Investigation launched after Idaho science teacher allegedly feeds puppy to snapping turtle - Sensationalist Headlines

[QUOTE=ilikecorn;53198235]"Taking steps to ensure this doesn't happen again" Seriously? "but think of the children" strikes again, how dare our children learn about how certain animals feed.[/QUOTE] more like "think of the dogs" you muppet

[QUOTE=Mort Stroodle;53198691]At that point you're more arguing that morals should [I]never[/I] be considered. Morals ARE cultural norms, there are very few constants throughout all cultures. In some cultures murdering outsiders is perfectly acceptable. If you try to divorce morals from cultures then you get rid of morals altogether.[/QUOTE] I would expect, in a civilized society, that morals and laws against cruelty to animals are based on animal suffering, not what people typically raise them for. Being bred for consumption shouldn't make unnecessary cruelty to, say, pigs any more acceptable than unnecessary cruelty to dogs. Culturally, Westerners might have more of a reaction to abuse of a dog than a pig, but AFAIK our legal system doesn't give dogs special standing in that regard- animal cruelty is animal cruelty. All morals are cultural norms, but that doesn't mean all cultural norms are enforced as morals/law. If you hear 'a teacher unnecessarily fed a live, conscious, terrified mammal to a snapping turtle' I don't think your assessment of whether it's morally right or wrong should be contingent on exactly [I]which[/I] species of mammal it is. Americans are more emotionally attached to dogs but that seems a poor justification for harsher treatment; it's projecting subjective, personal values onto others rather than appealing to an objective standard.

[QUOTE=Spookyspoots;53198605]I'm just gonna throw this out there. If the animal in question had a been a rat this wouldn't be news. I often hear the excuse that some animals are bred to be eaten by reptiles but that doesn't negate suffering.[/QUOTE] I think it's like a cognitive dissonance, helped along by the animal agriculture industry/industries, they don't really want to understand what they do to the organisms around them with their lifestyles. For example, this puppy died a shitty death, but no one seems to care about the billions of farm animals that live in holocaust conditions only to be slaughtered for people's taste pleasure.

Don't feed THESE animals to snakes, feed THESE animals instead. [QUOTE=Tampong;53198209]As long as it was not live feeding, I see no problem with it.[/QUOTE] This is the most argument, but even then [iirc] some reptiles refuse to eat other dead animals and require them to be alive.

The fact of the matter is, in order to own a carnivorous animal in captivity, you will need to find the healthiest option to keep them happy and sustained. Yeah, that sometimes involves using feeder animals, but you have to know which animals can mimic best what the animal may consume in the wild, whether the animal will benefit from live or dead feeders, and whether the animal chosen to use as a feeder is the most accessible and appropriate in the animal's natural food chain. You cannot own a carnivorous reptile without being part of the act of killing another live animal in order to feed your reptile, whether it's by paying the feeder farms that kill the animal for you or feeding a live feeder animal to your reptile. But feeding a live puppy that is not only not really found in a snapping turtle's natural diet and allowing others to watch you do it - especially students - is honestly just inappropriate. I don't know if there's a law for using typical non-feeder animals as food for another animal but even if there's not, it's an act that probably should have been done away from a school environment because of the general Western taboo.

I just think it's a little weird that people are all "feeding this kind of live animal to another animal is bad, but feeding this kind of animal to them isn't". It's actually a really interesting ethical issue. If you have an animal that only eats live prey, and it kills its prey in an "inhumane" way, which is less moral? Letting it starve, or feeding it? Does what you feed it matter, and if so, why? [editline]13th March 2018[/editline] [QUOTE=Pascall;53198997]The fact of the matter is, in order to own a carnivorous animal in captivity, you will need to find the healthiest option to keep them happy and sustained. Yeah, that sometimes involves using feeder animals, but you have to know which animals can mimic best what the animal may consume in the wild, whether the animal will benefit from live or dead feeders, and whether the animal chosen to use as a feeder is the most accessible and appropriate in the animal's natural food chain. You cannot own a carnivorous reptile without being part of the act of killing another live animal in order to feed your reptile, whether it's by paying the feeder farms that kill the animal for you or feeding a live feeder animal to your reptile. But feeding a live puppy that is not only not really found in a snapping turtle's natural diet and allowing others to watch you do it - especially students - is honestly just inappropriate. I don't know if there's a law for using typical non-feeder animals as food for another animal but even if there's not, it's an act that probably should have been done away from a school environment because of the general Western taboo.[/QUOTE] I don't really think puppies are that distinct from a dietary perspective from any other small mammal. I don't think coming at this from the angle of "it was inhumane for the snapping turtle" is going to go anywhere.

