PETA: Your Daddy Kills Animals - Page 2 - Tilted Forum Project Discussion Community

Menoman · 12-03-2005, 04:47 PM

Nonono, the leader of PETA, Ingrid is her name.

She says she wants animals to have the same rights as humans do. Humans do not have the right to be put into a sleep, and then pass in their sleep.

You can't have a HARD left side stance on "Killing animals is wrong, no exceptions" and actually kill animals yourself.

kirin · 12-03-2005, 04:55 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Martian

In function, fish nerves are the same as human or chimpanzee or crab or lion nerves. Or the ones in earthworms, for that matter.

Wow, an earthworm must be an intelligent creature with a personality that feels pain, just like us!

i think we can safely say that earthworms and / or fish don't have personalities in the way human persons do and that they can't experience psychological or emotional pain, but they would find some experiences physically undesirable, which, due to their biology, would compel them to avoid those experiences, in the same way a newborn human infant would recoil from such experiences.

so the question is whether human satisfaction should outweigh physically undesirable experiences of non-persons. or at least earthworms and fish. but we would still draw the line somewhere, and for most people, that line is arbitrary. for example, you might be ok with slaughtering 10 million cows to satisfy human desires but not 10 million dogs...?

hulk · 12-03-2005, 05:47 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Rhynome

I want proof that the Earth orbits the Sun, and I will not accept 'so and so said this' because in that case, 'Abraham said this, Moses said that'. It's the same thing.

Find a tennis ball. Drop it. Then find a bowling ball, and drop that. Notice how they both fall towards the centre of the Earth, and at the same rate? That's gravity, and she's a harsh mistress.

The Earth is indeed round, as can be seen in photographic evidence here and due to the fact that if you climb a large hill, you cannot see yourself. The sun, if you'll care to look at it (with the proper protection, of course) is also round. As well as round, it's a big fiery ball of cosmic death, many times greater than the Earth. Next time there's a solar eclipse, note how the moon (which is small and close, and has been landed on) overshadows the sun. Hence, due to simple reality, the Sun's mass would be far greater than that of our little watery home.

To put it simply, Earth is falling towards the sun. As there's no air resistance or outside forces, and because we're not headed directly towards it (throw a ball horizontally, it still is pulled towards the ground in an arc) we continue falling.

genuinegirly · 12-03-2005, 06:01 PM

Errr... I think that's a pamphlet that I'm going to try to avoid.

I'll write the next edition: Your Mommy Kills Plants!

shakran · 12-03-2005, 06:22 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Rhynome

Evolution was one example. But prove to me that the Earth orbits the Sun and not the other way round. (I believe it does, but I want proof nonetheless).

Have you ever seen resistance to penicillin happen? Now I don't know if you're a doctor, or a nurse, or so on. But if you were not then the only way I could imagine that you come to that conclusion is because someone told you.

I want proof that the Earth orbits the Sun, and I will not accept 'so and so said this' because in that case, 'Abraham said this, Moses said that'. It's the same thing.

You're being rather silly don't you think? Acting as though the statements of thousands of peer-reviewed scientists, who's methods and reasoning were made available for scrutiny, is no more trust worthy than the word of people 2,000 years ago who claimed an invisible man came down and told them stuff? And of course we have to take into account the fact that the stuff this invisible guy told them was handed down mainly by word of mouth for 1,450 years (and that's just the new testament. The old testament was told orally even longer) until Mr. Gutenberg invented the printing press so people could get hold of bibles.

Ever play a game of telephone? If you can't get the same message passed down through 25 people, how the hell are people supposed to keep the message intact for over a millenium?

If you're making a serious argument here, you need to rethink your position.

If you're being facetious then it's too transparent.

MikeyChalupa · 12-03-2005, 07:27 PM

Welcome to my world. Their world HQ is here in Norfolk, VA. Parked across the river is the retired battleship USS Wisconsin. If they could just point their 16 inchers at the building and fire a broadside into it...

And while we're bullshitting, so is Pat Robertson, the 700 club and CBN.

-Mikey

Martian · 12-03-2005, 08:01 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by kirin

i think we can safely say that earthworms and / or fish don't have personalities in the way human persons do and that they can't experience psychological or emotional pain, but they would find some experiences physically undesirable, which, due to their biology, would compel them to avoid those experiences, in the same way a newborn human infant would recoil from such experiences.

so the question is whether human satisfaction should outweigh physically undesirable experiences of non-persons. or at least earthworms and fish. but we would still draw the line somewhere, and for most people, that line is arbitrary. for example, you might be ok with slaughtering 10 million cows to satisfy human desires but not 10 million dogs...?

