Social contradiction on how we treat animals

gozunda · 18-08-2018 10:12pm

Eathrin wrote: »

Wild animals rape and murder each other all the time. I wouldn't be putting them in prison for it. I hold myself to higher standards than wild animals though. I'm not suggesting making eating meat illegal either, you do draw out some pretty insane conclusions. Again, I can act morally outside of the law. You don't need to look very far back in history to see where the law was quite obviously morally flawed. The law isn't necessarily just there for human on human offences either. Animal cruelty can carry quite a sentence depending on where you are in the world. However, again due to this "contradiction", the abuse of some animals is perceived to be worthy of greater sentencing than others. I don't support animal abuse at all.

Do they? Animals have no concept of rape or murder. There are uniquely human precepts. We can only hold ourself to our (own) human standards and laws - that's the whole point. And yes the logical projection of making the act of killing an an animal and inter alia the eating of meat illegal logically means that in assigning human rights and laws to animals that ultimately predators and other meat eaters will be breaking those laws.

And don't think this is crazy either - that idea is already being pushed by vegan thinkers who see animal meat eaters as serial killers. With regard to your point on ' animal right' differences It is humans who are responsible for ensuring laws on 'animal cruelty' are implemented. I have posted on this previously.

The law doesn't support animal abuse either. In fact I don't know anyone who supports or engages in animal abuse as defined by our laws. That said I understand animal abuse sometimes happens and that is why we have those laws.

Whatever 'you believe' is moral must be done within the law. Try presenting a defence that your morals do not need to be exercised within the law and I guarantee you will end up in court at some point. In Ireland the Animal Welfare Act of 2013 confers the same protection on all domestic and farm animals.

Eathrin wrote: »

Have you ever seen a cow in a slaughterhouse? Because I've seen lots of footage of cows absolutely terrified for their lives in these final moments. How could you not when you hear the screams of those who went before you and smell their blood?

Yes I have. In Ireland. I would suggest much of the footage you've been exposed to is highly selected and edited by certain extreme vegan interests working to their own agenda. I think you are anthropomorphising the slaughter process. Humans 'scream'. Animals don't. I've seen animals outside a facility waiting with no indicator that they are aware of where they are or what is to happen. That is my personal experience.

anewme · 18-08-2018 10:59pm

This type of crap is too much for me.

For me a gut instinct of what is right or wrong for me will direct me.

There's just too much politics to allow people make their own decisions.

Eathrin · 18-08-2018 11:03pm

standardg60 wrote: »

This is exactly what I mean!
You can only believe them to be terrified because of how you would feel, thank you for proving my point.

Have you ever seen a terrified dog?

There is absolutely no point in arguing this with you though because of your inability to separate logic from emotion. That's not a putdown btw, it's just the way you are.

My arguments all come from a point of logic. I've previously linked several scientific studies on the environmental benefit and health benefits of veganism over traditional diets. It is not necessary to slaughter animals, so, also from a point of compassion, I would rather they didn't suffer this abuse.

I'm glad I am the way I am. Ignorance is not a virtue, so I wouldn't want to be like you.

Base price · 18-08-2018 11:31pm

gozunda wrote: »

Do they? Animals have no concept of rape or murder. There are uniquely human precepts. We can only hold ourself to our (own) human standards and laws - that's the whole point. And yes the logical projection of making the act of killing an an animal and inter alia the eating of meat illegal logically means that in assigning human rights and laws to animals that ultimately predators and other meat eaters will be breaking those laws.

And don't think this is crazy either - that idea is already being pushed by vegan thinkers who see animal meat eaters as serial killers. With regard to your point on ' animal right' differences It is humans who are responsible for ensuring laws on 'animal cruelty' are implemented. I have posted on this previously.

The law doesn't support animal abuse either. In fact I don't know anyone who supports or engages in animal abuse as defined by our laws. That said I understand animal abuse sometimes happens and that is why we have those laws.

Whatever 'you believe' is moral must be done within the law. Try presenting a defence that your morals do not need to be exercised within the law and I guarantee you will end up in court at some point. In Ireland the Animal Welfare Act of 2013 confers the same protection on all domestic and farm animals.

