1. Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

Animal Rights

Discussion in 'General Debates' started by Green Gaia, Aug 7, 2005.

?
  1. It is OK to use animals however we see fit, even abusing them.

    2.6%
  2. It is OK to conduct medical research on animals.

    23.7%
  3. It is OK to conduct product testing on animals.

    5.3%
  4. I support banning all types of hunting.

    21.1%
  5. I believe animals are entitled to some protections from abuse and exploitation.

    73.7%
  6. I believe animals deserve the same rights as people.

    36.8%
  7. We should not experiment on animals for any reason.

    23.7%
  8. Those who abuse animals should go to prison.

    73.7%
  9. Humans should not eat meat or use animals products.

    7.9%
  10. Eating meat is OK, as long as the animal was treated humanely.

    65.8%
Multiple votes are allowed.
  1. Green Gaia

    Green Gaia Veteran Member

    Joined:
    Mar 27, 2004
    Messages:
    19,780
    Ratings:
    +1,925
    Poll to follow....
     
    • Like Like x 1
  2. retrorich

    retrorich SUPER NOT-A-MOD

    Joined:
    Sep 6, 2004
    Messages:
    2,321
    Ratings:
    +497
    Can we select more than one of the voting options?
     
  3. DreamQuickBook

    DreamQuickBook Active Member

    Joined:
    Jul 26, 2005
    Messages:
    583
    Ratings:
    +52
    yes. you can.

    It does not appear, however, that the voting is public. It doesn't indicate who votes for what. Or did I miss understand what public meant.
     
  4. Exis

    Exis Member

    Joined:
    May 4, 2005
    Messages:
    29
    Ratings:
    +4
    quite frankly, until Mother Nature quits eating humans and animals, I don't think it really matters what we do... But it is a little crude to abuse for the sake of abusing...
     
    • Like Like x 1
  5. Jaymes

    Jaymes The cake is a lie

    Joined:
    Sep 18, 2004
    Messages:
    7,759
    Ratings:
    +1,039
    You have to click on one of the underlined numbers and it will show who has voted for what.

    For the record, I'm divided on the issue of animal testing for medical purposes. Abuse is something worthy of jail time, and I think eating meat is acceptable as long as the animal has been treated humanely while raised and killed humanely.
     
  6. Fluffy

    Fluffy A fool

    Joined:
    Nov 27, 2004
    Messages:
    7,572
    Ratings:
    +1,007
    I support the banning of all hunting. Additionally, I do not think any kind of animal testing should be performed. Lastly, I do not think that people should eat meat or wear skin.

    I do not think any of these should be enforced by law until the majority of the population feels that they should be. Oh also, I support all of the above as long as all parties are consenting which normally limits the animal in question to a human.
     
  7. CaptainXeroid

    CaptainXeroid Following Christ

    Joined:
    Dec 22, 2004
    Messages:
    4,782
    Ratings:
    +755
    We've talked about many of these issues on different thread, so I think it's interesting to think about them all in one thread. I don't see a point in abusing or hunting animals solely for sport or amusement, but I don't have a problem with eating meat. If each of us had to acquire and prepare our own food, I would probably be a vegetarian. I just couldn't kill an animal unless I were in a survival situation.
     
  8. Katzpur

    Katzpur Not your average Mormon

    Joined:
    Apr 10, 2005
    Messages:
    29,423
    Ratings:
    +5,394
    Religion:
    LDS Christian
    As you can see, I only voted on two topics. I, too, am divided on the issue of animal testing for medical purposes. But I do not purchase products that have been tested on animals whenever I learn of them. And I totally believe animal abuse is worthy of a very stiff prison sentence. I admire people who are vegetarians out of a respect for animal life. Personally, I do eat meat. But I haven't eaten veal in over twenty years.
     
  9. DreamQuickBook

    DreamQuickBook Active Member

    Joined:
    Jul 26, 2005
    Messages:
    583
    Ratings:
    +52
    I believe animals are entitled to some protections from abuse and exploitation.
     
  10. Valjean

    Valjean Veteran Member
    Premium Member

    Joined:
    Nov 25, 2004
    Messages:
    20,287
    Ratings:
    +8,458
    Religion:
    Vedanta (reform)
    I'm a strict vegan and a supporter of animal rights, but I realize that there are still groups who must hunt to survive. I accept that that is their dharma.

    I also have more sympathy for those in developed societies who hunt than those who utilize "farmed" animals. At least a deer has a chance to lead a proper deer life before he is humanely shot. Most chickens, pigs &c lead only short, miserable, painful lives before they are often inhumanely killed.
     
  11. Ryan2065

    Ryan2065 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jul 3, 2005
    Messages:
    2,037
    Ratings:
    +175
    Do you know about hunting? I have only hunted in Ohio, so those are the hunting laws I know. In Ohio for deer season, there is a census taken to see how many deer are in the area. They compare that with how many deer should ideally be in the area and then they will say something like "Each hunter is only allowed one deer this season." Or something like that. They use hunting as a form of population control, not as just going out and killing lots of deer. Lots of times the rangers have to go out and kill deer just to keep the population under control. And no this isn't population control so they don't have alot of deer running wild, this is population control so the deer themselves don't starve to death over the winter. If deer wern't hunted, even more of them would die over the winter. I've always felt its more humane to kill say 100 deer instead of letting 500 deer die over the winter due to starvation.
     