[QUOTE=Mr. Scorpio;53199002]I just think it's a little weird that people are all "feeding this kind of live animal to another animal is bad, but feeding this kind of animal to them isn't". It's actually a really interesting ethical issue. If you have an animal that only eats live prey, and it kills its prey in an "inhumane" way, which is less moral? Letting it starve, or feeding it? Does what you feed it matter, and if so, why?[/QUOTE] I'd say it's inhumane to let it happen if there is an alternative. Realistically, there are no alternatives in the wild for these predator animals, it's not like they can create themselves an all vegan diet. To me...if you have a pet like this then your own morality is called into question because obviously there are a lot of alternatives to having a death machine as a pet. It just seems pretty selfish to have an animal that needs live feeding just...like why, because it's cool? It is immoral to eat other animals if there are alternatives, that goes for your pet's diet as well imo.

[QUOTE=Lok's;53198402]I've seen how snapping turtles eat, it isn't pretty. Also it is the first time I've read that they can feed snakes with guinea pigs, I tought mices or rats were the go to for food for these animals.[/QUOTE] Larger snakes are often fed rabbits and guinea pigs because of the amount of rats that would be necessary to sate them.

[QUOTE=Tetracycline;53199031]I'd say it's inhumane to let it happen if there is an alternative. Realistically, there are no alternatives in the wild for these predator animals, it's not like they can create themselves an all vegan diet. To me...if you have a pet like this then your own morality is called into question because obviously there are a lot of alternatives to having a death machine as a pet. It just seems pretty selfish to have an animal that needs live feeding just...like why, because it's cool? It is immoral to eat other animals if there are alternatives, that goes for your pets diets.[/QUOTE] consider, for a moment, snakes Snakes only eat live prey, so you can't feed them anything else. What is the most moral animal to feed a snake? Snakes are capable of eating a wide range of prey. Is feeding a snake several small animals less or more moral than feeding them a single larger one? Is being complicit in the eating habits of a snake immoral in and of itself? Are snakes themselves immoral creatures?

[QUOTE=Mr. Scorpio;53199054]consider, for a moment, snakes Snakes only eat live prey, so you can't feed them anything else. What is the most moral animal to feed a snake? Snakes are capable of eating a wide range of prey. Is feeding a snake several small animals less or more moral than feeding them a single larger one? Is being complicit in the eating habits of a snake immoral in and of itself? Are snakes themselves immoral creatures?[/QUOTE] The universe and snakes within it all act amorally. If snakes were made into intelligent minds and continued doing what they do with no regrets then yeah, they'd be pretty immoral. I think when you have an intelligent mind then morality becomes applicable. If you NEED a snake pet, then you need to weigh the suffering it causes against the suffering your lack of snake causes lest you become "immoral". Though, being "immoral" isn't a big deal all the time, since the universe in general doesn't give us much choice but to be immoral in some ways. I think it's important to recognize immorality when it happens and to deeply wish to end it all, that's the kind of society I want anyway.

That's kinda' fucked. It seems wholly unnecessary to feed it a fucking puppy of all things, I guess the dude really hates mammals or something? I've been working with reptiles my whole life and I haven't met a single person who'd do something like this, absolutely bizarre. We have feeder mice for a reason. [QUOTE=Zonesylvania;53198126]This guy is a fucking nutcase.[/QUOTE] I've fed guinea pigs to snakes before, it's not that uncommon. They're often bred specifically to be eaten as feeders. [QUOTE=SunsetTable;53198371]This is like that fucking idiot who fed a kitten to his pet snake for christmas and then posted the video online to shock everyone. No, a puppy nor a guinea pig is not [I]the natural[/I] part of a snapping turtles diet. Fish, planet life, small insects and other such creatures are what snapping turtles actually eat.[/QUOTE] Its common to feed snappers mice and they can and do eat mammals in the wild.

