Europe bans Canadian seal products

[dissentowner]

Originally Posted by Bring_Back_Shantz

Sounds a lot like cows.

not even close. My animals are not grouped together in bad conditions for slaughter. Not even remotely the same thing! Very very weak!

[dissentowner]

Originally Posted by CaptainCrunch

http://cats.suite101.com/article.cfm...ith_their_prey

Ok, why are those animals presented. To hone skills for what? To kill prey for what? So that the animal can eat, the prey is not killed for fun, it's to teach a survival skill.

[Bring_Back_Shantz]

Originally Posted by dissentowner

not even close. My animals are not grouped together in bad conditions for slaughter. Not even remotely the same thing! Very very weak!

What about free range cows?

Are you raising free range lizards?

I'll bet all of your snakes would love to be free, but instead you coop them up in aquariums and sell them to the highest bidder.

You're a monster.

[dissentowner]

Originally Posted by Bring_Back_Shantz

What about free range cows?

Are you raising free range lizards?

I'll bet all of your snakes would love to be free, but instead you coop them up in aquariums and sell them to the highest bidder.

You're a monster.

Again, your grasping at straws. Got any pets? You think anyone who has a pet is a monster? Good luck with that. Ridiculous.

[valo403]

Originally Posted by Bring_Back_Shantz

What about free range cows?

Are you raising free range lizards?

I'll bet all of your snakes would love to be free, but instead you coop them up in aquariums and sell them to the highest bidder.

You're a monster.

I've gotta agree with this. Unless you're the owner of some massive enclosures this doesn't sound all that different than the life of many animals bred for consumption.

[ok, ok,....I get it]

Listen all I have to run, but I have found this very enjoyable and just wanted to give this to all of you that posted in here today:

[dissentowner]

Originally Posted by ok, ok,....I get it

Listen all I have to run, but I have found this very enjoyable and just wanted to give this to all of you that posted in here today:

Now this is an awesome post, regardless of who thinks what this by far is the best group on the net. Do not know what I would do without CP. Now if we can just bring home the cup next year.

[Swarly]

Originally Posted by dissentowner

rejoice? Seriously, there is just as many lifers in prison I will bet as animals in research labs.

not my point, I could care less what happens to some of those people, but my point is who do we test on after we kill off all the prisoners? if we had been doing this for the last 50 years there would be no surplus of prisoners to test drugs on. Once they are gone do we stop testing? then would it be okay to test on rats? or should we reduce the minimum conditions for prisoners to be tested on?

shoplifting - you are experimented on with a new headache medicine,
grand theft auto - you will be given cancer so we can test on you.

[Hack&Lube]

Originally Posted by dissentowner

So what you are saying is that an animal "must invariably suffer" to be killed and eaten? Don't you think that after witnessing things like that and being ok with the fact that those things are happening that there is something very wrong with that??

No. Not at all. I realized at a very young age that this world is not a pretty place and hardships and suffering is a part of life. That these animals must suffer is unfortunate and I am sympathetic to their situation but I can accept as a simple fact of life and of our modern culture. There are more humane ways to slaughter animals but the industry is about speed/efficiency and lower prices at the grocery store. That's just how our society works. There are many things you are powerless to stop in this world. The amount of suffering that animals and human beings have gone through throughout recorded history and beyond is something most people cannot seem to grasp. It's simply a fact of life and I don't waste my time feeling sad or compelled or angry about things that are out of my control. If there is something that I do think about more often - it's the big picture (again, why I always look back at history and how everything fits together and came to be as it is now and try to be as less narrow minded as possible). I care about the environment and I worry more about the extinction of species and devastation to ecosystems more than the individual plights of individual animals that are plentiful.

I don't like animal suffering, but I don't lose any sleep over it. I don't have any guilty conscience or moral dilemmas from consuming animal products based on the knowledge that I have (and believe me, I've seen and read a lot on the subject due to morbid fascination). I love animals, and have raised many pets. Right now, there is honestly a bird perched on my shoulder. Sometimes I have pondered the philosophical implications of eating a Colonel's Original Recipe drumstick while Snowy (my Budgie) was perched on my shoulder nibbling at my ear: "Hey Snowy, I'm eating your (95% genetically related) cousin Bob, he was delicious, I hope you aren't delicious" but I just laugh at the strangeness of our world.

[Bring_Back_Shantz]

Originally Posted by dissentowner

Again, your grasping at straws. Got any pets? You think anyone who has a pet is a monster? Good luck with that. Ridiculous.

No I don't have pets.
The only animal I force to stay cooped up in my house is the big deer head on the wall, but I doubt he objects as I don't think he'd do too well in the wild what with no legs and all.

Hell, he didn't do to well when he did have legs did he?
But he sure was delicious.