That's not what I'm arguing. Just that their comment that their claim that the nervous systems of fish is misleading, if not outright wrong. It shares similarities, but so do the nervous systems of all animals.

i go by level of intelligence. We are (so far as we know) the most intelligent form of life on Earth. High levels of intelligence are evident in other forms of mammals, who have a similarly enlarged cerebral cortex. A dog has a primitive cerebral cortex and since MRI scans and physiological evidence leads us to believe that this is the area of the brain responsible for cognitive thought and intelligence, it can be reaonably theorized that a dog has a rudimentary intelligence.

A fish, on the other hand, doesn't have a cerebral cortex at all. It has a cerebrum, which may be viewed as a precursor to a cerebral cortex, but even that is small and undeveloped. From this it can be conjectured that a fish doesn't feel pain. And an earthworm doesn't even have a brain. It has what's referred to as a cerebral ganglion, which is just a small cluster of nerves responsible for reacting to stimuli. Despite the name, this ganglion is much closer to clusters of nerves in our spinal column in structure than it is to a brain. Neither of these animals is capable of thought; they simply react to stimuli. Given that, it can be concluded that neither animal is capable of suffering. They can 'feel pain' only insofar as they can react to negative stimuli.

There are plants that are capable of the same thing. Is it cruel to cut a flower just because it can move towards sunlight?

If you want to discuss the ethics of slaughtering cattle (or any other mammals) vs. killing dogs and cats, you're right; that line is completely arbitrary. A cow, with a rudimentary brain is capable of rudimentary thought and therefore capable of suffering. You could make a case that a cow may very well feel pain in exactly the way we do (note that being capable of thought is in no way the same thing as being sentient; none of these animals would pass a Turing test). So that's a bit muddier.Hell, even birds. Next to mammals they have the most developed cerebrum and therefore may have the capacity to experience pain like ours. But fish? The necessary physical components just aren't there.

In case you couldn't tell, I am not a 'save the critters' kinda guy.

EDIT - and your comparison with human babies is inaccurate. A human infant has a well developed brain in terms of the components, even though the neural pathways haven't yet been established. Infants learn at an incredibly fast rate and start learning even before birth. We can't say that a human infant is capable of complex thought, but we can't rule the possiblity out either.

Willravel · 12-03-2005, 08:32 PM

Daddy is killing that fish to eat for dinner. They could have taken the money they spent on that stupid comic and donated it to a national wildlife refuge (like I do every year). Morons.

analog · 12-03-2005, 11:41 PM

Sigh. They never stop.

KellyC · 12-04-2005, 12:20 AM

I have an urge to go fishing and hunting as well....

Quote:

Originally Posted by genuinegirly

I'll write the next edition: Your Mommy Kills Plants!

NOOOOOOOO! I eat meat because I love plants!!!

OzOz · 12-04-2005, 03:11 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Martian

The human body is designed in such a way so as to require amino acids that are very difficult to acquire from plants. We are herbivores, whether we were designed as such by an intelligent higher power or we simply evolved into it. And frankly, if it's a question of a fish's well-being over that of a human, I'll kill a thousand fish for one man.

I don't think 'herbivore' is the word you're looking for, Martian.

Omnivores - meat and plants. That's us. Don't put big words into PETA's mouths!

I used to date a vet for a little while, and on the subject of what we're designed to eat, of course she'd done comparative anatomy. She used to say that when her vegetarian friends would come out with, "But we're only designed to be vegetarians," she could immediately tell them what general features herbivores have, what general features carnivores have, and what features omnivores have, and deduce from that that we're omnivores.

MSD · 12-04-2005, 02:39 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Rhynome

Have you ever seen resistance to penicillin happen? Now I don't know if you're a doctor, or a nurse, or so on. But if you were not then the only way I could imagine that you come to that conclusion is because someone told you.

I did that experiment in 9th grade biology class. I was patient and persistant enough that my teacher had to kill mine with bleach. What could possibly go wrong with a bunch of high-school kids breeding supergerms?

Xazy · 12-05-2005, 05:20 AM

They have for a while been telling children that. I saw someone say that once to a kid in midtown (NYC), and I went over and tried conversing with the woman, trying to explain how you should not say that to a 5 yr old about her parents. Of course the woman did not understand at all. I once had a real estate agent say to my co-worker, during work, that she is lucky that she does not throw blood on her.

macmanmike6100 · 12-05-2005, 06:22 AM

PETA's such a joke. Who *are* these people?

stevie667 · 12-05-2005, 07:34 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Martian

From the linked site.

