HOME | DD
alaska-is-a-husky — It is Possible...
Published: 2010-06-13 18:32:53 +0000 UTC; Views: 29580; Favourites: 2747; Downloads: 108
Redirect to original
Description
To say that it isn't kind of makes you a judgmental prick, don't you think? You can read my thoughts and feelings no more than I can read yours.Related content
Comments: 1791
Yeah...when they aren't friendly it usually means they were abused in the past
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
Exactly its the owners fault that the dog isnt friendly
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
I hate people that abuse animals.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
Is it really? Well lets analyse this, would you eat your wife, husband, son, daughter? Why not, you can still love them and eat them, right? Animals and people both feel pain. The only reason you eat meet is for pleasure (there are other options.) So no, you can never truly 'love' animals, I am not saying you hate them, but heck, you sure don't love them. It is just exploiting and killing something you clam to 'love' for your own pleasure. Love is far too stronger word.
👍: 0 ⏩: 5
Plants feel pain too but you still eat them do you not?
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
Indeed some, (not all that reputable,) studied have 'suggested' plants feel pain, without a central nervous system and brain this seems unlikely, yes they can respond to certain stimuli, but that is not the same thing, further it is the lack of cognitive abilities (with the absence of a brain) for any plant to be able to comprehend pain. So as much as I respect your concern for plants, I'm sure animals are due that same amount of care, if not far more due to their own individual complexity and the great pain they can feel and understand.
Also, I would like to say the point of my above comment was referring to 'loving' and eating something, so this is all a bit off topic, (I don't run around with a 'I love cucumbers but still eat them t-shirt on,) but none-the-less, I hope I could put your mind at ease about your salad.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
There is nothing wrong with eating meat though. People been doing that for thousands of years. You can dislike it all you want but you shouldnt try and control other people. That just makes you look like a retarded dick
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
Oh naturally if people do something long enough it's fine right, rape, murder, and many other horrors in our world have been around for a long time, I'm definitely not trying to draw comparisons between the two, just pointing out that that is not a reason to go along with something.
Also I didn't mean to come off as controlling, I don't really see anything in my response to you as that, (I do see you throwing the cheap old 'plants feel pain' line and then getting out argued, and now you can't take it so resort to cheap insults.) But I do wish to correct you that I was just giving an opinion, not really controlling, you don't have to agree with me, but welcome to the internet, nobody can agree on everything all the time, that's just part of life. Though if you are so easily offended by discussions in which somebody doesn't go along with your view, I'd really suggest not starting them.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
You just compared rape and murder to eating meat.
Yup, you're a fucking dickbag who doesnt understand anything about the meat industry other than what PETA has told you. Why would I be offended? You compared RAPE AND MURDER, stuff that happens to YOUR OWN PEOPLE, to MEAT. That is just a fucking disgusting thing to say? I know what youre going to say "but its disgusting to eat meat 
I never met someone so despicable. Fuck you. You are one of the worst type of vegans. And you wonder why people fucking hate vegans. Go eat your damn salad and stay out of other people's lives.
I am going to enjoy my ham.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
Really? I can't believe you, I deliberately said I'm not drawing comparisons between those things, the basic point I was making was that a period of time 'something' goes on for does not make 'something' right. You said eating meat is fine, because people have done it for so long, that outlook is obviously open for issues to say the least, so I used a pretty terrible example of other things that have existed for the same amount of time, not to even think about comparing them, but to point out your flawed logic. Of course I am not comparing eating meat to rape, I was using it as an example of something (very shocking) that has existed for the length of human history, so you clearly didn't read or understand what I said. Please don't think I was comparing the two!
Secondly many people survive without meat or substitutes, so yes, it's quite possible.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
I'm done with you. It's no use talking to people like you
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
So the logic you have here is this:
You love animals -> You still eat them
You love anything else? -> You better be okay with eating that too
Lets apply this logic into some other things in life:
You love animals -> Bugs are animals
Bug is destroying your house and eventually if you do not stop the bug, the house will be destroyed
But hey you love animals, and you still kill the bug for what they did, to make sure your family still has a home
You get a child -> You love that child, and you also love animals
The child starts to destroy the house -> Well you killed the bug, that is an animal, and you love animals
You love the child, but you decide to kill it to make it stop destroying the house, it is the same thing
You loved both, but killed both.
Flawless perfect logic. XDDDDDD Just amazing.