[QUOTE=Mr. Scorpio;53199054]consider, for a moment, snakes Snakes only eat live prey, so you can't feed them anything else. What is the most moral animal to feed a snake? Snakes are capable of eating a wide range of prey. Is feeding a snake several small animals less or more moral than feeding them a single larger one? Is being complicit in the eating habits of a snake immoral in and of itself? Are snakes themselves immoral creatures?[/QUOTE] I dunno, the store bought mice my friend fed her snake had no sense of preservation whatsoever save for one. They basically walked around the cage like "oh hey what's this coiled up tube here :) OH SHIT" and continued to act like nothing was going on while it ate their friends one by one up until it went after the one woke mouse in the group because there were none left. By and large they don't seem to give a shit, I think they breed them to be retarded.

[QUOTE=Tetracycline;53199091]The universe and snakes within it all act amorally. If snakes were made into intelligent minds and continued doing what they do with no regrets then yeah, they'd be pretty immoral.[/QUOTE] Dude, I realized you were crazy when you harassed me, but this is taking it a bit far what even are you on about here

[QUOTE=Tetracycline;53199091]The universe and snakes within it all act amorally. If snakes were made into intelligent minds and continued doing what they do with no regrets then yeah, they'd be pretty immoral. I think when you have an intelligent mind then morality becomes applicable. If you NEED a snake pet, then you need to weigh the suffering it causes against the suffering your lack of snake causes lest you become "immoral". Though, being "immoral" isn't a big deal all the time, since the universe in general doesn't give us much choice but to be immoral in some ways. I think it's important to recognize immorality when it happens and to deeply wish to end it all, that's the kind of society I want anyway.[/QUOTE] what if the snake wasn't your pet? if you came across a snake in the wild, would you be obligated to kill it since not killing it would be allowing it to kill many other animals?

[QUOTE=Mr. Scorpio;53199115]what if the snake wasn't your pet? if you came across a snake in the wild, would you be obligated to kill it since not killing it would be allowing it to kill many other animals?[/QUOTE] And then if he killed every snake then the ecosystem would likely fall apart and even more animals will die. Arguing about morality when it comes to nature is nonsensical and pointless.

Fundamentally I could argue that feeding a puppy to a snapping turtle infront of students is still immoral because the students in that environment are used to treating dogs as friends instead of something that is meant to be eaten. Therefore the professor is still putting a large quantity of people in a certain culture under severe mental strain and potentially even mental trauma. It is possible to argue the subjective distinction between dogs and pigs and rodents quite continuously, however the fact remains that the professor potentially fucked a lot of the students up mentally, and that is the main reason why this is fucked up in this particular instance.

[QUOTE=ForgottenKane;53199130]And then if he killed every snake then the ecosystem would likely fall apart and even more animals will die. Arguing about morality when it comes to nature is nonsensical and pointless.[/QUOTE] that's exactly my point

[QUOTE=Mr. Scorpio;53199115]what if the snake wasn't your pet? if you came across a snake in the wild, would you be obligated to kill it since not killing it would be allowing it to kill many other animals?[/QUOTE] Obligated in order to be "moral"? No. There are a lot of actions that you can do to be variously moral. MAYBE killing a snake/snakes could be "moral" in some situations, but generally I'd say that trying to get in the way of an amoral process (nature) without extremely well-thought out alternatives that can deal with the balance the universe forces us to teeter with is arrogant and will only lead to more suffering. The universe/Darwinism has given us a ridiculously complex balance that can't be made better by simply killing the meat eaters.

Considering how snapping turtles actually eat, this person has very clear mental issues, needing to demonstrate said issues/fetish to children speaks of other issues, both of which should bar from him from teaching anything. There are rather public and documented means of showing how snapping turtles survive in the wild, and none of it involves domesticated young animals and a classroom environment. This person needs to not be teaching A and undergoing B psychological evaluation C probably from a judiciously imposed environment.

[QUOTE=ilikecorn;53198235]"Taking steps to ensure this doesn't happen again" Seriously? "but think of the children" strikes again, how dare our children learn about how certain animals feed.[/QUOTE] As any smart scientist man can tell you, puppies are a critical pillar of every healthy young turtle's diet.

