obw - That’s one reason why the Social Contract is the way to go.
Possibly -I don’t like some of the additional (often political) baggage. I am probably closer to a moral particularist, if I am every pressed on categorising myself.
You’re not an animal?
id agree with you but nourishment isnt 30% of a country being overweight. plus animals produce more vitamins and healthier meat when theyre not being force fed steroids and other hormones to increase size. its about profit the companies dont care about your nourishment. i think its worth the extra dollar to get free range chickens/livestock and cage free eggs.
yea im sure the screaming and flailing of limbs is just meaningless white noise to be ignored. show me an animal that doesnt understand death and danger. we tamed cows to make our life easier. go try to herd lions into a butcher shop.
its actually more cost effective to not eat meat. im sure youre smart enough to figure out why plants are easier to take care of than animals. the ecosystem is already being destroyed. if you care about it you would be killing humans. also note its usually the spandex wearing dolphin lovers who are trying to save the ecosystem and protect life and the planet as a life supporting surface while its usually the opposing side of the spectrum who cares less and does more harm than good in the course of their life.
this topic isnt even about that though. its not about whats better its about the morality of exploiting animals. not the morality of eating them. if we were carnivores this conversation wouldnt be about food. were omnivores though (barely) and we ignore the carnivorous part and focus on the morality of the rest.
That don’t make no goddam sense!
Animals aint got no rights! where they getem from I ask nyou.
Me and billions of other black folk demanded our rights back in the 1960’s and so far I haven;t seen no animal do that accept maybe on the cartoons and those creatures look happy to me.
Until cridders go marchin on washington to visit the big man all the people an babies of the world come first.
hear it?
That’s my philosophy.
I’ll give you the simple answer, if “you”, along with the vast consensus of a society believes they have rights, they will certainly “obtain” rights.
Screw the animals… Do we have rights…?
Choose one member name and stick with it.
So, when we get upset at the boss at work and must refrain from lashing back (although he is very much an animal 
), it’s okay to go home and kick the dog?
Show me a herd of wildebeast that don’t grow hungry and die off during the middle of a drought.
If you prefer the taste of lions, all you need is a good rifle, and that’ll silence em’ right quick.
are you comparing hunger in modern society to a herd of wilderbeasts? cause im pretty sure there is food surpluses that we dispose of yearly.
my point was that animals give off very obvious signs of unhappiness.
cba:
Your economic approach to a morality issue is less than sufficient. Economics measures numbers, cost-effective strategies, opportunity costs, etc. Something like utilitiarianism or natural law or kantian ethics might atleast be applicable to the debate at hand!? When you morph an ethical issue into a monetary one, well, truth is left standing on its head.
Nice answer. But what happens if the consensus of society, believes and believes not. Then each state will have their indpendent laws.
But what about the individual, I believe and I don’t believe. How is a contradicition be solve?
The existence of the word rights, I felt never existed with nature until the creation of government . So, one may ask what is the difference between nature and government?
Hey dan, how about an experiment? ingridients being; perception, ranking, morality, amorality, the law of close proximity, and the fine art of communication- just for kicks.
Utilizing this very thread, I want to direct your attention to ‘Old-gobbo’s’ response to you. Do you feel a reaking sense of superiority, or perhaps entitlement, eminating from gobbo’s response to you? What was your perception? Did you find it dismissive? Do you feel your rights were violated? Is gobbo aware of said rights? What was gobbo’s moralistic imperative during that response? If we gravitated from a fractured piece of communication to no means of communication at all, would gobbo’s morality wane or not? would there be any morality to consider anymore? Upon reading gobbo’s response, where do you think you rank? Are you closer to the dinner table, or are you on the dinner table?
As far as close proximity goes, I don’t see how one would mistreat an animal they were having relations with …then again…
You do realize we wouldn’t be having this conversation if animals had weapons or if were we lived in the serengeti right?
Are you familiar with Andy Rooney on 60 minutes? I like that guy. He is funny.
No, I’m saying domestic cattle may in fact have it pretty good.
Not if you make it quick and painless. In fact that’s much the way I would rather go myself. After that, they can grind my body up into hamburger for all I care.
morality to me is measured in waste and progress.
not the ones on the factory farms. besides most of them arent killed quickly and the handlers are usually redneck kids that shoot things for fun. im sure you can imagine the fun ways kids can entertain themselves when theyre taught to think of animals as the walking dead.
thats exactly what I was about to say. (but TR is the only person i read as a skimmed so sorry if i repeat what has already been said)
dan,
you ask ‘do animals have rights’ well i would have to ask you ‘do people have rights’?
well of course we would have to go through and discuss what ‘rights’ really are.
the conclusion we would come to is that ‘rights’ are constructed by the government and thus do not exist indefinitely.
rights, good, and evil…we debate over what these are but at the end of the day i think we all know that they don’t actually exist.
you are born with your brain, your nose, your ears, your mouth, your eyes, your hands, your feet…
everything that you have you are born with (with the exception of experience)
‘rights’ are not a part of your body.
…and futhermore what makes you think that you are not an animal???
you are most certainly an animal, there is no doubt about that.
No dan,
animals do not have rights
sangrain~
Damn, you are either obsess with gobbo or you are just being a pain in the azz, by inflicting much questions? I am a thinker but I do not like to think. I wait for your reaction on that.
cba~
Cba has a point on this one. Will you go to a farm and become a butcher, and kill animals, stuck a knife at their throats and rip their limbs?
If one is taught morality one will have a feeling not to, but when one is not taught morality he is but merely a redneck. But if this is job to kill animals for a living, he has a lot of blood in his hands. I suppose if one who is a follower of Locke , will put it , hey as long we eat them and make use of them it is okay.
I thought you would be smarter then that, judging by your screenname.
But, if you say we human beings are animals and we have rights, what makes you say animals do not have rights again?
Something tells me it would taste like chile beans. 