I never even saw that "animals are servents to man" comment. Thanks for that. I had a lol over it.
Where did I mention obesity?Extra Medium wrote:
You're kidding right? You actually believe that meat consumption causes more obesity than soft drinks, sugary snacks and pastries?Dilbert_X wrote:
No-one cares if you want to gorge on pastries, which I bet you do, because its just much less of problem compared with excess meat consumption.
Dilbert_X wrote:
No-one cares if you want to gorge on pastries, because its just much less of problem compared with excess meat consumption.
Dilbert_X wrote:
if people didn't consume meat they'd consume something else - which would also provide jobs and money, more efficiently and with less cruelty
Industrial meat farming, as practised today, as a means of producing food is grossly inefficient in land, water, fuel and waste, not forgetting the animal cruelty.Dilbert_X wrote:
I don't care if retarded hillbillies want to eat themselves dead.
I don't think its ethical to be breeding and slaughtering animals so dumbfucks can consume 8 times more calories than they need to and probably a higher multiple when it comes to protein and iron - both of which can be obtained more easily, efficiently and with less cruelty compared with factory farming.
I can't say it again, or any simpler, if you still don't understand please ask a grown up to draw you some pictures, or maybe use puppets to explain it.
You can make a neat and cheap puppet from a sock and a couple of buttons.
LOLI'm all for debating and arguing but I try not to do it with mentally retarded people.
Fuck Israel
so much stupid in this thread.
dilbert making out people only have an appetite for meat because of their subconscious being manipulated by ad men (i'm all for theories about PR and psychoanalysis, i've studied it, but this is bullshit of the highest and least meritorious order).
EM continuing his fine tradition of constructing responses to arguments that never existed.
dilbert making out people only have an appetite for meat because of their subconscious being manipulated by ad men (i'm all for theories about PR and psychoanalysis, i've studied it, but this is bullshit of the highest and least meritorious order).
EM continuing his fine tradition of constructing responses to arguments that never existed.
Take it to the what are you eating thread. This thread is about animals being property
Factory farming vs quality of life farming and market demand for meat are relevant to animal rights/welfare.
I disagree
Good lord. So I erred in referring specifically to obesity but obesity falls under, and is one of the major (if not the biggest) factors in humans being unhealthy from consumption of food. Nitpick some more.Dilbert_X wrote:
Where did I mention obesity?Extra Medium wrote:
You're kidding right? You actually believe that meat consumption causes more obesity than soft drinks, sugary snacks and pastries?Dilbert_X wrote:
No-one cares if you want to gorge on pastries, which I bet you do, because its just much less of problem compared with excess meat consumption.Dilbert_X wrote:
No-one cares if you want to gorge on pastries, because its just much less of problem compared with excess meat consumption.Dilbert_X wrote:
if people didn't consume meat they'd consume something else - which would also provide jobs and money, more efficiently and with less crueltyIndustrial meat farming, as practised today, as a means of producing food is grossly inefficient in land, water, fuel and waste, not forgetting the animal cruelty.Dilbert_X wrote:
I don't care if retarded hillbillies want to eat themselves dead.
I don't think its ethical to be breeding and slaughtering animals so dumbfucks can consume 8 times more calories than they need to and probably a higher multiple when it comes to protein and iron - both of which can be obtained more easily, efficiently and with less cruelty compared with factory farming.
I can't say it again, or any simpler, if you still don't understand please ask a grown up to draw you some pictures, or maybe use puppets to explain it.
You can make a neat and cheap puppet from a sock and a couple of buttons.LOLI'm all for debating and arguing but I try not to do it with mentally retarded people.
Furthermore, I believe you to be highly incorrect about animal production being an inefficient in it's production of actual sustenance. I will continue to believe so until you provide some more information outside of "because I said so" logic.
On the subject of meat production being cruel, it isn't. When it is, it is because it has been done improperly by someone who isn't following regulations, rules or agricultural ethics. That's a people problem. A cow in on an industrial meat farm doesn't know what the fuck is going on, it's a goddamn cow. Lay off the anthropomorphic Disney movies.
As a matter of fact, that cow is lucky in my opinion. Throughout that bovines life it will live in a sheltered barn and not be subjected to extreme heat and cold as a free range cow would be, it will not be subjected to driving winds, rain, sleet, snow and hail as free range cows would be, it will not have to rummage, roam and hunt around for edible food as a free range cow would, it will not live in fear of predators, it will not potentially die in a gully during child birth, it will not constantly attacked by insects, pests and parasites, it will not die a slow and painful death from age, disease or predator and have it's carcass rot in a briar patch somewhere.
Instead, this cow will live in a climate controlled barn, be fed ample amounts of food at regular and scheduled times every day, never know the fear of a predator or the aggravation of a pest and when it's time comes, it will unknowingly die an instantaneous and painless death before it's body is used to it's full potential with very little being wasted.
