Is it wrong to kill an animal?

[Bebelina]

I think it's wrong to kill anything, but if you are in a life threatening situation, you very quickly put your moral philosophies aside.
I would for example try to kill an animal if it was seriously injured and was going to suffer a long horrible death. If it was to attack me I would of course defend myself as much as I could, but I don't think I would be capable of killing...I was attacked by a cat once, I was a helpless victim, maybe I could defend myself against a rat... :bugeye:

 

[justiceusa]

If we never killed animals we would all have to be vegetarians, But we aren't , most of us go to Mac D's and chow down on some really poor quality beef. If you ever visited a slaughter house you would puke big time. But a big mac, thats a horse of a differen't color er flavor.

 

[Dudeyhed]

Originally posted by pumpkinsaren'torange
lemme pose this question to you, Dudeyhead...if you or any member of your family were literally starving to death ...would you kill an animal to save them? please answer this honestly. thanks.

honestly, no, I wouldn't. But if i were to find an animal that were already dead, and not rotted to the state that they inedible, I would be more than happy to feed it to them.

And if such a situation were to arise, I'm sure it would be somewhere in the wild and somewhere where fruit and other plant foods were available.

 

[Dudeyhed]

Yes, it is completed circumstantial. If an animal is endangered then it is not to be killed unless it is violent or causing problems.

So if a human were violent and causing problems it'd be ok to kill them?
Hmm, my brothers been trying to start me a bit lately.... and my neighbours been playing music up loud for the last couple of nights, havent been able to sleep easily....

But as far as cattle and live stock, then it doesen't matter. We have so much of them that the loss of some doesen't really effect us.

But as far as Chinese and Indians go, it doesn't matter. We have so much of them that the loss of some doesn't really effect us.

And what would life be without meat? I'd say it'd be pretty boring, as far as food goes.

Guess what, I'm a vegetarian and even so, I'm sure you could find more than a handful of people who would disagree with you.

Do you feel bad when you swat a Mosquito from the air or step on a Roach?

I dont' swat mosquitos or step on roaches. I get a glass and some paper, catch the bug with them and release them outside. When I do accidentally kill a bug, I feel horible.

What's the difference between them and fuzzy bunnies?

Nothing at all except for their appearance.

That is where the animal rights people like the A.S.P.C.A. mess up.

If you mean that people in the ASAPCA (which I'm assuming is like the animals rights organisation 'RSPCA' of Australia) will swat mosquitos while lobbying for the rights of fuzzy bunnies, then I'm sure that that is often the case. Hell, there are probably peole in the ASAPCA who eat roast chicken for diner, maybe even roast rabbit! But those people don't account for all those who believe in animal liberty.

 

[Dudeyhed]

Re: kill em all

Originally posted by spacemanspiff
what's people's feelings on animals that kill other animals? are they immoral. Every time i see that lion kill a gazel in the discovery channel i think, "that guy is going to hell"

Are you comparing your intelligence to that of a lion? Humans are the most gifted of all known organisms. We have one thing that clearly and undoubtedly sets us apart for animals. WE CAN THINK!

Do you really believe that a lion is thinking, let alone has the ability to think that the gazel is going to suffer when it kills it? Do you really think that the lion, like us humans, can see that the gazel is not running for the hell of it but is running because it is shit scared and is fearing death? Does a lion even have a comprehension of death unless it is its own?

Human's have the brains and capacity for a worldy trait known as COMPASSION. Let's use it ey? We are able to comprehend others suffering. It is because of this that we disgrace ourselves by continuing to inflict suffering and pain onto other beings while knowing it.

this reminds me of a discusion we had once in a social pych class. the situation was that you were stranded in the mountains or something. some people were dead and others alive. and the ONLY way you could not DIE would be to eat part of one of the dead people. you didn't have to cook it or watch it be cooked, all you had to do was open your mouth, chew and not die. anyway when asked if we would do it or not the split was completly along gender lines. all the girls refused to do it. they didn't care about dying, it was just to icky for them.

I don't see a thing wrong with eating the flesh of something dead for survival so long as you or someone else didn't kill it.

 

[Dudeyhed]

Originally posted by 'Strange
Animals don't seem to really mind...it's a life cycle.

Riiiight....

Animals don't seem to mind being killed. Makes all the sense in the world.