Okay lets try something a little less dramatic with this same logic:
You love plants -> You still walk on grass
You love your mother -> It must be okay to walk on your mother too, since you love her too, just like you love the plants you walk on
It's not like there is anything different in there. And you dare to claim that you love plants when you walk on them. How dare you. XD
Hey what about the love for your significant other?
You love your husband/wife/girlfriend/boyfriend right -> But you have sex with them
But you also love your pets -> Well why not just have sex with everything you love, since you love them all
I mean it's the same thing, you love both things, so what ever you do to the other thing is the exactly same as if you did it to the other right? "Just pure logic." How dare you claim you love your pets when you do not have sex with them. Or how dare you claim you love animals when you eat them, yet you say you love your family and do not eat them.
Could it be... That the love you have for the different things is different? BUT THERE IS ONLY ONE WORD, LOVE IS LOVE, I AM SURE I AM JUST IMAGINING THIS.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
Ah firstly, I never stated that ‘I’ love animals, the individual who made this stamp did, I was simply saying love was too stronger word. Though yes I do care greatly about animals and personally do not eat them, because they are intelligent, understand and feel pain, so to cause something you love to suffer seems rather cruel and illogical.
As for the bugs destroying your house, firstly there are many arguments about weather or not insects can even feel pain or understand it. If animals destroyed your house/put your life in danger then killing can be argued, just as if a human being did so, if some guy marched into your home in the middle of the night and tried to destroy it and you stabbed him, I wouldn’t say you were wrong, well to the next extreme if your husband/wife tried to kill you and you killed them first I would hardly say you were wrong. But eating meet is not so necessary because in our dear society’s there are other options, so as an ‘animal’ lover, eating animals and causing them to suffer seems somewhat illogical.
As for grass, really? Well, few people love grass that passionately, and grass cannot feel pain thankfully, so that’s that.As for having sex with animals, well that would cause pain to the animal and make me question your mental health. And I feel sex has nothing to do with ‘love’, sex is just are lust and pleasure really. If somebody loved children, I desperately hope that they would not have sex with them. So that isn’t really up for debate.
And please don’t just use so many of capitals to make your argument seem big…it really isn’t necessary. : )
Bottom line is, if you are willing to eat meet and cause animals pain and suffering to animals, then you cannot claim to love animals, like them sure, enjoy spending time with them yes, but I don’t think ‘love’. Just ask yourself why you eat meet, honestly, we are not cave men that know no other foods or something, we’re relatively smart and can eat other delicious stuff, so why eat something that can feel and understand pain?👍: 0 ⏩: 1
Ah the capitals are just in the beginning of 'sentences' XD Don't mind them. I can not get over some grammatical habits, yet I am not the best in all of them, also it's not really relevant to the whole issue I had, which was with the logic that you had in your statement.
(Also I am little sorry, I can not help myself, it's "meat" not "meet", I know this is a little irrelevant but still. DX)
Ah well your comment never said your real point, which was "I think the word 'love' is too strong" maybe next time include that in there.
Using the word "love" has become a cultural thing, much like using words "literally" and "for real", it doesn't necessarily mean what is said.
Just normal development of language and its usage in normal everyday culture.
About bugs not really fitting the category, I was just taking a hold of the generalization of the word "animal" since your comment was about "animals" in generally not specifically "only animals that feel pain and are able to understand it".
So your argument wasn't really about the word "love" at all? It was just about feeling the pain and understanding it? Since in your argument the word "love" seemed to be a great part of the whole issue. "You love animals -> You eat them = You love your family -> You eat them"
Sex is a natural thing in our "survival" just like "eating" is. It's the same with all of us animals. Again the focus was merely in the logic behind your statement "You love your partner -> You still have sex with them because it causes them no pain = You love your pets -> You could as well have sex with them if it causes them no pain" ?
If we really want to go analysig the word "love" what does it mean to you then? For me it means "Strong attraction between things, that is emotional and mental, also causing physical results in the brain." and I think it is very possible to love a pet dog (= animal), and eat an unknown cow (=animal) because of the basic human brain function and ability to recognize individuals. 
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
No I was referring to the CAPITALS AT THE END OF YOUR COMMENT, LIKE THESE, And ‘meet’ is my bad, so I will willing confess my rather stupid mistake there.
I think my comment was clear on that, and I quote ‘Love is far too stronger word.’