[Bagor]

Originally Posted by dissentowner

weak, talk about grasping at straws! Yes, an animal bred in captivity and taken care of for it's entire life is a huge act of cruelty, guilty as charged.

Of course it is. Just because you justify taking care of it for your own selfish benefit doesn't make it right.

It never ever gets even close to realising its full potential.

It's a life prisoner.

Either (a) release it into its natural habitat or (b) donate it for research.

Farmers farm animals for produce. You farm animals for pleasure and profit. Double standards?

[Hack&Lube]

Originally Posted by CaptainCrunch

http://cats.suite101.com/article.cfm...ith_their_prey

I'm a bit disinclined to make definite conclusions on why cats play with their prey based on a website catering to spinsters and their pet cats referencing a book by some cat enthusiast written for Reader's Digest :P

Get me some animal psychology specialists or scholarly articles. I have seen it equally argued that feline play with their prey is part of grooming natural hunting instincts on various wildlife documentaries and in textbooks. Animal curiousity is almost never given enough weight as well into factoring in their behaviors.

[dissentowner]

Originally Posted by Bagor

Of course it is. Just because you justify taking care of it for your own selfish benefit doesn't make it right.

It never ever gets even close to realising its full potential.

It's a life prisoner.

Either (a) release it into its natural habitat or (b) donate it for research.

Farmers farm animals for produce. You farm animals for pleasure and profit. Double standards?

Do you have pets? Are you willing to do the same? Not double standards at all, I have stated about a billion times now I have no issue with animals being bred to be eaten provided they are not improperly treated nd slaughtered humanly! What don't you get about that??? So how in the hell is it a double standard to raise animals in their own enclosures, well fed, and not abused?? Try again!

[LChoy]

My 2 cents again

There is a difference between testing commercial products on animals, and conducting MEDICAL research on animals.

The first one is frowned upon, and a lot of companies specify that their products were not tested on animals. No one wants to see animals suffer to see if something like hair spray stings the eyes

The second one however is important. Like some posters have already mentioned, there is no effective and clinical way to do without animals in some instances. We can work in vivo and in vitro at the cellular level for some drugs, but with the sheer complexity of the human body, animals are best we got in most cases. My experience with cancer research, we have obtained rats that were bred percisely for research and would not be found ordinarily in the wild. There is not a better way to induce tumour growth to test cancer drugs.

PETA and other like minded organizations seem to think it's easy and that any researcher can experiement on animals. That's not correct
You have to apply for animal testing rights, and both the US and Canada have Medical Research Bodies that specific oversee such applications. Animal experiementation has to be justified and shown to be necessary as there is no other effective way to experiment before it's allowed. There is also oversite bodies that monitor for abuse and penalties can be severe such as revoking of research licenses if animals are not treated humanely.
Also, Alberta (can't recall if it's a province or Country standard, too long ago) have some incredibly strict rules for testing. All procedures much be humane, even when we have to kill the animals. Animals are usually knocked out first with drugs or gas, and their euthanisia done using efficient techniques to ensure the animal feels no pain (cervical dislocation, Removal of blood directly from the heart...etc). For our rats, the tumours are not overly painful and once the tumours grow too large and the rats begin to have problems, they are quickly euthanized

we as humans are different than the animals for our ability to reason and adapt. Animal rights, just like any rights, are a human creation that does not occur with the animals (that we know of). Animals don't care about pain when they inject vemon to dissolve the insides of their prey (Poisonous spiders and snakes), tear apart their prey (any animal with sharp teeth, claws), or crush and strangle (snakes).
As humans, we think higher about oursleves and learn to respect what we have, so of course their is emotion when it comes to killing something for the sake of killing it, or even taking more than needed.

However, we also have the ability to rationlize that as the top order of the world, we have the intelligence to use what is in our environment, and use it as we see fit. Right now, it's not the matter that we can kill things, but whether it should is what everyone is torn up apart.

With medical testing on animals, unfortunately it is a need at this time until a more effective method is made available. All steps are taken to ensure animals are not mistreated, abused, or suffer needlessly.

Back on topic, this hunt is backed by sound scientific backing that determines the numbers that can be safely culled without effecting the ecosystem. There is no clubbing anymore as the seals are culled using rifles, which is much more humane. I think seals are cute and it's a horrifying image to know that they are hunted. However, this legislation is ruled by emotion. I rather people just take upon themselves to avoid seal products, or any products they don't agree with. That's noble of them and I respect their right to.

[dissentowner]

I should also mention that I also volunteer to go to schools with the animals to educate about these types of animals as well as work with people with phobias and I do not charge for these services at all. I have worked very hard to dispel myths and fears with these animals and to bring them to be more accepted in the public eye.

