New Zealand Recognizes Animals as Sentient

[Evangelicalhumanist]

Why not test on people instead. Something that can consciously decide whether or not the risks are worth it?

Edit: Or death row inmates, since we have already deemed their lives as irredeemable, apparently?

An awful lot of testing can be done on cells that have been cultivated for the purpose -- not all, for sure, and it is more expensive, but since cultivars are not connected to a CNS, it's at least humane.

 

[Valjean]

You should watch those Krueger National Wildlife park videos on YouTube.

Those animals don't have behavioral options. They are not moral agents. Humans do/are.

 

[Bear Wild]

You should watch those Krueger National Wildlife park videos on YouTube.

I have seen those videos. So what do those videos have to do with animals being sentient? Oh that's right nothing. This amendment is not to eliminate humans from eating animals but to treat animals as humanely as possible. Animals eating other animals does not deny them being sentient. Compare that to people skinning animals alive just for their fur and piling up their bodies still alive to die as what happens in China.

 

[Bear Wild]

Those animals don't have behavioral options. They are not moral agents. Humans do/are.

I would say they have their own morals for their situations. They have those behaviors that they recognize as important for their situation. They have their own social behavior that requires recognizing behaviors through adaptation. Although not written they are still understood.

 

[Bear Wild]

Most kinds of cruelty to animals is illegal here in USA. I think of all creatures the worst treated (here) are probably fowls and pigs, but there are regulations stipulating what is or is not allowed.

Unfortunately they are not enough. Butterball turkeys and Tyson as well as other treat life horribly. Unfortunately despite what laws we have they are still not enough.

 

[Brickjectivity]

Unfortunately they are not enough. Butterball turkeys and Tyson as well as other treat life horribly. Unfortunately despite what laws we have they are still not enough.

One thing to do, as a good start, is to encourage separate regulatory requirements for different sizes of farms. Having one-size-fits-all regulations discourages small scale farms causing the smaller farm to borrow for equipment that it actually shouldn't need. It is over-regulation through under-funded regulation. You see that the underfunded over regulation discourages situations where animals are treated more individually. Nobody knows what they look like, and they don't have names. They are numbers on a spreadsheet.

Why may a hunter not sell venison to a butcher? Its not any more dangerous than the pork in the store, but government encourages larger scale operations, pig pens and assembly line meat production. Regulatory agencies often have to deal with funding cuts. They streamline. They develop regulations to cover everyone. That's why.

If a mom and pop want to have a goat and sell the milk guess what? They may have to abide by the same regulations as Marva Maid, so they may have to acquire some equipment that isn't actually necessary. They may not be able to simply sell the milk to a shop. They may not even be allowed to sell it to a friend. Why then go to the trouble have having a goat? Most people just buy cow milk. They usually only buy a goat if they need shrubs eaten or want a very stupid pet that jumps almost any fence.

 

[Bear Wild]

One thing to do, as a good start, is to encourage separate regulatory requirements for different sizes of farms. Having one-size-fits-all regulations discourages small scale farms causing the smaller farm to borrow for equipment that it actually shouldn't need. It is over-regulation through under-funded regulation. You see that the underfunded over regulation discourages situations where animals are treated more individually. Nobody knows what they look like, and they don't have names. They are numbers on a spreadsheet.

Why may a hunter not sell venison to a butcher? Its not any more dangerous than the pork in the store, but government encourages larger scale operations, pig pens and assembly line meat production. Regulatory agencies often have to deal with funding cuts. They streamline. They develop regulations to cover everyone. That's why.

If a mom and pop want to have a goat and sell the milk guess what? They may have to abide by the same regulations as Marva Maid, so they may have to acquire some equipment that isn't actually necessary. They may not be able to simply sell the milk to a shop. They may not even be allowed to sell it to a friend. Why then go to the trouble have having a goat? Most people just buy cow milk. They usually only buy a goat if they need shrubs eaten or want a very stupid pet that jumps almost any fence.

I agree with you and small farms that persist show more humane methods from surveys (exceptions always present). Corporations have been eliminating the small farm at a loss quality. It is time to reverse this process. Now be kind to goats please.

Have you ever seen the film "A big little farm". This film is about a revolutionary idea that nature can teach us about producing food in not only a humane way but an ecologically sound way. A very impressive concept long overdue for us to learn from.

 

[Notanumber]

It will be a good start if it bans Halal slaughter and the export of live animals for slaughter.

Why New Zealand’s Animal Sentience Law Falls Short