Yes, the word love is tossed around lightly these days, but the use here seemed to be somewhat strong, or at least the responses I’ve had were, so clearly people feel pretty passionately about the fact that they ‘love’ animals and yet can kill and eat them.
No I did not specifically say animals that could feel pain, not that I though I would need to, that is like involving plants in my short comment, I didn’t intend on writing an easy for people, just my humble opinion.
I think the sex argument was simply you being very literal, which is fair enough, but not really going to get that far. My point still holds that if you truly ‘love’ (love being used in a strong way here) animals, you would not contribute to their suffering and eat them.
Yes, I think it does depend on how you define love as a word, it is probably possible to love your dog and eat a cow, but that would not be loving animals, that would be loving some animals, which still seems rather silly, I mean somebody wouldn’t love their teenage daughter, and then go and kill teenage girls…then in saying that it could happen, maybe people love one animal, not animals as a whole though, which was really my original point, so I hold to what I said.👍: 0 ⏩: 1
Oh that, I was just trying to express the obscurity of the thing, it can be hard with text in other means than altering the letter size. XDD
That is also a natural way of communication for me, if it seemed like I was pushing the meaning, yeah that was the point. To underline the thing I was saying, cause it was so absurd for me. Self expression, just like talking about this matter. It was not intended as aggression towards you if that made you feel like it.
Nah, including 'plants' into 'animals' is not the same thing at all. I mean... WHAT. XDDDD Where is the logic in that? It's two entirely different groups and words, and should not be considered in similar matter at all. XD But taking the word "animals" and the meaning behind it literally and as a whole is quite logical don't you think? Specially since you take the word "love" so seriously and thinking it has only one meaning, I thought you took the word "animal" as seriously too, specially since you seem to feel so strongly about the matter.
Well in your original statement, it sounds like you think that people absolutely can not love animals (= any animal, including and not limited to any specific species/ type of thing that falls under that category) if they eat any animal, which I think, simply put, is not true to the least. XD Mostly because animals as a whole is such a huge and diversity group of different species and beings and because human brain really does have the capability to recognize and create strong emotional attachments to individuals.
Ah, you think it's silly/weird to love some animals, but not all of them?
Again, lets go back to the original meaning of the word 'love' and 'animal', and what I mean with them.
Animal = any creature labeled under the group of animals, including humans, bugs, birds, fishes etc.
Love = Strong emotional attraction towards something.
So I am just trying to understand you, what exactly in there is silly/weird or highly unlikely in loving a pet dog, and eating an unknown cow?
Because of the meaning of the word "love" that I stated above, and the meaning behind the word "animal" I think, a scenario where you love an animal, but eat an animal is very possible. XDDDD
You still haven't clarified what you mean with the word "love", maybe that will clear up this barrier of misunderstanding the matter?
The thing stopping you from killing is not always only individual attraction, there is also morals / norms and even cultural/educational aspects to every person in this planet. XD
Damn right I am literal. How else would we be able to communicate if we never had any clear idea/lines what the words that we use mean? XD
Language was created as a tool of communication, and I really believe that it should be used as such.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
Yes, I am aware that using capitals commonly much represent shouting, which is an unnecessary response to 1 emoticon, or to a discussion at all, that was my first point. But you have all right to type and express yourself as you wish. : ) It wasn’t a big deal.
As for plants, my point was only that I didn’t want to talk about every detail and possible variant in the first comment, when you said I should have been more clear, but the idea wasn’t to get people to read an essay, just my small opinion, and if (being slightly argumentative here I’ll admit) plants are so irrelevant, I’ll humbly remind you of your use of grass a few comments back.
No actually I think it is pretty weird to kill anything that feels pain for your own pleasure.
It doesn’t matter how I define love, from the love you have when you are just married to somebody, to the self-sacrificing love you have for an individual where you would put your life on the line for them, no definition of love I have ever heard involves eating the ‘loved’ topic, asides cake that is.
The basic idea here, without blowing this out of proportion in loads of examples, is you can not love animals and still eat them, that would be like a serial killer making a stamp with ‘you can love women and still kill them,’ because he loves his wife but murders strangers, this of course isn’t true, but then why is this stamp right? Why doesn’t that serial killer ‘love women’, well obviously because he kills some of them, so why does somebody who claim to ‘love animal’ kill them, well they cannot love ‘animals’. Or an individual who enslaves children, saying ‘you can love children but still exploit them’ because he loves his own child just not strangers. That ‘logic’ doesn’t work.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
You compared animals to plants, saying that you didn't want to explain everything in such detail, I just pointed out that you do not have to explain "everything you didn't mean" rather "what you did mean".
