Poll: Where do you stand on animal rights?
- Thread starter Droors
- Start date
Recommended Videos
Your poll's a bit odd to be honest; I'm not going to go out of my way to make any animal's life miserable, but, well, it only makes sense. They're living creatures with emotions and intelligence.
PETA, on the hand...
PETA, on the hand...
I've met more clever animals than humans. As much as we'd like to think we're the all powerful being just because we reached the top of the food chain, the greater portion of our species is still dumber than dirt.blackshark121 said:
Also, it's grey area. All animals deserve to not be abused, but to be used for food/materials for other stuff when raised in captivity? I'm fine with that. The insane likes of PETA can eat me, shoving vegan-ism on people, and destroying furs in some misguided belief it will change the minds of someone wearing furs.
This. Eating em is fine and i'd help a human over an animal any day, but senseless abuse is wrong against anything.velcthulhu said:
To an extent, I am for animal rights. For example, if an animal is being abused, the abuser should be punished. When an animal is used in some sort of fight to the death with another animal, the people participating in these actions should be punished (Ex:Cockfights, Dogfights, etc.).
However, our foodstuff...slaughter them, but do it humanely. Don't drag out the death in anyway shape or form. I know I wouldn't want to be part of a slow painful death if I knew someone was going to eat me X_X .
However, our foodstuff...slaughter them, but do it humanely. Don't drag out the death in anyway shape or form. I know I wouldn't want to be part of a slow painful death if I knew someone was going to eat me X_X .
Ok, here is where i stand.
Killing animals senselessly is stupid, however, for food/clothing is fine. On the topic of testing on animals. Screw make-up that is just senseless cruelty, but if it is in the hopes of curing AIDS then go for it. It really depends on what you value as right and wrong and how severely. I value quality of human life more than the quality of animal life which would probably be spent in constant terror at being hunted anyway.
Final Ruling: If it is for the benefit (cosmetics don't count) of the human race (biological weapons don't count either) then I say "Go for it" provided there isn't an equally reliable alternative which can produce the same results minus the painful means.
Killing animals senselessly is stupid, however, for food/clothing is fine. On the topic of testing on animals. Screw make-up that is just senseless cruelty, but if it is in the hopes of curing AIDS then go for it. It really depends on what you value as right and wrong and how severely. I value quality of human life more than the quality of animal life which would probably be spent in constant terror at being hunted anyway.
Final Ruling: If it is for the benefit (cosmetics don't count) of the human race (biological weapons don't count either) then I say "Go for it" provided there isn't an equally reliable alternative which can produce the same results minus the painful means.
Unless you are a sociopath no one thinks animals should be abused needlessly. There are times when animal testing is acceptable imo, i.e. drug trials before they start on human tests.
However, the big hate on "animal rights" isn't against the rights themselves, it's just retarded groups like PETA.
However, the big hate on "animal rights" isn't against the rights themselves, it's just retarded groups like PETA.
While I agree that being unnecessarily cruel to animals is pretty abhorrent, animals are just that - animals. I do not believe in imposing human characteristics/intellect onto them or that we need to treat them like humans. We need to treat and regard them as animals because they are animals.
Hypothetical situation to explain my reasoning: PETA goes out of its way to save a grizzly bear, and the bear promptly mauls the PETA members. Even though PETA saved the bear, the bear is an animal and will not think "hey these people saved me out of the goodness of their hearts and I should be grateful"
Hypothetical situation to explain my reasoning: PETA goes out of its way to save a grizzly bear, and the bear promptly mauls the PETA members. Even though PETA saved the bear, the bear is an animal and will not think "hey these people saved me out of the goodness of their hearts and I should be grateful"
I think animals deserve rights, like not being tested on for products intended for people (that's what prisoners should be for). and they shouldn't be hunted for pure sport, if you insist on killing an animal, use as much of it as possible. But I'm not for going to the extremes that PETA often does, like throwing red paint on people who wear fur, which is actually worse for furry critters because now those people need to replace their ruined coat.
Honestly I think Destal pretty much got it right. Some people take the protection of animals too far though. Like PETA, if they had their way all pets would be released. It may sound like a noble concept to some but you must consider the fact that we have bred dogs to be dependent on us for 1000's of years. Many of them would starve to death. Cats would become feral within months and breed until they all started starving to death.
Animal rights and caring for animals somehow seem to be in contradiction to each other at points. I don't believe any animal should needlessly suffer, something a lot of people don't seem to understand also is that hunters in general actually do more to preserve wildlife than they take away from it. The licenses they buy is money for the wildlife fund. They want the wildlife there and healthy so they can hunt it. I have absolutely no problem with that as long as they intend to eat what they kill. I was raised hunting, and only once did I kill something I didn't eat, and that was a porcupine that was attacking my dog. The deer we ate every little part, even had the b grade meat turned into sausage for us.
I have to admit even being a hunter myself (even though I haven't actually gone out hunting in a decade) I have never understood fur trapping. It's cruel, painful, and there are plenty of other ways to make fabrics and clothes these days.
Animal rights and caring for animals somehow seem to be in contradiction to each other at points. I don't believe any animal should needlessly suffer, something a lot of people don't seem to understand also is that hunters in general actually do more to preserve wildlife than they take away from it. The licenses they buy is money for the wildlife fund. They want the wildlife there and healthy so they can hunt it. I have absolutely no problem with that as long as they intend to eat what they kill. I was raised hunting, and only once did I kill something I didn't eat, and that was a porcupine that was attacking my dog. The deer we ate every little part, even had the b grade meat turned into sausage for us.
I have to admit even being a hunter myself (even though I haven't actually gone out hunting in a decade) I have never understood fur trapping. It's cruel, painful, and there are plenty of other ways to make fabrics and clothes these days.
This all depends on what animal rights are.
Are you talking PETA style with their animals are just like people malarky, or are you talking treated fairly, and without undue harshness.
I think keeping an animal as a pet is both a responsibility and a privilege. I could care less if domesticated animals are killed for food. I know that the PETA shock videos get footage from around the world (you thought it all took place in the us? Silly you) and much of it is over 10 years old. I saw a similar video to their new shock video that was about half of that video, and some other videos of chickens, and that was 8 years ago. Product of an in depth insider study my ass.
I think people should be able to hunt. I think we have a pretty good idea here in developed countries about is abusive to animals.
One last little bit to add: I don't think that abusing an animal and abusing a person warrant the same punishment. Cause it is after all an animal, and I would kill 500 of them to save one person, and more and its not really worth the effort unless I know the person.
Are you talking PETA style with their animals are just like people malarky, or are you talking treated fairly, and without undue harshness.
I think keeping an animal as a pet is both a responsibility and a privilege. I could care less if domesticated animals are killed for food. I know that the PETA shock videos get footage from around the world (you thought it all took place in the us? Silly you) and much of it is over 10 years old. I saw a similar video to their new shock video that was about half of that video, and some other videos of chickens, and that was 8 years ago. Product of an in depth insider study my ass.
I think people should be able to hunt. I think we have a pretty good idea here in developed countries about is abusive to animals.
One last little bit to add: I don't think that abusing an animal and abusing a person warrant the same punishment. Cause it is after all an animal, and I would kill 500 of them to save one person, and more and its not really worth the effort unless I know the person.