tronvillain

You previously said "I don't agree that human life is most valuable", or at least I think you did (your command of the quote command leaves something to be desired). Now you say "I, and most other humans, value their lives and human life above animal life." What's going on here?

tronvillain

free12thinker:
This does not even vaguely resemble an answer to my question: Are you indifferent between the death of a human and the death of a dog? If your answer is no, you do not value humans and dogs equally. Also, that anecdote is not "proof" that you value them equally.

While impressive if actually true, it is not "proof" that you value animals equally either.

[ April 12, 2002: Message edited by: tronvillain ]</p>

Valmorian

</strong>

This isn't the same choice that was suggested to you. How about this one:

Person A is about to swat a mosquito. Do you stop him? Would you use lethal force to prevent this?

I seriously doubt you actually place the same level of worth on all animals. I think you're most likely fooling yourself.

</strong>

I presume you refrain from basically all medicine then hm? Because many products that are around today are only possible because of other products that DID involve experimentation.

At what level do you decide to stop treating living organisms the same? Do ants have the same worth in your eyes as a human? How about Bacteria? Viruses?

tronvillain

I just realized that it was brighid who said "I, and most other humans, value their lives and human life above animal life." Your use of the quote command leaves something to be desired.

brighid

There is a difference between risking your life and actually forfeiting your life for another species. Would you sacrifice your child to save another species and if that dog had attacked your child’s jugular would you have sat back and allowed the dog to kill your child, or if the only way to save your child was to kill the dog – would you kill the dog, what if it was a bear or a cougar? As a mother I doubt you would allow any person or animal to harm your child and I think if it came down to it and it was a choice between the life of your child and the life of the dog (or other predator), you would choose your child. I doubt you could say that you value the life of the dog equally to that of your child (even though you value the life of the dog), or that you would forfeit your life, your child’s or another humans in preference of an animal.

How do you know the medicines you take, such as those prescribed by your doctor have not been tested on animals? I am afraid that all drugs must be tested on animals extensively prior to be approved for use on humans. Are you telling me that if you had cancer, you would refuse chemo-therapy because chemo has been tested on animals? Both my father in-law and brother in-law work for universities doing research on animals for medical purposes. My uncle is also a chemical engineer who has been responsible for the development of many life saving drugs, including those used to treat his cancer and my asthma. We could not come up with cures from disease without animals and even though many will die in the process, their deaths provide enormous benefit to both animal and human disease. I can tell you this, I am grateful for the medication I have because without it I would have died a painful death a long time ago.

We have made ENORMOUS progress, even in religion, despite the fact that millions of people still believe in imaginary beings. Once upon at time humans believed the world was flat, that witches could control the weather, mental illness was demonic possession, women were stupid and black sub-human. We are society. Society is not a greater force then the people that represent it. We can and we do change. It may not be swift, but it does happen and it happens every day, even if only on a small scale. There will be certain aspects of humanity that will always remain – the good and bad ones – because we are human and it is a part of our nature. Thankfully, we do have the ability to change.

You do what’s best for your specific set of circumstances, and make the choices that you are best able to live with. In that sense you are doing what is right for you. I wonder, if scientific studies were to conclusively prove that eating meat was imperative (hypothetically) and without it you would suffer a slow, painful death – would you then eat meat?

All of our choices for survival create suffering and death for another living being, from the microscopic level right up to all forms of animals, plants, insects and even humans. I don’t think it is actually possible to completely cease the killing of other life forms so we may live. But death is not wrong. Death is a part of life and the death of a life form allows the life of another. One day you will feed a lot of worms and other creepy crawlers and your death may even save the life of one or more people through organ donation, or perhaps an act of heroism, or even through the donation of your body to science that may help create life saving surgeries or medicines. Death and killing are necessary parts of living. We should not be ruthless, careless or harm anything just for the sake of power and control, or maliciously or negligently, but we cannot avoid the death of life. We can only seek to minimize the damage we do and maximize the quality of life for all beings.

Brighid

daemon

This is a strawman approach. I do not argue for "survival of the fittest" as a moral argument, yet I still morally approve of (certain forms of) hunting, killing and animal experimentation. Thus, you are demonstrably incorrect about the beliefs and arguments of all people.
... what?

No such thing.
Firstly, I don't see the two as equivalent, and secondly, I don't see anything morally wrong with pit bulls' behavior. It is certainly an exaggeration to say pit bulls attack other animals and people for "sport."
First off, there's an equivocation in the use of the word "predator" here. From what I have seen, most mean "predator" as an animal which kills other animals for food, while you are using it to mean an animal which kills another animal for any reason. Pit bulls do not kill humans for food, and as such do not count as predators in the former sense.

Furthermore, I do not think that the "predator" argument that you have provided, alone, is what anyone here is arguing as a moral argument. I believe what people are trying to establish with this is that predator-prey relationships are not inherently immoral.

This is because human life, valued higher than other organisms, means that it is acceptable for humanity to prey upon other organisms, and that it is acceptable to prevent humans from being preyed upon.

The "of" was a verbal defect on my part.

daemon

This is no proof. Your daughter was injured, not in danger of being killed. This merely shows that you value an animal's life more than a human's injury.
I wonder if you would feel the same way if it were a matter of life and death.

free12thinker

I would say that with the dog having his teeth through her skin, having already bit her in the leg, there was a pretty dangerous situation there. But, opinions vary.

free12thinker

I am a father, not a mother, but just the same, if an animal was killing my daughter I would do what I had to do to save my daughter, but that doesn't mean I have to kill the animal. And in the same degree, If a man was killing my daughter (attacking her), I would do what I had to do to save my daughter. That doesn't mean I have to kill the man. See how this works? Of course I wouldn't let any animal (man or other species) kill my daughter. But, if I had to kill that being (man or other species), I would, simply because they were impeding the progress of another being. But that rule applies to man and species in my book. Would I sacrifice my daughter for another species? No. Would I sacrifice another species for my daughter? No. Killing one life to further another is not my idea of humanity. It's as simple as that. If I was diagnosed with cancer and the only medicine that was available had been tested on monkeys, I would decline. You may not believe that, but I would.

free12thinker

Where did I say "I" and most other humans value their lives above normal animals life? I don't remember putting I in that sentence.