My speaking of grass was just me using your logic in a different scenario. XD Not saying that someone would mix animals and plants in this conversation.
For you to think that livestock is only raised and killed for pleasure seems like a huge simplification of the situation. XD I mean wat. Have you got any idea what the meat industry actually means and what goes into it? Also just saying, I think there are good people who actually care for their animals and their welfare in the industry, and there are people who do not care, and that should be fixed.
There you go. Cake. XD I think the way you define love is in the essential here. As it seems that you do not understand how simple it is. You can love another animal, and kill another.
Did you know that some people who are Vegan, and eat vegan food/have vegan lifestyle have forced their pets also into a vegan diet thus killing their pets. Those people 'loved animals' but killed them.
Just saying, considering the common meaning behind the word animal and word love, it is very possible to love one and kill animals. If not "dog and cow" just "bug and cat" are enough to verify this statement. You love your cat, you are vegan, everything you own is vegan, you even force your cat into a vegan diet (that will cause it to die at some point as they are strictly carnivores). You walk home one day, and you see a banana-fly in your apartment. No matter what you do, the babana flies won't leave, so you kill them.
Saying "no, wait, I do not consider bugs animals cause they can not feel pain" doesn't chnage the fact that in the common language and logic and way of speaking they are considered animals. If you have decided that one word suddenly doesn't mean what it means, that doesn't change the entire meaning of the word, that just causes people to not understand you.
You can love and kill an animal. XD It's not that hard of a concept to grasp. You are perfectly capable of loving and killing an animal as a human being. Mentally, physically, morally, individually and by law. Will you do that is another question, and that was not the point of this conversation at all. Is it possible was the question.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
Yes, I am aware of what the meat industry is, but if for argument sake, if every body in the country stopped eating meat, the country would not collapse. Societies change, things change, and yes it would be an economical hit at first, but hey, people have to eat, if they stopped eating meet they’d eat alternatives, so that industry would expand. I don’t think the country would collapse, just look at Japan, it was nuked, every city was fire bombed, and yet it is a successful place, look at the world wars, so yes a nation can pick it’s self up pretty well. And if you wish to eat the best for the economy, then that would be insects, they eat way less and give just as much if not more nutrition etc, there are many debates about it being the best option actually. So, umm, get used to cricket soup I guess.
I was not just saying about animal’s welfare, if you kill something, you kill it. Weather it is fast or slow, nicely or cruelly, taking a life is taking a life. That’s like looking at a murder case and saying, well at least guy killed his victims quickly, it doesn’t excuse the crime. Of course though, I would rather the animals be kept as fairly as possible and their end to be as peaceful as it can. But that is often not the case.
I wasn’t saying all vegans love animals and are the best people on earth, some vegans I have met are total idiots that only stop eating meat with there hippy friends for the sake of being ‘different’.
Well, answer this, do you agree with a serial killer who targets women making a stamp saying ‘you can love women and still kill them’? He makes this stamp because he loves his wife, but kills other women. Same as the meat eater, who ‘loves’ their pet pig, but eats pork. I know using such a example is somewhat extreme, but it is the same principle. Thus what my original point was.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
We can debate about opinions all we want, I know there are people with many different opinions about many different things, and I am okay with that, the only time I feel like I want to debate about something is when someone claims something to be impossible, or possible, when it can be proven wrong. (I do not know why it bothers me so much, but you started typing "meet" instead of "meat" again DX I know it is not the point but somehow its really bothering me, just a side note).
Like stated before, all I wanted was someone understanding that the statement that someone can love an animal and kill an animal is totally possible for many reasons. Claiming it to be impossible considering language and the meaning of the words, like said before, bothered me cause it seemed almost insanely ignorant.
Opinions, norms and morals differ, and I think it's okay, and I do not see my personal opinion on this matter really that important at all. 
In my brain killing a livestock animal or any other animal that is bred for resources is different than killing a human. That is my opinion and my morals and my norms. Why? Because I see it as a natural acceptable thing as long as the animals face no cruelty in the progress. I do not think that everyone should agree to this, they have their rights to believe in what ever they want.
I am also fine with people deciding to not support the livestock industries with their own actions, and I respect them for their own beliefs, unless they come waving their finger in my face saying things that seem absurd to me, like the "loving and killing animals is impossible".
