|
Pu$$y (pg. 4)
|
View this Thread in Original format
| ASFSE |
| that was some ed up |
|
|
| astroboy |
| quote: | Originally posted by Spike
so basically you think the ends justify the means? |
Not as a general philosophical proposition, but in the case of animal experimentation for the benefit of human medicine yes I do.
"The end justifies the means" and "the end does not justify the means" are not philosophies, they are generalist statements taught by 7th grade English teachers. No one lives their lives or structures their beliefs based on something that simplistic... at least no one with an intelligence above that of a barnacle.
| quote: | | what if you had to kill another human being to get a cure for cancer or aids. heck what if you had to kill 100 ppl, or 1000? could you, would you be able to do that? |
No I believe man is an end in himself. To me, philosophically the killing of one human by another is never justified... though pragmatically there are situations where I can understand it (self-defence etc). |
|
|
| Spike |
| quote: | Originally posted by astroboy
I disagree. To me human life will always be more valuable than that of animals.
|
but why....see thats the point im trying to make. why are we so much more important. because we're smarter, have opposable thumbs, can make machines. what if the roles were reversed and you were experimented upon? would you then be ok with that since human life is more valuable than your own... |
|
|
| Akridrot |
| quote: | Originally posted by Halcyon+On+On
No. If you think that injecting innocent animals with chemicals, the vast majority of which are used for cosmetic purposes, is survival, then you are a ing waste of a human being. |
But I never said that. You're putting words in my mouth, and lumping me into a category based on those words.
You're telling me that if innocent human beings are dying because of a disease, it's still completely wrong to test animals to find cures for those diseases?
| quote: |
One thought that keeps occurring to me about that that I've seen argued a few times (Dallastar's story of her neighbour reminded me of this) is...why do we experiment on innocent animals, yet not experiment on convicted serial rapists, murderers and child molesters? Why are worthless ing human beings allowed to sit in a prison for the rest of their lives for what they did to other innocent human beings when we could make use of them to perhaps pay back the world for all the suffering they have caused? We could do AIDS research, cancer research, stem cell research, even. We could use their bodies for a variety of different things to help give people who don't deserve to die a fighting chance at life. That would be justice, I think.
|
OK, this is a good idea, but:
| quote: |
Because nothing deserves to be tied down or caged and be sprayed with or injected with chemicals. Not even for the sake of future relief, not if it has absolutely no choice in the matter whatsoever. |
Either way, it's the same thing.
*nah, I'm just playing devil's advocate here. I actually like that idea, it's a good one.
| quote: |
But it's wrong.
Because nothing deserves to be tortured and experimented on at the hands of people who would use it for what they believe to be "a more worthwhile cause". Least of all innocent human beings put in death camps because of their ethnicity. Least of all innocent animals. |
What if the experimentation is humane? Why does all experimentation have to be torture? How is putting a handful of animals through testing to save or improve millions of lives not a worthwhile cause?
My stance is:
If the animals aren't being abused, and the testing is for an important cause, it's OK. Condoning testing isn't condoning abuse. |
|
|
| Halcyon+On+On |
| quote: | Originally posted by astroboy
To me human life will always be more valuable than that of animals. |
I am not necessarily disagreeing with you here.
But what human life is being threatened so imminently that we need to test on animals? Whatever my views on inflicting torture and experimenting on other living creatures are, exactly what is it that we have to gain from animal testing that justifies its conduct? Cheaper toothpaste? Moisture-resistant hair spray? Mascara that doesn't run *quite* as bad when you cry because the fake people on the television are acting out a scene that is sad to you? None of this justifies the torture of animals. It's just another number to companies so that they can save money.
Is there actually any experimentation on animals for the use of AIDS/cancer research, even? I've only assumed there was this whole time, but I am not even sure anymore. |
|
|
| astroboy |
| quote: | Originally posted by Spike
but why....see thats the point im trying to make. why are we so much more important. because we're smarter, have opposable thumbs, can make machines. |
Because humans are self aware. Because for humans existence precedes essence.
| quote: | | what if the roles were reversed and you were experimented upon? would you then be ok with that since human life is more valuable than your own... |
If i were a cat? I wouldn't have the syntax to "think" anything. I wouldn't be able to conceptualise myself, since i wouldn't be self aware, much less understand that I am a different species to a human. All I would think would be "ouch". |
|
|
| Spike |
| quote: | Originally posted by astroboy
|
ok we were having a nice friendly debate and you had to insult me...go yourself |
|
|
| Akridrot |
I MADE THIS POST TWICE, BECAUSE OF THAT STUPID EMBEDDED VIDEO! :whip:
| quote: | Originally posted by Halcyon+On+On
No. If you think that injecting innocent animals with chemicals, the vast majority of which are used for cosmetic purposes, is survival, then you are a ing waste of a human being. |
I never said that. You're putting words in my mouth and lumping me into a category based on those words.
