FRDB Archives

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.


Go Back   FRDB Archives > Archives > IIDB ARCHIVE: 200X-2003, PD 2007 > IIDB Philosophical Forums (PRIOR TO JUN-2003)
Welcome, Peter Kirby.
You last visited: Yesterday at 05:55 AM

 
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old 04-03-2002, 08:50 PM   #61
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Alberta, Canada
Posts: 5,658
Post

Fix your link. Have you actually ever seen cattle in person? I've seen them born, dehorned, and castrated.
tronvillain is offline  
Old 04-03-2002, 09:06 PM   #62
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Alberta, Canada
Posts: 5,658
Post

Here, I'll do it for you: "<a href="http://stream.realimpact.org/rihurl.ram?file=realimpact/peta/week29-3.smi" target="_blank">video proof</a>" I could live with pretty much everything in that video, but I think much of the content is pretty suspect.

I'm afraid I didn't see anything about calves having their horns have their horns torns from their heads. You won't be able to find anything, since even if they weren't dehorned as calves, they'd be sawn off, not torn out. I also don't see anything about cattle living miserable lives, though I think there were a few veal calves in there.
tronvillain is offline  
Old 04-03-2002, 09:22 PM   #63
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Alberta, Canada
Posts: 5,658
Post

YHWH666:
Quote:
as a moral objectivist and a vegetarian my moral system goes like this:
the quality "happiness" has intrinsic value. therefore the most moral thing to do in any situation would be to maximise the amount of happiness in the universe.
That looks a lot like utilitarianism to me, but I don't see how it's any more objective than my morality. I do not grant that the quality "happiness" has intrinsic value.

Quote:
kinda like spock's "the needs of the many outmeasure the needs of the few are the one."
It is "The needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few, or the one."

Quote:
supporting this view is the fact that even egoists are willing to suffer for their future brain states. why else would you go to work each day? because you get a pay check obviously. but the problem is "you" never get the pay check.at any given time "you" are a set of brain states. once these brain states are replaced by new ones the "self" that was "you" no longer exists. this is why egoists are inconsistent with their worldview.
This supposed inconsistency disappears if "you" are not defined as the brain state at a specific moment. That we use "I" to refer to a past self rather than "he" indicates that it is commonly not. I remember being me yesterday and I anticipate being me tommorow. It would be a little odd if egoists were inconsistent, since ultimately everyone is one.

[ April 03, 2002: Message edited by: tronvillain ]</p>
tronvillain is offline  
Old 04-03-2002, 11:41 PM   #64
Regular Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: North America
Posts: 457
Post

vegetarian: You should stop eating meat, it is wrong to kill.

meat-eater: no it isn't animals are not intelligent.

vegetarian: so it's okay to kill things that aren't intelligent? would you kill a human who had the intelligence of an animal?

meat-eater: no

vegetarian: so you are just being illogical. you have no true justification for eating meat.

ex-meat-eater: your right. i have never before realised how terrible it is! i will no longer eat meat.
YHWH666 is offline  
Old 04-03-2002, 11:42 PM   #65
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Alberta, Canada
Posts: 5,658
Post

tronvillain is offline  
Old 04-03-2002, 11:51 PM   #66
Junior Member
 
Join Date: May 2001
Location: The midwest
Posts: 65
Post

It sounds like those who have a problem with eating meat really mean that they have a problem with eating farm raised animals. If that is so then call it that. Don't say that eating meat is immoral, say eating farm raised animals is immoral. "Meat" is more than just chicken, beef and pork.
KJELLMUSIC is offline  
Old 04-04-2002, 07:25 AM   #67
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: Huntsville, Al
Posts: 5
Wink

All this talk has made me hungry for a beer and a venison cheeseburger.
David Ortgiesen is offline  
Old 04-04-2002, 07:55 AM   #68
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: florida
Posts: 657
Post

Not long (maybe 2 weeks or less) before I admitted to myself I didn't believe in god anymore, I quit eating meat. I could no longer ignore the nonexistant monster I'd been serving and I could no longer ignore that I was unnecessarily causing another living being to die. Intellectual honesty is a bitch! I couldn't have it in only one area (religion) and not another (meat-eating). After reading The Food Revolution by J. Robbins, my mind was made up. I went on a vegetarian "trial" to see if I could do it, and I haven't eaten any meat since. That was in early December 2001. Funny thing is, I don't miss it.

Personally, I do feel it is immoral to eat meat when you have other options, but I would never attempt to force vegetarianism on another. Of course, that is only my honest opinion, to which we are all entitled.
Pensee is offline  
Old 04-04-2002, 08:30 AM   #69
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Andromeda Galaxy
Posts: 18
Post

Quote:
Cattle spend most of their lives on rangeland and in pastures.
If I remember correctly (I don't have a source with me at the current moment), vast expansion of pastureland and rangeland in the US was the primary contributing factor to making wild animals like desert tortoises and prairie gophers endangered.

Also, up until the 1970s, farmers in parts of Tennessee and the Carolinas would indiscriminately shoot Red Wolves that they felt were endangering their livestock. In the early 70's, a rescue effort began that could find only 17 purebred Red Wolves left in the wild. Funny thing is, the demise of the red wolves caused a predator void. Coyotes, who are far less afraid of humans than the wolves, came into the territory and caused far more damage to livestock than the wolves ever would have. Silly humans.

Quote:
Cattle are castrated without anaesthetic, and while it appears to be traumatic, they recover immediately.
I too have seen this in person. Basically the way I have seen it done is that a young calf has an elastic-like object tied tightly around the "offending" area. This cuts off all circulation to that area, basically killing that part of the body, it decays and in a few days falls off. Is that how you have seen it done tronvillain?

Bluebird

[ April 04, 2002: Message edited by: Bluebird ]</p>
Bluebird is offline  
Old 04-04-2002, 08:34 AM   #70
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Alberta, Canada
Posts: 5,658
Post

No, it was usually done surgically.
tronvillain is offline  
 

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -8. The time now is 03:53 PM.

Top

This custom BB emulates vBulletin® Version 3.8.2
Copyright ©2000 - 2015, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.