Like you said yourself before, opinions can be debated and will be debated now and in the future, but that is not what I was seeking from this debate, since opinion talk is opinion talk. XD
I went to the debate simply cause I wanted to clear up your misunderstanding on the facts and possibilities, and you wanted to talk about morals and opinions. c: It's okay tho, happens. XD This was fairly enjoyable, haven't had a good debate in a while, far too many people are not interest in actual things, but rather they call opinions facts and can not see the difference between morale/norms and facts.
Ugh, worst case was one person who linked me a opinion blog post written by an anonymous person, and claimed it to be "scientific resource". Needless to say, that time I was the one not caring to continue the debate/discussion. Just daymn, some people.... XD
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
Sorry, I was typing to fast and kept hitting e twice instead of a, I apologise for my fingers stupidity there. Sometimes writing by hand beats typing, you make less mistakes, but that makes me sound old fashioned lol.
My point still holds that this stamp is wrong, people cannot run around saying I love animals, when they eat them. Of course they may well dog, but not animals. That was just my thought, plus I thionk what compelled me to write the original comment was the feel of the stamp, by the comments and opinions I’ve heard in real life etc, this stamp was very much like: ‘I love all animals but eat some of them, cos I like meat.’ Which is just, pathetic, eating something that causes pain to a living being simply because you ‘like’ the taste is not a justifiable act. Further more if you do that, you cannot claim to ‘love animals’, and to that I hold.
Yes debates online can get interesting and irritating, but likewise they can be healthy, and even help us to understand other peoples views, or change them (though that is rare as people’s pride tends to get in the way of change.)
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
I had to write by hand the other day, and I typoed so many things. XD Writing by hand is not natural for me at all anymore.
Yah, we are all entiteled to our own opinions.
I do not even see it as a matter of pride, rather than that it's usually the fact that in opinion vs opinion debate both of the opinions are equally as valuable. By saying that I see the value of opinions as equal, of course well based/formed and structured opinions that are tied to facts are more valuable in my eyes, but it's the facts and proven things that I hold more valuable than opinions.
How I see the opinion debates is pretty much:
No matter how much someone thinks that a cat is a better and more useful animal than dog (their opinion), the fact that people use dogs in so many other ways than cats proves otherwise (fact). They are free to have their opinion on the matter, but they shouldn't go out there shouting the matter like a fact, expecting all people to agree and not to talk back to it. XD Seems illogical and ignorant.
The stamp is all about how you want to see the situation. Sure there are people who say "I love all animals" and still use Mac-makeup, and gress up in a mink coat, but then there is also people who are all vegan go find a roadkill and turn it into a mounted (stuffed) animal, and people will call them a killer and a tortuner etc etc. This stamp can be interporated in many ways, depending on how you see the words and how seriously/literally you take them. So saying that either one of us is "right" is wrong. The only thing that is for sure, that both of our arquments/interporations about this stamp are possible, and that was all I wanted to prove kinda.
Your first comment was just worded in such way that it sounded very judgemental and narrow minded, denying any other view on the matter, and that was the thing I was against.
2015, almost all the info in yhe world is out here in the internet, and people still seem to be narrow minded and judgemental... ._. I sure do hooe it will slowly get better. XD
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
I think the problem is, the stamp is very…light hearted, as you said it matters greatly on how you define ‘love’. And ultimately I still say that a murder could not make a stamp with ‘you can still kill humans and love them’, simply because he doesn’t kill his friends but would kill a stranger. I know it is literal but I believe you mentioned liking literal arguments.
I think it all comes back to the same thing, at the end of the day most people place animals below human (which is their free choice of course, I am not arguing the rights and wrong of that decision as such.) So, really chances are they will never love them like a human being, and thus for me they never ‘love’ them. Because I see love as an absolute, and a very strong feeling of putting yourself on the line for another, that is just how I feel, everyone views love differently. Likewise I do not doubt somewhere a ‘meat eater’ has put their life on the line for their dog, and they probably loved their dog, just not animals, I felt the term was used lightly, which I understand is pretty normal. Just the comments seem to be people ranting how much they ‘love’ animals but they also love cheese burgers, I suppose they see love very differently than me, which is cool, everyone has varied definitions and meanings for such a word. I think for most people, they think animals are fun and cute, so they ‘love’ them, they like the taste of meat so they ‘love it. Which is how you previously stated, how each defines love, which is what effects this stamp so greatly.
