Poll: Where do you stand on animal rights?

[Emilin_Rose]

Personally, i'm all for the humane treatment of animals.

However there is a limit. Kill them for food is fine, if you do it relatively painlessly. In my opinion, outside of using them for food, like any omnivore, you shouldn't do anything to an animal you wouldn't be willing to do to another human. This of course doesn't apply to spiders, ants, beetles, or retarded people.

 

[space_oddity]

Animals have the right to be delicious.

Animals have the right to be delicious.

Animal abuse I am against, but as far as eating them goes? OM NOM NOM

WOAH i just got massively ninja'd.
Exact same words.
We need to be friends.

 

[Happy Toki Toki]

Pets and livestock should be cared for and not abused, yes, but "animal rights" is the most ass-backwards concept in history. Give rights to creatures that can never and will never comprehend them? It's retarded.

This guy's got the idea

 

[joystickjunki3]

Some animal rights (and ideas for animal rights) are just unreasonable, but I don't believe in treating animals cruelly.

 

[LilGherkin]

If the animal annoys us and doesn't know how to get away from us it deserves to be eaten, or if it tastes great.

 

[space_oddity]

I believe this: Don't hunt the baby Kangaroos!

When cooked rare to medium-rare kangaroo meat is delicious, better than steak.
Kangaroo's dont produce even a hundreth of a percent of the methane that livestock produce.
There are an estimated 42 million kangaroos in australia, thats double the human population.

DO hunt the baby Kangaroos!

 

[Motti]

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.

That's interesting, because in Australia hunters hunt feral animals mostly (be it cats, pigs, buffalo, cute wikkle rabbits, whatever). They don't necessarily eat all the parts (who would want to eat cat?), but without them, feral populations would be much bigger and local wildlife would be in a much worse state. What may I ask then, is your opinion on those hunters?

 

[YYZed]

i will hunt, eat, test products on and wear any animal as long as its not being protected by a law or something like being borderline extinct or someones pet.

 

[Emilin_Rose]

Personally, i'm all for the humane treatment of animals.

However there is a limit. Kill them for food is fine, if you do it relatively painlessly. In my opinion, outside of using them for food, like any omnivore, you shouldn't do anything to an animal you wouldn't be willing to do to another human. This of course doesn't apply to spiders, ants, beetles, or retarded people.

So no more lab testing on rats to find a cure for AIDS?

This goes hand in hand with my views on abortion. Labrats were fine when abortion was little more than a wire up the uterus and an infection that killed half the women, but in this day and age when modern medicine has progressed so far, my opinion is that we should start taking unwanted fetuses and using THEM instead. It'd be much easier because we wouldn't waste time or money on "this rat lived lets see if we can make it work on people" instead it would just be testing on actual human DNA and thus if something actually worked it would be an actual cure and not just an animal that lived an extra day or so.

Human lives are no more valuable than animal lives. I think if we all learned that we'd either be a peaceful happy world or we'd all be dead and not have to worry about it anymore.

 

[Dancingman]

I think we should make sure that humans get all those things before worrying about the animals. But I certainly oppose senseless mistreatment of animals.

Same here

I'm against people who mistreat animals just for the hell of it (like that group of students in the UK that microwaved a hedgehog), but I'm also against those annoying charities that beg you to prolong the life of some dog with terminal illness for four more minutes by donating the money to them that could be better used to save the life of an impoverished human child in the world. Animals deserve fair treatment, but my fellow man comes first. Also, I think there should be a limit, and sometimes even a ban on certain pets in areas; some place that harbors a population of critically endangered birds should be cat-free, I don't have a problem with cats, I have two that I love very much, but Fluffy can very well be problematic to an ecosystem where she has little to no predators and plenty of prey. I also think that if feral cat/dog populations are a problem (not too bad in the USA, really bad in some developing countries) you need to euthanize them for the good of the whole ecosystem. Also, animal breeding farms (puppy farms, cat farms, etc.) should be more regulated, the reason America's shelters are full to bursting is because of people who breed dogs like mad, make a ton of puppies that spend their whole lives in shelters.

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 .

Why would they drag out the death? That's just inefficient.

I forgot the url, but there is a KFC video of people throwing chickens at walls and what not. Yeah, thats kinda what I'm talking about.

A lot of those videos are fake, the simple fact of the matter is that most of the alleged atrocities (cramming all the animals together into the same godforsaken place to live among their own filth and catch the various diseases that go around like wildfire in a situation like that) make for inefficient business. Dead, disease-ridden animals makes for bad business, though all the major meat companies pay less attention to tainted things than they should (though more food poisonings happen with vegetables), but basically the all-powerful magic of capitalistic choice forces them to pay attention. Logic: A diseased animal has a superb chance of yielding bad meat, bad meat that gets to consumers will cause a rash of food poisonings. Eventually, it will be discovered that the meat was the source of these poisonings; a company that gets a reputation for doing this a lot will go out of business to people who care just enough about the quality of their product.

Oh, and it sickens me that all the anti-lab-testing people are worried about stupid rats when millions of Africans are slowly dying of AIDS.

 

[Dancingman]

Personally, i'm all for the humane treatment of animals.

However there is a limit. Kill them for food is fine, if you do it relatively painlessly. In my opinion, outside of using them for food, like any omnivore, you shouldn't do anything to an animal you wouldn't be willing to do to another human. This of course doesn't apply to spiders, ants, beetles, or retarded people.

So no more lab testing on rats to find a cure for AIDS?

This goes hand in hand with my views on abortion. Labrats were fine when abortion was little more than a wire up the uterus and an infection that killed half the women, but in this day and age when modern medicine has progressed so far, my opinion is that we should start taking unwanted fetuses and using THEM instead. It'd be much easier because we wouldn't waste time or money on "this rat lived lets see if we can make it work on people" instead it would just be testing on actual human DNA and thus if something actually worked it would be an actual cure and not just an animal that lived an extra day or so.

Human lives are no more valuable than animal lives. I think if we all learned that we'd either be a peaceful happy world or we'd all be dead and not have to worry about it anymore.

I don't think that would work, I'm pretty sure that in most cases if you were to pry the fetus away from the mother at an early stage it's fate would be sealed as an early death or at least you'd need to put him up on life support.

Yeah, medical complications for that would be... hefty to say the least. Again, why we worry about rats while millions are dying of AIDS is beyond me.

 

[Emilin_Rose]

For father time and dancing: Did i not just say, that we are WORRYING about RATS when millions of PEOPLE are dying of aids, because people are NOT MORE VALUABLE than rats. If you ask me we're less valuable. If any religion other than the greek gods is right then we are all doing some great sin or another within our daily lives that we don't even think about and thus are all going to hell. And when i see you both there i will be smiling, simply because I TOLD YOU SO.

and furthermore, an early death isn't the point. It's not going to be a person, just like a lab rat isn't going to be a pet. We use it to find a cure, just like the rats, then we let it die in peace. WHICH BY THE WAY is more than we give the rats.

 

[Pandalisk]

what comes first above others in my eyes

1.Humans
2.Animals
3.Business men

 

[Blood_Lined]

The poll is very black and white. I am against animal rights for it would raise food prices.
Domestic animals are a different story.