Poll: Should our species be exempt from culling?

[Valkyrie101]

The point I'm making is that we humans have unimaginable potential: just look at how far we've come in the last five thousand years. Trees and flowers have zero potential, and literally do not have minds, so should be disregarded.

So... Should we kill off all the plants and trees then? How about insects? or even half the other far inferior species could probably go as well. They are obviously in the way our progression to ascend to out rightful place as gods of this world? [/sarcasm]

No, because they're useful to us. We need them to exist. Note that this only makes them important in conjunction with humanity.

Okay, that was probably quite offensive and distasteful to people, so apologies where needed.

Seriously though I am probably one of the first people to admit that I dislike other people, even put back in context, the superior-species entitlement some people have these days is quite disturbing.

So here we go, you're a people-hating misanthrope, which explains why you get on better with grass than people. But some of us have a vested interest in survival and progress.

 

[Pyro Paul]

Humanity as a species is the most destructive force on this planet we are the only species that knowlingly destroys our environment, our atmosphere, and the extinction of other species. We have the gift of knowledge and we choose to burn the world to a cinder instead of using it to make a better place. With this view I do beleive the population does need to be monitered and controled but by civilized means like birth control.

You think 'nature' is all lolly pops and gumdrops?
Nature is the most distructive force ever witnessed. it is full of chaos which, through flukes, alter the fate of millions of species.

we have the gift of knowledge, and we use it to Fight nature and try and bring order into a random chaotic world.

Global Warming, for instance.
That is a Fluke caused in a shift of the earths orbit from the increased number of massive volcanic eruptions and huge earth quakes seen in the past 50-100 years. It would of happened regardless if weither or not humans existed...

yet, as a race, we try and 'stop' it...

you give humans too much credit.
we are mearly a speck of paint in the larger picture... a grain in the hourglass of time... nothing more then a foot note in the annals of existance. To believe that we are anything more is just arrogance.

 

[omega 616]

Culling? That's sick. I'm all for cutting back on reproduction, but outright murder is just disgusting.

Yeah, try telling that to people. "Hey, can you give up your right to have more than one child? Even though you have enjoyed that freedom all your life".

It would be painfully hard to enforce that.

Just a thought, what about bringing natural selection back ... in a way. For instance, kill or abort a baby with a genetic defect, like down syndrome?

I mean, how much joy are they really going to get out of life? I know it would be heart braking with a population of around 7 billion we have to do something.

There can't just be a never ending population growth, I knew a family who had 13 kids from one mum!

The only way to reduce the population is to have one child per person 'cos if some people don't have kids the population will decrease.

I mean we have loads of children in adoption agencys, give them a home instead of making one.

 

[lord canti]

Every time I hear someone say animals are no more important than humans. I ask them if they would take an animals life to save their own kid? That usually shuts them up.

 

[Azure Sky]

The point I'm making is that we humans have unimaginable potential: just look at how far we've come in the last five thousand years. Trees and flowers have zero potential, and literally do not have minds, so should be disregarded.

So... Should we kill off all the plants and trees then? How about insects? or even half the other far inferior species could probably go as well. They are obviously in the way our progression to ascend to out rightful place as gods of this world? [/sarcasm]

No, because they're useful to us. We need them to exist. Note that this only makes them important in conjunction with humanity.

Okay, that was probably quite offensive and distasteful to people, so apologies where needed.

Seriously though I am probably one of the first people to admit that I dislike other people, even put back in context, the superior-species entitlement some people have these days is quite disturbing.

So here we go, you're a people-hating misanthrope, which explains why you get on better with grass than people. But some of us have a vested interest in survival and progress.

And you're a specie-elitist Hitler that doesn't seem to realize all facets of his own race (Not to mention doesn't read whole posts)

Now that I have given you the satisfaction of sinking to your level of namecalling, shall we move on?

I don't know about you, but I'm sure I can name the primary only contributing factor that will lead humanity extinct.

 

[Azure Sky]

Every time I hear someone say animals are no more important than humans. I ask them if they would take an animals life to save their own kid? That usually shuts them up.

