Captain... Posted 13 July 2012 Posted 13 July 2012 No, by management i mean managing..including steralising if required. I will be clear that i do not support culling. I prefer a world where we dont treat animals as something for our abuse and pleasure... i think there are more options than just the two you suggest Unfortunately we don't live in that world, nobody is going to authorise and fund a sterilisation and feeding program when there is no financial benefit, they will just kill them, even if we sterilise all the dairy cows/sheep/pigs then release them into the wild to feed themselves, they will still be taking food away from local fauna and destroying natural habitats and you would be effectively wiping out a whole species, now if you only sterilise a few then the population will increase exponentially once the next generation are born and become a pest and when that happens there will need to be a cull. As an Aussie, how do you feel about Cane Toads and the problems they are causing over there? Or the problems that were caused by Rabbits and Ferrets and Weasels that were introduced to combat the rabbit population, but then focussed on the slower more docile animals such as koalas and wombats, decimating local populations, the correct thing to do would be a program of extermination to protect and preserve the indigenous wildlife.Of course they were man made problems, but the man made solution to exterminate them was the correct one. In my opinion.
Charl91 Posted 13 July 2012 Posted 13 July 2012 Unfortunately we don't live in that world, nobody is going to authorise and fund a sterilisation and feeding program when there is no financial benefit, they will just kill them, even if we sterilise all the dairy cows/sheep/pigs then release them into the wild to feed themselves, they will still be taking food away from local fauna and destroying natural habitats and you would be effectively wiping out a whole species, now if you only sterilise a few then the population will increase exponentially once the next generation are born and become a pest and when that happens there will need to be a cull. To be fair, I understand where OZ is coming from. Hypothetically, if the Government wanted to implement a vegetarian law (not that I'm saying this would ever happen), I don't think it would be too difficult for them to just stop breeding cattle to either a manageable level, or even altogether, and compensate the farmers for losses. You're right that it's not practical or the best plan financially, but to be honest since in this (unrealistic) hypothetical scenario we are assuming that everyone would want to be a vegetarian for purposes of animal rights, I'm assuming people would rather shoulder the burden of the extra cost than allow the animals to be slaughtered which would go against all their vegetarian ideals. But you're right that it would never happen, this is just assuming that we lived in a crazy government run vegetarian world; the problem is that most people (me included) wont want to become vegetarian because it's so much easier to not be one; meat is a very big market and it also tastes so damn good. Eating animals is also natural, there's no shame in it. It's how they're kept and treated that we should be looking at.
Rincewind Posted 13 July 2012 Posted 13 July 2012 If there is a need for us to become vegatarian and there may well be by choice evolution or health I cannot see any government acting quick enough to impliment anything. There will be five years debating a change of government another five years debating politicians who introduced the bill dying, another bill introduced more debating sent to House of Lords. A few years waiting for the Lords to awake. Turned down. More debating. Return to beginning and start again. If I was cynical about politicians I could go on all day.
Houdini Logic Posted 13 July 2012 Posted 13 July 2012 Cool, to each his own. I stopped eating meat based purely on the animal cruelty issues, i dont believe i have the right to take another sentient beings life...for my pleasure. The problem though is where do you draw the line? It could be argued that you're not actively avoiding animal cruelty every time you walk around your garden and stand on hundreds of ants and bugs. At least eating them contributes to comething productive. Or is it a case that some animals we don't care about as much? As soon as you start talking about animal cruelty, without being a rural vegan recluse, you're opening yourself up to criticism and hypocrisy. That's why I have a very simple view of doing whatever makes me happy and letting everyone else do the same. It's not going to revolutionise the world, but at least I'll keep my head up high, rightly or wrongly.
Rincewind Posted 13 July 2012 Posted 13 July 2012 True. If you believe the Noah story he allowed on board his boat, the mosquitos and flys which cause diseases and death to millions yet he turned the poor unicorns away.
Jaspa Posted 14 July 2012 Posted 14 July 2012 http://thebestpageintheuniverse.net/c.cgi?u=vegetarian_test ps : That site is class
Daggers Posted 14 July 2012 Posted 14 July 2012 Cool, to each his own. I stopped eating meat based purely on the animal cruelty issues, i dont believe i have the right to take another sentient beings life...for my pleasure. If it's each to his own then carry on not taking "another sentient beings life" and get out of meat-eaters faces about it. If it's each to their own? I like to kill animals. I really enjoy killing wasps, mosquitoes and fluffy bunny wabbits.
ozleicester Posted 15 July 2012 Author Posted 15 July 2012 If it's each to his own then carry on not taking "another sentient beings life" and get out of meat-eaters faces about it. If it's each to their own? I like to kill animals. I really enjoy killing wasps, mosquitoes and fluffy bunny wabbits. The thread heading may have given you some idea of what it was going to contain, I think most people can work it out. So rather than me getting in meat eaters faces it would appear you have stood infront of me as i spoke. As i mentioned, i deliberatley started it so as not to hijack other threads. The thread title is reasonably clear, if you find it threatening, upsetting or not something you wish to discuss, probably best not to enter Thanks for your input. Many people enjoy killing.
Trav Le Bleu Posted 15 July 2012 Posted 15 July 2012 True. If you believe the Noah story he allowed on board his boat, the mosquitos and flys which cause diseases and death to millions yet he turned the poor unicorns away. All the ducks survived though. That's why they're evil.
OzFox Posted 15 July 2012 Posted 15 July 2012 I agree with this In fact it seems most of you ozzies and ex pats from around the world are more polite and willing to discuss without the need for insults . Presumably you all left the UK before it became JK (Jeremy Kyle land ) or do you just live more pleasant lives and this is reflected in your attitudes ? Who on earth is Jeremy Kyle?
