NationStates Jolt Archive

I can fully understand how people can love animals. After all they are often cute, cuddly and all of that and they give companionship to people. They are often enjoyable in many ways. However those who take animals as a cause are often believed to do so at the expense of humans. Is this the case? Do those who advocate humane treatment of animals and other causes do so because they love animals more than humans? After all, animals don't judge you. Animals can be controlled unlike other people. Animals don't talk back or argue.

So what do you think?

Some people are just plain crazy.

I think part of the problem may be that man's inhumanity to man is often deserved.

How can anyone not like humans? They're tastey!

yes of course... the only possible option is that animal lovers fight for animal rights because they hate humans. It's not like these animals can't help themselves. I just saw a group of baby kittens passing around a petition to get God to stop killing one of them everytime someone masturbates. Surely they have anough political savvy that animal lovers need not worry about them.

Some people are just plain crazy.

Name one!

Name one!


be careful - it's a trick!

b.t.w. I didn't sign that petition

yes of course... the only possible option is that animal lovers fight for animal rights because they hate humans. It's not like these animals can't help themselves. I just saw a group of baby kittens passing around a petition to get God to stop killing one of them everytime someone masturbates. Surely they have anough political savvy that animal lovers need not worry about them.

Unfortunately animal lovers are worried about those kittens when they grow up. As to that petition, well, it should be burned, for two reasons: A) Kittens are already too populous; and B) Humans are too populous as well.:D Masturbation results in two things: an immediate drop in the chance for the human population to grow, since that person isn't having sex, and a drop in the kitten population, since God is killing one of them.:D Now, if this actually happened, then the world would actually start improving, alas, those damned petitions are filled with false claims. Such as those that state human CO2 emissions are killing the planet. Please. Let me be.

yes of course... the only possible option is that animal lovers fight for animal rights because they hate humans. It's not like these animals can't help themselves. I just saw a group of baby kittens passing around a petition to get God to stop killing one of them everytime someone masturbates. Surely they have anough political savvy that animal lovers need not worry about them.

Hey, I've seen people who really obsess over the issue. They go so far into animal rights they often ignore their fellow humans or will favor the animal over the human. I do think that the way people treat animals says something about their character though. Someone who hurts an animal isn't someone people should let near their kids. In the end though humans must come first.

By the way, kittens are so cute that should they come together they should have no trouble influencing the politicians! :D

Hey, I've seen people who really obsess over the issue. They go so far into animal rights they often ignore their fellow humans or will favor the animal over the human. I do think that the way people treat animals says something about their character though. Someone who hurts an animal isn't someone people should let near their kids. In the end though humans must come first.

By the way, kittens are so cute that should they come together they should have no trouble influencing the politicians! :D


SO, what does it say about my character that I treat animals in a nice way, and have nothing against them, but really would like to kill off all the humans? You know, I'm the kind of guy you wouldn't want near your kids cause I'd eat them.

Just wondering...

And, in response to the OP: I think that some animal lovers do place animals above humans. I see nothing wrong with that.

I mean, its not like humans are particularly special.

I just watched the Comedy Central roast of Pamela Anderson last night. It was pretty hilarious.

Most of the comedians alluded to and made fun of her PETA involvement (thats why they held the roast - to raise money for it).

One of them came out with a fur coat on and sait it was 100% puppy. She was mortified - lol

Oh and for the record, she says that despite what everyone was saying, her pussy is actually very tight.

SO, what does it say about my character that I treat animals in a nice way, and have nothing against them, but really would like to kill off all the humans? You know, I'm the kind of guy you wouldn't want near your kids cause I'd eat them.

Just wondering....

Gotta kill all the humans, kill all the humans...

http://home.earthlink.net/~teambanzai/sitebuildercontent/sitebuilderpictures/bender.jpg

And, in response to the OP: I think that some animal lovers do place animals above humans. I see nothing wrong with that.

I mean, its not like humans are particularly special.

Humans are often disgusting and evil but we are all there is on this planet in regard to intelligence. Trying to say that animals are on the same level as humans is an arguement that isn't supportable.

Gotta kill all the humans, kill all the humans...

http://home.earthlink.net/~teambanzai/sitebuildercontent/sitebuilderpictures/bender.jpg

Hey, sexy mama. Wanna kill all humans?

Gotta kill all the humans, kill all the humans...

http://home.earthlink.net/~teambanzai/sitebuildercontent/sitebuilderpictures/bender.jpg



Humans are often disgusting and evil but we are all there is on this planet in regard to intelligence. Trying to say that animals are on the same level as humans is an arguement that isn't supportable.


I'm not saying that humans are on the same level as animals. I am not even saying that we are not better.