 

[Dudeyhed]

Originally posted by Dr Lou Natic
My problem with this subject is how over-rated human life is. An old lady can be on the front cover of a fishing magazine holding up dead baby sharks with a shit eating grin on her face and no one will think anything of it but replace the sharks with a human baby and it would be the biggest tragedy in history. To me it is the same. I am hurt when I see the dead sharks just as deeply as a mother would be if she saw dead babies, but are my feelings taken into account? NO. Also, I doubt the old lady on the cover could nudely swim after the shark and capture it in her jaws or even with her hands. Thats the problem any idiot can buy a fishing rod, they didn't invent the damn thing or even make it so why should they be able to mindlessly dangle it in the water and pull out creatures by the bucket load? A lion killing a gazelle is completely different because it is doing what it has to do and it is on a fair playing feild. We humans are cheating pussies when it comes down to it. Idiots even need detailed instructions on how to tie a freakin knot on a fishing hook! BAH! Its wrong. Guns against animals is also an unthinkably cheap concept, and I don't even want to get into harpooning a whale, the marine holocaust was truely the purest evil this planet has ever seen. As for misfit kids torturing domestic animals...... grrrrrr domestication is an eery idea. The animals are trusting us with everything, it can be a wonderful thing if you absolutely spoil your pet but it can also be the most sick twisted shit in the world if charlie decides to "lock the doors" and "vent some anger", it truely does seem equal to torturing an infant to me, how is a baby any more innocent than any animal? its not, by the time it can talk its already less innocent than a lion.
I'm not a vegetarian, so this might all sound like hypocrisy but there is a happy medium. I don't think humans should be allowed to kill anything wild, not even fish, in fact especially fish. I think any animal we want to eat should have to be farmed. And some animals just shouldn't be farmed or killed or hurt no matter what, these animals include, cetaceans, dogs, cats, octopus, elephants, the groper(an extremely intelligent fish), primates and PIGS, YES PIGS!!!!
Many more of course, no animal should be physically hurt or mentally. (playing torturous mind games with animals is only insulting your own intelligence ... you fucking idiot).
Again, its the WAY we hurt things that pisses me off, lab tests on animals are the height of wrongness. The idea of capturing and restraining a confused creature to bring it pain is so cowardly that it boggles the mind. Doing it to a human who knew what was going on would be so far less of a tragedy and still horrible. I hate thinking about this stuff it keeps me awake at night as it is.

Apathy,
rather than killing an innocent animal to "teach animal rights activists a lesson" (stupidest logic I've ever heard in my life) why not kill an animal rights activist or even just injure one? It would be far more efficient for your cause and Obviously makes a whole lot more sense.

I like and agree with a lot of what you say, but at the same time I find you sounding extremely hipocritical.

'Happy medium'?
Do you believe that farming an animal does phisically or mentally hurt and animal? Have you seen images of battery farms? And you seem to think that if an animal is not intelligent, its ok to kill them. What is the basis of this? I go to a selective entry state high school and started going there 3 year ago. I met some friends from my old school last week and when I was talking to them, I realised that a huge 'intelligence' gap had opened between us from the time i was at their school and now (I know that intelligence is a broad term open to interpretation but thats debate belongs in another thread). Can I kill the guys from my old school? Obviously, they aren't as intelligent as I am, and they are in the same year as me.

 

[Dudeyhed]

Originally posted by Bebelina
I think it's wrong to kill anything, but if you are in a life threatening situation, you very quickly put your moral philosophies aside.
I would for example try to kill an animal if it was seriously injured and was going to suffer a long horrible death. If it was to attack me I would of course defend myself as much as I could, but I don't think I would be capable of killing...I was attacked by a cat once, I was a helpless victim, maybe I could defend myself against a rat... :bugeye:

I once held a belief that if i were to be attacked by an animal, I would not kill it, even if it meant my own death.
My dad, who is also of the same view as me on animal treatment, called me an idiot.
I thought about it and came to this conclusion: If an animal were attacking me and the only way to defend myself from death were to kill the animal, I would, in much the same way as i would kill an armed assailant. Why? Because I figured that I would have more to offer the world than that animal. Seriously. That animals would probably have very little chance of getting $5 a week to a child in Africa whereas I would have a much, much better chance.

