When is it ok to cause suffering

Scanlas The 2nd

It's not ok to cause suffering to humans and dogs in our society for example, but people don't usually care that cows and pigs are slaughtered to death. Why not take advantage of being "immoral" when essentially you won't being doing much more harm than being "moral".

So my question is, what determines whether it's generally accepted that it's ok to cause suffering?

danniemcq

It's ok to cause pain and suffering to Rapists and Child Molesters.

MagicMarker

This thread is going places!

Jesus Wept

Plenty of suffering is imposed on humans, prisons for example.
But yes, there is a lot of double standards regarding what animals it is ok to eat, in this country anyhow. They'll eat anything in some places. :-o

Kensington

Well, apart from Halal and Kosher slaughtering, the death is pretty quick and painless for cows or pigs being slaughtered correctly. Same as when a dog is put down, very little suffering.

I don't know anyone who'd think deliberately inflicting suffering on a pig or cow is any more acceptable than inflicting it on a dog or human, to go with your examples.

Dravokivich

Scanlas The 2nd wrote: »

It's not ok to cause suffering to humans and dogs in our society for example, but people don't usually care that cows and pigs are slaughtered to death. Why not take advantage of being "immoral" when essentially you won't being doing much more harm than being "moral".

So my question is, what determines whether it's generally accepted that it's ok to cause suffering?

So you think it's cruel if I eat meat because an innocent animal was slaughtered for it...

Is it cruel when a lioness hunts down an antolope and kills it, or do they just not know any better?

Scanlas The 2nd

Kensington wrote: »

Well, apart from Halal and Kosher slaughtering, the death is pretty quick and painless for cows or pigs being slaughtered correctly. Same as when a dog is put down, very little suffering.

I don't know anyone who'd think deliberately inflicting suffering on a pig or cow is any more acceptable than inflicting it on a dog or human, to go with your examples.

Really, I think there would be more protest made about humans being put down with little suffering.

I'd like to point out, I'm happy with things the way they are. I like eating pigs and cows. I just want to point out the hypocricy of people who would consider themselves "moral". I'm fully aware that I'm immoral for having no problem with the suffering of pigs and cows and I'm ok with that.

blaze1

I know in spain when the knacker like people are done with dogs they take them to the middle of nowhere tie the dogs to a tree and inject them with bleach... Sick fucks

It wasn't me!

Maybe it's immoral according to your personal code of morality, but not mine. You seem to presuppose that killing is wrong, and you equate killing with suffering, which is in my opinion incorrect. Morality isn't objective in any case.

Mr Benevolent

blaze1 wrote: »

I know in spain when the knacker like people are done with dogs they take them to the middle of nowhere tie the dogs to a tree and inject them with bleach... Sick fucks

Certain areas of Spain have a robust attitude to animal welfare.

Jesus Wept

Obviously it becomes more acceptable the more tasty the animals are:

bacon
sausages
pork chops
ham


mmmmm

PAULWATSON

Scanlas The 2nd wrote: »

It's not ok to cause suffering to humans

What planet are you on? Go and watch the news, how many wars is Barry O now involved with?

Scanlas The 2nd

Dravokivich wrote: »

So you think it's cruel if I eat meat because an innocent animal was slaughtered for it...

Is it cruel when a lioness hunts down an antolope and kills it, or do they just not know any better?

Well if the lioness starts being righteous about morals and banging on about linoess being treated unequally to lions I'll piont out to the lioness that why should I care about your interests over the lions when you don't care about the antelopes interests over your own.

syklops

Last night I scraped the skin off three children and then slowly boiled them in a vat of water. Do I feel guilty? No, not one bit, and I'll do it again I'm sure. Sorry, not children, carrots.

Spunge

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=S4K0pM7NI90

Clearly these hens are suffering, but most people who are shocked at some dog being kicked or something still have their omelettes for breakfast with eggs from these farms.