So you mean to tell me that it doesn't matter if millions of innocent human beings suffer from a disease, it's still completely wrong to test a handful of animals?
| quote: |
One thought that keeps occurring to me about that that I've seen argued a few times (Dallastar's story of her neighbour reminded me of this) is...why do we experiment on innocent animals, yet not experiment on convicted serial rapists, murderers and child molesters? Why are worthless ing human beings allowed to sit in a prison for the rest of their lives for what they did to other innocent human beings when we could make use of them to perhaps pay back the world for all the suffering they have caused? We could do AIDS research, cancer research, stem cell research, even. We could use their bodies for a variety of different things to help give people who don't deserve to die a fighting chance at life. That would be justice, I think.
But it's wrong.
|
Not really. It would be better than the death penalty, and more productive than giving them life. These people would be doing us all a great good to pay for the great bad they did.
| quote: |
Because nothing deserves to be tortured and experimented on at the hands of people who would use it for what they believe to be "a more worthwhile cause". Not even serial rapists, murderers and child molesters. Least of all innocent human beings put in death camps because of their ethnicity. Least of all innocent animals. |
What if it's humane?
My stance:
As long as no animals are abused, I simply can't object to it. Condoning testing is not condoning abuse. |
|
|
| Nrg2Nfinit |
| quote: | Originally posted by Spike
ok we were having a nice friendly debate and you had to insult me...go yourself |
lol dont blow a dick vein you hes just trying to explain to you that humans are more valuable then animals. If you disagree you should convert to janism. Otherwise, enjoy your rare steak.
OR just nod and be happy your a vegiterian and that you havent harmed an animal except those insects you blasted with raid and those bacteria you killed with antibiotics or that racoon you burned to death that was living in your chimeny. |
|
|
| astroboy |
| quote: | Originally posted by Halcyon+On+On
I am not necessarily disagreeing with you here.
But what human life is being threatened so imminently that we need to test on animals? Whatever my views on inflicting torture and experimenting on other living creatures are, exactly what is it that we have to gain from animal testing that justifies its conduct? Cheaper toothpaste? Moisture-resistant hair spray? Mascara that doesn't run *quite* as bad when you cry because the fake people on the television are acting out a scene that is sad to you? None of this justifies the torture of animals. It's just another number to companies so that they can save money. |
I disagree with the testing of non-essential products like cosmetics on animals. Only medicine.
| quote: | | Is there actually any experimentation on animals for the use of AIDS/cancer research, even? I've only assumed there was this whole time, but I am not even sure anymore. |
Of course there is. There are different research groups conducting animal testing in different places for different institutions for different purposes. There is no massive animal testing lab that runs a conspiracy to hide what research actually goes on.
Read any medical journal and you can see the results of animal testing specifically or the purposes of finding cures or drugs for chronic medical conditions. Almost every new drug invented, including the recent HPV vaccine (which vaccinates women against two types of cervical cancer) undergoes animal testing before it hits clinical human trials. Any medical researcher will tell you that animal testing provides irreplaceable data, that would be impossible to obtain except for immediate testing on humans, which no one would allow you to do. |
|
|
| astroboy |
| quote: | Originally posted by Spike
ok we were having a nice friendly debate and you had to insult me...go yourself |
Huh? Where was the insult?
If you meant this:
| quote: | Originally posted by astroboy
"The end justifies the means" and "the end does not justify the means" are not philosophies, they are generalist statements taught by 7th grade English teachers. No one lives their lives or structures their beliefs based on something that simplistic... at least no one with an intelligence above that of a barnacle.
|
then you are mistaken. There was no specific reference to you or your belief system. I was making a statement about people who say their philosophy is "the end justifies the means" or vice versa. Since you never made such a statement, my judgement doesn't apply to you. In fact I had assumed, by your posts that you are more intelligent than that. Was my assumption incorrect? I hope not. |
|
|
| Spike |
| quote: | Originally posted by Nrg2Nfinit
lol dont blow a dick vein you hes just trying to explain to you that humans are more valuable then animals. If you disagree you should convert to janism. Otherwise, enjoy your rare steak.
OR just nod and be happy your a vegiterian and that you havent harmed an animal except those insects you blasted with raid and those bacteria you killed with antibiotics or that racoon you burned to death that was living in your chimeny. |
k buddy lol. i like my steak WELL DONE and i step on the occassional ant. just cuz i dont like to see animals being tested on doesnt mean im a tree hugging, hemp wearing vegan hippy. i jus felt a off was in order here |
|
|
|
|
