?

Log in

No account? Create an account

Previous | Next

Taking my mind off other things.

flemco reminded me. I don't think I've stated my position on animal rights recently, or indeed at all. He puts it rather succinctly:

Animals have no fucking rights.

EVER.

Unless you count the right to be delicious between two slices of bread.

Comments

( 13 informants — We want information! )
tatzlwurm
Mar. 9th, 2006 01:55 pm (UTC)
So, say, puting kittens in blenders just to hear them scream is....ok as far as you're concerned?

Can't say I agree with you there.
digitalraven
Mar. 9th, 2006 02:00 pm (UTC)
Kittens do not have the right to not be put in blenders.

Humans must make their own stands with regards to the morality of cruelty to other animals. These stands should not be confused with giving animals "rights", as it is a decision made by humans about human behaviour towards something with alien thought processes.
tatzlwurm
Mar. 9th, 2006 02:30 pm (UTC)
An interesting way of looking at things.

However, if humans make a collective decision as to the standard of care that other creatures should expect then that, in effect, gives the animals in question a sort of "rights by proxy". After all, we are not dictating what they can and can't do to each other - simply what we can and can't do to them.
purplerabbits
Mar. 9th, 2006 02:34 pm (UTC)
Humans don't 'make a collective decision as to the standard of care that other creatures should expect', because we have no way of communicating with those creatures and no idea of what, if anything they are capable of 'expecting'. Humans dictate (collectively if they live in a fair-minded society) the responsibilities that other humans have towards the rest of the world, which includes animals and inanimate objects like the environment. I agree that 'rights' is totally the wrong word for this.
fizzyboot
Mar. 9th, 2006 02:53 pm (UTC)
I agree. The notion of giving "rights" to non-sapient entities, who don't understand what rights are, doesn't make sense.

Note that I do not approve of cruelty towards animals, which is a separate issue.
chrisondra
Mar. 9th, 2006 04:14 pm (UTC)
Now it's interesting because who are we to decide who's "non-sapient" and who's not? I know, we're human, we have the rational minds, for the most part, but not all that long ago people would have told you corvids are just dumb birds. Hell, there are probably still a lot of people who think that way. And yet, when crows need them, they can not just use tools, they can create tools. They can have a vocabulary of our words, and really, I'm not sure we have any way of judging just how intelligent they really are. We just can't understand them, at least not yet.

It's an interesting question, anyway.
spudtater
Mar. 9th, 2006 06:43 pm (UTC)
All rights are the results of descions made by humans about human behaviour. The alienness or not of thought processes is irrelevent. In other words, something does not need to know that it is being given rights in order to gain them. Or do the severely retarded not have rights either?
dgg
Mar. 9th, 2006 04:32 pm (UTC)
I agree with you somewhat. I have a lot of friends and family who hunt and fish and I would like to try it someday to which some people gasp and say "How could you!? That is so disgusting! What kind of a human being are you to shoot an innocent deer?" while they take a hefty bite out of their cheeseburger.

If you're gonna be an animal rights activist, please don't be a hypocrit. Same goes for the ones who are disgusted by looking at famine stricken victims in Ethiopia on television. They quickly change the channel that shows some cats holed up in an animal shelter they go "Oh! The poor kitty! Where do I send money to help?"

Grrrr...

deimos_masque
Mar. 9th, 2006 04:39 pm (UTC)
Remember, we only want to save the cute animals.

Those Ethiopian kids... not cute. More creepy than anything
chrisondra
Mar. 9th, 2006 05:40 pm (UTC)
Exactly, to the first party anyway, and that irritates me. Look at the US government trying to program sharks. Like I said on the entry where I saw that, they couldn't do it to dolphins. Dolphins are cute and are our friends. Sharks aren't.
spudtater
Mar. 9th, 2006 06:34 pm (UTC)
Yeah, but sharks are thick.
razorsmile
Mar. 9th, 2006 06:48 pm (UTC)
Alternatively, sharks are dicks.
spudtater
Mar. 9th, 2006 06:52 pm (UTC)
Yeah, but so are dolphins. As proved by the video footage of a couple of dolphins beating a porpoise to death — either to reduce competition for food, or just for fun.
( 13 informants — We want information! )

Links

Tagcloud

Powered by LiveJournal.com
Designed by Lilia Ahner