That depends, would you take the life of another human to save your own kid?
Would you take two? =3

 

[bad rider]

Humanity as a species is the most destructive force on this planet we are the only species that knowlingly destroys our environment, our atmosphere, and the extinction of other species. We have the gift of knowledge and we choose to burn the world to a cinder instead of using it to make a better place. With this view I do beleive the population does need to be monitered and controled but by civilized means like birth control.

You think 'nature' is all lolly pops and gumdrops?
Nature is the most distructive force ever witnessed. it is full of chaos which, through flukes, alter the fate of millions of species.

we have the gift of knowledge, and we use it to Fight nature and try and bring order into a random chaotic world.

Global Warming, for instance.
That is a Fluke caused in a shift of the earths orbit from the increased number of massive volcanic eruptions and huge earth quakes seen in the past 50-100 years. It would of happened regardless if weither or not humans existed...

yet, as a race, we try and 'stop' it...

you give humans too much credit.
we are mearly a speck of paint in the larger picture... a grain in the hourglass of time... nothing more then a foot note in the annals of existance. To believe that we are anything more is just arrogance.

In response to the question: Do you think human activity is a significant contributing factor in changing mean global temperatures?

Source: http://www.skepticalscience.com/global-warming-scientific-consensus-intermediate.htm

 

[Kingsnake661]

Culling? That's sick. I'm all for cutting back on reproduction, but outright murder is just disgusting.

Why is it any more wrong than killing any other species? That is the big point of my question. What makes us so special? For hundreds of millions of years, animals have lived harmoniously with the planet. In all that time, we are the only species to be aiding in the planets destruction. Why are we so deserving of existence but other more respectable species aren't?

If you belive in God, it's because we'er created in his image.

If you don't, it's cause we'er the top of the food chain.

Simple truth is, we'er special because we'er the higher life form, reguardless of how you think we got there. Either by divine grace or survivle of the fittest.

 

[quantumsoul]

No way. It would too easily turn into mass execution of disabled people. Having dealt with people for varying handicaps, they're not the drain on society some think they are.

Limiting the number of births is the only way I'd accept population control.

 

[razer17]

Why is it suddenly hip to hate human kind? Maybe we should cull those who feel that we should kill other humans, because apparently there are more of those than people who don't like to see others killed.

 

[lord canti]

Every time I hear someone say animals are no more important than humans. I ask them if they would take an animals life to save their own kid? That usually shuts them up.

That depends, would you take the life of another human to save your own kid?
Would you take two? =3

yes I would doesn't mean I won't feel bad for it. Just like as much as I love animals if a dog is attacking my kid I wouldn't hesitate to kill it.

 

[Darius Brogan]

Oh, I get it, you're just a huge fucking asshole not willing to believe that the Earth wasn't put here just to suit your specific needs as a being that perceives itself to be intelligent! That's makes SO much more sense!!!

Point here being that I'm capable of perceiving myself as intelligent, rightly or wrongly. Animals can't do such a thing, so that puts me ahead immediately. You too, much as you seem to hate your inborn superiority.

I live as a neutral entity, and I will die as a neutral entity.

Not very ambitious, are you? Well you might be determined to be a worthless nothing, but please don't hold back those of us with our human instincts intact.

Ambition nothing. My inborn superiority doesn't make me think I'm better than any other animal, as I cannot fathom a logical reason to place ourselves above them on the food chain 'Just because we can think'. It does, however, perform the same function as beating the shit out of the previous Alpha wolf, and make me a better Human Being than others. I'm not perfect, and will never claim most, as your argument has already proven.

Try not to take it the wrong way but, if intelligence truly makes one better, I really am quite a bit higher than most of humanity. Neutrality does not make me an emotionless, opinion-less being, it just assures a near completely unbiased opinion in every case.

 

[Alade]

Some people just need to realize that we ARE better than any other living being on this planet and that we deserve special treatment from ourselves, since we can't expect it from the other (non-intelligent) creatures on this planet.

However I will agree that the population increase is alarming and needs to be handled in some way.

 

[Red Albatross]

Murder is hardly necessary.