[QUOTE=genkaz92;53199137]Fundamentally I could argue that feeding a puppy to a snapping turtle infront of students is still immoral because the students in that environment are used to treating dogs as friends instead of something that is meant to be eaten. Therefore the professor is still putting a large quantity of people in a certain culture under severe mental strain and potentially even mental trauma. It is possible to argue the subjective distinction between dogs and pigs and rodents quite continuously, however the fact remains that the professor potentially fucked a lot of the students up mentally, and that is the main reason why this is fucked up in this particular instance.[/QUOTE] This is all hypothetical, of course, but one could argue against that simply by saying that our treatment of dogs is nothing but a social construct we've been conditioned to have over time that doesn't exist for any relevant reason other than to subjugate them to being our pets. And as for immoral, well that depends on which type of morality you are looking at it through.

I don't think you need to go all philosophical to agree that feeding an animal a potentially live puppy, in setting where impressionable children are present, when other more humane methods of feeding it are available is fucked up tbh

[QUOTE=Silence I Kill You;53199234]This is all hypothetical, of course, but one could argue against that simply by saying that our treatment of dogs is nothing but a social construct we've been conditioned to have over time that doesn't exist for any relevant reason other than to subjugate them to being our pets. And as for immoral, well that depends on which type of morality you are looking at it through.[/QUOTE] I will rephrase it more directly. The professor mentally traumatized his students, as a result he should be held responsible for it.

[QUOTE=Mr. Scorpio;53199054]Snakes only eat live prey, so you can't feed them anything else. What is the most moral animal to feed a snake?[/QUOTE] Just an FYI snakes can be raised to eat dead prey. My fiancee and I have a boa constrictor and a ball python and they both eat only thawed/reheated rats. They're dumb as fuck so they need the rat to be paraded around with tongs as if it were alive, and then they make a big show of strangling the dead rat to death before eating, but they will do it if properly conditioned.

[QUOTE=genkaz92;53199253]I will rephrase it more directly. The professor mentally traumatized his students, as a result he should be held responsible for it.[/QUOTE] Well of course he did. I'm not trying to argue otherwise. What he did was fucked up. [QUOTE=RearAdmiral;53199245]I don't think you need to go all philosophical to agree that feeding an animal a potentially live puppy when other more humane methods of feeding it are available is fucked up tbh[/QUOTE] I wasn't aware that I needed an excuse to look at things in a philosophical way. I thought it being interesting was a good enough excuse.

To me, animal abusers are the worst fucking scum on the planet and I would fucking do anything to put them through the worst pain imaginable. Fuck I'm not even good with animals myself but killing and abusing something innocent and weaker than you disgusts me beyond belief.

[QUOTE=catbarf;53199263]Just an FYI snakes can be raised to eat dead prey. My fiancee and I have a boa constrictor and a ball python and they both eat only thawed/reheated rats. They're dumb as fuck so they need the rat to be paraded around with tongs as if it were alive, and then they make a big show of strangling the dead rat to death before eating, but they will do it if properly conditioned.[/QUOTE] brb making a kickstarter for specialized dead rat puppeteering snake deception marionettes

[QUOTE=Mr. Scorpio;53199295]brb making a kickstarter for specialized dead rat puppeteering snake deception marionettes[/QUOTE] That's kind of what would be nice to do. There has to be a way for all of those live prey eating jackasses to be fooled into eating some kind of a replacement.

[QUOTE=catbarf;53199263]Just an FYI snakes can be raised to eat dead prey. My fiancee and I have a boa constrictor and a ball python and they both eat only thawed/reheated rats. They're dumb as fuck so they need the rat to be paraded around with tongs as if it were alive, and then they make a big show of strangling the dead rat to death before eating, but they will do it if properly conditioned.[/QUOTE] I have a few snakes that eat thawed, but some of the ones I work with were already adults, so I knock out the mice before I feed them. It's safer for the snake this way and no undue suffering is involved. [editline]13th March 2018[/editline] People who feed live and awake prey to snakes are asshole imo. Not only is it cruel and inhumane, it's also incredibly dangerous for the snake.

[QUOTE=genkaz92;53199296]That's kind of what would be nice to do. There has to be a way for all of those live prey eating jackasses to be fooled into eating some kind of a replacement.[/QUOTE] we need to create edible robotic exoskeletons filled with ethically sourced nutritionally balanced protein substitutes that are programmed to mimic the movements of prey animals