Yes I have. In Ireland. I would suggest much of the footage you've been exposed to is highly selected and edited by certain extreme vegan interests working to their own agenda. I think you are anthropomorphising the slaughter process. Humans 'scream'. Animals don't. I've seen animals outside a facility waiting with no indicator that they are aware of where they are or what is to happen. That is my personal experience.

AFAIK the Animal Health and Welfare Act 2013 confers protection to all animals.

http://www.irishstatutebook.ie/eli/2013/act/15/section/2/enacted/en/html
http://www.irishstatutebook.ie/eli/2013/act/15/section/12/enacted/en/html#sec12

ExoPolitic · 18-08-2018 11:36pm

Either way the animals serve their purpose, how humans want them.

For companionship or a good bacon buttie, its all good.

That's all there is to it really, we use animals like we use plants and resources of the earth, to our advantage.

standardg60 · 18-08-2018 11:37pm

anewme wrote: »

This type of crap is too much for me.

For me a gut instinct of what is right or wrong for me will direct me.

There's just too much politics to allow people make their own decisions.

Have you always had the same 'gut instinct' then?
About anything?

anewme · 18-08-2018 11:41pm

standardg60 wrote: »

Have you always had the same 'gut instinct' then?
About anything?

Yes and it's served me well.

Base price · 18-08-2018 11:42pm

ExoPolitic wrote: »

Either way the animals serve their purpose, how humans want them.

For companionship or a good bacon buttie, its all good.

That's all there is to it really, we use animals like we use plants and resources of the earth, to our advantage.

You have stated it in a nutshell.
Excuse the pun

standardg60 · 18-08-2018 11:50pm

Eathrin wrote: »

Have you ever seen a terrified dog?

My arguments all come from a point of logic. I've previously linked several scientific studies on the environmental benefit and health benefits of veganism over traditional diets. It is not necessary to slaughter animals, so, also from a point of compassion, I would rather they didn't suffer this abuse.

I'm glad I am the way I am. Ignorance is not a virtue, so I wouldn't want to be like you.

You are still proving my point. You've seen a terrified dog because of something that's happened in its past, not in its future!

And your argument doesn't come from a point of logic at all, you've firstly reached a conclusion based on emotion and only then tried to argue that point with completely irrelevant (to the argument) information.

Would you care to address my point as to how a pet being euthanized in the vets is any different to a cow being slaughtered?
As far as they know they've both lived long and happy lives, its only you who doesn't think that.

anewme · 18-08-2018 11:56pm

standardg60 wrote: »

You are still proving my point. You've seen a terrified dog because of something that's happened in its past, not in its future!

And your argument doesn't come from a point of logic at all, you've firstly reached a conclusion based on emotion and only then tried to argue that point with completely irrelevant (to the argument) information.

Would you care to address my point as to how a pet being euthanized in the vets is any different to a cow being slaughtered?
As far as they know they've both lived long and happy lives, its only you who doesn't think that.

This is the type of **** I don't want to get into. Making excuses about my feelings and opinions.

I don't feel I owe this person an opinion or apology about how I live my life. They are not paying my Salary. .

ExoPolitic · 19-08-2018 12:05am

Base price wrote: »

You have stated it in a nutshell.
Excuse the pun

Thanks!

I just see it for how it is, what ever we do in between is just culturally appropriate to who ever is dealing with the animals.

There is no right answer if you are taking the world as your context.

Base price · 19-08-2018 12:12am

anewme wrote: »

This is the type of **** I don't want to get into. Making excuses about my feelings and opinions.

I don't feel I owe this person an opinion or apology about how I live my life. They are not paying my Salary. .

Why on Earth should your feelings/opinions be influenced by your Employer ???

standardg60 · 19-08-2018 12:15am

anewme wrote: »

This is the type of **** I don't want to get into. Making excuses about my feelings and opinions.

I don't feel I owe this person an opinion or apology about how I live my life. They are not paying my Salary. .

You don't, and I don't care about how you live your life.
I was simply responding rationally to the op and others who want to question how I live mine.

gozunda · 19-08-2018 1:03am

anewme wrote: »

This is the type of **** I don't want to get into. Making excuses about my feelings and opinions.

I don't feel I owe this person an opinion or apology about how I live my life. They are not paying my Salary. .

Tbh I don't think they are. That conversation is covering stuff brought up between them relating to their own stand on those issues.