We just are not special. If all humans were to be suddenly wiped off the earth, there is a (I would think) high probability that some form of "intelligent" creature other than us will evolve, if not here on earth (although I would figure that might well happen), then somewhere out in the universe. And in any case, it is my belief that intwelligence is not particularly noteworthy.

I can fully understand how people can love animals. After all they are often cute, cuddly and all of that and they give companionship to people. They are often enjoyable in many ways. However those who take animals as a cause are often believed to do so at the expense of humans. Is this the case? Do those who advocate humane treatment of animals and other causes do so because they love animals more than humans? After all, animals don't judge you. Animals can be controlled unlike other people. Animals don't talk back or argue.

So what do you think?
So you're saying humans are superior than every other animal.
"love animals"...you're an animal too (curseword)
"Expense of humans" you cant give a little of something you shouldnt have anyway and have too much of
"more than humans" other animals deserve more respect because they earned it unlike humans who just fuck things up
"controlled" last time I checked humans can be brainwashed, restrained, locked up, etc...
"talk back or argue" they probably would if they had the chance and might even do so, but we cant understand them.

I've come to the conclusion that You sir, are an idiot.

Hey, I've seen people who really obsess over the issue. They go so far into animal rights they often ignore their fellow humans or will favor the animal over the human. I do think that the way people treat animals says something about their character though. Someone who hurts an animal isn't someone people should let near their kids. In the end though humans must come first.

By the way, kittens are so cute that should they come together they should have no trouble influencing the politicians! :D
Well, that's SOME people. It must be constantly repeated that there are lunatic fringes in just about every sector of human organization. Are there animal rights activists who act like this? Yes. Are they the majority? No. Just like there are White Power proponents who claim to be toeing the line with Jesus. Would Jesus ever agree with such hatred or would aminstream Christians ever invite them to a potluck? No. Christ would forgive them, and Neo-Nazi racists are notorious for showing up with nothing but things slathered in mayonnaise and cases of cheap beer.

I completely agree with you about seeing character in how someone treats animals.

I'm not saying that humans are on the same level as animals. I am not even saying that we are not better.

We just are not special. If all humans were to be suddenly wiped off the earth, there is a (I would think) high probability that some form of "intelligent" creature other than us will evolve, if not here on earth (although I would figure that might well happen), then somewhere out in the universe. And in any case, it is my belief that intwelligence is not particularly noteworthy.

A Planet of the Apes scenario? I suppose that is possible but that is a hypothetical situation that hopefully will never happen. At the moment we are the only lifeform on the planet that can think for itself. Animals are important but not at the expense of humans.

*snip*

And, in response to the OP: I think that some animal lovers do place animals above humans. I see nothing wrong with that.

I mean, its not like humans are particularly special.
Exactly.

Quoth the Goat-Boy: "I'm sick of all this 'ain't humanity neat' bullshit. We're a virus with shoes."

So you're saying humans are superior than every other animal.
"love animals"...you're an animal too (curseword)
"Expense of humans" you cant give a little of something you shouldnt have anyway and have too much of
"more than humans" other animals deserve more respect because they earned it unlike humans who just fuck things up
"controlled" last time I checked humans can be brainwashed, restrained, locked up, etc...
"talk back or argue" they probably would if they had the chance and might even do so, but we cant understand them.

I've come to the conclusion that You sir, are an idiot.

Ok how about "non human"?

Humans can't screw up their environment too much without paying the price but we can't are certainly not going to sacrifice a human life for a "non human".

How have animals earned anything? They don't think, they just ARE.

As for the last two you are missing the point. Humans are complicated beings, "non humans" are simple. Your dog isn't going to tell you to mow the lawn after all.

Ok how about "non human"?

Humans can't screw up their environment too much without paying the price but we can't are certainly not going to sacrifice a human life for a "non human".

How have animals earned anything? They don't think, they just ARE.

As for the last two you are missing the point. Humans are complicated beings, "non humans" are simple. Your dog isn't going to tell you to mow the lawn after all.

Pretty much seconded. I love animals and all, and I'm basically an environmentalist, but if someone gave me a gun and forced me to choose between killing a human or a kitten, the choice would be obvious. But I'm a dirty meat-eater, so maybe some vegetarians would like to share their views.

Exactly.

Quoth the Goat-Boy: "I'm sick of all this 'ain't humanity neat' bullshit. We're a virus with shoes."


I love that quote. Fuck yes.

Pretty much seconded. I love animals and all, and I'm basically an environmentalist, but if someone gave me a gun and forced me to choose between killing a human or a kitten, the choice would be obvious. But I'm a dirty meat-eater, so maybe some vegetarians would like to share their views.

That is the reasoning that seems to escape some people. Same thing with eating meat. We are meant to do so after all, needed nutrients come from meat. I have to enjoy a good burger however I can get it.

If you consider fast food burgers to be really meat that is. :p

I like both species actually.

Does anyone actually like humans?

