Yea I feel bad for the kosher eaters but its a pretty sick way to kill an animal and I don't see why there god should care how much pain the animal goes through.
[QUOTE=Eli_r;30782854]I have no idea what's wrong. Maybe just plain discrimination.
I live in a small town in Friesland (In the North of Holland) and there are quite some Turkish and Maroccan people here. A few of the older people don't speak our language that good but it doesn't matter because they get the message across. They're not forcing their religion, practices or language on us. They don't form a problem for society and they do normal work and try their best at higher education.
I have no idea why our fellow dutchmen be hatin'[/QUOTE]
I agree, I live in a big city (Utrecht) and there are actually lots of Turkish and Moroccan people here. Most older people are very nice, even though they can't always speak the language. The youth are more 'aggressive', but it's way too exaggerated by too many. They are usually more aggressive in packs, but they can get fined and seperated when they walk with like 4+ people. Individually they're often pretty okay people who go to school and finish it too.
Anyway, I think they have to find a solution for this. This shouldn't mean the jewish and muslim shouldn't be able to eat meat anymore.
The way the meat is prepared in the western world is atrocious. How can they call those methods inhumane? Can you suggest a more humane and reasonable way?
[QUOTE=imasillypiggy;30787609]Yea I feel bad for the kosher eaters but its a pretty sick way to kill an animal and I don't see why there god should care how much pain the animal goes through.[/QUOTE]
iirc the whole idea of Kosher meat is to prevent the animals' suffering in the first place. Well-performed, it should be so.
[QUOTE=Elecbullet;30787408]I mightn't feel so good about citing PeTA. But Google search "PETA fur farm".
They skin the animal alive. It remains alive, skinned. They don't kill it because that'd harm the valuable fur.
Is that not unjust?[/QUOTE]
No, Justice is not relevant in this case.
As others have mentioned with regard to slaughter, since in the end you are killing the animal, the method you go about doing so is largely irrelevant, especially with regards to a conversation the the "rights" of the animal.
Similarly, if skinning the animal in the methods depicted in peta videos(which I have seen) allows the fur farmers to make more money, I can't necessarily blame them.
However if I were going to buy a fur coat, and I had a choice between one made of the fur of animals who were killed quickly and as painlessly as possible, or a coat made out of the fur of animals skinned alive, or otherwise tortured, I would prefer to buy the one made of the fur of animals killed painlessly.
But if my only choice were the skinned alive animals, I wouldn't lose any sleep over it, same goes for food.
[QUOTE=Novistador;30787914]No, Justice is not relevant in this case.
As others have mentioned with regard to slaughter, since in the end you are killing the animal, the method you go about doing so is largely irrelevant, especially with regards to a conversation the the "rights" of the animal.
Similarly, if skinning the animal in the methods depicted in peta videos(which I have seen) allows the fur farmers to make more money, I can't necessarily blame them.
However if I were going to buy a fur coat, and I had a choice between one made of the fur of animals who were killed quickly and as painlessly as possible, or a coat made out of the fur of animals skinned alive, or otherwise tortured, I would prefer to buy the one made of the fur of animals killed painlessly.
But if my only choice were the skinned alive animals, I wouldn't lose any sleep over it, same goes for food.[/QUOTE]
Oh god you disgust me, I can't stand that I'm even part of the same species as you.
[QUOTE=carcarcargo;30788498]Oh god you disgust me, I can't stand that I'm even part of the same species as you.[/QUOTE]
Maybe you could wish to become another species so I could eat you and or wear you as a hat.
[editline]29th June 2011[/editline]
I am a proud Human Supremacist :hitler:
[QUOTE=Novistador;30788587]Maybe you could wish to become another species so I could eat you and or wear you as a hat.[/QUOTE]
Well as a strong believer in transhumanism I'll just buy myself into a new species
[QUOTE=Novistador;30787914]No, Justice is not relevant in this case.
As others have mentioned with regard to slaughter, since in the end you are killing the animal, the method you go about doing so is largely irrelevant, especially with regards to a conversation the the "rights" of the animal.
Similarly, if skinning the animal in the methods depicted in peta videos(which I have seen) allows the fur farmers to make more money, I can't necessarily blame them.