I still struggle to see, however, if you even mildly like something, why you would wish to inflict pain upon it by eating it’s flesh for your own pleasure.
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
Lol animals eat each other, some even pray on us! It's called a food chain. Dogs eat dog food which is horse, and their are dogs that hang around horses happily.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
Yes, but my point was not if they can 'hang around happily' and such. It was could you really 'love' something that you are happy to kill and eat, for pleasure. Also, many animals bodies could not very well live without meat, they know no better, we on the other hand, do.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
It's false that we are strickly vegetarian. We need the fats to keep us warm. Without meat we would of died out during the ice age. I really enjoy horses but in a desperate situation I would eat the horse. We ARE predators like big cats, wolves, and etc.. We are also fair game to animals. But I show strong connections to dogs and could never eat a dog!
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
I didn't mean that humans are 'naturally' vegetarian. I just meant that currently there is no need to eat meat (thankfully the ice age isn't here... ) And I still feel 'love' was not the right word for this stamp. 
It is interesting how you could never eat a dog, but you could eat, say a cow? May I ask what difference you see between them? I mean, they all feel pain and suffering, so why (if unnecessary) eat them. I'm not trying to argue the situation of starvation, as it is not relevant to the moment and is a whole new concept.
But I still feel, you cannot truly love an animal and eat it. For example, if you had a pet dog who you really cared for, loved and had a connection with, you probably couldn't eat him/her, why? You can still eat an animal and love them....according to this stamp anyway.... I am sorry if I sound sarcastic, but just showing my point.
👍: 0 ⏩: 2
The difference between a dog and a cow is the taste and the 'morals/norms' around them.
You probably wouldn't eat a pet cow, but you would probably eat a cow that you do not know.
In some countries it's still legal to farm and eat dogs, yet people wouldn't eat their pets.
You wouldn't cry over 100 people who you do not know who died in a plane crash, but you would probably cry over your dad who died in a traffic accident. Human brain works that way, it recognizes individuals and creates bonds between them.
As long as the animals are not suffering in life nor death, I would be okay with raising and killing them.
The fact that so many animals live and die in agony is the part that I am not okay with.
Eating them I see as a natural thing for us, hunter gatherers.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
Norms? If we never broke free from everyday norms we would still be hanging Homosexuals and sending children up chimneys.
And if you would not eat a pet cow but eat a ‘strange’ cow then you are an idiot. That’s like a serial killer saying they wouldn’t hurt their family, but they’ll happily kill a stranger. I would rather somebody eat their pet, at least they could ensure it was looked after and killed somewhat humanly.
No I would not necessarily cry on either of those occasions, but if 100 people died, I would feel sad and would never try and cause it, eating meet causes the animals death, that’s the obvious difference with these cases really…
I agree there in some ways, I mean I would rather somebody raise and kill them somewhat fairly, instead of the horrific abuse that takes place. But still, you are basically taking a life to fill your stomach with something that tastes good? We do not need to worry so heavily about nature, we have developed, nature is pretty against homosexuality, c-sections for birth along with artificial insemination, darn nature is against cures for deadly diseases in many ways, and other things our society is now for, change is nature.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
Yes indeed, norms. I never said that norms never change did I? Or that I disagree with the evolution of norms? Evolution and changing of the norms is just the everyday life, it's natural. Some norms we agree with as individuals, and with some we do not. We all should have the freedom to agree and disagree with what ever norms we want to. XD
No, more like my brain works like it should. Human brain is known for telling apart individuals and developing emotional attachments /feelings for individuals. Also that is not only a human thing, its quite normal for animals. So one could say, it is quite natural. XD
So your brain also seems to recognize individuals, so we share that natural trait. Then you should be able to even mildly understand why people feel this way about things they do not have emotional attachment to. It's natural to feel sad for something dying, but it's also natural not caring about it too much since you do not share a personal emotional connection to it = the difference between being sad/able to eat an unknown cow and your own pet cow.
I personally wouldn't "happily kill a cow" and even less "kill a pet cow". If you stated that you do not recognize individuals and feel differently about them could probably be considered a type of psychological/mental issue. But hey, according to some studies 1/5 of us is having some type of psychopathic tendencies, so that makes them kind of 'normal' I suppose. XD
Ah, a common misconception. Homosexuality is seen in over 420 animal species in the nature.