We are all free to come up with out own ideas - it doesn't mean we can't talk about them or discuss how we arrived at that point.

For myself I've been around animals all my life. I prefer to see animals well looked after and cared for much like the chickens you were talking about. That said I'm a realist that accepts that both domestic and farm animals have different lives and experiences do our own.

I'm interested in animal welfare and making sure animals are well looked after. I've read a fair bit about this and whilst doing that have came on various stuff about veganism. Most of which in principle is ok. However i have noted that there is a worrying extremist edge as well .

The scariest thing I personally came across were several vegan writers who genuinly proposed that wild carnivores and other meat eaters should be eradicated, because they believed those carnivores caused suffering to other animals. I had thought perhaps these ideas were fairly isolated until I and across several facebook pages which - very much supported these ideas. This worries me deeply. Because humans should not play god and determine whether any wild animal should exist or not purely on the basis of what other wild animal it eats.

I know most vegans don't entertain such ideas but the issue I see is that there are those who embrace these types of ideas as part of their belief that 'meat is murder' to 'all meat is murder and that is not right imo.

Base price · 19-08-2018 1:05am

ExoPolitic wrote: »

Thanks!

I just see it for how it is, what ever we do in between is just culturally appropriate to who ever is dealing with the animals.

There is no right answer if you are taking the world as your context.

For fecks sake what other context can one take

.

Thankfully I will be long dead when we (Homo Sapiens) spin out off this little Planet.
I often wonder why people who champion Veggie/Vegan diets refer to animal welfare but neglect to reference the destruction of ancient/historic natural habitats that clears virgin ground for palm trees etc.

anewme · 19-08-2018 4:16am

Base price wrote: »

Why on Earth should your feelings/opinions be influenced by your Employer ???

Lighten up ffs.

It's a saying.

He who pays the piper calls the tune.

ExoPolitic · 19-08-2018 7:55am

Base price wrote: »

For fecks sake what other context can one take .

Thankfully I will be long dead when we (Homo Sapiens) spin out off this little Planet.
I often wonder why people who champion Veggie/Vegan diets refer to animal welfare but neglect to reference the destruction of ancient/historic natural habitats that clears virgin ground for palm trees etc.

Well... if you lived in northern China, you'd be eating the dog you care so much about here in Ireland lol.

Or if you lived in the middle east you'd kill your animal by slitting its throat and hanging it up to drain of blood and that would be seen as the normal thing to do.

Depends from where you are in the world in relation to the answer of the OP

emaherx · 19-08-2018 8:20am

Eathrin wrote: »

It is not necessary to slaughter animals, so, also from a point of compassion, I would rather they didn't suffer this abuse.

Isn't it though? How large does a creature need to be before it matters? Lots of insecticide used to produce vegtables. Rodent/pest control a requirement at many levels of food production. Plenty of animals killed either intentionally or unintentionally in the large scale production of all food.

auspicious · 19-08-2018 5:52pm

A house down the road in a housing estate has a 2 to 3 month old kitten locked in the boiler house outside by itself with no water or food, in darkness.
It is constantly crying ( not in a nice way) and scratching to get out. Many neighbours are commenting.
I haven't seen it myself. One neighbour called to door pretending she had lost her cat and asked the man of the house to open the boiler. He did so but quickly snapped the doors shut after proving it was not the lady's cat.
Disturbed by the interaction, the concerned lady went in to the local ISPCA here in the midlands to report the issue.
Quote " What do you want us to do about it?" was the association representative's reply. Quite shocking coming from a body designed to provide and most likely encourage positive animal welfare practices.

What should be done? Should the guards be notified about the distressed kitten?

ganmo · 19-08-2018 6:15pm

auspicious wrote: »

A house down the road in a housing estate has a 2 to 3 month old kitten locked in the boiler house outside by itself with no water or food, in darkness.
It is constantly crying ( not in a nice way) and scratching to get out. Many neighbours are commenting.
I haven't seen it myself. One neighbour called to door pretending she had lost her cat and asked the man of the house to open the boiler. He did so but quickly snapped the doors shut after proving it was not the lady's cat.
Disturbed by the interaction, the concerned lady went in to the local ISPCA here in the midlands to report the issue.
Quote " What do you want us to do about it?" was the association representative's reply. Quite shocking coming from a body designed to provide and most likely encourage positive animal welfare practices.

