Welcome to TheFitnessForum.net!
FAQFAQ    SearchSearch      ProfileProfile    Private MessagesPrivate Messages   Log inLog in

Ethics (was: Who's "Him"?)

 
Goto page Previous  1, 2
   Fitness Forums (Home) -> Weight Training & Fat Loss RSS
Next:  Why excess abdominal fat is more DEADLY than you ..  
Author Message
pearl

External


Since: Oct 26, 2008
Posts: 11



(Msg. 16) Posted: Fri Oct 31, 2008 11:26 am
Post subject: An introduction to bunny hugging [Login to view extended thread Info.]
Archived from groups: soc>support>fat-acceptance, others (more info?)

'An introduction to bunny hugging

We are kind to a select few animals, and horribly cruel to many others

Posted By DANIEL WILSON

Posted 1 day ago

"All the arguments to prove man's superiority cannot shatter this
hard fact: in suffering the animals are our equals." -- Peter Singer

When little Claudio died in his mother's arms a few months ago, his
mother behaved like any mother would upon losing her baby: she
grieved. For several days, Gana, a gorilla at Germany's Muenster
Zoo, carried and stroked her dead son, trying to revive him.

Dr. Bill Sellers, a primatologist at Manchester University, says gorillas
can experience pain and loss similar to humans, "but of course it's
extremely difficult to prove scientifically."

Still, a growing number of scientists are recognizing what pet owners
have known all along -- that animals have feelings; perhaps not exactly
like us, but they have them nonetheless.

Some animals have demonstrated a wide range of emotions, including
grief, guilt, revenge and even altruism. Elephants have risked their own
lives to help other animals. People have witnessed buffaloes sliding
across the ice, apparently for the sheer pleasure of it. Captive dolphins
have been known to "get even" with abusive trainers and farmers tell
of cows calling for days when their calves are taken away.

Dogs are even prescribed anti-depressants these days; further
evidence that animals have emotions.

According to Marc Bekoff, a biology professor at the University of
Colorado, "If we feel jealousy, then dogs and wolves and elephants
and chimpanzees feel jealousy. Animal emotions are not necessarily
identical to ours but there's no reason to think they should be. Their
hearts and stomachs and brains also differ from ours, but this doesn't
stop us from saying they have hearts, stomachs and brains. There's
dog joy and chimpanzee joy and pig joy, and dog grief, chimpanzee
grief and pig grief."

So why aren't we nicer to animals? If they share many of the same
feelings that we do, wouldn't they want to avoid pain, suffering
and death, like we do?

Of course most people will say they love animals. But our actions
speak louder than our words. We're really only kind to a select
few, and unspeakably cruel towards others.

We hunt and kill animals for "sport," lock them in cages for our
amusement and torture them for scientific curiosity. We even
consume their flesh and wear their skins.

If such atrocities were committed against our own kind, we would
be repulsed and outraged, yet we have no problem doing these
things to other sentient animals, provided we don't have to think
too much about it.

Enter the animal rights activists, those annoying bunny-huggers
whose mission in life is to remind us of how barbaric and nasty
we are to animals; always trying to make us feel guilty for
enjoying our steaks, wearing our leather jackets and going to the
circus.

As you may know I'm one of those bunny-huggers, but my goal
is not to make anyone feel bad. It's simply to try and end the
suffering we humans have created.

My hope is that by educating the public about how we treat
animals, people will choose compassion over cruelty; that just
because we can exploit and kill others doesn't mean we should.
Live and let live.

But discussing animal rights is a touchy subject. Some people
get offended, even belligerent, when it's suggested the animals
we use suffer as we do. Others argue that if you're defending
animals, you've turned your back on your own kind.

I don't see why we can't do both. A lot of animal rights people,
including myself, support organizations aimed at reducing human
suffering too. My circle of compassion is big enough to include
humans AND animals. It doesn't have to be one or the other. A
mother doesn't tell her children, "Sorry kids, but I can only love
one of you," and neither should we.

