|
Post by Wycco on May 1, 2003 7:21:20 GMT -5
The difference between fur- and food. a) If the animal is killed purely for some aesthetic pleasure. ex: Ivory, Mink Fur... etc. That is wrong. b) If the leather is taken from animals that was killed for food... sure why not use it? - or if the animal died of natural causes- again- thats OK... I have Ostrich skin boots, and an Ostrich skin belt- I see nothing wrong with either... I eat the Ostrich, I love Ostrich- (tastes a bit like beef but much healthier) - so why waste the leather? Same with my leather shoes... I eat a cow- therefore I might as well use the skin for my shoes... Best not leave anything to waste. Re: Milk cows. I grew up in an area almost exclusively dedicated to pastoral farming: sheep, lots of dairy cows and some meat cows. Believe me- Milk cows don't have it easy. Being bred to produce inordinate amounts of milk- being given chemicals to trick pregnancy- and then living your life every day with extreme pain in your teets as the milk builds up to unnatural levels... not a pleasant existance! (BTW many cows serve the purpose of both dairy and meat cows... depends on the breed). Free Range hens eggs is good. I've never had a problem with free range hens- free range hens actually have a nice pampered life- better than their wild cousins. I wish I could find free range eggs in America- I would be willing to pay much more for free range eggs than battery hen eggs- but unfortunately you can't find them around here!!! BTW- who won- I'm not trying to vilify you- I'm just disagreeing with you- I mean you no ill-will. I'm glad you are taking what you believe is the moral stance... but if we all had the same opinion there would be no point to a forum! JWK- was just joking- re the David Coulthard comment!
|
|
|
Post by glendo on May 1, 2003 11:18:20 GMT -5
as for animal cruelty, i swear the hamsters enjoy it as much as i do!
|
|
|
Post by Topcontender on May 1, 2003 13:24:48 GMT -5
Yesterday some guy saved a week old duckling from falling into a strom drain next door to me. Well he didn't know what to do so he took the little guy and stuck him on my pond. The pond is about 7,000 sq feet so it is small but nice. Well i have rasied many ducklings that have been hurt so i went to get the little guy out. I get 5 feet from the little guy and he diped under the water and never surfaced. Poor little guy was ate by one of my bass.
|
|
|
Post by who won on May 1, 2003 23:09:11 GMT -5
no problemo
as far as your opinion on trading one level of cruelty for another. In my opine, killing is the most sever cruelty, almost, without paralellel, to kill is the ultimate cruelty apart from ultimate discomfort in life.
If milk giving is worse than death, then we should not drink milk.
apart from that, there are many good reasons for the planet to be vegetarian rather than eat meat. You refused to comment on the very real environmental issues I mentio0ned above, Deforestation etc. Self gratification vs need, etc.
However you somewhatr acknowleged the parlleles in your last comment.
aam I vegetarian? nope
I eat meat, I love the taste, I acknowledge the hypocrisy, but I do not chase fur wearing fashion dick heads down the street who wear fur, because I am as guilty as they.
|
|
|
Post by pabs on May 2, 2003 0:13:23 GMT -5
so fashion = nutrition?
I am sure you have talked about that somewhere else but I am too lazy to read this whole thread looking for the argument.
It is one thing to kill an animal to eat it and then use the skin to protect yourself. That's simple self-preservation. Even the early man knew this. It is another thing to kill an animal just to wear its fur, especially endangered species.
It is true that you can get all your protein and stuff from other sources like vegetarians and vegans do so we can spare all animals. But then again I don't see anyone complaining about lions killing antelope to get their food. Is that still animal cruelty? The fact is: humans are omnivores by evolution. We are meant to eat meat because Mother Nature decided that. Is it cruel to raise animals for food? I don't think so. In fact, to me there's a distinction between killing a cat just because and killing a cow for its nutritional value. One has no goal and no justification, while the other has to do with satisfying one of the most basic needs of all creatures.
And then killing a wild animal just because someone in their infinite wisdom decided that its fur looks good is just plain unacceptable.
I really don't see the hipocresy in eating meat and complaining about unnecessary animal cruelty.
|
|
|
Post by who won on May 2, 2003 7:04:20 GMT -5
Because you have no moral authority to claim that you care for animals when you eat them! At least thats the case when you chosse to eat meat for pleasure rather than pure necessity. Why is it okay to pick and choose which animals are worthy of care.
What is it that makes a fox something we should care about while we tip the contents of an unfinished steak (which came from a living breathing cow) in the trash can.
You know, in all reality, I try not to eat meat. I eat very little. The only meat I eat is chicken and less and less. I consider the ethical reasons, but despicable though it is, it would be the height of hypocrisy for me to follow a woman down the street and shout at her for wearing fur while I'm chewing on a chicken sandwich.
|
|
|
Post by who won on May 2, 2003 7:07:40 GMT -5
By the way, where in any of my arguments above did I preach to you telling you not to eat meat?
All I ever suggested was the same argument, that if we eat meat for pleasure when there is good reason that we do not need to, we are little better than those who wear fur.
Thats all I ever suggested.
|
|
who won seriously who
Guest
|
Post by who won seriously who on May 3, 2003 0:15:38 GMT -5
dont want to start anything but you are subscribing somewhat to a debating ish site, so what difference does it make what I personally do?