Vicxas

I know its been coined already, but usually i only onto others... yada yada yada

Local-womanizer

The-Rigger wrote: »

Obviously it becomes more acceptable the more tasty the animals are:

bacon
sausages
pork chops
ham


mmmmm

Don't forget Bacon Fries.

Don't forget in certain places people eat cats and dogs as well as cows,pigs,sheep. Food is food and I need to eat so I will kill all inferior to me to do so,or just buy the stuff in Tesco.

Also, Slaughtered to death, how else can it be done

Scanlas The 2nd

Local-womanizer wrote: »

Don't forget Bacon Fries.

Don't forget in certain places people eat cats and dogs as well as cows,pigs,sheep. Food is food and I need to eat so I will kill all inferior to me to do so,or just buy the stuff in Tesco.

Also, Slaughtered to death, how else can it be done

You are food and inferior to me so let me know your address so I can come over and slaughter you, I'm starving.

stovelid

When it tastes really nice covered in gravy.

Scanlas The 2nd

PAULWATSON wrote: »

What planet are you on? Go and watch the news, how many wars is Barry O now involved with?

I think it's fairly hard to disagree that most people are against causing suffering to humans.

pragmatic1

Scanlas The 2nd wrote: »

I think it's fairly hard to disagree that most people are against causing suffering to humans.

No some humans deserve it.

hardCopy

The animals basically choose to be eaten.

If they don't like it they can just evolve.

chin_grin

Strange this topic should come up after me watching this.

But yeah, watch that flick. That's all.

<insert some Yoda quote that doesn't make any sense about flicking yourself leading to anger and anger leading to the cheese aisle in Tesco and Tesco leading to suffering.....>

Gummy Panda

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EdpZG4YXELk

Aoifey!

Saying "I love animals so much" then eating them and not thinking about it, is very hypocritical. And a hell of a lot a people are hypocritical.

But different people have different morals.

TeddyTedson

If someone has wronged you they should expect revenge.

Wazdakka

Scanlas The 2nd wrote: »

what determines whether it's generally accepted that it's ok to cause suffering?

How funny it is..

thebigbiffo

Scanlas The 2nd wrote: »

slaughtered to death.

is there another type of slaughtered?

Scanlas The 2nd

thebigbiffo wrote: »

is there another type of slaughtered?

Slaughtered to near death then helped to recover.

Rabidlamb

Quite simply we are God.
We choose if these animals live.
We choose if they breed.
We choose at what age they should be killed.

We then choose if they taste nicer with pasta or vegetables.
It's not easy being God.

Shouldn't you be off worrying about some single fox being killed by a hunt & not the 1000's we slaughter everyday.
It's all about priorities people.

evercloserunion

Scanlas The 2nd wrote: »

Slaughtered to near death then helped to recover.

And *then* slaughtered to death. Makes the meat taste much nicer.

sensibleken

There is no universally accepted standard on what is cruel. we can generally imply that killing a chicken for food is in itself not cruel. But keeping thousands of them locked up in individual cages like in battary farms is cruel.

Putting down a sick dog is not in itself cruel. An industry which overbreeds racing dogs resulting in thousands of surplus dogs killed ever year is cruel.

Then some people will always try to mitigate a cruely arguement with an economic arguement

Wazdakka

thebigbiffo wrote: »

is there another type of slaughtered?

Scanlas The 2nd wrote: »

Slaughtered to near death then helped to recover.

You can't spell "Slaughtered" without "Laughter"

blaze1

Rabidlamb wrote: »

Quite simply we are God.
We choose if these animals live.
We choose if they breed.
We choose at what age they should be killed.

We then choose if they taste nicer with pasta or vegetables.
It's not easy being God.

Shouldn't you be off worrying about some single fox being killed by a hunt & not the 1000's we slaughter everyday.
It's all about priorities people.

Rabidlambs would be put down surely? :cool:

Rabidlamb

blaze1 wrote: »

Rabidlambs would be put down surely? :cool:

I'd be the one Rabidram kept to cover 300 ewes.
Just like in real life....... sigh:(

biko

AH -> Humanities by request

Standman

Whatever about cruelty to animals, as consumers living in the first world we are most of us complicit in the exploitation and human rights abuses of people in 3rd world countries.