Stupid smelly overbearing incompetent irratational warmongering jerks.

My two favorite things are music, and dogs, in no particular order.

I much prefer the company of a good dog, than of people.

I have a small circle of very close friends, who I would do anything for.
(They know who they are).
I purposely keep it small, becuase as near as I can tell, most of you people suck.

If you are kind to a dog, and give it plenty of food, and water, and affection, it will love you unconditionally, until it dies.
It will ask nothing more of you, than your companionship.

A person wil lie to you, or betray you, or simply get tired of you.
A person can hurt you far more than any dog ever could.

This isnt to say that people dont have thier uses, or cant be capable of love...many of us are.

But when it comes to loyalty, or unconditional love.....people cant out-do a dog.

"If you would make the most of your money, take it and buy a pup. You will have purchased love, unconditional."
-Rudyard Kipling.

I can fully understand how people can love animals. After all they are often cute, cuddly and all of that and they give companionship to people. They are often enjoyable in many ways. However those who take animals as a cause are often believed to do so at the expense of humans. Is this the case? Do those who advocate humane treatment of animals and other causes do so because they love animals more than humans? After all, animals don't judge you. Animals can be controlled unlike other people. Animals don't talk back or argue.

So what do you think?


I don't think that its a case of not liking humans. People can complain, say no talk back etc. Animals are for the most part defenseless. If animal testing was band and all tests had to be carried out on people, then companies would have to ensure the use of safer ingredients in their products.

I don't think that its a case of not liking humans. People can complain, say no talk back etc. Animals are for the most part defenseless. If animal testing was band and all tests had to be carried out on people, then companies would have to ensure the use of safer ingredients in their products.
I agree with you there, companies shouldn't be allowed to test on animals. In a way I'm okay with scientific testing for important research, but for people to test cosmetics and stuff like that on animals is just wrong. I dislike all companies who make animals suffer just to increase thier profits. Yes I do love animals, but not at the expence of humans as well (unless you count businessmen who are upset at having to spend more money researching their products, because they are no longer allowed to pour it into a rodents eyes). I just don't want to see any living creature suffer so much, and that includes humans. I don't love animals more than humans, unless you count those people who get some sort of sick pleasure out of torturing other creatures, or those that don't think twice about putting other living beings through suffering and pain just to pocket some extra cash...
Actually I think I do prefer animals. Although I like Gravlen better than any pet I've ever had. He's so cute, like a kitten. :flu**le:

Pretty much seconded. I love animals and all, and I'm basically an environmentalist, but if someone gave me a gun and forced me to choose between killing a human or a kitten, the choice would be obvious. But I'm a dirty meat-eater, so maybe some vegetarians would like to share their views.

Of course the choice would be obvious! Kittens ARE the cutest things in the world, after all.

Seriously though? I could never kill a kitten. I doubt I could shoot a person either (and ugh, I hate guns), but I KNOW I could never kill a kitten.

And I'd feel like a much weaker person if I did, rather than killing a person, too. The easy way out unsettles me.

If you are kind to a dog, and give it plenty of food, and water, and affection, it will love you unconditionally, until it dies.
It will ask nothing more of you, than your companionship.
But when it comes to loyalty, or unconditional love.....people cant out-do a dog.

"If you would make the most of your money, take it and buy a pup. You will have purchased love, unconditional."
-Rudyard Kipling.

See, this is what usually separates the dog lovers from the cat lovers. As a cat lover, I don't 'get' wanting love unconditional... what's the point, after all? If you die, and someone different comes along and feeds your dog, it's going to love them just as much as it loves you. Dogs will love anyone, without discrimination.

Cats... ah, well, with cats you have to EARN their love. It actually means something, and is worth getting. Much more emotional interaction and reward.

Or you could just hate cats, of course. Cats ADORE people who hate cats.

I don't think that its a case of not liking humans. People can complain, say no talk back etc. Animals are for the most part defenseless.

Exactly. Animals are defenseless so humans can beat up on them at will. Going after humans is much more problematic not to mention the lengthy jail terms that could result. Of course that is going to animal abusers instead of animal lovers but it still shows how many prefer animals to their fellow humans.

Think I may be getting off track here...

Does anyone actually like humans?

Stupid smelly overbearing incompetent irratational warmongering jerks.

Animals may not start wars but then again they can't think like we do or have a sense of self. Humans have a ways to go in treating each other right but we'll get there if we only concentrate on improving ourselves.

Of course the choice would be obvious! Kittens ARE the cutest things in the world, after all.

Seriously though? I could never kill a kitten. I doubt I could shoot a person either (and ugh, I hate guns), but I KNOW I could never kill a kitten.

And I'd feel like a much weaker person if I did, rather than killing a person, too. The easy way out unsettles me.



