If we can kill animals, why can't we torture them for fun?

TranceAddict Forums (www.tranceaddict.com/forums)
- Chill Out Room
-- If we can kill animals, why can't we torture them for fun?
Pages (3): [1] 2 3 »

Posted by MrJiveBoJingles on Dec-30-2007 05:20:

If we can kill animals, why can't we torture them for fun?

Do animal cruelty laws make sense in a society where millions of animals are slaughtered for food each year?

People killing animals for food (or for sport in hunting) is perfectly legal, but people torturing animals to death simply for their own pleasure is not. Is it defensible to treat these two kinds of actions (killing for food and torturing for pleasure) so differently?

Posted by Frenchie on Dec-30-2007 05:20:

No. We kill to eat, we don't torture to eat. I don't care if animals are slaughtered to be eaten. I do , however, care if someone just tortures for lol purposes. When an animal gets killed for food, I would hope it doesn't get tortured , if it does then I don't want to know about it.

Posted by Zewad on Dec-30-2007 05:21:

we are animals by nature... survival of the fittest...

we are fit...

Posted by tubularbills on Dec-30-2007 05:21:

quote:
Originally posted by Zewad
we are animals by nature... survival of the fittest...

we are fit...

and at the top of the food chain

Posted by eROs.au on Dec-30-2007 05:21:

These laws are quite sick and unneeded. I hope they get rid of them soon

Posted by Zewad on Dec-30-2007 05:22:

quote:
Originally posted by eROs.au
These laws are quite sick and unneeded. I hope they get rid of them soon

no more allowing of killing meat

or no more to not allowing tortorureing animals?

Posted by RJT on Dec-30-2007 05:25:

Re: If we can kill animals, why can't we torture them for fun?

quote:
Originally posted by MrJiveBoJingles
Is it defensible to treat these two kinds of actions (killing for food and torturing for pleasure) so differently?

If I understand your question right, yes, it is, and the reasoning behind my argument (at the risk of oversimplifying the issue) would be one that stems from motives for action.

Posted by Direct on Dec-30-2007 05:26:

You make me FUCKING sick. People who torcher animals grow up to be murderers, cerial killers, pedophiles, rapist and other shit.

Hey do any of you guys ever finger your butthole while masturbating at the same time? I do.

Posted by Zewad on Dec-30-2007 05:26:

Re: Re: If we can kill animals, why can't we torture them for fun?

quote:
Originally posted by RJT
If I understand your question right, yes, it is, and the reasoning behind my argument (at the risk of oversimplifying the issue) would be one that stems from motives for action.

that answer belongs in the political forum..

its late saturday night.. 50% of us on here are boozen and need not hear thinking answers...

Posted by RJT on Dec-30-2007 05:27:

quote:
Originally posted by Direct
You make me FUCKING sick. People who torcher animals grow up to be murderers, cerial killers, pedophiles, rapist and other shit.

Hey do any of you guys ever finger your butthole while masturbating at the same time? I do.

You are an idiot. It's a thought experiment, and a rather clever (yet commonly used) one at that - but still one that for me has a relatively simple solution.

Posted by Frenchie on Dec-30-2007 05:27:

Posted by RJT on Dec-30-2007 05:28:

Re: Re: Re: If we can kill animals, why can't we torture them for fun?

quote:
Originally posted by Zewad
that answer belongs in the political forum..

its late saturday night.. 50% of us on here are boozen and need not hear thinking answers...

I've been enjoying Tully and Grolsch all night, and further just ate an Ambien - let's do this.

Posted by MrJiveBoJingles on Dec-30-2007 05:28:

quote:
Originally posted by Frenchie
No. We kill to eat, we don't torture to eat. I don't care if animals are slaughtered to be eaten. I do , however, care if someone just tortures for lol purposes.