FoxyPV Posted 15 July 2012 Posted 15 July 2012 Who on earth is Jeremy Kyle? An English Jerry Springer with an incredibly obnoxious, sneery personality. He makes the pond life that comes on to his show look human.
Daggers Posted 16 July 2012 Posted 16 July 2012 The thread heading may have given you some idea of what it was going to contain, I think most people can work it out. ...and? Does this even remotely respond to my very clear point? So rather than me getting in meat eaters faces it would appear you have stood infront of me as i spoke. What the fvck does this mean? As i mentioned, i deliberatley started it so as not to hijack other threads. Again, and...? So...? What? Does any of this make sense to you at all? The thread title is reasonably clear, if you find it threatening, upsetting or not something you wish to discuss, probably best not to enter Um, haven't you already needlessly covered this point once in your post? Does this even remotely respond to my very clear point? Thanks for your input. Many people enjoy killing.
ozleicester Posted 17 July 2012 Author Posted 17 July 2012 ...and? Does this even remotely respond to my very clear point? What the fvck does this mean? Again, and...? So...? What? Does any of this make sense to you at all? Um, haven't you already needlessly covered this point once in your post? Does this even remotely respond to my very clear point? Im sorry you are confused, i thought i was reasonably clear with my response. Would you like to re-state your "very clear point" and i will address it again, hopefully in a different, more easily understood fashion
OzFox Posted 17 July 2012 Posted 17 July 2012 I think I'm largely with you on this one, fellow oz. You only have to drive around the countryside now (in england or australia) to realise that most farm animals are out of sight, out of mind. Factory farming is little more than legalised cruelty for higher profit.We stuff animals in small cages where they can barely move. We cut off tails, teeth, beaks, genitals and horns with no pain relief. I find it sickening, and there's enough video footage around now to make anyone with a concience think twice. As for that miserable bunny-killing git Daggers, stalking the countryside with his shotgun, don't worry about him. He'll get his comeuppance sooner or later. With any luck he'll run into one of those big cats that we all KNOW are out there.
OzFox Posted 17 July 2012 Posted 17 July 2012 An English Jerry Springer with an incredibly obnoxious, sneery personality. He makes the pond life that comes on to his show look human. Ah right. Thanks. The only Jeremy I remember was Beadle.
Daggers Posted 17 July 2012 Posted 17 July 2012 Im sorry you are confused, i thought i was reasonably clear with my response. Would you like to re-state your "very clear point" and i will address it again, hopefully in a different, more easily understood fashion Seeing as you seem to have a difficulty with English would you prefer I use another language?
ozleicester Posted 17 July 2012 Author Posted 17 July 2012 Seeing as you seem to have a difficulty with English would you prefer I use another language? I'll take that as a no then shall i? http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=50Sq4n4kt2k
Trav Le Bleu Posted 17 July 2012 Posted 17 July 2012 I had thought of a really profound and serious question to put to Oz in this thread and now that I sit down in front of my keyboard I can't remember what it was for the life of me! It was a pearler too! Watch it come back to me when I'm driving or going for a swim - stupid brain!
ozleicester Posted 17 July 2012 Author Posted 17 July 2012 I had thought of a really profound and serious question to put to Oz in this thread and now that I sit down in front of my keyboard I can't remember what it was for the life of me! It was a pearler too! Watch it come back to me when I'm driving or going for a swim - stupid brain! Phew... im safe for a little longer then
cambridgefox Posted 17 July 2012 Posted 17 July 2012 Ah right. Thanks. The only Jeremy I remember was BEAGLE Wasn't that the breed of dog medical labs used to smoke fags and squirt shampoo in their eyes!!!
Guest Posted 17 July 2012 Posted 17 July 2012 Wasn't that the breed of dog medical labs used to smoke fags and squirt shampoo in their eyes!!! Wasn't that bungle - or was that the bear that used to make suggestive comments on kids programmes.
DANGEROUS TIGER Posted 17 July 2012 Posted 17 July 2012 I do not believe it is right to test animals for cosmetics, for fur, or other non essential items. ( I well remember the smoking Beagles-that was gross cruelty.) Domestic animals for food I see as ok, just so long as the animal is despatched quickly and humanely, ( We often hear of abuse, even in this country) Asian countries tend to be totally barbaric when slaughtering animals, and this is a bloody abominable disgrace.
The Doctor Posted 17 July 2012 Posted 17 July 2012 I do not believe it is right to test animals for cosmetics, for fur, or other non essential items. ( I well remember the smoking Beagles-that was gross cruelty.) Domestic animals for food I see as ok, just so long as the animal is despatched quickly and humanely, ( We often hear of abuse, even in this country) Asian countries tend to be totally barbaric when slaughtering animals, and this is a bloody abominable disgrace. not really - it's just a ****ing animal. People hunted animals for centuries - you think they killed them humanely?
Charl91 Posted 17 July 2012 Posted 17 July 2012 not really - it's just a ****ing animal. People hunted animals for centuries - you think they killed them humanely? Humans are animals. And using historical precedent isn't the greatest of arguments - we also worshipped Gods for centuries, but that doesn't mean I should have to believe in Jesus.
The Doctor Posted 17 July 2012 Posted 17 July 2012 Humans are animals. And using historical precedent isn't the greatest of arguments - we also worshipped Gods for centuries, but that doesn't mean I should have to believe in Jesus. Technically yes, but not when we're referring to animal rights. Ok then, I'll phrase it differently - does the predator give a shit about how it's prey dies in nature? No, it'd be a crap hunter otherwise. No different here, to get all soppy about how it's killed is perplexing, no matter how you do it, the end result is a dead animal.
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.