And it's not that I love animals more than people; I just don't want
to see anyone suffer. A parent who stops his child from kicking
the family cat doesn't love the cat more than the child, he just
wants his child to grow up to be a kind, caring and compassionate
human being.

That's what I want too. I want us to be kinder than we currently are.

Gandhi said, "The greatness of a nation, and its moral progress,
can be judged by the way it treats its animals."

The advances we've made as a species don't mean much if we still
enslave, exploit and murder those that are weaker than us. I know
we are better than this. I believe we can, and should, extend our
circle of compassion to include the animals.


Dan Wilson is a vegan, environmentalist, animal rights activist and
public education director for the Niagara Centre for Animal Rights
Awareness. He is a member of The Standard's community editorial
board. Contact him at [...].

http://www.stcatharinesstandard.ca/ArticleDisplay.aspx?e=1272893

 >> Stay informed about: Ethics (was: Who's ""Him""?) 
Back to top
Login to vote
Rudy Canoza

External


Since: Oct 30, 2008
Posts: 3



(Msg. 17) Posted: Fri Oct 31, 2008 11:26 am
Post subject: Re: An introduction to bunny hugging, by lesley the stupid new-age [Login to view extended thread Info.]
Imported from groups: per prev. post (more info?)

This message is not archived

 >> Stay informed about: Ethics (was: Who's ""Him""?) 
Back to top
Login to vote
Hoots

External


Since: Oct 26, 2008
Posts: 19



(Msg. 18) Posted: Fri Oct 31, 2008 4:46 pm
Post subject: Re: Ethics [Login to view extended thread Info.]
Archived from groups: per prev. post (more info?)

pearl wrote:
> "Ron Hamilton" wrote in message
>
> From: Ron Hamilton
> User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.17 (Windows/20080914)
> MIME-Version: 1.0
> NNTP-Posting-Host: 67.101.104.64
>
> From: Rudy Canoza
> Reply-To: pierre.RemoveThis@frankreich.fr
> User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.17 (Windows/20080914)
> MIME-Version: 1.0
> NNTP-Posting-Host: 67.101.104.64
>
> Is fraud ethically permitted and morally correct behaviour, ball?
>
>
>
>
>
>
>

I'm still working on the ipse dixit thing, so I have no clue about this.
 >> Stay informed about: Ethics (was: Who's ""Him""?) 
Back to top
Login to vote
FOB

External


Since: Mar 16, 2005
Posts: 11



(Msg. 19) Posted: Fri Oct 31, 2008 6:13 pm
Post subject: Re: An introduction to bunny hugging [Login to view extended thread Info.]
Archived from groups: per prev. post (more info?)

Actually, we aren't very nice to each other a lot of the time.

pearl wrote:
|
| So why aren't we nicer to animals? If they share many of the same
| feelings that we do, wouldn't they want to avoid pain, suffering
| and death, like we do?
|
 >> Stay informed about: Ethics (was: Who's ""Him""?) 
Back to top
Login to vote
FOB

External


Since: Mar 16, 2005
Posts: 11



(Msg. 20) Posted: Sun Nov 02, 2008 9:29 am
Post subject: Re: An introduction to bunny hugging [Login to view extended thread Info.]
Archived from groups: per prev. post (more info?)

Gitmo, Abu Ghraib.

pearl wrote:
| "FOB" wrote in message
|
||
|| pearl wrote:
|||
||| So why aren't we nicer to animals? If they share many of the same
||| feelings that we do, wouldn't they want to avoid pain, suffering
||| and death, like we do?
||
|| Actually, we aren't very nice to each other a lot of the time.
|
| 'The Monstrosity of Animal Exploitation
|
 >> Stay informed about: Ethics (was: Who's ""Him""?) 
Back to top
Login to vote
pearl

External


Since: Oct 26, 2008
Posts: 11



(Msg. 21) Posted: Sun Nov 02, 2008 11:26 am
Post subject: Re: Ethics [Login to view extended thread Info.]
Archived from groups: per prev. post (more info?)

