Hunting And Today's Protest

[Rico]

For every animal you don't eat, I'm going to eat three. Seriously.

​

That website sucks. I never force my views on anyone, nor do I consider myself morally superior.

​

He might be an asshole, but my experience is that almost every vegetarian I've met in real life has pretty much acted like that. It seems at least initially that vegetarians want to show the world that they've decided to stop eating meat, in the hope of converting others. A bit like Christians. You're not one of those people, I can tell that from your posts and your statement above, but that doesn't make his words any less valid. And I usually hate Maddox so that's saying a lot.

--

Okay so we've kicked up a fuss about fox hunting and succeeded. What about pigeon shooting or non free range chickens being cramped up like sardines, or elephants being killed for their ivory or seals being clubbed? Have we really succeeded?

 

[PinkSpider]

Id never push my views on anyone; did try and convince kat on the phone that a cheese and onion pasty is nicer than a chicken pie. She wouldnt believe me .

 

[thebluenewt]

Okay so we've kicked up a fuss about fox hunting and succeeded. What about pigeon shooting or non free range chickens being cramped up like sardines, or elephants being killed for their ivory or seals being clubbed? Have we really succeeded?

​

Pigeon shooting? :blink: The sale of ivory under 100 years old is illegal. Seals don't get clubbed in this country. I'll give you the chickens, I always get free-range.

 

[lizard808uk]

Omlet.co.uk

Keeping Chickens in the 21st Century.

 

[declaration]

Meat eaters started this argument, and I have just read people slagging off vegetarians for thinking they are morally superior.

Well why do you think we feel morally superior??

It may be because we dont murder and torture innocent animals just so we can have food that supposedly tastes nice.

The other stuff on that site is also bullshit, because I dont wear leather, and would like our ways to be changed so that we sont end up ruining the world as so would many vegetarians/ vegans.

and so what if we are fucking annoying and that means you've got to think for a second before shuveling food down you mouths.

This isnt meant to be taken personally and more than anything is aimed at that site and those who agree with it.

 

[Rico]

Pigeon shooting? :blink: The sale of ivory under 100 years old is illegal. Seals don't get clubbed in this country. I'll give you the chickens, I always get free-range.

​

I was referring to the world in general. Seal clubbing happens everywhere and so does the sale of ivory, it's extremely common whether it's illegal or not. Pigeon shooting is the killing of innocent animals for sport; if you have a problem with fox hunting then you should have a problem with that (although the act of killing them is often less painful). Chickens are just one example of breeding animals to be killed with no regard for their welfare.

It may be because we dont murder and torture innocent animals just so we can have food that supposedly tastes nice.

​

You're really not helping with the whole 'vegetarians aren't annoying morons' thing.

 

[Mosch]

The difference is that one is killed for food, the other is killed for sport. Unless the hunter really can't afford to buy meat at the supermarket.

Of course he could afford it, seeing that he tried to scam me out of my money <_<
But I really still don't see the problem. He does it for sport, and if he left the cadaver lying on the ground I would say it is a stupid thing. But he in fact has the deer processed and eats it. So the idea is sport AND sustenance. If he feels an appetite for deer, he goes deer hunting. I would basically say it still is killed for food too, with the added "bonus" of doing the sport.

Ah at my fault there. The term "prey" usually refers to an animal being hunted, where "predator" is the hunter. These are words most often used to describe a basic animal hunter & hunted relationship. Since humans are not basic animals, that's why the word seemed out of place.

Thanks for clearing that up for me.

Well, sex does serve a purpose - procreation. But it would be nice if we could evolve past sex being fun and find other things just as enjoyable. Yet killing other animals for sport has no purpose and it's cruel. If the biggest difference between us an lower animals is that we can blow 'em up and they can't, then why do people get so upset when countries bomb other countries?

Now, about eating meat...well, we have to make choices. Eating other humans is bad, but eating lower animals and plants is OK. So let's take one step further - eating lower animals is bad, but eating plants is OK. Then hopefully there will come a time where we need only consume artifically-produced matter and nothing is killed for our benefit. The less death in the world, of anything, the better.