Nature will eventually fight back with a nice big epidemic that will wipe a good 30-80% of us off the map. I'm okay with that.

 

[Valkyrie101]

The point I'm making is that we humans have unimaginable potential: just look at how far we've come in the last five thousand years. Trees and flowers have zero potential, and literally do not have minds, so should be disregarded.

So... Should we kill off all the plants and trees then? How about insects? or even half the other far inferior species could probably go as well. They are obviously in the way our progression to ascend to out rightful place as gods of this world? [/sarcasm]

No, because they're useful to us. We need them to exist. Note that this only makes them important in conjunction with humanity.

Okay, that was probably quite offensive and distasteful to people, so apologies where needed.

Seriously though I am probably one of the first people to admit that I dislike other people, even put back in context, the superior-species entitlement some people have these days is quite disturbing.

So here we go, you're a people-hating misanthrope, which explains why you get on better with grass than people. But some of us have a vested interest in survival and progress.

And you're a specie-elitist Hitler that doesn't seem to realize all facets of his own race (Not to mention doesn't read whole posts)

Now that I have given you the satisfaction of sinking to your level of namecalling, shall we move on?

I don't know about you, but I'm sure I can name the primary only contributing factor that will lead humanity extinct.

Oh God, tell me you didn't just compare trees to Jews, or civilization to the Holocaust.

I'm not going to bother continuing this discussion, because you're starting to give the impression of being a tiny little bit sociopathic not to mention unhinged species-traitor.

snip

Listen, it's this simple. We are humans. Look around and take in everything that we have achieved and created. Now look at animals and plants. What have they achieved? Nothing. What will they ever achieve? Nothing. They are simply biological processes. So are we. We are, however, far more advanced biological processes.

That is, of course, taking the very broad universal perspective. Since we are humans, we ought to take the human angle, which is this simple: we are human. We are more important, because we are we and they are they (not to mention considerably inferior in any case). Therefore, it is in our interest, yours and mine, to survive, even at their cost. That is instinct. That is our purpose. Anyone who fails to live by this creed, dies. Simple Darwinism.

Anyway, what's your long-term plan if it doesn't involve human survival?

 

[Darius Brogan]

There is NO VALID REASON that Human beings are better than any other species in existence. End of story.

Our higher moral reasoning? The ability to create beauty i.e. art in all its forms? Our completely unique ability and desires to save other life forms?

How about that there isn't and there has never been an animal that would want to actively protect other species from their environments/predators/extinction, even if they could. [And before you get clever, rare cases of adoption in animals doesn't count. I'm talking organised efforts, to artificially maintain the life cycles of dying species.]

This is actually provable when you consider that something like 97% of ALL species that have ever been -in the billions of years before we came along- are extinct. There were no telethons for them, no awarenesses raised, no resources diverted, no shits given.

There are a couple of reasons for you.

I'm well aware of the fact that billions of species around the world have gone extinct without the interference of the human race, I believe the numbers are closer to 99% by the way.

I am also aware of the fact that the Human Race has directly (and in many cases knowingly/intentionally) caused the extinction of millions and millions of species that, without our interference would not have gone extinct for decades, centuries, and possibly millenia.

Organizing efforts to preserve the dying remnants of species we, ourselves, caused near extinction of, does not make me believe that humans are better than any other animals.

Off the top of my head, animals we're 'preserving' in North America alone include, but are not limited to: (A-B) Amargosa Vole, American Bison, Bighorn Sheep, Brown Bear, Cougar, Gray Wolf, Jaguar, Jaguarundi, Margay, Ocelot, Red Wolf, and West Indian Manatee. All of which live on, at, or near North America.

 

[PixelJunk]

Somehow, I severely doubt we're that important.

 

[Xanadu84]

Humans are worthy of Moral consideration. Animals arn't. If you disagree with the first point, you are a psychopath. If you disagree with the second, either your a hypocrite or a PETA supporter. Humans well-being is always, always, ALWAYS an ends, not merely a means. To think otherwise could be argued as the very definition of evil. Human beings certainly have disgusting aspects, but that is because of their treatment of OTHER members of humanity, whether directly, or indirectly through the destruction of resources.