"Hoots" wrote in message
> pearl wrote:
> > "Ron Hamilton" wrote in message
> >
> > From: Ron Hamilton
> > User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.17 (Windows/20080914)
> > MIME-Version: 1.0
> > NNTP-Posting-Host: 67.101.104.64
> >
> > From: Rudy Canoza
> > Reply-To: pierre.RemoveThis@frankreich.fr
> > User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.17 (Windows/20080914)
> > MIME-Version: 1.0
> > NNTP-Posting-Host: 67.101.104.64
> >
> > Is fraud ethically permitted and morally correct behaviour, ball?
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
>
> I'm still working on the ipse dixit thing, so I have no clue about this.

'ipsedixitism
...
IN BRIEF: n. - An unsupported dogmatic assertion.
...
Latin "Ipse dixit" ("Himself said [it]") ..
...
Ipsedixitisms are given as though /absolutely no supporting argument/
is necessary.
...
Modern dictionaries dramatically narrow the class by associating it
with arbitrary, dogmatic belief, implying that the argument has been
repeated after having been challenged2.
...'
http://www.answers.com/topic/ipsedixitism

'dogmatic adj.
...
Characterized by an authoritative, arrogant assertion of unproved
or unprovable principles. See synonyms at dictatorial.
...'
http://www.answers.com/topic/dogmatic

TSH.
 >> Stay informed about: Ethics (was: Who's ""Him""?) 
Back to top
Login to vote
dh

External


Since: Oct 28, 2008
Posts: 4



(Msg. 22) Posted: Sun Nov 02, 2008 2:28 pm
Post subject: Re: An introduction to bunny hugging [Login to view extended thread Info.]
Archived from groups: per prev. post (more info?)

On Fri, 31 Oct 2008 18:13:51 -0400, "FOB" wrote:

>Actually, we aren't very nice to each other a lot of the time.

True, but that's for a thread about human hugging. Changing
the subject is a misnomer advocate trick. Misnomer advocates
--or eliminationists--can not appreciate the fact that millions of
livestock animals have decent lives of positive value. They're
opposed to seeing it become popular for people to take that into
consideration, because doing so suggests that providing decent
animal welfare for livestock could be ethically equivalent to their
elimination objective which they extremely dishonestly cloak
withing the gross misnomer "animal rights" in order to create
confusion...so people who are actually in favor of AW will sometimes
contribute to eliminationist organizations by mistake. One misnomer
advocate in these ngs was--astoundingly--honest enough to
publically admit he believes the vast majority of contributors
to PeTA are not in favor of the elimination objective. That same
advocate also suggested I kill myself rather than point out the
differences between AW and the misnomer.
 >> Stay informed about: Ethics (was: Who's ""Him""?) 
Back to top
Login to vote
dh

External


Since: Oct 28, 2008
Posts: 4



(Msg. 23) Posted: Sun Nov 02, 2008 2:28 pm
Post subject: Re: An introduction to bunny hugging [Login to view extended thread Info.]
Archived from groups: per prev. post (more info?)

On Fri, 31 Oct 2008 14:37:53 -0000, "pearl" wrote:

>'An introduction to bunny hugging
>
>We are kind to a select few animals, and horribly cruel to many others
>
>Posted By DANIEL WILSON
>
>Posted 1 day ago
.. . .
>torture them for scientific curiosity.
_________________________________________________________
If scientists could replace animal research and testing
with methods which did not need to use animals then
they would.

There are several reasons for this:

* Scientists do not like or want to use animals in research.
Like the vast majority of people they do not want to see animals
suffer unnecessarily. In fact less than 10% of biomedical research
uses animals. Unfortunately for much of the work involved in
biomedical research there are as yet no working alternative
techniques that would allow us to stop using animals.