[Bring_Back_Shantz]

Originally Posted by dissentowner

Do you have pets? Are you willing to do the same? Not double standards at all, I have stated about a billion times now I have no issue with animals being bred to be eaten provided they are not improperly treated nd slaughtered humanly! What don't you get about that??? So how in the hell is it a double standard to raise animals in their own enclosures, well fed, and not abused?? Try again!

Sweet, welcome to logic beatdown #.....???? well it's a big number.

Follow me now as I will use the age old technique of constructing a premis based argument that leads to a conclusion that must be true if all of the premisis are correct.

a) dissentowner stated that he belives all living beings are equal, and have equal rights to life
b) dissentowner stated that it is okay for animals to be bread to be eaten provided they are not improperly treated, and slaughtered humanely
c) if A and B are true, then dissentowner must belive that it is morally acceptable to breed humans for consumption provided they are not abused and are killed humanely.

Wow dissentowner!
You really are a monster!

[Devils'Advocate]

Funny seeing the people that usually piss all over PETA throwing PETA logic at dissentowner.

Given that this thread was 17 pages long before I jumped in, it's impossible to respond to everything, so I'll just throw out my own PERSONAL view on things:

As humans, we know and understand suffering and should work towards minimizing suffering while retaining our right to survival. I'm a utilitarian up to the point of taking or endangering a life. Just as we would not kick a dog for my own pleasure, I wouldn't eat a cow for my own pleasure.

Some may point out that hundreds of jobs will be lost by the cutting of the seal hunt. However, those seal pelts were made into jackets, hats, etc. Are people going to stop buying jackets and hats? The Europeans will just now buy faux-fur hats and jackets or buy parkas and toques. The jobs just shift to other people. Perhaps buying from other countries, so it may well be a cost to the Canadian economy, but to the world economy this will be less than a blip on the radar.

"Hack&Lube" suggests that everything must suffer and that it is a natural part of life. Personally, I don't think believing that "sh*t happens" necessarily suggests that I should "cause sh*t". That is a solid teaching of Anton LaVey, but I don't buy it as a solid philosophy (though I would suggest that LaVey's form of satanism is at least more honest than most organized religion). A belief that everything suffers and a big "so what?" means that teens can microwave frogs and kick stray dogs.

[dissentowner]

Originally Posted by Bring_Back_Shantz

Sweet, welcome to logic beatdown #.....???? well it's a big number.

Follow me now as I will use the age old technique of constructing a premis based argument that leads to a conclusion that must be true if all of the premisis are correct.

a) dissentowner stated that he belives all living beings are equal, and have equal rights to life
b) dissentowner stated that it is okay for animals to be bread to be eaten provided they are not improperly treated, and slaughtered humanely
c) if A and B are true, then dissentowner must belive that it is morally acceptable to breed humans for consumption provided they are not abused and are killed humanely.

Wow dissentowner!
You really are a monster!

You have gone beyond ridiculous at this point, your posts are so twisted and sad it's not funny! Seeing how you have posted absolutely nothing worth reading, have asked ridiculous questions and ducked mine and continue with the insults you are going on the ignore list. If you had even posted a remotely decent conclusion it would be different. Carry on.

[Bring_Back_Shantz]

Originally Posted by Devils'Advocate

Funny seeing the people that usually piss all over PETA throwing PETA logic at dissentowner.

I'll assume this is directed at me so let me clarify.

Dissentowner has stated several times that he truely belives that all living beings are equal, and that we're all arogant or beliving that we are better than them.

I've pointed out several examples of contradictions that he has made that point to the fact the he doesn't belive this (including advocating medical testing on prison inmates instead of rats), and that the difference between him and me is where we draw the line. And that he has been VERY inconsistent on where he draws that line.
This wasn't meant to actually imply he thinks that it's okay to eat people, only to point out the logical contradictions he has made over and over again.

[Bagor]

Originally Posted by dissentowner

Do you have pets?

Fish

Originally Posted by dissentowner

Are you willing to do the same? Not double standards at all, I have stated about a billion times now I have no issue with animals being bred to be eaten provided they are not improperly treated nd slaughtered humanly! What don't you get about that??? So how in the hell is it a double standard to raise animals in their own enclosures, well fed, and not abused?? Try again!

Because a 6x4 or whatever size glass tank with a heat lamp is no substitute for their natural environment. How many do you keep per tank and what is the natural density and range (3 dimensional) of these animals in their natural habitat? Do you replicate these densities and ranges?

That's why prisons exist as punishment measures. They take away an individuals freedom to exist as they should so choose.

Just because the prisoners are "well fed and not abused" doesn't take away from the fact that they are being punished and their freedom is taken away.

Normally I could care less, I just find it veryyyy strange that someone who would advocate for animal rights would be involved in captive breeding where the species involved are cooped up and totally restricted from behaving naturally.