I am perfectly entitled to put forward any argument I like whehter I personaly subscribe toi it or not is actually totally irrelevant.
Disuss the points and not the person. I merely put forward a point that you can agree with or argue with. If the fact I belive in. If I dont believe in the argument I put forward it should not matter. Its not about personality, its about the discussion.
If we all had to follow our own convictions, then I dont believe any of us would put forward any arguments at all.
I'm guessing plenty here put forward many ideas that most idealise about yet really only dream of yet do not physically go to the extremes that the ideas themseleves require.
e.g. world peace may require certain sacrifices frin all of us, but we'll happily discuss what should be without doing what we believe can be.
This is a debating site. I can debate any side I choose and you should not take what I say as any personal vendatta nor lifestyle. That is what debating is about and if it is disturbing to you that people are capable of debating a side that they do not follow, then dont read the site.
|
|
|
Post by greg99 on May 3, 2003 3:43:08 GMT -5
I haven't read the other pages of this thread coz I'm way behind in my reading but I will get there. I don't know why I ended up here. But I have to put my 2 cents in. This is a debating site. I can debate any side I choose and you should not take what I say as any personal vendatta nor lifestyle. That is what debating is about and if it is disturbing to you that people are capable of debating a side that they do not follow, then dont read the site. Who-won-whatever-and-so-on-who-is-still-not-registered, I think there is something you are not getting: this is indeed a debating site BUT please don't make it sound like it's just any other site. THAT to me is an insult. This place is a home, this is where we all come to find our friends around the world and all the members (who have registered, a thing you still haven't done), we are a family and we look out for each other. If you haven't had the guts to properly register then you should be the one refraining from visiting our place. I am not asking you to leave – NOT AT ALL. I’m just asking you to respect Shamu’s members. But honestly, I have asked you who you were (in another thread a long time ago) and you didn’t respond. That’s cool, if you want to remain a guest but please respect SC as your host. And if you are who we think you could be, then you know me and you can contact me by email. If you are that person, then know that I miss having you around but above all I hope you’re ok and happy. If you are not, then just disregard my last paragraph.
|
|
|
Post by who won on May 3, 2003 8:03:38 GMT -5
I wasnt trying to insult anyone. I was making the point that in an argument or discussion it is perfectly reasonable to put forward a point you may or may not believe in, playing devils advocate as it were.
I was responding to the post above who asked how I dare put forward such an argument.
|
|
|
Post by smokingun on May 4, 2003 7:35:05 GMT -5
am i the only one here who agrees with who won??
geez, all he said was eating meat for pleasure is the same as wearing a fur. by eating meat only because we like the taste, we are no better or no worse than the idiots who wear a fur for fashion. i honestly fail to see why we should become so defensive. perhaps the problem lies within ourselves and our motives rather than with the very civil and yes very valid arguments that who won posted.
now play nice people, this isn't the sort of way we should be treating our guests.
smokingun
|
|
|
Post by Srrh on May 5, 2003 9:29:12 GMT -5
JWK- was just joking- re the David Coulthard comment! And don't get in a fight because of it either: I am the one who made the "DC" comment...I was just trying to be funny... I don't always succeed... S....
|
|
|
Post by Srrh on May 5, 2003 10:26:53 GMT -5
A few points if I may: -Who won is a registered member if I am not mystaken. But not under Who won. -SG; No you're not. -Who won has the right to debate any side of the argument he wants. He doesn't even have to abide by his reasoning. But on the other hand, he souldn't be surprised being labelled for the said reasoning. As he said "I can debate any side I choose" but on the other hand "you should not take what I say as any personal vendatta nor lifestyle" is a bit too easy... Suppose tomorow, for the pleasure of debating, I argue that apartheid is a good idea, because blacks are generally more violent and less trust worthy then whites....you will not be out of line in calling me a racist biggot....I may very well not be, but that will be the image I will have chosen to project... You're sort of asking people to read through your argument and to respond to "the real you"...Errrr...it's rather difficult... Greg99 S....
|
|
|
Post by Wycco on May 5, 2003 10:37:27 GMT -5
Srrh,
Who won's IP doesn't match any "recent" post by any reigstered member of SC. (at least none that I've seen- and as an admin I see the IP address of everyone's post on their post)
However, based on the area who won is posting from, and a lot of his views, I have a good guess who "who won" might be. (if indeed he is someone we know).
And BTW, I'm not going to reveal what my guess is- if who won wishes to remain anonymous thats his choice.
|
|
|
Post by Henrik on May 5, 2003 10:44:19 GMT -5
Srrh,
Sure anybody can argue whatever they want. I think the difference being that the Shamu "family" has gotten to know each other well enough to know at least to a certain extent where each one stands. As such, if you argue for apartheid I think most of us would understand that you are acting as a devil's advocate. Not so in the case of Who Won, since as a guest we really don't know anything about him/her.
Also, as has been the case in some other threads, Who Won has directly insulted some of the Shamu members. Now at least I feel that as a guest this is stepping over the line. Admitedly he/she appologized to the last insult in another post.
I agree with Greg (surprise!) in that I am very protective of Shamu and all its members. Having had the chance to get know such great people, and meet some of them, I do indeed consider this place as "family".
|
|