However if I were going to buy a fur coat, and I had a choice between one made of the fur of animals who were killed quickly and as painlessly as possible, or a coat made out of the fur of animals skinned alive, or otherwise tortured, I would prefer to buy the one made of the fur of animals killed painlessly.
But if my only choice were the skinned alive animals, I wouldn't lose any sleep over it, same goes for food.[/QUOTE]
So what you're saying is that any human gain is worth more than animal suffering no matter how great the suffering or how little the gain. The only way that could make sense were if there was an absolute distinction between humans and other animals, and spoiler: there isn't one.
[QUOTE=ThisGuy0;30788647]So what you're saying is that any human gain is worth more than animal suffering no matter how great the suffering or how little the gain. The only way that could make sense were if there was an absolute distinction between humans and other animals, and spoiler: there isn't one.[/QUOTE]
Spoiler, there is, our rational faculty.
Please point me towards the great animal civilizations, systems of language, technology, etc
(protip, posting something an animal makes mindlessly and repeatedly as the result of instincts is not funny and does not count, ex: a termite colony or spiderweb)
When an animal develops the ability to communicate rationally why they should not be eaten, congratulations! they have the same distinction that separates humans from other creatures and they must now have their rights respected.
[QUOTE=Novistador;30788697]Spoiler, there is, our rational faculty.
Please point me towards the great animal civilizations, systems of language, technology, etc
(protip, posting something an animal makes mindlessly and repeatedly as the result of instincts is not funny and does not count, ex: a termite colony or spiderweb)
When an animal develops the ability to communicate rationally why they should not be eaten, congratulations! they have the same distinction that separates humans from other creatures and they must now have their rights respected.[/QUOTE]
I can't understand what you're saying so I'm going to eat you.
Sorry if its been mentioned in the previous 7 pages (I am still reading), but really who gives a fuck about how an animal is killed.
I know it sounds really cold and cruel, but its being slaughtered so why does the method matter.
[QUOTE=carcarcargo;30788778]I can't understand what you're saying so I'm going to eat you.[/QUOTE]
Most animals aren't saying anything
They can grunt and hoot to express fear, or hunger, or contentment or whatever.
But to say that they are using language on the same level as human being use it is absurd.
Animals can't understand concepts, try explaining justice to one, try even explaining rights to an animal.
Animals don't think like us, they are incapable of it (at least currently known animals are)
Because of this the lives of human beings are improved more by using other Animals as food or resources, than simply letting them run free saying "oh but its the chicken's right".
The human life is short and finite, and after it ends, that's it.
I intend to make the most of mine and if that means sacrificing clucky( or fido, or polly parrot, or mr. kitty cat) for the sake of a double down then thats what I intend to do.
[editline]29th June 2011[/editline]
If someone would like to try and argue that human beings would be better off by granting animals the same rights we grant ourselves, then I'm all ears.
[quote=Wikipedia]According to Islamic tradition, the animal is brought to the place of slaughter and laid down gently so as to not injure it. The blade must be kept hidden until the very last moment while the jugular of the animal is felt. The conventional method used to slaughter the animal involves cutting the large arteries in the neck along with the esophagus and vertebrate trachea with one swipe of an non-serrated blade. Care must be taken that the nervous system is not damaged, as this may cause the animal to die before exsanguination has taken place. While blood is draining, the animal is not handled until it has died. If any other method is used its meat will not be halal.[/quote]
Sounds pretty inhumane to me.
[QUOTE=Novistador;30787914]
As others have mentioned with regard to slaughter, since in the end you are killing the animal, the method you go about doing so is largely irrelevant, especially with regards to a conversation the the "rights" of the animal.[/QUOTE]
So do you think it should be legal to torture terminally ill people and those on death row?
[editline]29th June 2011[/editline]
[QUOTE=elitehakor v2;30789065]Sounds pretty inhumane to me.[/QUOTE]
I've been to a Halal slaughter house. They take the animal, put it towards mecca, say a prayer and cut the throat.
[editline]29th June 2011[/editline]
It's quick easy and makes it halal.