 

[Dr Lou Natic]

Awesome points dudeyhead.
I'm glad there are other people out there with the ability to look at things from a non-I'm a human i'm so great-perspective.
I personally am not a vegetarian so you probably think I'm a monster, that is a label I will except and I will admit you are better than me. But we have the technology to kill things without pain. We should be using that technology more often. I believe it is ok to eat animals that have been farmed, it makes me sad as it does you but we are omnivores. Perhaps if we didn't have domestic animals and ways to kill them painlessly the right thing to do would be violently hunting wild animals but thats crueler and considering our technology, just as unfair. So we might as well eat the animals we have breeded for that purpose. Eating pigs is questionable though.
Killing and eating wild animals is insane and should never be done. Including fish? Especially fish. We are doing a real number on the oceans and if there were any justice some drastic action would be taken.
To me human life is no more important than anything else. I can honestly say I truely believe that and I would find it easier to kill a human than a pig. Does that make me a bad person? How? why?
Ask yourself why you hold humans so highly

 

[Dr Lou Natic]

Originally posted by Dudeyhed
I once held a belief that if i were to be attacked by an animal, I would not kill it, even if it meant my own death.
My dad, who is also of the same view as me on animal treatment, called me an idiot.
I thought about it and came to this conclusion: If an animal were attacking me and the only way to defend myself from death were to kill the animal, I would, in much the same way as i would kill an armed assailant. Why? Because I figured that I would have more to offer the world than that animal. Seriously. That animals would probably have very little chance of getting $5 a week to a child in Africa whereas I would have a much, much better chance.

Hmmm.... I'm not sure I agree with all this. How are you killing this animal? I can't think of a single animal with the potential to kill a human that you(or me) could take unnarmed. If you have a gun what gives you the right to use that gun? Did you invent it and make it on the spot? The animal has the advantage and therefore should win and eat you. Thats how it works. Why do we assume we should have no natural predators? We should and that is the problem with us today. Thats why there is too many of us, we have made it so even the weak and elderly or sick can pull a trigger and destroy the mightiest of fit beasts. Its wrong. Its not how this place was intended to run.
$5 to a child in africa? this is the problem I was just addressing. You seem to work on emotion, which isn't always right.

 

[Dudeyhed]

Put evolution and the way things seem to be aside.
Lets think up a scenario:

25 year old Mary Smith is a little woman who is on her way to spending all her life looking after sick children in hospitals and the like. She is a talented researcher and has started and is well on her way into research releating to children and cancer.

Jimmie Hardy is a young ruffian who has spent the 21 years of his life generally being nasty but in that time he has also developed his muscles quite substatially. With or without a weapon, he could kill you.

Now, Jimmie has turned to a life of crime and one day he happens to pass Mary. She is carrying her purse and Jimmie sees this. He confronts her and threatens her. She tries to run but Jimmie, the naturally stronger and more capable one knocks her down, killing her, takes the purse and runs.

Jimmie was, compared to Mary, the mightiest of beasts. He killed Mary, and, she was unarmed, she diddn't use a gun to defend herself. Was this ok? Was is ok for Mary to die at Jimmie's hands because he had the advantage?

Clearly the answer is no. Just because someone has the advantage that does in no way mean that they deserve or that it is ok for them to overpower you and destroy you. Just in the same way it is not ok for large coperations to stomp out little businesses. (But lets not go there, this thread is about animal rights ethics, not business ethics. Threads seem to go on tangents quite a bit on this site.)

 

[Dudeyhed]

Originally posted by Dr Lou Natic
Awesome points dudeyhead.
I'm glad there are other people out there with the ability to look at things from a non-I'm a human i'm so great-perspective.
I personally am not a vegetarian so you probably think I'm a monster, that is a label I will except and I will admit you are better than me.

Thank you for the completments!
But on the point of me being better than you, I wouldn't say that. I'm happy to change my views as long as i'm shown sufficient arguments...

But we have the technology to kill things without pain. We should be using that technology more often. I believe it is ok to eat animals that have been farmed, it makes me sad as it does you but we are omnivores.

I'm gonna have to disagree with you there simply on the fact that there is no realy need to kill the animals in the first place. Sure, if there were a scale of 'badness', killing an animal painlessly is lower than killing an animal with pain, but that doesn't mean its ok, no way.
I don't believe that it's ok to eat animals that have been farmed. There are too many alternatives to mention. I'm sure you've heard the argument about the amount of grains used to produce one cow being able to feed many more mouths than that cow could. I think just the fact that vegetarians are alive and well is enough to rebut that. And just being omnivores doesn't mean we have to eat mean. That just like saying that because we are able to kill we should.

To me human life is no more important than anything else. I can honestly say I truely believe that and I would find it easier to kill a human than a pig. Does that make me a bad person? How? why?

