary from slightly different to hugely different. Then there is the fact of dna complications etc. If you want an example of it, why do you think no matter what happens it has to go through a human trial phase before being put onto the market. (o.k. more than one but for this we will just use 1). If animal testing gave them the information, why do they need multiple phases of human testing? You got it, because animal testing doesn't give us half the information we need. Computer modeling gives us far more information than animal testing ever will.

    This sounds all like I'm going "oh if you kill an animal death to you". The reality is that most people are too uneducated to know what they are talking about.
    This is so incredibly wrong. Animal testing has resulted in so many countless breakthroughs in modern medicine that you can't be in medicine and are a troll. My #1 example would be that insulin was discovered by tying strings around the pancreas of several dogs, and that commerical insulin comes from pig pancreas. http://www.endocrineweb.com/conditio...s-what-insulin

    However, there are thousands more. Also, lot's of useful testing can be completed quickly on the common fruitfly, because of how amazingly similar they are to humans http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases...0315201633.htm

    In my bio-mechanics course I attended several guest lectures, and nearly all research performed by engineers in the field of bio-mechanics is done on lab rats. For instance, lab rats are genetically altered to be born with a specific disorder, so that engineers can test a machine that diagnoses that disorder by studying the gait of the affected rats (this disorder affects motor control) with various force plates and cameras. Very cool stuff, very important research, conducted on animals.

    EDIT: Many of these are not medicinal examples I realize, but you can't just pan animal testing because of a different body chemistry. It IS very useful to medicine.
    Last edited by apwill4765; 2011-02-02 at 12:49 PM.

  19. #59
    Warchief Tikaru's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    Earth
    Posts
    2,038
    Quote Originally Posted by unkn0wnerr0r View Post
    Well then, let's start with a simple question really.

    What is the difference to you between a dog and a human? It may seem basic, but please try to answer it.

    What will I do with that? If you choose to continue I will use your own words to prove you are wrong. It's just a little talent I have. What's more I will use nothing more than logic, mathematics, your own words, and a light sprinkling of philosophy to do it.



    Twizzlers...you are so freaking right man. Mmm apples and peanuts. I want my coffee.
    What's the difference between a go kart and a Ferrari?

    Sure, they're both vehicles (just like Humans and dogs are both mammals), they both have wheels (Humans and dogs have lungs), they both...

    You get the picture.

    You can find comparisons all day between the two, but they're still not the same. This isn't a moral discussion, this is just simple reality. A dog is not a Human. A Human is not a member of the canida family.

    Apples to peanuts...

    This does not mean that you can treat a dog like sh*t though.

  20. #60

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •