LBPCentral Archive

Home

General Stuff

General Chat

Hunting - Morally Wrong?

Archive: 82 posts

I imagine a lot of you feel that hunting is an unnatural and morally wrong pastime and that it should be banned globally. To those of you who think this way, I believe that you are hypocrites.

Advancements in food science have allowed us to survive using alternatives to meat, as healthily as we would consuming slaughtered animals. So why don't we all switch to these alternatives? Simply because we enjoy meat more.

Now why do people hunt? For the same reason, they enjoy hunting.

In both cases, the death of an animal can be avoided with the revoking of luxuries, which we choose to retain. By that logic, you cannot truly oppose the nature of hunting if you are not a vegetarian.

I am not a vegetarian, nor have I ever gone hunting. That's not to say that I wouldn't if the opportunity arose. My point is that we sacrifice the lives of other beings for our own enjoyment, regardless of how we justify it.

Thoughts? Counter-arguments?

Edit: I'd just like to point out that I'm not trying to start any fights with anyone. Just a friendly discussion/debate.

2009-06-18 21:12:00

Author:
Killian

Posts: 2575

My thoughts are my own.

Who are YOU to ask me MY thoughts?! MY THOUGHTS AREN'T SOME CHEAP BARGAIN ITEM!

2009-06-18 21:16:00

Author:
RockSauron

Posts: 10882

The one time I was hunting, I didn't enjoy, but it wasn't hunting for fun but rather hunting to limit a pest. That made it a bit better, but not much.

Hunting just for one is not really good in my opinion, but if you hunt too limit damage or hunt to survive (some people have to do that, but not western Europe, nor many in America) than that is okay with me.

PS: Yes, three animals died because of me.

2009-06-18 21:22:00

Author:
Syroc

Posts: 3193

I am a animal person and hate any kind of harm to animals.
I see what you are trying to say Killian but it's a crap way of looking at it if you ask me. It's like saying because someone likes to wear fur then it's fine to kill animals for their fur. Which is also a bad thing in my opinion.

I get very angry and have got in quite a few arguments/fights because of what I have seen done to animals.

I'll just leave it at that as I don't want to get into any kind of heated "debate" about this with anyone. Just thought I'd leave my views. But I won't be back here so call me what ever you want guys

2009-06-18 21:31:00

Author:
dorien

Posts: 2767

Let me start this by saying that I absolutely love animals, all of them, even the ones I don't like that much. And yeah I love eating meat too. But I wouldn't enjoy hunting. I don't even kill insects or spiders if they pose no threat to my life. Sooo...

So why don't we all switch to these alternatives? Simply because we enjoy meat more.

Now why do people hunt? For the same reason, they enjoy hunting.

In both cases, the death of an animal can be avoided with the revoking of luxuries, which we choose to retain. By that logic, you cannot truly oppose the nature of hunting if you are not a vegetarian.

It's an interesting argument, and probably the soundest pro-hunting argument I've heard. However, just because two things are done for for enjoyment and the general outcome is the same, they are not necessarily morally comparable. I heard a story in the paper the other day that police were looking for some teens that tortured some animals to death*. They did it because they enjoyed it. I chose to have steak sandwich for lunch, and I **** well enjoyed it. Are the two even close to being morally comparable. I personally don't think so.

If hunting is done purely for fun, then I believe that it is a somewhat sadistic act, taking pleasure in the actual act of killing. You could argue it's a fine line but I think it's a clear one. As syroc says, there is definately a moral difference behind the different motivations for hunting as well.

I believe that if you enjoy the act of killing an animal there is something wrong with you.

*Yes my retelling of the story is vague, I was hungover, sunburned, half blind from hayfever, and possibly mashed at the time I was told the story.

2009-06-18 21:32:00

Author:
rtm223

Posts: 6497

I think it's ok to hunt for food, or maybe even for fur in a life or death situation

Mass producing fur or killing for fun is just disgusting though, i don't know how trophy hunters can live with themselves :/

Personally i couldn't even hunt for survival

2009-06-18 21:33:00

Author:
Dexiro

Posts: 2100

We don`t eat meat because we enjoy meat more than any other foodstuff. We eat meat because as a species it`s in our make-up to eat meat. We`ve been eating meat long before the time of teh internetz. We`ve been eating meat before man learned how to make fire.

Sure, people make lifestyle decissions whether to eat meat or not and that`s fine. But, to argue the point that being anti-hunting and still wanting to eat meat is hypocritical is ridiculous.

If I want a rabbit for my tea and I go to the butchers and buy one, I`m relatively safe in the knowledge that the rabbit has been killed in the most humane way possible. The polar opposite of that would be using dogs to chase a rabbit/hare all over the a field before being ripped to shreds all in the name of "fun". Atleast when I buy a rabbit from the butchers, I eat it.

This isn`t really a good topic for discussion on a forum like this to be honest. Especially when your opinions are as skewed as they are. As a mod on this site I`m surprised at you and disappointed, really.

2009-06-18 21:43:00

Author:
killbot

Posts: 25

Interesting points, rtm.

I heard a story in the paper the other day that police were looking for some teens that tortured some animals to death (yes that vague, I was hungover, sunburned and blind from hayfever at the time!). They did it because they enjoyed it. I chose to have steak sandwich for lunch, and I **** well enjoyed it. Are the two even close to being morally comparable. I personally don't think so.

There are horror stories on both sides. You'll often hear about animals being bred in horrific environments so that the producers of meat can cut costs and make more money. The torture of animals is a different subject. The majority of hunters try to kill the animal as fast as possible rather than drag it out, as do meat suppliers. In no way am I trying to support the torture of animals before death, just compare the goal of killing them. What's the difference of an animal killed to make an unnecessary meal and an animal killed for sport? None. The animal is killed for satisfaction.

I believe that if you enjoy the act of killing an animal there is something wrong with you.

My point is that we all support the killing of animals indirectly for our own pleasure.

We don`t eat meat because we enjoy meat more than any other foodstuff. We eat meat because as a species it`s in our make-up to eat meat. We`ve been eating meat long before the time of teh internetz. We`ve been eating meat before man learned how to make fire.

We have also been murdering each other, fighting with each other and doing other horrific things just as long because, as a species, it's what we do but that doesn't justify them, does it?

2009-06-18 21:45:00

Author:
Killian

Posts: 2575

Killian, just before you posted I changed that last sentence because I realised it didn't quite reflect my thoughts properly

It the sadism in taking pleasure in the actual death I have issue. Hence the fact it's quite a fine line. If we rule out the more torturous forms of hunting, with dogs etc and go for a rifle to the brain, 1 shot kill, I still think there is something wrong with you if that moment of death is what gives you pleasure. Especially if the corpse serves no purpose to you after the death.

Also I understand about horror stories of animals kept in such ways, but as killbot mentioned, in this country, I can be reasonably assured in humane rearing and killing of animals whose meat I eat.

Also, if god didn't want us to eat animals, he wouldn't have made them out of food...

2009-06-18 21:54:00

Author:
rtm223

Posts: 6497

I definitively see your point though, seriously speaking. The only people who actually can be against hunting are vegetarians.

Really, though, while I do like meat... it does disgust me how we still do it... I know I can say nothing, but...

2009-06-18 21:55:00

Author:
RockSauron

Posts: 10882

Killian, just before you posted I changed that last sentence because I realised it didn't quite reflect my thoughts properly

Okay, edited them in.

It the sadism in taking pleasure in the actual death I have issue. Hence the fact it's quite a fine line. If we rule out the more torturous forms of hunting, with dogs etc and go for a rifle to the brain, 1 shot kill, I still think there is something wrong with you if that moment of death is what gives you pleasure. Especially if the corpse serves no purpose to you after the death.

I see what you mean, and it's a good argument. Though from the point of view of a hardcore vegetarian, the eating of another being is just as horrific when alternatives are available.

This isn`t really a good topic for discussion on a forum like this to be honest.

I don't really see how the morality of a daily factor of people's lives is inappropriate, but if people are truly offended, I will lock it.

2009-06-18 22:03:00

Author:
Killian

Posts: 2575

I'll make my statement short for once.

Hunting for food = Ok
Hunting just for fun/ just to kill something = Bad

2009-06-18 22:07:00

Author:
Silverleon

Posts: 6707

I'll make my statement short for once.

Hunting for food = Ok
Hunting just for fun/ just to kill something = Bad

Could you explain your argument to support those statements?

2009-06-18 22:11:00

Author:
Killian

Posts: 2575

Could you explain your argument to support those statements?

Great, the time i make a short statement the time they ask me for a longer explanation...

Fine...

Why is hunting for food is ok?
Because its the natural order of things, animals have always hunted other animals for food, and people don't have a problem with that
remember we are still animals, and that we NEED food to survive.
"Hunting for food is bad" is like saying milking a cow is bad, eating chicken eggs is bad, or that eating any food is bad.
Yes we are omnivores so we can eat plants, but its the same thing, plants are as alive as animals, so saying that hunting for food is bad is saying eating is wrong and shouldn't be done.

Why is hunting for fun/ just to kill bad?
Because, if there's no pourpuse to killing, what's the point of doing it.
It would be like trying to get honey from a hive just to throw it away, or like there are thousands of harmless things one can do for fun, and if you're
(oos)

feeling like killing something, buy a freakin game like GTA or something, you don't have to kill a living thing for fun you know?

Simply put, killing without a reason is just plain dumb, pointless, and has no benefits whatsoever to anyone, so it shouldn't be done.
Killing with a pourpuse like getting food has a point, a reason, and is useful to survival.
Hunting to get food has been done for thousands of years, from the stone age to the preset age, and for such hunting for food has a good benefitial pourpuse and is ok in my opinion.

2009-06-18 22:22:00

Author:
Silverleon

Posts: 6707

Well i did type out a massive argument a few minutes ago but my internet connection cut off the second i hit post reply -.-

Basically what i said is that i think you're starting to imply that eating meat is ENTIRELY for pleasure, which it isn't because we need it to survive.

I also said that emotions can justify hunting for food because they can effect our mental and physical health.
And you could argue that in that case emotions could justify killing for fun, but there are thousands of alternatives to that and morally it's just wrong.

2009-06-18 22:34:00

Author:
Dexiro

Posts: 2100

Because its the natural order of things, animals have always hunted other animals for food, and people don't have a problem with that
remember we are still animals, and that we NEED food to survive.

Killing was the natural order of things. The human race has come to a point where it collectively aims to minimize the loss of lives, human or otherwise. As I said before, we don't need to kill anything.

"Hunting for food is bad" is like saying milking a cow is bad, eating chicken eggs is bad, or that eating any food is bad.

The point here is the killing of the animal. Only a minority of people object to the use of eggs, milk etc. as it does not harm the animal.

Yes we are omnivores so we can eat plants, but its the same thing, plants are as alive as animals, so saying that hunting for food is bad is saying eating is wrong and shouldn't be done.

Plants are not conscious and are not nearly "as alive" as animals. Plants do not suffer, therefore are seen as an expendable resource.

Simply put, killing without a reason is just plain dumb, pointless, and has no benefits whatsoever to anyone, so it shouldn't be done.
Killing with a pourpuse like getting food has a point, a reason, and is useful to survival.

Killing for food can be avoided. It may have a point, but they're both done for the same basic reason - for our enjoyment. As I explained a few posts up, just because it has been done for a long time doesn't make it right.

2009-06-18 22:41:00

Author:
Killian

Posts: 2575

Basically what i said is that i think you're starting to imply that eating meat is ENTIRELY for pleasure, which it isn't because we need it to survive.

Is that why my vegitarian and vegan friends are all dead then. Now it all makes sense...

Nah, we do eat meat for pleasure. That and because of cultural / social upbringing and conditioning into a mindset where we believe it has to be a cornerstone of our diet. But largely because it tastes so **** good.

The only way you can argue a need for it is based upon the fact that most meats contain all the essential amino acids, where as most substitutes don't. But you eat more than one thing right? You don't even need to use modern science to create a perfectly healthy vegitarian / vegan diet. So it's a pretty poor argument.

2009-06-18 22:43:00

Author:
rtm223

Posts: 6497

No my point is that we eat to survive while we don't kill for fun to survive

I'm not saying that meat is 100% necessary, but it serves more of a purpose than doing things for fun

Oh and you forgot to comment on the second part of my argument, it sort of justifies eating meat

2009-06-18 22:49:00

Author:
Dexiro

Posts: 2100

I don't care what other people do. If you want to go hunting, go ahead. When house cats kill mice just to kill 'em, it's cute, but when people do it it's wrong.

I never would go hunting. It seems too boring. However, I did have quite a lot of fun in Biology playing with the organs of the dead frog. If you ask me, hunting seems a lot better than raising animals in giant barns, growing up beaten and abused only to be made into my dinner. I would have a bigger problem with raising animals just for food if chicken wasn't so delicious.

And I believe killing would be fun. Humans are horrible that way.

But so are kitties. We kill to feel powerful.

I learned, from Alec Baldwin, that meat allowed us to get intelligent. Vegetarians and vegans have to find other ways to get protein...How do vegans get protein? They don't drink milk, right?

Killing was the natural order of things. The human race has come to a point where it collectively aims to minimize the loss of lives, human or otherwise. As I said before, we don't need to kill anything.

Correct. We never had to kill anything. We could just die.

The thing about hunting is that most hunters go after deer.
Come on. Deer? Seriously? What a n00b target. Go after more exotic stuff at least. Like Octupus. Or Lion.

I'm also desensitized to just about everything, though.

2009-06-18 22:51:00

Author:
qrtda235566

Posts: 3664

Well..
i can see where your going with this.

i cant really explain it good so try to stay with me.

Hunting is a sport ( sadly ) so theres really no ending to that ( and in my opinion as long as its under control and people arent killing every animal they see, instead having tags for them i guess its okay )

hunting is a way of life for people up north, the natives go whale hunting as there culture so there isnt any problem really there only for the people that hunt seals for commerical use if u know what i mean...

and i always thought that God made animal for us to be-friend and stuff but also its a way of life.
if someone doesnt hunt a gazell then a lion will. but animal like bears need to be kept under control and if they arent under controlled in size they may fight against.

( so lets say your a bear, hi bear, u have a couple of bear friends.... u guys are getting a bite on the go, xD u guys go to the nearest camping ground and munch away. but then u guys find out ur still hungry! so then you'll go look for some more and if u cant find it in the forest, to the town you guys go! )

wow that really came out bad

well what im trying to say is that if theres to many of a certain animal, it will get overcrowded which means more deers getting hit by cars, mooses aswell, everything is connected.
the food chain is a good example, if theres to many bears and theres no more deers the bears will go look for some other meat, and if theres nothing else near there which was deer it will come eat human.

2009-06-18 22:55:00

Author:
01philip01

Posts: 545

We have also been murdering each other, fighting with each other and doing other horrific things just as long because, as a species, it's what we do but that doesn't justify them, does it?

Killian, you debate like an 12 year old.

The fact that we`re carnivores alone justifies that reason why we eat meat. I even have pointy teeth. If you`re opinion is to be believed I eat meat not for sustinance, but because it`s fun. Brilliant.

Here are a few of scenarios....

1. It`s Sunday and you meet up with your upperclass toff friends round at some manor house on your horse. You then spend the whole afternoon chasing a fox all over the countryside until it`s exhausted and then watch as your hounds rip it to shreds.

2. It`s Sunday and you crawl hungover out of your caravan to meet up with your Pikey mates in a local field. You set your dogs onto a hare and after chasing it around and terrorising it for awhile it`s ripped to shreds.... you laugh.

4. It`s Sunday and you buy a great big side of beef from the supermarket to eat for Sunday dinner with your family. You don`t live in the 3rd world so you`re relatively safe in the knowledge that your food has been reared and killed in the most humane fashion and to government regulations. Come 17.30 you`re hungry and eat food that way nature intended you to eat. It was nice.

Killing to eat is fine. Killing for the sake of killing is not. There is a difference, but it seems that you can`t see it. I look forward to your next comical responce, Killian.

2009-06-18 22:58:00

Author:
killbot

Posts: 25

2009-06-18 23:04:00

Author:
Loius

Posts: 342

I'm not saying that meat is 100% necessary, but it serves more of a purpose than doing things for fun
Oh yeah, and I actually agree with that. I stated earlier, sort of, that hunting for food is more acceptable than hunting for sport. But I still think Killian's argument is sound. We don't need to eat meat to survive. In the absense of necessity, that actual choice to eat meat over a vegitarian diet does come down to pleasure.

Oh and you forgot to comment on the second part of my argument, it sort of justifies eating meat

Yeah it's a bit vague tbh. I don't fancy chasing that one

Awesomemans, have you never got mouse guts all over you feet and carpet 'cause you trod on your "present" from pussikins in the middle of the night? There is nothing cute about that I can assure you!

On a more serious note, killing another human would probably give you even more of an intense experience than killing an animal. This has nothing to do with morality.

Killbot, if killian debates like a 12 year old, you're looking about 7, 8ish. His arguments are well structured, well considered and it's actually quite hard to pick holes in the logic. Yours is just attempting to be emotive and easy to pick holes in. After skimming the surface: 1 it's unbalanced in the fact that all of your scenarios are highly torturous in nature, hunting doesn't have to be. 2. We aren't carnivores

3. What's natural and human evolution play no part in intellectual human morality. We are nowhere near natural so it's nonsensical to base your argument on that. I could go on but I won't.

I don't think this needs to get personal or insulting, unless you are just trying to get a reasonable debate locked because you don't agree with someone....

2009-06-18 23:08:00

Author:
rtm223

Posts: 6497

I find that killing with a purpose is fine, and if you enjoy doing so, I would not consider it morally wrong [for you to kill for a purpose such as feeding or providing some sort of goods]. However, killing greedily or because you enjoy killing, is wrong. Life should be respected at least. American-Indians would (I am not an expert on this) be very respectful of any animals they killed, even in self-defense, and use as much of the animal as they could; I think they had the right idea.

And yeah, matadors stick it until it bleeds to exhaustion, then chop it apart. Never have approved of that, have I.

Not only that, they also thanked the animals for giving their lives to the greater good of their people, praying to their corpses for their sacrifice. Other peoples like the Bushmen in Africa that we deem "uncivilized" also followed this practice... but I won't get into a whole other argument here

2009-06-18 23:12:00

Author:
RockSauron

Posts: 10882

Killian, you debate like an 12 year old.

Personal insults are not what I was aiming to start in this thread, I'll leave it at that.

The fact that we`re carnivores alone justifies that reason why we eat meat. I even have pointy teeth. If you`re opinion is to be believed I eat meat not for sustinance, but because it`s fun. Brilliant.

I never said because it was "fun", I said because we enjoy it. Because we are carnivores does not mean we have to eat meat and because we are human it does not mean we have to start physical disagreements with every person, neighbor or nation that opposes us, as we have done throughout our evolution. We have evolved to look for alternative means to solving arguments just as we have evolved to search for alternative means of nourishment.

1. It`s Sunday and you meet up with your upperclass toff friends round at some manor house on your horse. You then spend the whole afternoon chasing a fox all over the countryside until it`s exhausted and then watch as your hounds rip it to shreds.

2. It`s Sunday and you crawl hungover out of your caravan to meet up with your Pikey mates in a local field. You set your dogs onto a hare and after chasing it around and terrorising it for awhile it`s ripped to shreds.... you laugh.

4. It`s Sunday and you buy a great big side of beef from the supermarket to eat for Sunday dinner with your family. You don`t live in the 3rd world so you`re relatively safe in the knowledge that your food has been reared and killed in the most humane fashion and to government regulations. Come 17.30 you`re hungry and eat food that way nature intended you to eat. It was nice.

As I have stated before, I do not support the torture of animals. There are alternative sources of entertainment available rather than the ones you have explained as there are alternative sources of food available rather than meat. You do not need to kill animals in any circumstances, other than if you have no other source of food. What some individuals do for entertainment is sadistic, there is no doubting that, but you venture beyond the subject and aim towards the worst case scenarios. Of course I could find hundreds of stories dedicated to the mistreatment of animals when they were being bred for use of food but this isn't about the severity of certain cases, it's about the basic principle of murdering animals for enjoyment.

I'm also going to have to edit some of your scenarios due to the vulgar content.

2009-06-18 23:25:00

Author:
Killian

Posts: 2575

Hunting for sport may be morally wrong for some, but the way I see it nothing is changing, the scale is not tipping either way. Hunting a deer for sport is as insignificant as a cat killing a bird, you don't care, you just say "Eww" and walk by.

To quickly sum it all up, I'm not saying sport hunting is right, i'm saying it's not upsetting anything in the world. If you don't like people hunting for the sake of hunting then that's your opinion.