See, this is what usually separates the dog lovers from the cat lovers. As a cat lover, I don't 'get' wanting love unconditional... what's the point, after all? If you die, and someone different comes along and feeds your dog, it's going to love them just as much as it loves you. Dogs will love anyone, without discrimination.

Cats... ah, well, with cats you have to EARN their love. It actually means something, and is worth getting. Much more emotional interaction and reward.

Or you could just hate cats, of course. Cats ADORE people who hate cats.

I too have noticed this.I have 3 cats,2 cute fluffy and adorable(boo hoo my spritey has a heart murmur)and what my best friend deems as 'the devil cat' apparently my 3rd cat Janu is the devil incarnate and is contoling me through telekenisis,and funnily enough janu just loves to sit(and nibble)my friens(when she wants attention she bites you!!)my father hates cats too, and whenever he sits on my setee the three cats(including my tiny kitter-called tiny)are all vieingfor his attention.
I love animals, I think they are more inteligent than us, we may have philosophy and science but animals live in harmory with the world without huntin to extinction or wrecking the ozone layer!!
Og course I think human rights are more important than animal rights but they should be treated with respect(eg not testing cosmetics on them!!)(i completly understand medical testing tho)

I love animals, I think they are more inteligent than us, we may have philosophy and science but animals live in harmory with the world without huntin to extinction or wrecking the ozone layer!!
Og course I think human rights are more important than animal rights but they should be treated with respect(eg not testing cosmetics on them!!)(i completly understand medical testing tho)

Animals don't do those things because they only have their survival instincts. Eat, sleep, reproduce and survive. With no higher intelligence they can't affect their enviroment. If animals can learn not to run in front of traffic than maybe we can revisit the intelligence issue. Or better yet when they see their reflection and can recognize themself.

Animals don't do those things because they only have their survival instincts. Eat, sleep, reproduce and survive. With no higher intelligence they can't affect their enviroment. If animals can learn not to run in front of traffic than maybe we can revisit the intelligence issue. Or better yet when they see their reflection and can recognize themself.


You've never seen a human run in front of traffic?

Just this morning on my way to work I saw a dog waiting for cars to pass by and then cross the street.

Do you have any animals? I see genuine affection, excitement, lust, love, anger, fear, jealousy, and sadness from animals all the time.

EDIT: oh, also I have seen plenty of instances where animals have shown very good problem solving abilities. Not just primates, pigs and dolphins, but cats, dogs, squirrels, birds, horses, elephants...

I trust animals and humans probably about as much. Both can be nice when it suits them, but are prone to sudden outbursts of instinctive violence that you need to be careful of and are ultimately out for their own interests in the end of it all.

Do those who advocate humane treatment of animals and other causes do so because they love animals more than humans?

For some animal lovers that is true, yes. And you already gave some reasons why.

To others it is not that they ascribe more value to the wellbeing of animals than to the wellbeing of humans, but that they do not believe that animals are worthless nor that the smallest gain in human wellbeing is worth any amount of suffering of the animal.

An example: some people do not believe it is right to kill a hundred kittens to give a human a nice coat, while an almost as nice coat could have been obtained without any animal dying or suffering at all. They do not see the small amount of extra comfort for the human to be worth the extreme discomfort/death of all those animals.

You've never seen a human run in front of traffic?

Just this morning on my way to work I saw a dog waiting for cars to pass by and then cross the street.

Do you have any animals? I see genuine affection, excitement, lust, love, anger, fear, jealousy, and sadness from animals all the time.

EDIT: oh, also I have seen plenty of instances where animals have shown very good problem solving abilities. Not just primates, pigs and dolphins, but cats, dogs, squirrels, birds, horses, elephants...

Ok there are plenty of instances of human idiocy. That can't be denied. :p

I do have animals, 3 cats in my house and I love having them. Still I'm not going to place them on the same level as my parents and my brothers. I find the idea silly.

Animals can show instances of cleverness, dolphins "learn" tricks, dogs help the blind and some apes can do basic problem solving. Animals can learn some basic things but anything slightly complex? Or do they have a sense of self? No. Animals simply cannot be placed on an equal level with humans.

Ok there are plenty of instances of human idiocy. That can't be denied. :p

I do have animals, 3 cats in my house and I love having them. Still I'm not going to place them on the same level as my parents and my brothers. I find the idea silly.

Animals can show instances of cleverness, dolphins "learn" tricks, dogs help the blind and some apes can do basic problem solving. Animals can learn some basic things but anything slightly complex? Or do they have a sense of self? No. Animals simply cannot be placed on an equal level with humans.

Hm. I wish I had made a note of the name of the show...

I did see what was probably a documentary on television once where they showed that dolphins do in fact understand the concept of a reflection. First, they lined the top of the pool with mirrors. Then, for each dolphin, they would either mark or pretend to mark the underside of the dolphin with some black mark.