[QUOTE=amute;30789332]So do you think it should be legal to torture terminally ill people and those on death row?[/QUOTE]
I don't understand the terminally ill comparison. They are not executed.
[QUOTE=Sanius;30784192]Good post.[/QUOTE]
But there are meat substitutes
[QUOTE=Zeke129;30789386]But there are meat substitutes[/QUOTE]
Are there substitutes that provide all of the necessary nutrients and whatnot? I'm honestly curious, because I haven't heard of any. I'm not trying to shit on you or anything.
[QUOTE=amute;30789332]So do you think it should be legal to torture terminally ill people and those on death row?
[/QUOTE]
A terminally Ill human being, is still a human being
The only time it is appropriate to kill a human being is if they are violating your rights, terminally ill people don't necessarily do such a thing.
Either you have the right to kill somebody or you don't, in the case of an innocent person who is terminally ill you don't.
(I see what your trying to say with the whole "well their going to die anyways" thing, but the fact is that a human has rights and an animal doesn't and the rights of the person are intact until they die.)
When it comes to people on death row I think weather or not they are subjected to horrible torture should really be dependent on the severity of their crime.
In the case of people on death row, these are usually human being who have either no hope of ever rejoining society without harming others, or have committed crimes so terrible that they are judged to deserve the worst punishment that could possibly be given to them.
So I guess if someone was irredeemably evil, and had committed a horrible horrible crime that it would be proper to torture them before their execution.
This is a case where the concept of Justice IS relevant, where one must evaluate a human being and their actions, and treat them accordingly, praising the praiseworthy and damning the terrible.
[QUOTE=Sanius;30789403]Are there substitutes that provide all of the necessary nutrients and whatnot? I'm honestly curious, because I haven't heard of any. I'm not trying to shit on you or anything.[/QUOTE]
You can easily live healthily without meat, hundreds of thousands of people do
[url]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Meat_analogue[/url]
You haven't heard of any of the things on there, especially the vegetarian section?
[editline]29th June 2011[/editline]
Novistador what is wrong with you anyway
"It's not okay to kill someone unless they're violating your rights" and then within 200 words, "it's okay to torture in some cases"
A person on death row isn't violating anyone's rights anymore, in fact THEIR human rights are being violated
By your logic a prisoner being executed would be well within his rights to kill the guards, executioner, etc to save himself
[QUOTE=amute;30789332]
[editline]29th June 2011[/editline]
I've been to a Halal slaughter house. They take the animal, put it towards mecca, say a prayer and cut the throat.
[editline]29th June 2011[/editline]
It's quick easy and makes it halal.[/QUOTE]
Yeah I know, I've seen my dad slaughter a goat for eid
[editline]29th June 2011[/editline]
The meat wasn't too bad, but then again I'm not too fond of goat
[QUOTE=Zeke129;30789527]You can easily live healthily without meat, hundreds of thousands of people do
[url]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Meat_analogue[/url]
You haven't heard of any of the things on there, especially the vegetarian section?
[/QUOTE]
I wasn't aware that things like tofu were actually an appropriate substitute. I've never really looked into the subject.
So I guess the omnivore argument is completely unfounded
[QUOTE=Sanius;30789376]I don't understand the terminally ill comparison. They are not executed.[/QUOTE]
They're going to die soon anyway, so therefore it's okay to hurt them before they die.
[editline]29th June 2011[/editline]
[QUOTE=Novistador;30789515]A terminally Ill human being, is still a human being
The only time it is appropriate to kill a human being is if they are violating your rights, terminally ill people don't necessarily do such a thing.
Either you have the right to kill somebody or you don't, in the case of an innocent person who is terminally ill you don't.
(I see what your trying to say with the whole "well their going to die anyways" thing, but the fact is that a human has rights and an animal doesn't and the rights of the person are intact until they die.)
When it comes to people on death row I think weather or not they are subjected to horrible torture should really be dependent on the severity of their crime.
In the case of people on death row, these are usually human being who have either no hope of ever rejoining society without harming others, or have committed crimes so terrible that they are judged to deserve the worst punishment that could possibly be given to them.
So I guess if someone was irredeemably evil, and had committed a horrible horrible crime that it would be proper to torture them before their execution.
