Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
Roderick

Legal rights for dolphins and whales

Recommended Posts

Twig, I don't hate you, nor do I think you must stop eating meat, nor am I bothered that you eat meat. What bothers me is that you don't seem to be willing to engage in an actual discussion about it, but post oneliners and don't reply to valid insights about the nature of animals. If it hasn't been made clear enough at this point, no one here is trying to make people switch to different eating habits - all I ask is that you try thinking about it on a different level, a level beyond 'I like meat and that's why I eat'.

I understand, man. There's no hate here either! It's true that I don't really want to engage in an actual discussion. That's why I post the one-liners. I thought it would be obvious from my first post that I'm not necessarily invested in this topic. I just kind of hoped that would be okay. I guess not. U:

BUT FINE, RODI. FOR YOU!

I have two questions! They're not necessarily related, but they also are, so whatever.

1) Why should I have to think about it on a different level?

2) What makes you think I haven't already?

I love animals, okay! One of my biggest regrets is that I went into the field of computer science, rather than zoology. More specifically, marine biology is probably my number one choice of alternative profession. Either that or working at a zoo...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Those are easy baby questions!

1. Because that's the power level of this topic. It's annoying if we're all discussing along a certain intellectual wavelength and then someone else comes in and doesn't want to play along. Those oneliners are bothersome for that very reason.

2. It was logical step to think that because you didn't want to discuss it. If you had a solid, well-thought out philosophy to back up your opinion it would've been very easy to post it and prevent a lot of bother.

I was actually wondering about Twig's age as well. It would not surprise me if he turned out to be a few years younger than most of us.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I saw that this topic suddenly made it to three pages overnight and I was hoping it would be a lot of debate on performing dolphins and whales and how to best get them back into the wild and give them the quality of life they need, but instead it's completely derailed. What do you all have to say for yourself?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If you wanted to

I was actually wondering about Twig's age as well. It would not surprise me if he turned out to be a few years younger than most of us.

You tried pretty hard to seem intellectually superior in this thread, but then you come out with internet douchebaggery like this. Please. Guess I'll just write this animal rights movement off as another pretentious hipster fad.

To be honest, this discussion is completely ridiculous to even have in the context of a country where death penalty is in practice, health care is extremely poor, and same sex marriage is illegal.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

To be honest, this discussion is completely ridiculous to even have in the context of a country where death penalty is in practice, health care is extremely poor, and same sex marriage is illegal.

Except he's Dutch, where there is no death penalty, health care is alright and same sex marriage is legal. OOPS!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

must have been all that pot he has been smoking

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It all makes sense now! The US is trying to circumvent the ban on whaling by labeling them as persons and then sentencing all the killer whales to death.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
easy baby questions

Well, I guess if that's how you feel, that explains the lack of satisfactory answers to the questions I asked. "Because I care" is not really a good answer.

I was actually wondering about Twig's age as well. It would not surprise me if he turned out to be a few years younger than most of us.

Nice. I suppose you're wanting me to actually start ignoring you now? You keep personally attacking me, when I've done nothing of the sort to you. It's a good thing I have the ability to approach life with a certain level of levity, or I might cry!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Oh man, I do apologize for that. I did not mean to be douchebaggy with that remark, it was an honest question in my head that I should've kept locked inside. No snippiness intended, very sorry if it was a stupid thing to write.

As for my answers, I don't think 'because I care' was the gist? In any case, I feel this is getting really far from the topic. If you feel like it, we can discuss some further, if not we can just let it rest.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It's fiiiiiiine. U:

I have no problem with dropping it. I hate taking over a topic like this more than other people hate me doing it, I think. If you wanted to continue, this kind of thing is generally better in private, anyway, since it's probably annoying for everyone else!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I like animals as much as the next guy, but I have no qualms about eating meat at all. We live in a world that thrives on creatures killing and eating each other. Some people expect us to be held to a higher standard, that we're better than that, but it's something our species has done for thousands of generations and I don't think we can just now decide that it's wrong. I hate the thought of animals being treated badly just because it's more convenient, but while I wouldn't like to be the guy holding the cleaver, I don't think there's anything unethical about killing them for food. Hunting for sport seems a bit unreasonable though.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Except he's Dutch, where there is no death penalty, health care is alright and same sex marriage is legal. OOPS!