I would too. If i did kill a human, it would be for self-defence. If a human were trying to kill me, it would not be because I was trying to kill them, I'm just not an agressive person. And if they did think I was threatening them, I wouldn't kill them, I'd just try and explain myself. But if that were impossible without me dying, I really don't know what I would do.. I guess that would be something I would decide in the heat of the moment.. (Let's just hope that never happens )
I don't think I would ever kill a pig. I can't think of a situation where I wouldn't be able to defend myself against a pig without killing it. And if a pig were trying to kill me, it would never be malicious. Animals generally just wouldn't think like that. They are in a human way, stupid. Due to that, me killing them for self-defnce would be like me killing a kid for saying that 3+3=4.

 

[Dr Lou Natic]

Originally posted by Dudeyhed
Jimmie was, compared to Mary, the mightiest of beasts. He killed Mary, and, she was unarmed, she diddn't use a gun to defend herself. Was this ok? Was is ok for Mary to die at Jimmie's hands because he had the advantage?

No but think about why jimmie killed mary? Money, thats just our crap and this argument should in no way affect how we think about animals.
If a lion killed mary it would want her for food and frankly, thats what she is , so the lion has a pretty good argument. We try our hardest to stop our dead from becoming food by burying them but they still become food for worms. So many times I have heard of animals being killed because they have a human in their jaws but why? The human's already dead, let the cycle of life continue if you ask me. Don't bother asking "would you let an animal eat YOUR loved one?" because the answer will be a swift and firm "yes" and I myself would much prefer to become food for animals than locked away underground only to become food for worms eventually anyway.
What I'm saying is people are food, we can't escape it, and we can't expect animals to not think of us as food because we haven't explained to them we are ego-tystical jerks that think we are above nature.

 

[spacemanspiff]

bring the pain!

couple of questions/comments for the poeple

1) is all life equal? I can see maybe a horse or a dog, but lets go down the evolutionary chain. what about an earthworm, or an insect. I'm sure every one has stepped on a bug at some time even if by accident.
i won't bring up microscopic dust mites(ooops just did). what about a virus? it's alive. your imune system goes after them all the time.
I'm not saying a virus is the same as a dog, i'm just wondering where the line is drawn.

2)still don't see how animals killing animals(for food) is any different. it's all around us in nature, yet it is imoral? has anyone ever tried getting animals to become vegitarians? just wondering.

3) is the pain and suffering the real issue here? would a painless instant death change anything?

 

[justiceusa]

spacemanspiff

Most of the animals we eat are vegetarians. Although animal by products are sometimes put in their food as a filler. That is how we got mad cow disease, and really mean chickens.

 

[Dudeyhed]

Originally posted by Dr Lou Natic
No but think about why jimmie killed mary? Money, thats just our crap and this argument should in no way affect how we think about animals.
If a lion killed mary it would want her for food and frankly, thats what she is , so the lion has a pretty good argument. We try our hardest to stop our dead from becoming food by burying them but they still become food for worms. So many times I have heard of animals being killed because they have a human in their jaws but why? The human's already dead, let the cycle of life continue if you ask me. Don't bother asking "would you let an animal eat YOUR loved one?" because the answer will be a swift and firm "yes" and I myself would much prefer to become food for animals than locked away underground only to become food for worms eventually anyway.
What I'm saying is people are food, we can't escape it, and we can't expect animals to not think of us as food because we haven't explained to them we are ego-tystical jerks that think we are above nature.

I understand what you are saying and I do agree to an extent. But realistically, what would be a better outcome: Mary gets killed by the Lion and all hopes of her research on cancer and children end, or, the lion lives and does nothing that will really help anyone or anything?

If Mary were to have killed the Lion in her self-defence I wouldn't have a problem. But, if she were to have killed in her self-defence while an alternative exsited, I would have a problem.

I'm not going to say that we're above nature, but I will say that we are above animals, but only in the sense of cognition. And it is because of this that we should never bring ourselves into a situation where he endanger another being life, but if ones life were to come to danger from an animal and there was no way to guarantee ones safter other than by the death of the animal, I see that it is ok to go ahead and do so.

Don't think that i see that it is ok to kill a dog after it attacks someone, that logic is seriously flawed. If a dog has to be killed because its violent, most of our criminals should be dead.

A few years back, I can't remember exactly where it was, but a dingo had attacked and killed a small child or something. What the authorities did was nothing but stupid and disgusting. They ordered the entire dingo population of that area to be killed. It was just mass murder. I diddn't approve of such action and I still don't.