This is a case where the concept of Justice IS relevant, where one must evaluate a human being and their actions, and treat them accordingly, praising the praiseworthy and damning the terrible.[/QUOTE]
You should buy some morals, I hear they're going cheap. Pick up some. Any, get a sample taste I don't care, just get them.
[QUOTE=amute;30789836]They're going to die soon anyway, so therefore it's okay to hurt them before they die.[/QUOTE]
People aren't put on death row because they are going to die of medical complications. I can't believe that you of all people would make such a stupid comparison.
[QUOTE=Zeke129;30789527]
Novistador what is wrong with you anyway
"It's not okay to kill someone unless they're violating your rights" and then within 200 words, "it's okay to torture in some cases"
A person on death row isn't violating anyone's rights anymore, in fact THEIR human rights are being violated
By your logic a prisoner being executed would be well within his rights to kill the guards, executioner, etc to save himself[/QUOTE]
If your on death row, and your actually guilty of something(lets assume the person is actually guilty, arguments against death row regarding wrongful conviction are an entirely different issue which is irrelevant to this specific conversation) that makes you deserve being there (multiple murders, serial violent sexual assault, etc) then their rights are not being violated, they are they because they chose not to recognize rights, and as such theirs aren't going to be recognized either.
You can't expect to commit some heinous crime then as soon as your sentenced go "BUT I'M A CHANGED MAN I PROMISE NOT TO DO IT AGAIN" and then go on your way because at that specific moment your not actually doing anything wrong.
It is in a human beings self-interest not to violate the rights of others, it is not in ones self interest to allow rights violators to go free and unanswered until they have their way with you.
Its totally ridiculous context dropping to say that you are a terrible rights violator and kidnapping murderer because you apprehend a serial killer and execute them.
(as for the escaping prisoner thing, since the prisoner has previously proven through his actions that he does not respect the rights of others, indeed he threatens and violates them, he does not deserve to have his rights respected, and unless everyone around him is suicidal, it would be impossible for them to.
that said, I would fully expect a man condemned to death to fight to his last breath to try and escape, yet that would not erase their crimes, or make their execution any less righteous)
[QUOTE=Sanius;30789853]People aren't put on death row because they are going to die of medical complications. I can't believe that you of all people would make such a stupid comparison.[/QUOTE]
You have missed the point by about 50 miles.
[QUOTE=Sanius;30789583]I wasn't aware that things like tofu were actually an appropriate substitute. I've never really looked into the subject.
So I guess the omnivore argument is completely unfounded[/QUOTE]
We're omnivores in the sense that traditionally we've eaten both and mostly still do
[QUOTE=Zeke129;30789903]We're omnivores in the sense that traditionally we've eaten both and mostly still do[/QUOTE]
I always thought that humans required nutrients that only come from meat. I was taught wrong
[QUOTE=amute;30789836]You should buy some morals, I hear they're going cheap. Pick up some. Any, get a sample taste I don't care, just get them.[/QUOTE]
I do have morals, and I'm sure you have quite a good idea of what they consist of based on our numerous previous encounters mr. amute/trotsky/ho chi mihn
It is moral to defend yourself, executing someone whose existence poses a threat to yours is a form of self defense and is as such moral as well.
For the same reasons, It would be moral to torture someone who had information they were withholding, which could prevent the deaths of innocent people.
An amoralist would not be making reference to justice, or even rights for that matter, they would just say that all actions are just meaningless motion that can't be analyzed further or given deeper significance, which is clearly not my angle at all.
[QUOTE=Sanius;30789938]I always thought that humans required nutrients that only come from meat. I was taught wrong[/QUOTE]
In terms of basic nutrients like protein and so forth we can get everything we need, but as for specific amino acids or whatever I'm not 100% sure
I know there are different types of proteins too and some may be exclusive to meat, I couldn't speak to their importance though
[editline]29th June 2011[/editline]
[QUOTE=Novistador;30789982]
For the same reasons, It would be moral to torture someone who had information they were withholding, which could prevent the deaths of innocent people.[/QUOTE]
Is it still moral when you realize that statistically, torture is a really shitty way of obtaining accurate information?
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.