Rule 1 in how to succeed in life: don't be a dick.
I wouldn't kick a puppy for any price because it would make me a total asshole.
I wouldn't kick a puppy for any price because it would make me a total asshole.
Hey, I don't want to get kicked either.rmb1983 said:I guess you missed my footnotes, eh?falconsgyre said:You kick my puppy and you're going down.
Seriously, I don't get why people are pissed by the poll. I put up a disclaimer saying I'd never actually ask someone to do it, and I personally think it's far too trivial a reason as well.![]()
I'm pretty sure you just failed humanity, hey?frozen_scarecrow said:Sure, for five bucks. No matter how cute it is, and the picture is cute, it's just an animal. I would have no problem doing it. I wouldn't want to drop kick it over a fence, or kill it, but a solid kick would be fine.
what if you need the 15 dollars to survive?rmb1983 said:I bolded the part of his argument that really has weight against any possible reasoning you could lobby for hurting an animal for no just reason. Survival is a different matter entirely. $5 or $15 is a stupid reason to seriously hurt anything; whether it's an animal or person is irrelevant.brandon237 said:I really don't care that you think animals have intelligence (witch they don't they have instinct nothing more)but by your logic even the ones we eat should have intelligence and killing them should be wrong. no its not for food its for money think about all the food that goes to waste in the US. you gonna cry about that to? kicking a dog is like kicking a brick the only reason you might not do it is because you could hurt your foot. don't let the cuteness of a puppy stir up your emotions and cloud your logic.(and yes I do think puppy's are cute)you clearly place the idea of a dog higher then me, and instead of using logic to try and win your argument you go around trying to insulting/hurt me. make better choices become a wise person kill the animals save the babies!AlexNora said:Prove you have read my post before replying.brandon237 said:prove its wrong to kick a puppy don't just say it is. it is not wrong to kick a puppy or kill a duck to... I don't know stuff it, or grind up a cow for a hamburger, or use animals in medical test to save a human life or to just to test stuff.AlexNora said:You know why I would kick the person?brandon237 said:hypocrite
you say they feel pain but then you would turn around kick a person that also feels pain
animals are nothing any human is far more beautiful than a stupid dog
and that person that would kick the dog would not be insane or cruel he'd be 15 dollars richer and possible have a small meal.
Social link go!
Because they should understand that what they did was wrong and greedy. They have potentially ruined this puppy's life with serious injury (that can be up to 15 years of suffering, and for a dog that is always loyal to a good owner, and lives to enjoy life and run full speed ahead all the time, a crippling injury is as bad as it gets) for $15 F---ing dollars?
The person was a greedy bastard and deserves to get the kick in return, the puppy does not know greed, evil, right or wrong. Animals don't understand these concepts, we do. But that does not make them stupid, it does not make them unable to feel pain, unable to suffer or understand that it is getting hurt by the one who kicked it.
So just because you have an advantage in size and intelligence you should injure and take advantage of this puppy to get, of all things, richer?
Humans are always more beautiful than stupid dogs?
Humans can be cruel, evil, greedy and many more. Animals are pure, they do not understand, or need to understand these things, and to injure one for such a trivial reason just goes to show that you are, at the very least, greedy and slightly uncaring.
How people treat animals is a good indicator of how they would treat other people if they had such an advantage over them, it shows how caring you are to those lower in the pecking order than yourself. And from this I can say that I am glad you have no power over me.
humans are more beautiful then animals, "even the naiz's where cute when there where little you know, why cant they stay small but ..."
"Animals don't understand these concepts, we do. But that does not make them stupid, it does not make them unable to feel pain, unable to suffer or understand that it is getting hurt by the one who kicked it.
So just because you have an advantage in size and intelligence you should injure and take advantage of this puppy to get, of all things, richer?"
If that to you does not make it wrong, then you are someone on the selfish to psychopath spectrum.
I am okay with using animals for food or to save lives, but not for the purpose of making money (ie: cosmetic tests, you have prisoners for that), entertainment (hunting) or just cause (stuffing it, also falls into money).
Yeah, but the nazi's grew up to be evil, genocidal bastards, the puppy won't, no animal will. Their moral simplicity is what makes animals beautiful, they do what they must to survive, they do not cause harm they must not, they have no need for laws or politics that change. If that is not beautiful, then nothing is, no system ever will be.
You're also reading far too much into his statements. Nowhere did he say that animals possessed intelligence. On the other hand, they do, just not in the same capacity as we do. They're primarily instinctual, but look no further than the way a lot of carnivores hunt for some good examples of animal intelligence at work. Just because we operate on a completely different level, does not mean animals are devoid of all intelligent thought.
And really, who are the stupid ones? We trudge to work every day to keep a roof over their heads, put food in their bowls, and just generally love the ever-living out of them. Sure, they're loyal, and they love you, and Mr. Whiskers is just so adorable, but that's a pretty one-sided deal. Especially when it comes time to clean the litter box/back yard.
Yes. Some people. I, uh, definitely don't know anyone who thinks like that very personally.Chemical Horse said:Fair enough, but I know there are people who would consider cows being slaughtered for food a trivial matter.falconsgyre said:That's what the "trivial reason" thing is trying to get at. There are some situations in which it is definitely okay to hurt an animal, such as in self-defense. Very few people would disagree with that, so I felt it wouldn't be worth it to include an option for that.Chemical Horse said:You forgot to put the option "No, it's not morally acceptable to hurt an animal." because some people wouldn't hurt animals, trivial reason or not.
(please no one beat me with sticks for saying that.)
They're extrapolating on the hypothetical situation of someone coming up to you, cute pet in tow, and saying "$5 to kick this puppy." The bolded portion of my last quote is the reason behind wanting to kick the person, instead. How someone treats pets is a good reflection of how they treat others, in general. You may not know the puppy, or really give a damn about it, but are you seriously going to abuse it for $5? Or even $15?AlexNora said:i also find it interesting that the very fact they asked the question deserves reprimand. you don't have to kick the dog for 15$ dollars, but does the person asking you to really deserver to be kicked possible even killed by you just for asking you to? some of the post i'm reading seem to think so.
That doesn't sound pretentious, just ignorant. The only thing that defies logic is causing serious injury to some other living, breathing thing for a measly $5-$15.AlexNora said:but I understand you all have some form of attachment to animals and it blocks your logic (im sounding pretentious)