* Biomedical research is producing thousands of new compounds,
which may have potential as new drugs. It is much more efficient to
screen these compounds using rapid non-animal techniques to test
their effectiveness and toxicity.

* The very high standards of animal welfare and care required of
British research establishments are a contributory factor in making
animal research very expensive. If scientists can develop alternatives
to using animals it will allow them to divert their limited research funds
to other areas of research.
[...]
http://www.bret.org.uk/noan.htm
ŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻ
_________________________________________________________
[...]
From the bald eagle to the red wolf, biomedical research has
helped bring many species back from the brink of extinction.
Conservation and captive breeding programs, often using
fertilization techniques developed for humans, have made it
possible for these animals to be reintroduced into the wild, and
today their numbers are growing. Biologists and wildlife
veterinarians rely on the latest research in reproduction, nutrition,
toxicology and medicine to build a better future for our wild
animals.

In vitro fertilization, sperm banks and artificial insemination were
all developed to help human couples, but today they also are
regularly used to ensure the survival of endangered species.
[...]

http://fbresearch.org/helpingwildlife.html
ŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻ
_________________________________________________________
WITHOUT ANIMAL RESEARCH:

Polio would kill or cripple thousands of unvaccinated children and
adults this year.

Most of the nation's one million insulin-dependent diabetics wouldn't
be insulin dependent -- they would be dead.

60 million Americans would risk death from heart attack, stroke or
kidney failure from lack of medication to control their high blood
pressure.

Doctors would have no chemotherapy to save the 70% of children who
now survive acute lymphocytic leukemia.

More than one million Americans would lose vision in at least one eye
this year because cataract surgery would be impossible.

Hundreds of thousands of people disabled by strokes or by head or
spinal cord injuries would not benefit from rehabilitation techniques.

The more than 100,000 people with arthritis who each year receive hip
replacements would walk only with great pain and difficulty or be
confined to wheelchairs.

7,500 newborns who contract jaundice each year would develop cerebral
palsy, now preventable through phototherapy.

There would be no kidney dialysis to extend the lives of thousands of
patients with end-stage renal disease.

Surgery of any type would be a painful, rare procedure without the
development of modern anesthesia allowing artificially induced
unconsciousness or local or general insensitivity to pain.

Instead of being eradicated, smallpox would continue unchecked and many
others would join the two million people already killed by the disease.

Millions of dogs, cats, and other pets and farm animals would have died
from anthrax, distemper, canine parvovirus, feline leukemia, rabies and
more than 200 other diseases now preventable thanks to animal research.

http://www.ampef.org/research.htm
ŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻ
_________________________________________________________
We live longer and healthier lives than ever before. Animal research has
improved the treatment of infections, helped with immunisation, improved
cancer treatment and had a big impact on managing heart disease, brain
disorders, arthritis and transplantation. My own field, the prevention of
genetic disorders in babies, has been possible only because of humane
work on animals.

Animal rights activists talk about cruelty and torture, some backing their
assertions by publishing out-of-date photographs of "experiments"
banned long ago. This is a misrepresentation.
....

Some so-called anti-vivisection organisations would have people believe
that animal research does not work. This is simply a lie. Animals do not
give information that is 100% accurate when applied to humans, but they
do provide invaluable information that cannot be replaced by computer
modelling, cell culture or human experimentation. Mice have virtually the
same genes as humans, which is why they are so useful for exploring
human physiology.

Animal research has contributed to 70% of the Nobel prizes for physiology
or medicine; many award-winning scientists say that they could not have
made their discoveries without animals. Polio would still be claiming hundreds
of lives a year in Britain if it wasn't for animal research by the Nobel
laureate
Albert Sabin. "There could have been no oral polio vaccine without the use
of innumerable animals," he once said."
....