The article in the OP has a very US standpoint. An article that isn't a very good read for someone who isn't very familiar with the field of animal legal rights already, I should add.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

"Green Lantern is the Blindfolded Fool"

:innocent: ?

It all makes sense now! The US is trying to circumvent the ban on whaling by labeling them as persons and then sentencing all the killer whales to death.

That would be a fucking genius twist.

Some people expect us to be held to a higher standard, that we're better than that, but it's something our species has done for thousands of generations and I don't think we can just now decide that it's wrong.

Wasn't really expecting to engage in this discussion, but that sentence caused me to make a bit of a "huh?" face. I don't understand that perspective at all, since members of our species have also killed each other for thousands of generations but most people have no problem considering murder "wrong" and trying to prevent it. I'm not implying a perspective on eating meat, just noting that the logic does not seem to hold up there.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Wasn't really expecting to engage in this discussion, but that sentence caused me to make a bit of a "huh?" face. I don't understand that perspective at all, since members of our species have also killed each other for thousands of generations but most people have no problem considering murder "wrong" and trying to prevent it. I'm not implying a perspective on eating meat, just noting that the logic does not seem to hold up there.

As far as I know, people have always considered murder wrong. Ethics regarding eating meat seems to be something that has only existed (at least on a big enough scale) in very recent history. I could well be totally wrong about that. I'm not claiming to be educated on the subject, that's just my impression of it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well, there's also quote-unquote murder in the sense of war.

Not to mention some of the darker stuff in our past.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Some species wouldn't be able to survive without eating others and we used to be the same way. In the wild nature, the jungle laws still hold and will forever. And if any of us would have to survive in the wild tomorrow, I think nobody would oppose if you had to kill animals to eat. With domesticated animals raised with the almost sole purpose of becoming food, and the act of killing them abstracted away behind the supermarket, the ethics might be a bit more complex. And that applies to most of the meat we eat, so I totally see that someone would be ethically opposed to eating meat.

I still like to eat it, though. And I only recognize the possibility that there might be some ethical issues (and definitely are if the animals are mistreated throughout their lives), but I'm not ready to accept that as a certainty. What if they discover that plants are intelligent too, or whatever along those lines that makes the killing of plants dubious -- we must eat something.

What if the humankind as a whole suddenly decided to stop eating meat and started eating a lot more plants. Are you sure there would be no re-precussions, such as eating away the food of some herbivores low in the food chain, causing their numbers to wane, and maybe causing some carnivores higher in the food chain to die out completely.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

As far as I know, people have always considered murder wrong. Ethics regarding eating meat seems to be something that has only existed (at least on a big enough scale) in very recent history. I could well be totally wrong about that. I'm not claiming to be educated on the subject, that's just my impression of it.

You're assuming that whatever our forebears decided about morality was correct. Moral standpoints and related beliefs often shift, particularly with regard to who or what are to be assigned particular rights or obligations. To defer purely to historical beliefs without critical thought is not a strong ethical position. To defer to our biology as an omnivore is an appeal to nature, an example of the naturalistic fallacy.

From what I can tell, my position is similar to Miffy's: I eat meat, but am not entirely comfortable with the fact, and don't feel able to satisfactorily justify it. I enjoy eating meat, but I'm aware that that's a motivation, not a justification. A large portion of the stuff we do, good or bad, is done because we like it; that it suits our tastes has absolutely no bearing on its acceptability.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

My only problem with all this is the fact that we are using human-intelligence as the standard by which to measure the worthiness of any other animal's intellect. Like, the more similar they are to us, the better they are. Seems kinda arrogant.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That's true, but what would be an alternative? Judging within-species, e.g. whether a dog is stupid in comparison to other dogs? I'm pulling this outta my ass here, but wouldn't any rubric we come up innately privilege human intelligence since we as humans are the ones devising it? Is there such a thing as intellectual relativism?