Yeah, I share the same instinctive feeling. But think about it this way:

Nobody needs to eat meat to survive. Strictly speaking, the animal deaths caused by the habits of people eating meat are just as unnecessary as those caused by people who torture animals for kicks. Ultimately both groups are causing deaths or pain to animals for the sake of their own personal pleasure, not out of any strict necessity. The only difference is that in the case of the sadist the pleasure comes directly from the pain or death of the animal, while in the case of the meat-eater the pleasure comes from the tastiness of the resulting carcass. But is this difference really all that relevant? Either way, the animal is dying unnecessarily so that humans can add some pleasure to their lives.

Posted by Zewad on Dec-30-2007 05:29:

Re: Re: Re: Re: If we can kill animals, why can't we torture them for fun?

quote:
Originally posted by RJT
I've been enjoying Tully and Grolsch all night, and further just ate an Ambien - let's do this.

stupify your answers... or you lose the game..

but you get a +1 for grolsch

Posted by RJT on Dec-30-2007 05:29:

Are we really going to equate all pleasures?

I certainly don't.

Posted by Frenchie on Dec-30-2007 05:29:

I need my goddamn chicken and steak. Sorry...and beer. because let's be honest beer and steak...you know..

Posted by tubularbills on Dec-30-2007 05:30:

Re: Re: Re: Re: If we can kill animals, why can't we torture them for fun?

quote:
Originally posted by RJT
Grolsch

FINALLY someone drinking something good.

Posted by smakmagik on Dec-30-2007 05:30:

Same way in which we torture people but keep them off our plates

Posted by jupiterone on Dec-30-2007 05:31:

They are obviously two totally different things. What I hate though is the latest upbringing that killing animals for food is cruel. People have been doing it since the beginning of man. I know this one girl who won't eat or drink dairy products because she believes 'dairy is rape' and 'meat is murder'. So she forces herself to take vitamin complex for the nutrition she lacks from not eating meat or dairy products. People are really ridiculous.

Posted by Chris Crossland on Dec-30-2007 05:32:

quote:
Originally posted by Frenchie
I need my goddamn chicken and steak. Sorry...and beer. because let's be honest beer and steak...you know..

OMGHI2U!

Posted by tubularbills on Dec-30-2007 05:32:

quote:
Originally posted by jupiterone
They are obviously two totally different things. What I hate though is the latest upbringing that killing animals for food is cruel.

not really killing, but same idea at least.

www.milksucks.com

Posted by wizniz on Dec-30-2007 05:34:

Posted by Frenchie on Dec-30-2007 05:35:

quote:
Originally posted by Chris Crossland
OMGHI2U!

HAI

***

My milk moos.

I have no problem if you're vegetarian or vegan, fine. When someone starts blabbing rubish about how it's soo omgcrule and you'll go to hell if you eat meat, I have problemz.

Posted by Chris Crossland on Dec-30-2007 05:35:

quote:
Originally posted by tubularbills
not really killing, but same idea at least.

www.milksucks.com

Milk is delish!

Chcik in my shop just had a baby and she was pumping in the back room and brings some out in a bottle. I was going to try it and realized it came out of her tit and there was shit floating at the top. BWAHHHH BBBWWAHAAAAH

Posted by RJT on Dec-30-2007 05:36:

The problem with the argument that human bodies are essentially better designed to digest plants than they are to digest animals is that it doesn't take into account the reason's why people eat animals beyond that of general "pleasure." Those environmental ethicists who champion such views are both numerous and stubborn as hell because they have loads of sound, objective, scientific evidence to support the claims they make. What they fail to realize is that "pleasure" isn't generally why a culture eats meat; it's survival. Even those who live in a country like the U.S. where the average amount of meat eaten per person is astronomically high, the motivation to eat it does not fundamentally come from the thought of pleasure, but rather from cultural dietary norms that dictate what we are "supposed" to do to survive ("supposed" is obviously a relative description concerning normative dietary behavior for various cultures).

Phew. That was a bit much - good to get the brain working again. Great thread.

Edit: I should have put a disclaimer that this was obviously my own opinion stemming from my experience with the issue - I realized after I had written all of the above that I wrote in too much of a "matter of fact" tone.

Pages (3): [1] 2 3 »