The last big drug disaster in the UK happened because of a lack of animal
research. Four decades ago, when thalidomide's awful effects were revealed,
the drug was returned to the lab to be tested on pregnant animals for the first
time. Birth defects were quickly seen in mice and rabbits. This prompted an
overhaul of the legislation and is the basis for our laws on drug development.
....

http://www.guardian.co.uk/comment/story/0,,1786503,00.html#article_continue
ŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻ
 >> Stay informed about: Ethics (was: Who's ""Him""?) 
Back to top
Login to vote
Hoots

External


Since: Oct 26, 2008
Posts: 19



(Msg. 24) Posted: Sun Nov 02, 2008 2:36 pm
Post subject: Re: Ethics [Login to view extended thread Info.]
Archived from groups: per prev. post (more info?)

pearl wrote:
> "Hoots" wrote in message
>> pearl wrote:
>>> "Ron Hamilton" wrote in message
>>>
>>> From: Ron Hamilton
>>> User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.17 (Windows/20080914)
>>> MIME-Version: 1.0
>>> NNTP-Posting-Host: 67.101.104.64
>>>
>>> From: Rudy Canoza
>>> Reply-To: pierre.RemoveThis@frankreich.fr
>>> User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.17 (Windows/20080914)
>>> MIME-Version: 1.0
>>> NNTP-Posting-Host: 67.101.104.64
>>>
>>> Is fraud ethically permitted and morally correct behaviour, ball?
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>> I'm still working on the ipse dixit thing, so I have no clue about this.
>
> 'ipsedixitism
> ..
> IN BRIEF: n. - An unsupported dogmatic assertion.
> ..
> Latin "Ipse dixit" ("Himself said [it]") ..
> ..
> Ipsedixitisms are given as though /absolutely no supporting argument/
> is necessary.
> ..
> Modern dictionaries dramatically narrow the class by associating it
> with arbitrary, dogmatic belief, implying that the argument has been
> repeated after having been challenged2.
> ..'
> http://www.answers.com/topic/ipsedixitism
>
> 'dogmatic adj.
> ..
> Characterized by an authoritative, arrogant assertion of unproved
> or unprovable principles. See synonyms at dictatorial.
> ..'
> http://www.answers.com/topic/dogmatic
>
> TSH.
>
>

Flirt. Smile
 >> Stay informed about: Ethics (was: Who's ""Him""?) 
Back to top
Login to vote
pearl

External


Since: Oct 26, 2008
Posts: 11



(Msg. 25) Posted: Mon Nov 03, 2008 7:27 am
Post subject: Re: An introduction to bunny hugging [Login to view extended thread Info.]
Archived from groups: per prev. post (more info?)

wrote in message
> On Fri, 31 Oct 2008 14:37:53 -0000, "pearl" wrote:
>
> >'An introduction to bunny hugging
> >
> >We are kind to a select few animals, and horribly cruel to many others
> >
> >Posted By DANIEL WILSON
> >
> >Posted 1 day ago
> . . .
> >torture them for scientific curiosity.
> _________________________________________________________
> If scientists could replace animal research and testing

Repeatedly rebutted (search archive) pro-vivisection spam snipped.

Animal Experimentation
- The Facts
http://www.uncaged.co.uk/vivisect.htm

'Werner Hartinger, M.D. a surgeon in West Germany stated in 1989,
"There are, in fact, only two categories of doctors and scientists
who are not opposed to vivisection: those who don't know enough
about it, and those who make money from it."
.....'
http://www.navs.org/site/PageServer?pagename=ain_sci_defend
 >> Stay informed about: Ethics (was: Who's ""Him""?) 
Back to top
Login to vote
dh

External


Since: Oct 28, 2008
Posts: 4



(Msg. 26) Posted: Mon Nov 03, 2008 9:29 am
Post subject: Re: An introduction to bunny hugging [Login to view extended thread Info.]
Archived from groups: per prev. post (more info?)