Meta - It's really easy to slide into reflexive snark. I do it all the time - and I've said this in the Life thread (or the Feminism thread, I forget which). It's a defense mechanism for me because it's that or the alternatives, which are:

1. Genuinely and fully engage with the topic at hand. This is risky because it makes me vulnerable - e.g. if I confess in the feminist thread that I am a victim of xyz, or think abc, there's a chance that such honest share could come back to shame me later or be used against me.

2. Not post in the thread (omg whaaaaaaaaat).

I probably should take option 2 more often, ha.

P.S. "Green Lantern is the Blindfolded Fool" is a ref to "Sincerely, These Nuts," the musical interlude in Idle Thumbs Episode 8.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You're assuming that whatever our forebears decided about morality was correct. Moral standpoints and related beliefs often shift, particularly with regard to who or what are to be assigned particular rights or obligations. To defer purely to historical beliefs without critical thought is not a strong ethical position.

I don't believe there is a correct answer when it comes to morality. Everyone is going to feel differently about every moral issue. That said, I don't think this (relatively) sudden wave of vegetarian ethics is going to convince the majority of people about something that was never an issue throughout our entire history. I'm not 'deferring purely to historical beliefs', that's just one point I made. I feel a lot more strongly about the fact that most animals are going to endure some sort of gruesome death out in the wild regardless.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yeah, I'm vegetarian but I (save for the exceptions I'm about to mention) don't mind people eating meat. The things that bug me are: firstly, how greedy some people can be... three meals a day with meat? At least THREE LIVES for each day that you gorge yourself to a bloated, cancerous death which will not just a drain on the NHS and society when it happens, but also a kick in the teeth for the environment in the meantime.

Also: how the 'animals aren't even sentient anyway probably!' argument is used in conjunction with people not giving a shit where their meat comes from. If you're going to eat meat, the least you can do is ensure as best you can that the animal has led the best life possible before its demise. There is really absolutely no excuse for not doing this... Oh except that in my world, animals don't HAVE feelings! Probably. Despite all the evidence to the contrary. Which is convenient because I plan to consume them in the most abhorrent way possible. Now that we're on this topic, I bet people who have been trafficked for sex probably love it too. And also I bet I have a million pounds in the bank, because thinking it probably makes it true after all!

I agree with the point, not at all with the tone, because you're probably typing this on a device made by people who are basically slaves, a device whose production, delivery, use and waste also have a very significant impact on the environment. . And I know that it's my case too and 2 wrongs don't make 1 right; but the fact that you're labeling people eating meat carelessly as 'not giving a shit' about animal when others of your consumption habits might say the same about you and human beings is a strong enough contradiction for me to be ticked off by your 'you have no excuse!' tone.

That being said, you're right about the rest and I can only commend people who are trying their best to avoid animal suffering or over consumption of meat; their ethical and ecological arguments cannot be disagreed with - their health related ones probably can though.

Also, I agree with Sal's post; anthropomorphizing animals is one of the thing that really ticks me off: I wish we stopped at recognizing their sentience, and on that basis, not to treat them in ways that make them suffer. That makes sense; that's us using reason successfully. But obsessively linking their behavior to human ones (do they dance? do they have relationships? are they faithful?) is a misguided, childish shortcut that leans toward saying that animals who don't display human-like behavior don't deserve similar treatment.

As for animal rights, I really don't know because my perception is split between thinking of some animals as individuals and some other as species with no real individual components. So in one case, right for each animal make sense to me, but in the other no. It's one of those case when I'll let somebody more educated - an expert - decide on my behalf because even though I can be more educated about the issue, I don't think I can devout enough time to build an informed-enough opinion that can stand serious examination. And honestly, I'd rather spend this time examining other issues, ones that I find more crucial.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  

×