Scanlas The 2nd

Standman wrote: »

Whatever about cruelty to animals, as consumers living in the first world we are most of us complicit in the exploitation and human rights abuses of people in 3rd world countries.

We generally aren't seen to be doing wrong in society though. What I'm interested in is what deterimines whether causing suffering is seen to be acceptable or unacceptable. Cleary kicking a cow to death in the street would be seen to be wrong yet those people who see it as wrong would go home and eat beef.

irishh_bob

Scanlas The 2nd wrote: »

Really, I think there would be more protest made about humans being put down with little suffering.

I'd like to point out, I'm happy with things the way they are. I like eating pigs and cows. I just want to point out the hypocricy of people who would consider themselves "moral". I'm fully aware that I'm immoral for having no problem with the suffering of pigs and cows and I'm ok with that.

cows are ( in most cases ) looked after incredibly well in this country , were they left to fend for themselves , thier lives would be much less comfortable as they are by and large very stupid animals and would be less well fed and enjoy a lower quality of food and shelter , especially in winter

as for when they are slaughtered , they get a bullett in the head and are dead before they hit the floor of the meat factory , when you consider the fact that they are blissfully unaware thier life is about to end , where exactly is the cruelty , when you put a man up against a wall in front of a firing squad , the main aspect of cruelty involves the feeling of impending death on the part of the condemned man , no such issue exists in relation to cattle being slaughtered , i doubt my passing will be as benign tbh

Standman

Scanlas The 2nd wrote: »

We generally aren't seen to be doing wrong in society though. What I'm interested in is what deterimines whether causing suffering is seen to be acceptable or unacceptable. Cleary kicking a cow to death in the street would be seen to be wrong yet those people who see it as wrong would go home and eat beef.

Well there is a huge difference between beating a cow to death and eating beef. What determines its unacceptably is the needless cruelty inflicted on the animal.

Scanlas The 2nd

irishh_bob wrote: »

cows are ( in most cases ) looked after incredibly well in this country , were they left to fend for themselves , thier lives would be much less comfortable as they are by and large very stupid animals and would be less well fed and enjoy a lower quality of food and shelter , especially in winter

as for when they are slaughtered , they get a bullett in the head and are dead before they hit the floor of the meat factory , when you consider the fact that they are blissfully unaware thier life is about to end , where exactly is the cruelty , when you put a man up against a wall in front of a firing squad , the main aspect of cruelty involves the feeling of impending death on the part of the condemned man , no such issue exists in relation to cattle being slaughtered , i doubt my passing will be as benign tbh

It's ok because cows are stupide animals....should we kill off stupid or retarded people with a bullet to the head.

I assume you think it's ok to kill people if they are blissfully unaware that their life is about to end.

sensibleken

irishh_bob wrote: »

cows are ( in most cases ) looked after incredibly well in this country , were they left to fend for themselves , thier lives would be much less comfortable as they are by and large very stupid animals and would be less well fed and enjoy a lower quality of food and shelter , especially in winter

as for when they are slaughtered , they get a bullett in the head and are dead before they hit the floor of the meat factory , when you consider the fact that they are blissfully unaware thier life is about to end , where exactly is the cruelty , when you put a man up against a wall in front of a firing squad , the main aspect of cruelty involves the feeling of impending death on the part of the condemned man , no such issue exists in relation to cattle being slaughtered , i doubt my passing will be as benign tbh

Its not as simple as the cow being in a field and then on the floor of the abatoir. The beef and dairy industry is more complex than that. Dairy cows get impregnated constantly to keep the milk supply going then have the calfs taken away and used for food. The cows slaughtered are about 2 or three years old whereas a cow that is on a sanctuary can live into their thirties.