Think about socialisation. You can NOT convince me that you only have sex to have fun or to get children. Sex is also a social act, a demonstration of love that you feel for your partner. You can have sex for enjoyment and procreation too and if both are OK with it, I think that is fine.
Eating meat serves the purpose of sustenance. As with sex, we could substitute meat with something else (in this case plants for example) and still get the desired result (as in "we won't starve"). But eating is also a social act and a part of luxury in life. I have never eaten lobster, but it is considered a fine food. Getting together with a business partner and having a lobster dinner has a similar social meaning as having sex with your lobster has, expressing respect and trust.

And personally I see no problem in killing living things. we don't want to kill other people because of pity. And I will not accept a comparison between humans and animals as being equal. Animals are stupid.
Read it again.
ANIMALS ARE STUPID.
In the food chain absically everything points to us humans. We can eat everything because we are evolved to a stage that allows us to do that. While we humans can rationalize our decisions, animals only have instincts and have to obey those. That is what convinces me that ANIMALS ARE STUPID AND DESERVE TO BE EATEN.
Where do we draw the line? Let's get philosophical. Is it right to kill another human being who could possibly assault you? Is it right to kill a voracious animal that tries to devour your flesh? Is it right to kill bacteria because they make you sick?
Personally, I do not want to eat Soy crap. Why do vegans and vegetarians imitate meat at all if meat is such a bad thing? Personally, I don't want to eat some artificially flavoured hippie crap mde of farts and sunshine. I want to sink my jaws into the sweet sweet flesh of the innocent and viciously gorge on the cute little deer baby (with eyes THAAAAT BIG!).



Oh, and if you don't find Maddox funny, you are either absolutely unfunny or didn't get the joke, probably the second

@declaration, I think about my food all the time. I think "I sure hope I can more meat soon". You don't get a free ticket for annoying the crap out of me because I have a different diet than you. And if you really think you are morally superior, I will not argue with you because then you are not open to the logos.
Besides, I have learned that all vegans are complete idiots if you talk to them. I hope that sooner or later I wil be proved wrong, but so far EVERY vegan I have talked to really was an inspiration for birth control.

 

[declaration]

You're really not helping with the whole 'vegetarians aren't annoying morons' thing.

​

I'm not trying to. If its annoying to defend people for having the right to an opinion and the right to express that said opinion, then I'm annoying and glad to be.


@Mosch- your arguments really are pathetic.
Saying things like every vegan I've ever met is an idiot is useless to everyone involved.

Its just like me saying, everyone I know called Mosch is an idiot, and at least that one would be true.

 

[xboxit]

Listen to him, he is a declaration

 

[declaration]

In my experience, debates about the morality of meat eating come a close second to religion in terms of making people defensive and offending people.

Vegetarians were attacked first.
If its alright to slag off a Veggie's opinions, why not the other way round?

 

[raven]

Getting together with a business partner and having a lobster dinner has a similar social meaning as having sex with your lobster has

​

I refuse to have sex with my lobster

 

[Mosch]

@Mosch- your arguments really are pathetic.
Saying things like every vegan I've ever met is an idiot is useless to everyone involved.

Its just like me saying, everyone I know called Mosch is an idiot, and at least that one would be true.

​

So you're a vegan then? It seemed to me that you were a vegetarian, but of course I couldn't care less about your preferred diet
I am still waiting to be proved wrong. Most vegetarians I know are OK people, vegans.... see my last post. Concerning my pathetic arguments, you sound like you have no idea what to say against them but you want to slag them off. Please tell me which arguments you are talking about, I may then explain them in further detail if you are interested.

And I am by the way called Patrick and surely not every Patrick you know is an idiot


@raven: Yeah, OK, honest mistake, that was supposed to be "lover" :lol:

 

[raven]

Mosch, some of your arguments are not very valid, eat meat if you want to but get your facts straight if you state something:

The idea that animals are stupid and only follow instincts come from biblical and middle-aged philosophical ideas. Only recently scientists are actually researching what makes animals tick and if they think or not. We just assumed animals were stupid and only have instincts.

Most animals do not know how to survive in the wild without their parents teaching them how to do this (instincts versus learning or nature versus nurture if you will) they simply die.

Animals can learn sign-language and can start forming their own sentences doing so, we always assumed they couldn't talk but actually we just didn't understand them. Even chickens have different words to tell eachother what type of birds are flying around. They don't have a huge vocabulary but that makes them not as chatty as we are, not stupid.

I've seen a tv-show were a pigeon was taught to respond to pictures of trees and later pictures of paintings. He could tell the difference between a Picasso and other paintings, he could spot a Picasso as a Picasso even if it had never seen that painting before. he only couldn't always see the difference between a Picasso and a Matisse but even most art-students can't.