Oh yes, nature is very against overpopulation = it tries to decrease the amount of people with diseases. I even think myself that there is too many humans in this planet as of right now, but taken in consideration that the evolution/nature/what ever you want to call it is the source of us, humans, the things we do are only natural for us in a way.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
No, but you said about doing something simply due to norms in the original statement, or at least that is how it sounded, I was only saying that that isn’t a good reason.
Ah attachment, so I can kill a stranger because I’m not attached to said stranger, no didn’t think so. So that doesn’t get anywhere. The idea of being okay with eating a ‘strange cow’ reminds me of something I read in a children’s book when I was little, and that is where such an ideology should stay. Of course, you will not care as much for an animal you have never met, but that is no excuse to kill it.
As for the attachment, again, that does not justify killing. A volunteer aid worker has no attachment to the starving children they help, they do it because they care about life or children’s lives, they do not need to have a deep connection to help them. If that were the case it is really not right, even if natural, helping a stranger etc is often the kinder act than helping someone you know. But maybe my theory of helping strangers does make me a psychopathic, oh well (yes I'm only being sarcastic there, sorry).
Homosexuality was just an offhand an example, animals will try and have intercourse with a chair, not that I think animals have chair fetishes, so I’m not so sure they are homosexual either, not that I care too much as homosexuality doesn’t hurt anything (unlike eating meat) I am perfectly cool with it. My point was simply looking entirely to out natural make up is not always the best idea.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
Let me go back and see what I originally said, and see what you thought I meant, and then let me explain what I actually meant with it.
"The difference between a dog and a cow is the taste and the 'morals/norms' around them.
You probably wouldn't eat a pet cow, but you would probably eat a cow that you do not know.
In some countries it's still legal to farm and eat dogs, yet people wouldn't eat their pets. "
So... you are saying that I said "doing something simply due to norms"
The norms was just one part in the whole statement. If I break down all of the parts in that statement, it talks about: "norms/morals", "pets (=individuals)" and "legal things (= culture, relative to each country)".
I never said that people do something ONLY because of the morals/norms around them. XD I just gave you an example of why people can do such a thing.
So morals/norms enough are not a good enough reason not to do something? Well then, I really could go and kill off the people I do not really care about. XD
Tho wait killing the stranger because no attachment? That is against the beloved evil norms that previously made us think its okay to eat that unknown cow and not okay to eat the cat.
Also it is (hopefully at least) in our current society's good norms/morals to want to help out people in need.
"helping a stranger etc is often the kinder act than helping someone you know" yes, because it is a little more against the everyday norms, and considered "good moral/behavior". XD Doesn't change the fact that morals and norms are somewhat important, just like changing them up at times. XD Also there is "personal desire to help others" but it again has to do with individuals and morals within that individual, probably with their past and the way they were raised etc.
Yeah well, the offhand example was entirely false. XD So it doesn't really back you up in any way. XDDD Animals like penguins are know to form "families/pairs" that consist of 2 males, they sometimes steal eggs from other pairs to raise them together. I do think people who study animal behavior know what homosexuality really means.
I still think that the nature and what is natural is pretty okay thing to base off things to. It should not be the only thing ofc, I spoke about norms/moral too, and also spoke about individuals and views.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
In my opinion somebody who loves his or her pet, whatever animal it is, and then eats a strange animal is just not thinking. Why would you want to cause a thinking, feeling being pain and suffering for no good reason? It is to some extreme making you no better than a rapist, forgive my use of a serious topic, but there is a principle here. Organism A (which feels) exploits organism B (which feels) for organisms A’s own pleasure. So yes, I think that is wrong. Thus loving your pet and eating another animal is rather cruel, especially when you do not have to as an individual. You shouldn’t really even have to love animals to stop eating them, you should just be caring and compassionate enough as a human being to not support their suffering, pain and death.
I really was not trying to turn this into a debate about homosexuality, but for a point of interest my point wasn’t really what animals do, more it isn’t logical to nature. Two males don’t make a baby thus it is unproductive in a way, or at least it seems it. But as I said I don’t care as it doesn’t hurt anybody and homosexuality in animals is still argued back and forth by people a lot smarter than you and me.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
"For no reason" this basically means that you look down on the people who do this only because you can not see the reason to do that. People have a lot of reasons to do what they do, claiming that they are just stupid and have no reason is just you not understanding their reasons.