On Mon, 3 Nov 2008 11:43:10 -0000, "pearl" wrote:

> wrote in message
>> On Fri, 31 Oct 2008 14:37:53 -0000, "pearl" wrote:
>>
>> >'An introduction to bunny hugging
>> >
>> >We are kind to a select few animals, and horribly cruel to many others
>> >
>> >Posted By DANIEL WILSON
>> >
>> >Posted 1 day ago
>> . . .
>> >torture them for scientific curiosity.
>> _________________________________________________________
>> If scientists could replace animal research and testing
>
>Repeatedly rebutted (search archive) pro-vivisection spam snipped.
>
>Animal Experimentation
>- The Facts
>http://www.uncaged.co.uk/vivisect.htm
>
>'Werner Hartinger, M.D. a surgeon in West Germany stated in 1989,
>"There are, in fact, only two categories of doctors and scientists
>who are not opposed to vivisection: those who don't know enough
>about it, and those who make money from it."

All doctors make money from it. Duh. All of society benefits
from it too. It's interesting, amusing and pathetic that the people
who pretend to be the biggest authorities on it can't:

1. appreciate the ways that humans and many other animals
benefit from what is learned from it.

2. suggest anything any better than the research they so
ignorantly say is of no value.

If you people think you know of better ways of getting the
answers than by doing research on animals, then why don't
you just DO IT? You can't, because the idea is bullshit. If
it weren't, then it would be done instead of still needing to
be done. On the positive side which you can't appreciate
(like you can't appreciate the lives of livestock...), what
has been done has been done.
 >> Stay informed about: Ethics (was: Who's ""Him""?) 
Back to top
Login to vote
johnreal




Joined: Feb 09, 2011
Posts: 17



(Msg. 27) Posted: Wed Feb 09, 2011 4:55 am
Post subject: Re: Ethics (was: Who's [Login to view extended thread Info.]

From the life and death of a thousand pound grass raised
steer and whatever he happens to kill during his life, people
get over 500 pounds of human consumable meat...that's well
over 500 servings of meat. From a grass raised dairy cow people
get thousands of dairy servings.
 >> Stay informed about: Ethics (was: Who's ""Him""?) 
Back to top
Login to vote
Display posts from previous:   
Related Topics:
Getting too fat -- need cutting advice - I'm currently 6'6" 270 and and have been lifting steadily for 9 months after a couple years off. I've been bulking for 3 months and have developed an admirable gut. I was gonna wait till the spring to cut but feel like I'm letting it get away fro...

Fitting alcohol into diet plans - I'm currently on a ~3000 kcal/day diet; 35% from protein, 45% from carbs, 20% from fat. If I wanted to have a beer or two this weekend, I'm wondering where's the most logical place to swap out some calories from my diet. Should I cut back on fat or..

Questions about Athletes and Dietary Supplements - Dear Sir and Madam: I am a student at the University of Northern Iowa, and I am very interested in Athletes and Dietary Supplements because I use dietary supplements as part of my training; and I am writing a journalistic report about this topic. I..

check out my cutting diet - Here is a typical day. Due to my schedule I can only get three meals in a day instead of the more optimal 5 or 6. Breakfast 4 extra large eggs fried(I use cooking spray to minimize fat calories) 2 slices wheat bread 2 cups of 1% milk Lunch Roast beef...

How Much to Increase Calories Per Week? - Hi, I just started my HST cycle on Monday, and I'm currently at 2500 calories per day w/ 200 grams protein (I'm ~ 205lbs). I will need to eat more to support more muscle mass, but I don't want to put on too much fat. How often and by how much should ...
   Fitness Forums (Home) -> Weight Training & Fat Loss All times are: Pacific Time (US & Canada)
Goto page Previous  1, 2
Page 2 of 2

 
You can post new topics in this forum
You can reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum



[ Contact us | Terms of Service/Privacy Policy ]