    • Like Like x 1
  12. Valjean

    Valjean Veteran Member
    Premium Member

    Joined:
    Nov 25, 2004
    Messages:
    20,287
    Ratings:
    +8,458
    Religion:
    Vedanta (reform)
    So, Ryan, I suppose you would have no problem with human culls in regions where population has clearly exceeded carrying capacity?

    I'm taking issue with your support of killing for pragmatic reasons, rather than universal right-to-life principles. Such excuses have, in the past, resulted in some rather spectacular human-rights abuses.
     
  13. Green Gaia

    Green Gaia Veteran Member

    Joined:
    Mar 27, 2004
    Messages:
    19,780
    Ratings:
    +1,925
    I'm Ok with hunting as long as the animal is being hunted for food (i.e. WILL be eaten not just thrown away or kept as a trophy) and that is it not done in one of those hunting farms where the animals have no chance of escape.
     
  14. michel

    michel Administrator Emeritus
    Staff Member

    Joined:
    Sep 27, 2004
    Messages:
    28,675
    Ratings:
    +2,658
    I agree with what you said about hunting, I think, sadly that until we have the technology, there are certain needs to use animals for testing - but only for medical research, and as little as possible. I seems a sad necessity.........:(

    I stopped eating meat at one time, on Moral grounds - and then thought myself a hypocrite, because I was still eating vegetables - and they are a form of life, even if they can't feel pain (as far as we know) - they are still living, reproducing beings......:(

    I think, at the end of the day, it comes down to accepting their sacrifice, in the way that they nourish us. If there ever was a form of totally man made food, I would opt for that, in a flash - even if it was in the form of a pill; to me, that is the only way out of the 'food' cruelty...........
     
  15. Katzpur

    Katzpur Not your average Mormon

    Joined:
    Apr 10, 2005
    Messages:
    29,423
    Ratings:
    +5,394
    Religion:
    LDS Christian
    I admire you for that. But I have a question. It is my understanding that vegans refuse to wear wool or eat dairy products. I don't follow the reasoning behind this, since shearing sheep and milking cows does nothing to harm them. Would you mind explaining?
     
  16. Ryan2065

    Ryan2065 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jul 3, 2005
    Messages:
    2,037
    Ratings:
    +175
    So you are for the death of hundreds of deer due to starvation? What is more humane, killing some deer for food with guns or letting them slowly starve to death?

    And equating killing deer for population control to killing humans for population control is a bogus argument and you know it. Deer are NOT humans, they are food. To disagree is to go against the natural order.
     
  17. Green Gaia

    Green Gaia Veteran Member

    Joined:
    Mar 27, 2004
    Messages:
    19,780
    Ratings:
    +1,925
    I know you didn't ask me, but here's my 2 cents.

    Do you know any other mammal that drinks the milk of another? I'm not vegan, but I won't drink cow's milk. Vegans did not consume animals or animal products in any form (that includes dairy). For most this is an ethical stance because of the dairy connection to veal.

    From GoVeg.com: "In order for a cow to produce milk, she must have a calf. "Dairy cows" are impregnated every year in order to keep up a steady supply of milk. In the natural order of things, the cow’s calf would drink her milk (eliminating her need to milked by humans). But dairy cows’ babies are taken away within a day or two of birth so that humans can have the milk nature intended for their calves. Female dairy calves may be slaughtered immediately or raised to be future dairy cows. Male dairy calves are confined for 16 weeks in tiny veal crates too small for them even to turn around in.

    The current high demand for dairy products requires that cows be pushed beyond their natural limits, genetically engineered and fed growth hormones in order to produce huge quantities of milk. Even the few farmers who choose not to raise animals intensively must both eliminate the calf (who would otherwise drink the milk) and eventually send the mother off to slaughter after her milk production wanes."

    Those who are opposed to leather, wool, fur and other animals products are so because the animals are generally not treated humanely. Check out http://www.savethesheep.com for more info on that.
     
    • Like Like x 1
  18. Scuba Pete

    Scuba Pete Le plongeur avec attitude...

    Joined:
    Dec 1, 2004
    Messages:
    16,472
    Ratings:
    +3,192
    Religion:
    Christian Taoist
    I guess I shouldn't tell you about fileting live catfish then. Almost all of the 8,000 pounds consumed were alive when we started cleaning them. They WERE good to eat.
     
  19. Valjean

    Valjean Veteran Member
    Premium Member

    Joined:
    Nov 25, 2004
    Messages:
    20,287
    Ratings:
    +8,458
    Religion:
    Vedanta (reform)
    Maize summed up the situation pretty well, Katzpur. Just because the product an animal's currently being used for doesn't cause it's immediate death doesn't mean the animals aren't forced to lead short, miserable lives. Market pressures force farmers to be ever more efficient in their husbandry in order to stay competitive, and humane treatment doesn't feature in their investment:return algorithms.

    Most people familiar with the industry say they'd rather be a beef "cow" than a dairy cow.
     
  20. Valjean

    Valjean Veteran Member
    Premium Member

    Joined:
    Nov 25, 2004
    Messages:
    20,287
    Ratings:
    +8,458
    Religion:
    Vedanta (reform)
    Sorry Ryan, You make some good points. Looking back, my post #12 was overly critical, more a knee-jerk reaction than a well-considered response. I apologize.
     
    • Like Like x 1
Loading...