That is the most misleading piece of propaganda I have ever seen.

In function, fish nerves are the same as human or chimpanzee or crab or lion nerves. Or the ones in earthworms, for that matter.

Wow, an earthworm must be an intelligent creature with a personality that feels pain, just like us!

Or maybe a dendrite is a dendrite is a dendrite.

A fish brain is little more than a glorified hypothalamus. In fact, a fish brain is the least complex brain in the animal kingdom that can still be classified as such (discounting the neural nets seen in animals like crustaceans). A fish has a large cerebellum and visual cortex in relation to the rest of it's brain and a very small cerebrum (commonly called the 'forebrain'). A fish doesn't even have a cerebral cortex. A fish is not capable of complex thought. The parts of the brain necessary for such are simply not there.

A fish is much closer to a very complicated machine than a thinking creature. It responds to stimuli and uses encoded behaviour to form a complex behavioural pattern. In that sense, a fish does not feel pain the same way we do at all, except how we do in a reflex reaction. You touch a hot stove, your hand moves away. You don't have to think about it, you don't even actually feel pain - your body takes a stimulus and formulates a response, entirely without conscious input on your part. This is how a fish goes about it's daily life.

The human body is designed in such a way so as to require amino acids that are very difficult to acquire from plants. We are herbivores, whether we were designed as such by an intelligent higher power or we simply evolved into it. And frankly, if it's a question of a fish's well-being over that of a human, I'll kill a thousand fish for one man.

I do beg to differ. Granted, some fish given bricks a run for their money in the stupidity department, but there are many many species out there that have personalities and induvidual quirks on rival to many cats and dogs i know.
Fish will move away from pain sources, and can easily be taught simple rememberance tasks that some humans would have trouble with (e.g. being fed at the same spot each day at the same time, and being there exactly when you go to feed them).
We are not herbivores by any strech of the imagination. The human body is omnivorous. We lack many of the vital elements to properly digest tough plant structures. Yes we may still be able to utilise a large proportion of plant life, but a quick look at your teeth will give a sneak peak into our meat eating ancestry through our canines.

A human life is worth considerably more than a fish (though i can think of exceptions to this rule...), that i will agree with.

BigBen · 12-05-2005, 07:58 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Martian

...And frankly, if it's a question of a fish's well-being over that of a human, I'll kill a thousand fish for one man.

AHAH!

There lies an excellent ethical question:

How many fish are you willing to see slaughtered and disposed of (not eaten, not processed; just needlessly killed) to prevent the death of one person?

How many fish are you willing to see slaughtered and disposed of (not eaten, not processed; just needlessly killed) to prevent harm done to one person?

My opinion? Not quite sure, but it would have to be in the millions, and I would want assurance that the ecosystem would be able to recover. If all of the fish were killed to keep someone alive... I don't know.

Is a pedophile's life worth more than a goldfish?

How about Saddam Hussein vs. Atlantic Carp?

xepherys · 12-05-2005, 09:25 AM

PETA really does alarm me. Frankly, I love the fact that people have opinions that differ from mine. I enjoy debate, and therefore would be sad if everyone agreed with everything I said. There comes a point, however, both to the far left and far right that people stop offering me amusing banter and begin to scare me a little. PETA is a group of such people.

longbough · 12-05-2005, 09:33 AM

Some of y'all might already know this little fact, but one of the PETA directors, Mary Beth Sweetland, is an insulin dependent diabetic - even though PETA believes insulin should be banned.

What is her stance? She concedes that, "(my medicine) still contains some animal products -- and I have no qualms about it…. I don’t see myself as a hypocrite. I need my life to fight for the rights of animals.”

That's worse than Senator Diane Feinstein, in her anti-handgun zeal, owning and carrying a handgun for personal protection - also true.

Chilek9 · 12-05-2005, 01:51 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by shakran

But you need to find out WHY they euthanized them before you use that figure to attack them. Often times it IS much more humane to euthanize an animal than to let it suffer.

For what it's worth, PETA says that they euthanize animals because death is better than slavery. They contend that animals kept as pets are slaves and are better off being killed (which they were doing illegally) than being kept as pets.

Coppertop · 12-05-2005, 04:13 PM

For what it's worth, PETA also demonstrates outside animal clinics that euthanize animals, stating that any killing of animals is wrong, while demonizing the vets who care more for animals than they ever would.

Sorry, PETA = whack.