What should be done? Should the guards be notified about the distressed kitten?

This should be asked in the animal and pets forum

Nekarsulm · 19-08-2018 8:53pm

Eathrin wrote: »

It is not necessary to slaughter animals, so, also from a point of compassion, I would rather they didn't suffer this abuse.

Well that's true, but it's what all reasonable humans in Western society do, and in as humane a way as possible.
In the natural world, of course, this is not the way.
They rip each other apart and eat each other while still alive.
Have you ever seen a cat torment and kill/eat a mouse?
A terrier with a rat?
Any wildlife programme on the TV from the Serengetti or the great plains of Africa?

Eathrin · 19-08-2018 11:56pm

Nekarsulm wrote: »

Well that's true, but it's what all reasonable humans in Western society do, and in as humane a way as possible.
In the natural world, of course, this is not the way.
They rip each other apart and eat each other while still alive.
Have you ever seen a cat torment and kill/eat a mouse?
A terrier with a rat?
Any wildlife programme on the TV from the Serengetti or the great plains of Africa?

What makes it reasonable when there is a viable and better for everyone solution available for all? These animals have their whole short life planned out for them the moment they're born, and it's usually not all that humane.

Humane - "having or showing compassion or benevolence". No such thing as humane slaughter I'm afraid.

I consider myself capable of making decisions morally superior to that of a wild animal.

gozunda · 20-08-2018 1:00am

Eathrin wrote: »

What makes it reasonable when there is a viable and better for everyone solution available for all? These animals have their whole short life planned out for them the moment they're born, and it's usually not all that humane.
Humane - "having or showing compassion or benevolence". No such thing as humane slaughter I'm afraid.I consider myself capable of making decisions morally superior to that of a wild animal.

Unfortunately some misinformation there . At the scale required to feed everyone on the planet - the alternatives have been shown to be little better or any more viable than that any other system in that arable, horticulture and animal agricultural systems are intrinsically linked. Is there room for improvement in these systems - undeniabley yes.

Livestock farming remains a very important part of Agriculture - for the one simple reason that vast amount of land on the planet which can not be used to grow crops suitable for humans - such as areas of climatic and topographical limited grasslands which cover vast areas of the globe. In these areas farm animals eat grass - which humans are not able to. And in these areas livestock rearing remain the mainstay for local populations.

As to humane - farming in Ireland is every bit as humane as possible. Farm animals such as cows etc are cared for in detailed humane conditions and are protected by law to ensure that those responsible for animals must provide "five freedoms" to animals under their care, these are:
freedom from hunger and thirst, freedom from discomfort (by providing adequate living conditions), freedom from pain, injury and disease, freedom to express normal behaviour, and freedom from fear and distress.

A quick browse shows that humane slaughter is both practised and legislated here in that every animal for slaughter must be instantaneously killed or rendered instantaneously unconscious and insensible to pain until death occurs. Dept of Agriculture vetinary staff oversee all slaughter facilities.
Legislated conditions for humane slaughter include:
,*Supply of water and food to animals prior to slaughter.
*Prohibition of slaughter in sight of another animal.
*Prohibition of slaughter causing excessive suffering.
*Compulsory use of approved instrument for slaughter of animals.
*Approved instruments for slaughter of animals.
*Requirement for Slaughter Licences. *Prohibition of slaughtering without licence.

Ensuring animals are fed and looked after and are slaughtered quickly is both humane and correct. . Animals in the wild unfortunately frequently suffer fairly agonising deaths. And yes that is how it is. As humans however - we can provide humane slaughter conditions for the animals in our care and imo that is the right thing to do.

It matters little if anyone considers themselves "capable of making decisions morally superior to that of a wild animal". No society revolves around any one person's world view. I would add that to define oneself as superior to wild animals is in itself speciest. Tbh I find that a strange stance as vegan.

gozunda · 20-08-2018 1:19am

Eathrin - for clarification the definition that you gave for "Humane" appears to be incomplete.

Eathrin wrote:

Humane - "having or showing compassion or benevolence"...

This from the online dictionary:

humane
adjective

1. having or showing compassion or benevolence.