Cuttlefish when shown an x on a piece of paper and being fed afterwards started making the letter x on their backs when they wanted food. That's just copying but that's exactly how humans learn and it's quite an achievement for an animal that has no other way of comunicating with us.

Animals (even stupid birds) use tools if they see the need for it, even if they have never seen how to do that before. We can teach them to communicate with us and slowly scientists are starting to accept that animals can do things just for fun.

Sure we are smarter and yes we are on top of the foodchain but the idea that animals 'just follow instincts' is wrong and is proven wrong whenever investigated. It was just a stupid assumption.

Oh, and bacteria are plants not animals.

Edit:

@raven: Yeah, OK, honest mistake, that was supposed to be "lover" :lol:

​

Yeah, I got that, but it was funny

 

[Mosch]

Oh at and bacteria are plants not animals.

​

Well... they are classifies as "alive", that's what I was alluding to.

That thing about animals is interesting to read, but really not what I was thinking about. Animals obey their instincts full stop. You can not teach an animal moral or ethics. A tiger does not think that it is unethical to hunt sick and slow animals and teach that to his children. His instincts tell him "That's guy is slow, I'll chew on his bones". Maybe I can teach it simple patterns, for example taking a dump if he wants water. But what does that prove? I'm simply manipulating his automated reflexes (no idea if this is the right word). You must convince me that animals understand the logic behind the things they learn to make me appreciate it

 

[thebluenewt]

@Rico

If people kill pigeons for fun then I am against it, now if they were to eat the pigeons, that would be ok!

Eating meat is natural, hell foxes do it! If a man wants to (legally) shoot a deer to eat then that's fine, at least the deer had a better life than those bred to be eaten.

Interesting stuff raven, luckily I don't eat pigeons or cuttlefish. Pigs can play computer games too, true that.

 

[raven]

Oh at and bacteria are plants not animals.

​

Well... they are classifies as "alive", that's what I was alluding to.

That thing about animals is interesting to read, but really not what I was thinking about. Animals obey their instincts full stop. You can not teach an animal moral or ethics. A tiger does not think that it is unethical to hunt sick and slow animals and teach that to his children. His instincts tell him "That's guy is slow, I'll chew on his bones". Maybe I can teach it simple patterns, for example taking a dump if he wants water. But what does that prove? I'm simply manipulating his automated reflexes (no idea if this is the right word). You must convince me that animals understand the logic behind the things they learn to make me appreciate it

​

I think an animal has morals and ethics, I just don't think they are the same as ours Elephants and hippo's mourn dead creatures, even from other species and even though they both do not have natural enemies (so their mourning cannot be mistaken for fear). If an animal would have to prove it is smart by showing it understands our logic and ethics that will be very hard, we don't understand theirs either (or our own).

Basicly constructing sentences by yourself to express yourself means you understand the logic behind it. It has just taken us a very long time to figure out how to research animals properly, for too long we have thought that animals are stupid because they don't understand us.

Don't forget that humans, when they go without proper upbringing, start resembling animals again. All human ethics, morals and logic are gone when a child grows up by itself in the wild. We have probably evolved into what we are because we are so succesfull and because we are very speech-orientated. Social animals appear to have more rules and 'ethics' too.

 

[declaration]

This talk of it being ok to eat an animal because it is not very clever seems awful to me.
Why is it ok to eat an animal just because it is not as clever as humans?

Using the same logic, you would surely agree that it would be morally ok to eat a human in a vegetive state or a metally handicapped person.

 

[bringoutthegimp]

This talk of it being ok to eat an animal because it is not very clever seems awful to me.
Why is it ok to eat an animal just because it is not as clever as humans?

because it tastes nice. are you one of those hippy vegetarians?

 

[declaration]

This talk of it being ok to eat an animal because it is not very clever seems awful to me.
Why is it ok to eat an animal just because it is not as clever as humans?

because it tastes nice. are you one of those hippy vegetarians?

​

yeah, one of those ultra-cool hippy vegetarians.

but, seriously, what if human meat tastes nice? Would you eat that?

 

[skysnapper]

Yes with a nice chianti..

Although i would only eat vegitarians as meat eaters do not tend to eat the meat of other meat eaters. Doesn't taste as nice
Hence we hunt foxes, badgers, bears but don't eat them but do deer, pheasents etc..