Standman

The fact is that for the most part we as humans see ourselves as superior to animals. They are at the mercy of us. Whats the difference between killing a cow and killing a human? The difference is humans are given rights that no other living thing has.

irishh_bob

sensibleken wrote: »

Its not as simple as the cow being in a field and then on the floor of the abatoir. The beef and dairy industry is more complex than that. Dairy cows get impregnated constantly to keep the milk supply going then have the calfs taken away and used for food. The cows slaughtered are about 2 or three years old whereas a cow that is on a sanctuary can live into their thirties.

you know very little about the subject you speak of , most breeding cows stay productive untill they are ten years old , some last longer , some less your talking about bullocks and beef heifers , besides , a cow has no appreciation of the fact that she is alive so it doesnt matter whether she lives thirty years or thirty days , this is the real world , people want to eat meat hippy

sensibleken

irishh_bob wrote: »

you know very little about the subject you speak of , most breeding cows stay productive untill they are ten years old , some last longer , some less your talking about bullocks and beef heifers , besides , a cow has no appreciation of the fact that she is alive so it doesnt matter whether she lives thirty years or thirty days , this is the real world , people want to eat meat hippy

Not the cleverest are we? the fact i said eating meat was fine escaped you did it. And cows have no appreciation of being alive? That has to be the single most idiotic thing i have ever read, I don't even know where to start on that.

irishh_bob

Scanlas The 2nd wrote: »

It's ok because cows are stupide animals....should we kill off stupid or retarded people with a bullet to the head.

I assume you think it's ok to kill people if they are blissfully unaware that their life is about to end.

yeah thats what i think :rolleyes:

the thread is about cruelty to animals - cows , were cows allowed to roam free like in the distant past , the supply of meat would collapse worldwide due to the fact that many cattle would die from lack of food , shelter etc , while you and paul mc cartney might be happy , most would not

irishh_bob

sensibleken wrote: »

Not the cleverest are we? the fact i said eating meat was fine escaped you did it. And cows have no appreciation of being alive? That has to be the single most idiotic thing i have ever read, I don't even know where to start on that.

you claimed cows are only kept for three years and then slaughtered , you prooved yourself completley ignorant on the topic with that statement , i was born on a farm and regulary help out on my brothers farm so i happen to know a little about what im talking about , unlike you

oh and why dont you take a trip out to the countryside some day , stop by a field of cows and ask them whether or not they think life is worth living , apparently the fresian cow is big into discussing the enlightentment

sensibleken

irishh_bob wrote: »

you claimed cows are only kept for three years and then slaughtered , you prooved yourself completley ignorant on the topic with that statement , i was born on a farm and regulary help out on my brothers farm so i happen to know a little about what im talking about , unlike you

oh and why dont you take a trip out to the countryside some day , stop by a field of cows and ask them whether or not they think life is worth living , apparently the fresian cow is big into discussing the enlightentment

Pointless trying to talk to someone who comes out with the nonsense in your last paragraph.

raah!

It is important to first specify the moral system under which you are operating. If you accept the law as a definition of good and bad then the answer is "when the law says it's ok". If you are in a religion then it's "when the religion says this or that", if you are a utilitarian it's "when it results in a greater over-all happiness/pleasure/whatever"

If you are one of these fellows who thinks that all morality is derived from what "feels right" then it's ok to kill people if it "feels ok".

Most people do not think about why they feel a certain way about this or that. It's ok to eat cows and not eat meat because they can't see the cows suffereing (or being killed without any suffering) and they can hear the dogs yelping. They feel bad because of the dogs and not the cows. As far as I can see the logical conclusion of such a system is that everyone should do heroin. Heroin makes you feel good physiologically, therefore it is the best thing to do from a moral perspective.

irishh_bob

sensibleken wrote: »

Pointless trying to talk to someone who comes out with the nonsense in your last paragraph.

your the one claimed a cow can appreciate what it means to be alive

sensibleken

irishh_bob wrote: »

your the one claimed a cow can appreciate what it means to be alive

cant read either no.