But it doesn't get to walk around. WE ARE MONSTERS!
cows have to "rummage, roam and hunt around for edible food" nowadays? that's funny. last time i checked, they ate grass.
Wake up, put head down, eat.
observe the harsh and unforgiving environment that we save our cows from here in england/europe
thank god we're not abandoning them to have to roam, desperate and hungry, for suitable food.
thank god we're not abandoning them to have to roam, desperate and hungry, for suitable food.
I hate killing animals. I do my best to avoid killing ants. Once a class mate was upset an ant was on her desk. I took a piece of paper and got the ant to go on to it and put it by the window. I have a tremendous appreciation for animal life.
But this fly that is buzzing around is really annoying me. I really don't want to have to kill it.
But this fly that is buzzing around is really annoying me. I really don't want to have to kill it.
Last edited by Macbeth (2013-05-21 18:29:41)
but you love torturing them you sick fuckMacbeth wrote:
I hate killing animals.
that's humans cybargs.
It is about people. I care about people more. No human should be punished for hurting an animal. Humans are more important. I read in the news a little while ago a man was sent to prison for a year for throwing a dog out of a window. Ridiculous.Cybargs wrote:
but you love torturing them you sick fuckMacbeth wrote:
I hate killing animals.
This is where we torture our cowsUzique The Lesser wrote:
observe the harsh and unforgiving environment that we save our cows from here in england/europe
thank god we're not abandoning them to have to roam, desperate and hungry, for suitable food.
oh god that's terrible. can't you put it in nsfw tags? i would've asked if i wanted to see ww2 holocaust pictures dude, damn.
to be honest i don't think he got sent to prison because "you're hurting an animal and animals are intrinsically important and have souls". he probably got sentenced because that sort of angry, abusive, loss-of-control type behaviour is worrying, and society looks down on it. little children are told off when they throw tantrums and throw their dolls. they aren't told off because the parent implicitly believes that the action man has rights and feelings. if animals are just property, it's perfectly fine to send someone to jail for damaging/abusing property. or do you disagree with vandalism or arson laws, too? no human being should go to jail for damaging a window? human life is too important? etc. it's about the human behaviour/transgression more than anything else - not the (transitive) object involved.Macbeth wrote:
It is about people. I care about people more. No human should be punished for hurting an animal. Humans are more important. I read in the news a little while ago a man was sent to prison for a year for throwing a dog out of a window. Ridiculous.Cybargs wrote:
but you love torturing them you sick fuckMacbeth wrote:
I hate killing animals.
Last edited by Uzique The Lesser (2013-05-21 18:45:01)
If the animal is their property they can do what they want with it. If it is someone else's, they should be punished.
For destruction of property.
pretty sure you don't have legal invulnerability in all scenarios because "it's my property". certain acts and behaviours cross over into a realm of social concern and public interest. for example you couldn't just burn down your house tomorrow in the middle of a neighbourhood, because "it's my property". nor could you plant a bomb inside your car and blow it up. people get annoyed and complain even when neighbours paint their house a certain colour, or make certain design-changes to their property/garden. of course people are going to be concerned if someone is beating their dog or throwing it out of a window. that behaviour shouldn't go without punishment. it is sadistic and beyond the pale.
Throwing a dog out of a window counts as littering or indecent disposal of an animal. It is a crime that could get you a fine, yes. But not because of the value of the animal. Same way burning down your house is illegal because of the danger to others property and not the value or rights of the home to not be set on fire.
right. which is exactly what i just said. people don't go to prison because of the animal's 'soul' or 'feelings'. it's not out of empathy with the animal. it's because the consequence of the individual's actions crosses over into public concern and welfare. or because the behaviour itself transgresses into areas of moral/ethical 'wrongness', which society wishes to prohibit.
and this is why everyone thinks your a psycho beth.
And I'm saying that someone kicking a dog in an elevator (like someone went to jail for here also) isn't a thing that should concern anyone else. Someone tossing puppies from a car window should be stopped because it is littering and dangerous to other drivers. Beating your dog isn't an issue for anyone else but you and the dog. I don't care if society finds it cruel or wrong. It doesn't affect them, they should stay out of it.Uzique The Lesser wrote:
right. which is exactly what i just said. people don't go to prison because of the animal's 'soul' or 'feelings'. it's not out of empathy with the animal. it's because the consequence of the individual's actions crosses over into public concern and welfare. or because the behaviour itself transgresses into areas of moral/ethical 'wrongness', which society wishes to prohibit.
if it causes distress to members of the public and upsets the 'common peace' (or somesuch legal phrasing), then sadly it does become a legal concern. the law isn't there to enforce a morality but it is there to make sure that society ticks along with a minimum of upset. sadly, for most people - who are emotionally stable and wired right - the sight of a dog being kicked violently makes them concerned/agitated/upset. if they complain to police, of course they're going to follow it up. as i said before, that sort of (public) behaviour by an individual very often is cause for concern in-itself. abusive people and animal beaters very often lead naturally onto abusing people: it's an anger problem, at root.