Chilek9 · 12-05-2005, 04:50 PM

Oh, I don't disagree that they are whacky. I was just trying to explain the "logic" that they use to explain why they kill the animals that they do.

punx1325 · 12-09-2005, 03:27 PM

I always found PETA commercials funny. I never supported what they said but I do love that cat nuetering commmercial

william · 12-09-2005, 04:08 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by shakran

But you need to find out WHY they euthanized them before you use that figure to attack them. Often times it IS much more humane to euthanize an animal than to let it suffer. I'm not a fan of PETA myself because they're a load of bloody loonies, so it'd be ashame to weaken the position against them by attacking them for doing something right for once

Actually, you don't. The topic speaks a lot for itself. Just like those that stand outside of a doctors office waiting to kill those that are part of an abortion

- irony is funny that way. Not to say that children=cats, but it is PETA we're talking about. These are the same people that throw ANIMAL blood on other people!

12-03-2005, 06:01 PM	#44 (permalink)
genuinegirly Eat your vegetables Super Moderator Location: Arabidopsis-ville	Errr... I think that's a pamphlet that I'm going to try to avoid. I'll write the next edition: Your Mommy Kills Plants! __________________ "Sometimes I have to remember that things are brought to me for a reason, either for my own lessons or for the benefit of others." Cynthetiq "violence is no more or less real than non-violence." roachboy

12-05-2005, 09:33 AM	#58 (permalink)
longbough Soylent Green is people. Location: Northern California	Some of y'all might already know this little fact, but one of the PETA directors, Mary Beth Sweetland, is an insulin dependent diabetic - even though PETA believes insulin should be banned. What is her stance? She concedes that, "(my medicine) still contains some animal products -- and I have no qualms about it…. I don’t see myself as a hypocrite. I need my life to fight for the rights of animals.” That's worse than Senator Diane Feinstein, in her anti-handgun zeal, owning and carrying a handgun for personal protection - also true. Last edited by longbough; 12-05-2005 at 09:37 AM..

12-09-2005, 03:27 PM	#62 (permalink)
punx1325 Junkie Location: San Diego	I always found PETA commercials funny. I never supported what they said but I do love that cat nuetering commmercial __________________ If something seems too good to be true, then it probably is....

12-03-2005, 07:27 PM	#46 (permalink)
MikeyChalupa Squid Location: USS George Washington	Welcome to my world. Their world HQ is here in Norfolk, VA. Parked across the river is the retired battleship USS Wisconsin. If they could just point their 16 inchers at the building and fire a broadside into it... And while we're bullshitting, so is Pat Robertson, the 700 club and CBN. -Mikey

12-03-2005, 08:32 PM	#48 (permalink)
Willravel ... a sort of licensed troubleshooter.	Daddy is killing that fish to eat for dinner. They could have taken the money they spent on that stupid comic and donated it to a national wildlife refuge (like I do every year). Morons.

12-03-2005, 11:41 PM	#49 (permalink)
analog Banned	Sigh. They never stop.

12-05-2005, 05:20 AM	#53 (permalink)
Xazy People in masks cannot be trusted Location: NYC	They have for a while been telling children that. I saw someone say that once to a kid in midtown (NYC), and I went over and tried conversing with the woman, trying to explain how you should not say that to a 5 yr old about her parents. Of course the woman did not understand at all. I once had a real estate agent say to my co-worker, during work, that she is lucky that she does not throw blood on her.

12-05-2005, 06:22 AM	#54 (permalink)
macmanmike6100 High Honorary Junkie Location: Tri-state.	PETA's such a joke. Who are these people?

12-05-2005, 09:25 AM	#57 (permalink)
xepherys <3 TFP Location: 17TLH2445607250	PETA really does alarm me. Frankly, I love the fact that people have opinions that differ from mine. I enjoy debate, and therefore would be sad if everyone agreed with everything I said. There comes a point, however, both to the far left and far right that people stop offering me amusing banter and begin to scare me a little. PETA is a group of such people.

12-05-2005, 04:13 PM	#60 (permalink)
Coppertop Getting Medieval on your ass Location: 13th century Europe	For what it's worth, PETA also demonstrates outside animal clinics that euthanize animals, stating that *any* killing of animals is wrong, while demonizing the vets who care more for animals than they ever would. Sorry, PETA = whack.

12-05-2005, 04:50 PM	#61 (permalink)
Chilek9 Upright	Oh, I don't disagree that they are whacky. I was just trying to explain the "logic" that they use to explain why they kill the animals that they do.