The dolphins would immediately swim down to the mirrors, flip over, and examine themselves. The ones with no mark swam away after this brief examination. Those with actual marks stayed to study them for a while. Does this prove intelligence? Well... it's hard to prove anything. It seems to show some awareness, though.

Sometimes people ask me why I care more about the wellbeing of animals than I do the wellbeing of humans. It's simply untrue. There are just fewer people working toward the animal rights cause than the human rights cause. Besides, improvements in animal rights would likely have quite a positive impact on human wellbeing in the long run.

I'm an animal lover. Doesn't mean I'm going to nuke any country any time soon. After all, foxies might get hurt. However, bunnies would die, of course. Damn complications.

It's not that animals can't think. It's that we don't care. If we discovered that, say, foxies can think and do math(after being taught to write stuff using paints and paws), do you really think we'd acknowledge that? Or would we still go "It's all instinct. Therefore, we are the only special species worth protecting and we can kill them all we want" like we always did? Don't just dismiss this. Think about it. We are human. We have egoes bigger than we are. Once you understand this, you can discover why we are "the only sentient beings to ever exist!!111oneoneone".

Plus, why kill off an entire species just to save one person? We have over 6 billion in reserve and growing. We might want to lose a few billion. The earth's soil can only support so much people food. We are not immune to overpopulation, people. Not every person is obese. Look at Sub-Sahara Africa. Massive poverty. No, poverty is not imaginary. The more we focus on saving ourselves, the closer we come to self-imposed extinction. Oh, the irony.

EDIT: oh, also I have seen plenty of instances where animals have shown very good problem solving abilities. Not just primates, pigs and dolphins, but cats, dogs, squirrels, birds, horses, elephants...

Lemme know when they solve the problem of being delicious.

Lemme know when they solve the problem of being delicious.

That is a slight problem that animals have. :D

Which is yet another part of the of more extremist animal rights activists beliefs that annoy me, that we don't have a right to eat animals. Humans have needed meat to survive, I don't think in human history there have been that many vegetarians. Let them kill the kosher way, which I believe is the quickest and then enjoy the tastiness of Earth's creatures!

That's a good question. I am an animal lover, and I often feel as though I don't particularly like humans. I like humans who act on their unselfish impulses to make life better for others, including animals. At any rate, I'm in the counseling profession, so...I had better like people, or I should go for a different career.

That's a good question. I am an animal lover, and I often feel as though I don't particularly like humans. I like humans who act on their unselfish impulses to make life better for others, including animals. At any rate, I'm in the counseling profession, so...I had better like people, or I should go for a different career.

Which is another plus people feel they have in loving animals instead of humans. Animals don't complain about their day or how awful their life is etc, etc.

Perhaps we need to teach humans not to complain so much so that they are more likeable?

Which is another plus people feel they have in loving animals instead of humans. Animals don't complain about their day or how awful their life is etc, etc.

Perhaps we need to teach humans not to complain so much so that they are more likeable?

It's not the complaining I have a problem with. It's all the thoughtless shit people do to each other and to animals. I visit with people in their homes, and I get to see the way they treat their children and their dogs/cats/ferrets/whatever. I notice that oftentimes when people have a baby, suddenly the beloved family pet gets neglected, constantly yelled at, and sometimes hit or kicked around, just for sniffing in curiosity at the baby.

You know what? If you can't or don't want to care for your dog anymore once you procreate, give the dog to somebody who WILL love him and care for him. Okay? Don't kick your dog in front of me, or leave him outside in the freezing cold (or heat) while I'm there, or any other shitty thing. Okay? Your baby is not more important than your dog.

"Animal lover" is pretty vague. You can't determine how much someone likes humans by how much they like animals. Some people like animals and hate humans, other people have different combinations.

After all, animals don't judge you.
Animals judge you, alright, but they judge you in terms of things they care about. They judge whether to run from you, attack you, ignore you or treat you as family. They also decide whether you are above or below them on the social hierarchy (if they have one).

Animals can be controlled unlike other people.
Other people? Animals aren't people.
Also, people can be controlled. Quite easily actually.

Animals don't talk back or argue.

Animals don't talk back because they can't talk. Not just because they don't have the necessary vocal parts, but because their brains are not sufficiently sophisticated.

Hmm. Given the gun and the choice of feline or human victim it'd have to be someone I considered quite special to make me even need to think about it...

It's been pointed out that animals tend to be less intelligent than humans, which is probably true, but think of typical human behaviour; which is worse: Not being intelligent, or not using your intelligence?

"Animal lover" is pretty vague. You can't determine how much someone likes humans by how much they like animals. Some people like animals and hate humans, other people have different combinations.

I know. I'm interested in the radicals who seem to feel that the Earth should be depopulated of humans so that animals can roam freely again. The morality of THAT shouldn't be in question.