"regulations ensuring the humane treatment of animals"

synonyms:compassionate, kind, kindly, kind-hearted, considerate, understanding, sympathetic, tolerant, civilized, good, good-natured, gentle;

lenient,forbearing, forgiving, merciful,mild, tender, clement, benign,humanitarian, benevolent,charitable, generous,magnanimous;

approachable,accessible; rarebenignant

"regulations ensuring the humane treatment of animals"

Eathrin · 20-08-2018 1:51am

I agree with the definition

To murder compassionately
To murder kindly
To murder kind-heartedly
To murder considerately
To murder understandingly
To murder sympathetically
...

These are oxymorons. Humane treatment of animals means not murdering them for starters. This isn't the same as euthanising a pet that is in pain and has lived a full life. How you fail to see the contradiction there is beyond me.

Using the law as your sole moral compass is living blindly if you ask me. No doubt it's a good starting point but the law has been shown to be morally lacking time and time again throughout history. Slavery, apartheid, women's rights, children's rights etc. Were any of these things morally justifiable just because they were lawful and regulated in the past?

If you don't possess the decision making ability superior to that of a wild animal then I truly pity you!

emaherx · 20-08-2018 7:31am

Eathrin wrote: »

I agree with the definition

To murder compassionately
To murder kindly
To murder kind-heartedly
To murder considerately
To murder understandingly
To murder sympathetically
...

These are oxymorons. Humane treatment of animals means not murdering them for starters. This isn't the same as euthanising a pet that is in pain and has lived a full life. How you fail to see the contradiction there is beyond me.

Using the law as your sole moral compass is living blindly if you ask me. No doubt it's a good starting point but the law has been shown to be morally lacking time and time again throughout history. Slavery, apartheid, women's rights, children's rights etc. Were any of these things morally justifiable just because they were lawful and regulated in the past?

If you don't possess the decision making ability superior to that of a wild animal then I truly pity you!

And what of the sentient creatures killed to produce your food, this is the social contradiction.

Murder?
Definition of Murder; The premeditated unlawful killing of one human by another.
Safe to say no animal has ever been murdered.

gozunda · 20-08-2018 8:33am

Eathrin wrote: »

I agree with the definition
To murder compassionately
To murder kindly
To murder kind-heartedly
To murder considerately
To murder understandingly
To murder sympathetically
These are oxymorons. Humane treatment of animals means not murdering them for starters. This isn't the same as euthanising a pet that is in pain and has lived a full life. How you fail to see the contradiction there is beyond me.

Using the law as your sole moral compass is living blindly if you ask me. No doubt it's a good starting point but the law has been shown to be morally lacking time and time again throughout history. Slavery, apartheid, women's rights, children's rights etc. Were any of these things morally justifiable just because they were lawful and regulated in the past?
If you don't possess the decision making ability superior to that of a wild animal then I truly pity you!

Ah I see you you subscribe to that old oxymoron that "meat is muder". The contradiction in that statement was already covered in a previous post.

Yes the humane treatment of animals includes providing humane means of slaughter of animals. See the definition of 'humane" for a start. As a previous poster said - 'do you think that the much loved pet about to be euthanized feels differently to the cow?'

The killing of an animal by any other animal for the purpose of food is not 'murder' no matter which way you want to look at it. I've already explained how entrophy works.

You really do need to get a better dictionary. Because murder is defined as follows:

murder

noun

the unlawful premeditated killing of one human being by another.

Yes I do abide by the law. And no your 'morals' do not constitute a proper basis for a rule of law thankfully. For example just because you think pumping a chicken full of antibiotics is 'morally right' does not mean it is A. either moral or B. legal.

Btw I am confused why do you keep comparing yourself to other animals?

Edit: genuine question - As "slavery, apartheid, women's rights, children's rights" are all 'human' issues - how do these fit with animal based agriculture etc?

Tilikum17 · 25-08-2018 8:35am

A bus in Seattle

gozunda · 25-08-2018 8:50pm

Tilikum17 wrote: »

A bus in Seattle

If you havn't seen it - that sentiment had a good outing in the other thread ...

https://touch.boards.ie/thread/2057903285/1/#post107847708

Tilikum17 · 04-09-2018 7:06am

https://www.reddit.com/r/vegan/comments/9cll1a/the_sheer_scale_of_worldwide_animal_agriculture/?st=JLNB8SDQ&sh=9a80d113

Social contradiction on how we treat animals

Comments