 

[Dudeyhed]

Re: bring the pain!

Originally posted by spacemanspiff
1) is all life equal? I can see maybe a horse or a dog, but lets go down the evolutionary chain. what about an earthworm, or an insect. I'm sure every one has stepped on a bug at some time even if by accident.
i won't bring up microscopic dust mites(ooops just did). what about a virus? it's alive. your imune system goes after them all the time.
I'm not saying a virus is the same as a dog, i'm just wondering where the line is drawn.

Just quickly, I could be wrong but I do remember reading something about virus being a controversial. I think that they aren't officially organism or something along those lines... but anyway...

I think the line is drawn when its significance to the greater chain of things becomes insignificant. But don't for a second assume that that means that its ok to go out and kill those 'insignificant' being for the hell of it. I just think that if you were forced into a situation where it was your life or anothers, you would have to decide on who/what has greater significance.

2)still don't see how animals killing animals(for food) is any different. it's all around us in nature, yet it is imoral? has anyone ever tried getting animals to become vegitarians? just wondering.

Killing animals for food is not different. It's the same as killing humans for food. And it is immoral.
Trying to make animals vegetarian is just not practical. While humans are able to get a variety of food sources and are able to gain nutrients from them, many animals require specialised diets. Carnivores generally cannot survive on anything but meat.
It is hower, regardless of how outrageous it may sound, not out of reach to see every human as a vegetarian. We are more intelligent and are able to see that it is possible whereas an animal, even if it were able to survive without meat, would have no chance of seeing this if it is already eating meat.

3) is the pain and suffering the real issue here? would a painless instant death change anything?

I posted earlier that I would see a painless death as 'less bad' than one with pain, but that doesn't make it ok.

 

[Dr Lou Natic]

the lion won't help anyone or anything

I disagree, the lion is helping everything in a far deeper and greater way than cancer research ever would. Thats how I feel, in fact, I don't think cancer research is a very good thing at all and I will probably get cancer(I smoke) so don't say I'm being selfish.
Me and you disagree on some things and I'm not going to say I'm right and you're wrong and I hope you won't either. I'm glad your logic leads you to be kind to animals but I just disagree with you that humans are more important. What will cancer research and feeding the hungry achieve? More people? More use of resources, more clearing of land more polution..... I simply can't see an upside.
You obviously greatly value individual human lives to the point where they are more important than the long term health of the planet but I'm afraid I don't. Thats fine. Everyone has the right to an opinion and I think you are living your life in a wonderful relatively harmless way so you're ok with me

 

[Tristan]

Im sorry, this is something to do with the original topic right?

I LOVE STEAK WITH McCORMIKS STEAK SEASONING! MMMMM AND PO-TATE-TOES THAT HAVE BEEN BAKED ON THE SIDE WITH A LITTLE RANCH DRESSING! YUM....

Is killing animals wrong?...Rephrase as such, "Is killing animals for no reason wrong?"

Later
T

 

[Dudeyhed]

Originally posted by Dr Lou Natic
I disagree, the lion is helping everything in a far deeper and greater way than cancer research ever would. Thats how I feel, in fact, I don't think cancer research is a very good thing at all and I will probably get cancer(I smoke) so don't say I'm being selfish.
Me and you disagree on some things and I'm not going to say I'm right and you're wrong and I hope you won't either. I'm glad your logic leads you to be kind to animals but I just disagree with you that humans are more important. What will cancer research and feeding the hungry achieve? More people? More use of resources, more clearing of land more polution..... I simply can't see an upside.
You obviously greatly value individual human lives to the point where they are more important than the long term health of the planet but I'm afraid I don't. Thats fine. Everyone has the right to an opinion and I think you are living your life in a wonderful relatively harmless way so you're ok with me

I totally see where your comming from.
I've thought like that before and to tell you the truth, I'd forgotten about all that! (long term effects). I do often trail off and dream of a land where we all live in little villages.
You can call me extreme, but I think that if something were to streak across the world and wipe out a great deal of human life, I can see that having extremely positive long term effects.

But I have to clear something. I didn't in any intend to say that a human life was dearer than that of an animal. Say Jimmie (from the earlier example) were to be attacked by a lion, I wouldn't kill the lion to save his life. He has no value to society in anyway. Even if killing the lion was the only way for Jimmie to survive, he wouldn't deserve life. He cause problems intentionally whereas the lion would continue to do what he naturally would do.

and you'll be happy to hear that I'm not going to say that I'm right. You have a very good point.