Animals don't talk back because they can't talk. Not just because they don't have the necessary vocal parts, but because their brains are not sufficiently sophisticated.

So? Animals still don't talk back so are much more easily controlled. There are plenty of people who don't care being questioned or restricted by others, an animal won't be doing any of that.

Perhaps we need to teach humans not to complain so much so that they are more likeable?

Does that mean you will stop complaining about animal rights people?

So? Animals still don't talk back so are much more easily controlled. There are plenty of people who don't care being questioned or restricted by others, an animal won't be doing any of that.

Animals don't talk, so they can't be manipulated through persuasion and have to be controlled through force. What makes them easy to control is that we can outwit them. Anyway, this isn't really on-topic.

What was it about radicals you wanted to discuss? It seems like you were saying "do human-hating animal-loving people hate humans and love animals?"

To be honest, I can't help thinking that these extremists who attack people to "protect animals" just want to be mean and violent to people and have found a way to "justify" it and find allies.

I can fully understand how people can love animals. After all they are often cute, cuddly and all of that and they give companionship to people. They are often enjoyable in many ways. However those who take animals as a cause are often believed to do so at the expense of humans. Is this the case? Do those who advocate humane treatment of animals and other causes do so because they love animals more than humans? After all, animals don't judge you. Animals can be controlled unlike other people. Animals don't talk back or argue.

So what do you think?

I love neither animals in general, or humans in general.

I'm vegan, and I respect animals. I will fight for their rights.

I respect humans.

I will fight for the rights of animals, but I will also fight for the rights of humans.

Of course there are exceptions (for example, some humans need to remain in prison).

Does that mean you will stop complaining about animal rights people?

Ooooh. Someone has a 'tude don't they? What does anyone do on NSG but make an arguement about something? That could easily be seen as complaining? You don't care about the subject fine, but if you find this complaining maybe NS isn't the place for you?

I love neither animals in general, or humans in general.

I'm vegan, and I respect animals. I will fight for their rights.

I respect humans.

I will fight for the rights of animals, but I will also fight for the rights of humans.

Of course there are exceptions (for example, some humans need to remain in prison).

Finding a balance between the two seems to be a noble goal but since humans are the dominant species we have to be favored in any plan to better the state of the planet.

Finding a balance between the two seems to be a noble goal but since humans are the dominant species we have to be favored in any plan to better the state of the planet.

Why?

I'm not suggesting that we shouldn't look out for ourselves, but you're making it sound like the ecosystem (or planet) itself thinks we are important. It's *us* that care about humans... I doubt very much that the rest of the world would care much if we died out.

Or did I misunderstand?

Ooooh. Someone has a 'tude don't they? What does anyone do on NSG but make an argument about something? That could easily be seen as complaining? You don't care about the subject fine, but if you find this complaining maybe NS isn't the place for you?

Making an argument is a matter of perception. Let's look at your original post:

"I can fully understand how people can love animals. After all they are often cute, cuddly and all of that and they give companionship to people. They are often enjoyable in many ways."

Ok starts of all right.

"However those who take animals as a cause are often believed to do so at the expense of humans. Is this the case? Do those who advocate humane treatment of animals and other causes do so because they love animals more than humans?"

This sounds like you are lumping all people under once label.

I have studied Primates. Dr. Jane Goodall is an animal rights person and yet concedes the need for research. However, she argues for enrichment of the animal as a depressed animal can give different results on research.

"After all, animals don't judge you."

Actually, they do. Take dogs for example, if they feel you don't come across as an alpha, they will take the job. Why is it some dogs don't like certain people?

"Animals can be controlled unlike other people."

Ever try to control a chimp? They can pull your arm off and beat you with it.

"Animals don't talk back or argue."

Actually, they do. "Talking back" doesn't have to revolve around words. Chimps can toss stuff at you. Ever try to wash a dog that doesn't want a bath?

"So what do you think?"
You are just complaining about the animal rights extremists.

Finding a balance between the two seems to be a noble goal but since humans are the dominant species we have to be favored in any plan to better the state of the planet.

So what you are saying is as long as it doesn't impede business, working with the environment is ok?

Why?

I'm not suggesting that we shouldn't look out for ourselves, but you're making it sound like the ecosystem (or planet) itself thinks we are important. It's *us* that care about humans... I doubt very much that the rest of the world would care much if we died out.

Or did I misunderstand?

I wasn't asking the opinion of the ecosystem. It can be seen as selfish I suppose but humanity is the lifeform with the most intelligence and potential to accomplish even more than it already has. We shouldn't sacrifice any more than we have to of course, that would be counterproductive to ourselves, but in the end there isn't any question that if we must choose between humanity and animal lifeforms... well its not that hard a choice. Still like I said we should do what we can to protect the environment for we need an intact ecosystem for our own survival.