"For own pleasure" again this, I think I explained this to you in the other comment, it's not just for pleasure. XD
The entire question was not "is it cruel" the question was "is it possible" and that was the thing you denied from the start.
It is possible.
It's highly illogical to take the homosexuals into the conversation of debate and then not expect to get some kind of response to it. "...-homosexuality in animals is still argued back and forth by people a lot smarter than you and me. " So is "evolution" and "the existence of dinosaurs" the fact that its being debated on doesn't make it any less true.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
Well, when I said for no reason and for pleasure, I mean that there are plenty of vegetarians who are alive and well, so yes, you eat meat for pleasure under the circumstances of the everyday individual. So for your pleasure, a living, feeling being suffers and dies. I’m aware that is not the point of this stamp but our discussion lead to that topic, so that is why I said what I said.
As for going back to the stamp, I am not denying that a person could say, have a pet cow and then eat cows, not loving their pet, maybe they do, (again depending on how you define love, I’m just using it in the typically socially used term here), but they cannot say they love cows, they love their cow. What individuals I have spoken to in life have said on the loving and eating animals, is that they love all animals, which if you eat them then, no, you don’t. It’s the same as a child killer saying they love ‘children’, when obviously they do not, they may love their own child, but not ‘children.’
Yes, as I said, I didn’t want to drag homosexuality out as a big deal, I’m perfectly happy about gay rights and marriage and all that, so I’m not really that interested in discussing it, doesn’t hurt anything, so why would I worry if two men or women wish to be in a relationship.
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
I feel like some animals show high intelligence and can be loyal hunting companions. We do many things with dogs including hunt and why should we kill an animal that can help catch food and remain very loyal. I see dogs as mute humans basically. I know animals feel pain that's why one should be thankful and respectful after hunting an animal maybe At least thank them for their sacrifice and end their life fast without slow suffering. I believe in humain euthanisation.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
I feel like if we value killing something due to intelligence, then who's to say a person with learning disability's shouldn't be killed over an 'intelligent' person. I of course do not mean any offence to any person with such a disability, but I feel that is the roots of this discussion, intelligence cannot be valued too highly. Besides, pigs are an extremely intelligent creatures and yet we kill them. In some country's, dogs are eaten and they view it no differently to us eating pigs. So pain and suffering should come before anything. I am glad to see you feel an animal, if killed should be killed quickly and such, it seems many meat industry's are so about money the animals suffer far greater than just hunting and killing them swiftly. I'm glad that you show respect, I do certainly think that is good of you!
And returning the stamp, do you agree that you can't kill something you 'love'? Such as the example of you having a dear pet dog.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
You have a point there. I am all about using only what is needed, i hate the meat industries I saw a video of them tossing baby chicks onto a covator belt like they were just products instead of living things and skining cows alive. I mean how can you just sit there and think it's normal to strip flesh off a living cow, I want to know that the meat I'm buying is from a cow that lived a healthy life in the feilds. I like some meats but it's impossible to know if the meat I'm eating died humainly. I still have respect and well being for the lower thinking animals but know they have their part on the food chain, I mean heck we are food! Maggots love having feast on decaying human and some tribes used to perform cannibalism but is considered taboo now. But it wouldn't be such a bad idea to turn psychopath killers into meat for carnivores at the zoo.. I know I'm dark..
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
I completely agree, the meat industry is all about greed and the animals have a horrific time. I would rather somebody hunt and kill the animal humanly. I remember a video of a cow I watched once, the poor animal didn't want to enter the slaughter house, she was trying to back up, but the workers just used a electric shock forcing her inside and to whatever cruel fate awaited her. There are some very good videos out there that show the abuse in the industry. I always like the music video for the song 'free me' by goldfinger.
Haha, it's not that dark, more of an interesting idea actually. I know I've heard many people say we should test medications on certain criminals instead of innocent animals. Though that would be a rather complicated law debate.
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
//I// eat meat to be healthy.
Vegans are just plain sick, in so many ways.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
There is plenty of evidence to suggest that a diet without meat is healthier.....
And a lot of vegetarians/vegans are not 'sick'.
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
It's not a fact, Deal with it.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
No need to be so abrupt, I was simply giving an opinion, in which love does not typically involve killing the loved thing for pleasure, be it a animal or human. Love is far more powerful, you can like some animals and still eat them, yes, but you can never love them.
Have a peaceful day!
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
SO you think i hate them by eatting them?!
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
| Next =>