Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
There are 2 kinds of humans, one kind is a predator that eats meat, and then there is the other kind who pretends to use np animal parts for anything at all, and would never kill, but going thru life not killing is impossible.
To take a flue shot means you used chicken eggs and by proxy a lot of other animals used in testing. I maintain there is no clean human no matter what. From birth to death we humans are all dirty.
I hunt, buy meat, and use plastics, which are the dirtiest things man can do, but that doesn't make me any dirtier than a veggie head. A great white shark is a far cleaner living animal than man.
I'ld like to see a 100% veggie head live with no killing what so ever... I say it can't be done.
There is no logic in your quotes, only flowery language. Since you do not bother to come up with a cohesive, logical argument, I can only assume you do not really care about your cause as much as you profess.
You still haven't answered the question: Is it moral for a wolf to hunt for food?
i dont know how much clearer or logical the fact that in no way do humans need to kill other animals to survive and prosper while wolves do can be.
here are a few references on the subject if you are interested in comprehensive arguments on the subject:
btw, i consider the words of some of the greatest figures in history including lincoln, gandhi, einstein, edison, tolstoy, darwin, pythagoras, and da vinci to be extremely logical, succinct and elegant.
You keep trying to have it both ways: that humans are the same as animals, and that humans are not the same as animals.
"There is no fundamental difference between man and the higher animals in their mental faculties... The lower animals, like man, manifestly feel pleasure and pain, happiness, and misery."
--Charles Darwin
i dont know how much clearer or logical the fact that in no way do humans need to kill other animals to survive and prosper while wolves do can be.
So there we have it. Not all animals are the same - or equal.
Quote:
btw, i consider the words of some of the greatest figures in history including lincoln, gandhi, einstein, edison, tolstoy, darwin, pythagoras, and da vinci to be extremely logical, succinct and elegant.
Please look up fallacy of defective induction. None of your quotes contain logical reasoning. An appeal to authority is a non-argument.
Every section in this 'argument' is replete with logical fallacies and unfounded premises. I don't really want to go through each point, so all I can recommend is reading a book on logic.
There is no logic in your quotes, only flowery language. Since you do not bother to come up with a cohesive, logical argument, I can only assume you do not really care about your cause as much as you profess.
You still haven't answered the question: Is it moral for a wolf to hunt for food?
"Now, you may try to argue that eating animals is a matter of personal opinion or choice, but again I'd have to disagree -- this is not about your opinion versus my opinion, this is about animal suffering. You can't discuss your "personal choice" of eating animals while leaving animals completely out of the conversation. Think of it this way, if you were walking down the street and saw someone beating their dog, would you try to do something to stop it? The same principle applies here. Since eating animal foods is a question of want and like versus need, killing a sentient being, when there is absolutely no need -- except for someone's pleasure -- becomes simply unnecessary and merciless.
And if we say we care about cruelty to animals then it's time we start caring about all animals. Yes, dogs and cats are companion animals but in terms of suffering our canine and feline friends feel the same as a pig, cow, chicken, lamb, or turkey. To pick and choose species in terms of whose pain we care about is incredibly hypocritical and inconsistent. Sorry, but if you're eating veal parmigiana or turkey sandwiches, you don't really care about animals. You may care about dogs and cats but you certainly don't care about birds and baby cows.
So, who's the real extremist? The person who tries to stop unnecessary suffering by cutting out animal products, or the person who says, "I like the way that tastes, so a sentient being needs suffer and die?"
Please look up fallacy of defective induction. None of your quotes contain logical reasoning. An appeal to authority is a non-argument.
1)humans using animals as food causes them to suffer
2)humans do not require animals to be healthy or survive
3)humans use animals as food for selfish gratification
4)humans should stop using animals as food sources
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