So what you are saying is as long as it doesn't impede business, working with the environment is ok?

We can't work with both?

I wasn't asking the opinion of the ecosystem. It can be seen as selfish I suppose but humanity is the lifeform with the most intelligence and potential to accomplish even more than it already has. We shouldn't sacrifice any more than we have to of course, that would be counterproductive to ourselves, but in the end there isn't any question that if we must choose between humanity and animal lifeforms... well its not that hard a choice. Still like I said we should do what we can to protect the environment for we need an intact ecosystem for our own survival.

It seems like we're not making too much progress on this last point, to be honest. It doesn't seem to be what drives us at all. That's not to say that there aren't plenty of people and organizations working to create a sustainable way of living, but you won't find that many businesses, I think, that would choose to do so without some sort of reward (financial, publicity or otherwise).

While I believe that we should continue to push forward technologically, we need to do so in a manner that doesn't throw everything else out of balance. As for animal rights... well, some people just seem to be better than others at putting themselves in the animal's place and deciding they wouldn't like it, even with the limited intelligence that people always use as a justification. Or maybe they can do it, but decide that they don't care.

I love neither animals in general, or humans in general.

I'm vegan, and I respect animals. I will fight for their rights.

I respect humans.

I will fight for the rights of animals, but I will also fight for the rights of humans.

Of course there are exceptions (for example, some humans need to remain in prison).
Since when have animals had rights?

Let’s be clear here. Rights are a man-made set of ideas. They are not natural, and by no means "universal". To paraphrase, "what right to life does a man drowning in the ocean have?" And for that matter, whose rights are superior? Does the prey's right to live trump the predator's?

Now I don't think we should go about just wantonly torturing for the hell of it, but not because someone decided to assign abstract ideas to animals. If it isn't (sentient) Ramen (Let alone Framling or Utlanning), then giving it rights is absurd.

You should all watch the movie Grizzly Man. It's about Timothy Treadwell, a guy who wanted to be a bear so badly that he lived among them every summer in Alaska for thirteen years, until - surprise - a bear killed him. It brings up interesting questions about the line between man and nature and the rights of animals and humans.

Now I don't think we should go about just wantonly torturing for the hell of it, but not because someone decided to assign abstract ideas to animals. If it isn't (sentient) Ramen (Let alone Framling or Utlanning), then giving it rights is absurd.

Why? If you assert that rights are an artificial construct, which I happen to believe is true, then all rights are assigned by us. Why shouldn't we assign some that govern how we act upon other types of beings? Or would you argue that since, for example, animals are unwilling to work with us to construct an Earthly Bill of Rights, that we should have no responsibility to treat them in a non-horrific manner?

You should all watch the movie Grizzly Man. It's about Timothy Treadwell, a guy who wanted to be a bear so badly that he lived among them every summer in Alaska for thirteen years, until - surprise - a bear killed him. It brings up interesting questions about the line between man and nature and the rights of animals and humans.

You left out the fact that the bear that killed him was new to the area and he didn't know him or his personality.

Never mind the fact that his research had greatly increased our understanding of them.

You left out the fact that the bear that killed him was new to the area and he didn't know him or his personality.

Never mind the fact that his research had greatly increased our understanding of them.

You live in close proximity to such dangerous animals such a result can happen. I suppose we can come to our own opinions if living with them was dumb or not...

Don't know or care. But I like humans and animals. Human's because we kick ass, and animals because they're tasty. Or funny. Or both.

You left out the fact that the bear that killed him was new to the area and he didn't know him or his personality.

Never mind the fact that his research had greatly increased our understanding of them.

Hey, I wasn't trying to insult him. I admire his determination; it would take a lot to do something like that. But there are two sides to his story, which you see in the film.

I'd like to point out that no creature is superior to another. We are all specialized. Can you fly like a humming bird? Or swim like a fish? If your answer is "yes I can with a helicopter and a submarine" Well then lets see you build a sub and chopper with your own bare hands and carry it around all the time incase you ever need to take flight.

I'd like to point out that no creature is superior to another. We are all specialized. Can you fly like a humming bird? Or swim like a fish? If your answer is "yes I can with a helicopter and a submarine" Well then lets see you build a sub and chopper with your own bare hands and carry it around all the time incase you ever need to take flight.

Specialization cannot take the place of intelligence or having a sense of self. A hummingbird has neither.

Specialization cannot take the place of intelligence or having a sense of self. A hummingbird has neither.

Probably true.
Next question: should we determine the value of a life by the things it does not have or cannot do, or by the things it does have and can do ?

Animals are not humans. But they do share some things with us.

Probably true.
Next question: should we determine the value of a life by the things it does not have or cannot do, or by the things it does have and can do ?

Animals are not humans. But they do share some things with us.

We may not have wings and may not be able to do things other lifeforms can do but I would say that our intelligence more than makes up for it. Given our bodies we need our brains or we wouldn't survive long. Given that we are the top lifeform it seems pretty clear that we have the highest priority to survive. For the animals it depends on how helpful they are to humans. Cattle, sheep, pigs, fowl, horses etc., and pets, have a higher priority than a tiger does. Doesn't mean we shouldn't try to keep them alive but one must have priorities.

For the animals it depends on how helpful they are to humans. Cattle, sheep, pigs, fowl, horses etc., and pets, have a higher priority than a tiger does. Doesn't mean we shouldn't try to keep them alive but one must have priorities.

Taking the same reasoning further - do you believe that humans that are more useful to society than others also deserve more rights/higher priority ?

Example: there is one donorheart available. Suitable candidates are a 50 year old president of a higly succesfull company that provides jobs to a few thousand people and a 16 year old boy who will probably become an assistant mechanic. Should the man, who is obviously more useful to society, get the heart ?

Taking the same reasoning further - do you believe that humans that are more useful to society than others also deserve more rights/higher priority ?

Example: there is one donorheart available. Suitable candidates are a 50 year old president of a higly succesfull company that provides jobs to a few thousand people and a 16 year old boy who will probably become an assistant mechanic. Should the man, who is obviously more useful to society, get the heart ?

Aren't we getting a little off track? All humans are to be treated equal despite what some may say. Sure you could say that the brilliant scientist should be saved before the janitor but if you go down that road it leads to places we don't want to think about. Because we have intellect and that "spark" that gives us awareness we are all equal. It is hard to make the same arguement with animals who do not have this. Quite different than saving a cat before saving a woodchuck.

Aren't we getting a little off track?

Nope. You provided a way to measure the value of an animal. Not using the same standard to value human life would be hypocritical, unless you could give decent reasons for the double standard.

Sure you could say that the brilliant scientist should be saved before the janitor but if you go down that road it leads to places we don't want to think about. Because we have intellect and that "spark" that gives us awareness we are all equal. It is hard to make the same arguement with animals who do not have this.

Intruiging. Most animals do not have self-awareness, but many do experience emotions. Does the lack of selfawareness in your reasoning mean that the emotions have no real value by themselves, but only if they influence humans ?

Intruiging. Most animals do not have self-awareness, but many do experience emotions. Does the lack of selfawareness in your reasoning mean that the emotions have no real value by themselves, but only if they influence humans ?

Animals may feel flashes of pain, hunger, fear and other such primitive emotions. What do these matter to a human? Should we feel sympathy for killing rodents and other pests or for going hunting? Emotion is pointless if there is no true understanding behind it.

Animals may feel flashes of pain, hunger, fear and other such primitive emotions. What do these matter to a human? Should we feel sympathy for killing rodents and other pests or for going hunting? Emotion is pointless if there is no true understanding behind it.

Using that reasoning - why would torturing a baby be wrong ? If your answer involves the higher understanding the baby can obtain later of what was done to him in his early days, assume the baby is subsequently killed.

Using that reasoning - why would torturing a baby be wrong ? If your answer involves the higher understanding the baby can obtain later of what was done to him in his early days, assume the baby is subsequently killed.

I'm told that babies are able to understand and remember at a young age. Besides, the baby being human and able to grow up into an adult outweighs everything. An animal will always be just that. An animal.

Specialization cannot take the place of intelligence or having a sense of self. A hummingbird has neither.

It's also easier to put yourself at the top of the charts when you make them.

Animals may feel flashes of pain, hunger, fear and other such primitive emotions. What do these matter to a human? Should we feel sympathy for killing rodents and other pests or for going hunting? Emotion is pointless if there is no true understanding behind it.

Chimps morn their dead. A mother carried her dead child for several days before setting it down. She later visited the remains several times.

I'm told that babies are able to understand and remember at a young age.

Not more so than many adult mammals. Significantly less in fact, though it learns fast.

Besides, the baby being human and able to grow up into an adult outweighs everything. An animal will always be just that. An animal.

That of course is the problem. The baby is not more than the animal at that stage, it just has the potential to become more.
But if I know for certain that the baby will not become any more than it is now, for instance by planning to kill it, your reasoning seems to say that its suffering should not concern us since it has no real self awareness. One can even argue that the killing and torturing of the baby is a good act, if the humans oberving it enjoy it.

I dislike this reasoning.

Chimps morn their dead. A mother carried her dead child for several days before setting it down. She later visited the remains several times.

I can believe that. Some are more smart then others but will still not come close to humans. I'm sure that as time goes by, like all animals, the memory will disappear and the chimp will forget the child even existed. If the species aquires the idea of a ceremonial burial then I suppose it will be a step towards at least a limited intelligence.