2009-06-18 23:28:00

Author:
Sage

Posts: 2068

1.
"The point here is the killing of the animal. Only a minority of people object to the use of eggs and milk.."

2.
Plants are not conscious and are not nearly "as alive" as animals. Plants do not suffer, therefore are seen as an expendable resource

So you're saying that if the majority of people were good with killing crime and such that would make it ok?
Or that just because not many people disapprove its all good?

2.
So...
Acording to that statement abortion is perfectly ok as the fetus is not fully developed and aren't concious so they're not "as alive" as other living things?
Look, they might not be "as alive" but the point it they ARE alive, killing a plant IS like killing an animal, or are you saying just because something isn't as developed as a human its ok to kill it?
Because animals aren't "as alive" as humas, so according to your logic, its perfectly fine to kill animals...

look, wether you like it or not, there has to be killing for animals
(oos)

to survive, wether it be killing plant or other animals, animals have to eat other beings that were once alive to survive, since unlike our fellow plants we can't absorb energy directly from the sun or the nutrients from the earth.
We cant use electricity or fire, the only abundant non living easy acces thing we can consume is water, and you'd only live for only a couple of weeks withwater alone, so you either kill and eat or starve and die, your call.

2009-06-18 23:29:00

Author:
Silverleon

Posts: 6707

Here's one thing we need to do:

Start hunting humans. Overpopulation is destorying the erf, people!

2009-06-18 23:38:00

Author:
qrtda235566

Posts: 3664

Silverleon your arguement is a bit weird
You're saying that killing a plant is the same as killing an animal, which isn't true

Plants can't experience fear or pain, while animals can. That's why killing animals is morally wrong.
The same argument justifies abortion, because the fetus can't experience fear or pain until a certain stage in development.

2009-06-18 23:40:00

Author:
Dexiro

Posts: 2100

Here's one thing we need to do:

Start hunting humans. Overpopulation is destorying the erf, people!

Dang the Earth! Only dang hippies care bout da planet

2009-06-18 23:40:00

Author:
RockSauron

Posts: 10882

Dang the Earth! Only dang hippies care bout da planet

Well, I need more living space Rock! I can't build my giant castle with all these babies crawling around the place. PEOPLE HUNT!

2009-06-18 23:41:00

Author:
qrtda235566

Posts: 3664

2009-06-18 23:44:00

Author:
Sage

Posts: 2068

So you're saying that if the majority of people were good with killing crime and such that would make it ok?
Or that just because not many people disapprove its all good?

No, not at all. I may have phrased that wrong. What I meant was that it was common understanding that milking an animal, harvesting eggs etc. does not harm the animal and is therefore okay.

2.
So...
Acording to that statement abortion is perfectly ok as the fetus is not fully developed and aren't concious so they're not "as alive" as other living things?
Look, they might not be "as alive" but the point it they ARE alive, killing a plant IS like killing an animal, or are you saying just because something isn't as developed as a human its ok to kill it?
Because animals aren't "as alive" as humas, so according to your logic, its perfectly fine to kill animals...

You're twisting my words here, extending my original goal of that point. If something is not conscious, and has no opportunity to ever become conscious, such as a plant, then it is okay to use it as a resource.

look, wether you like it or not, there has to be killing for animals
(oos)

to survive, wether it be killing plant or other animals, animals have to eat other beings that were once alive to survive, since unlike our fellow plants we can't absorb energy directly from the sun or the nutrients from the earth.
We cant use electricity or fire, the only abundant non living easy acces thing we can consume is water, and you'd only live for only a couple of weeks withwater alone, so you either kill and eat or starve and die, your call.

Animals need to kill other animals to survive. That's perfectly fine. My point is that we don't have to kill animals to survive as we have advanced, as a race, to search for alternative means of food. Animals have to die, yes, but we don't have to kill them. The human race has done nothing but disrupt and exploit the natural order.

2009-06-18 23:45:00

Author:
Killian

Posts: 2575

Sigh...
I'm simply saying "If you have a problem eating a living being, you should have a problem eating any kind of living being.
Otherwise you're just a plain old hippocrate.

2009-06-18 23:49:00

Author:
Silverleon

Posts: 6707

Of course, Killian, not eating meat is further disrupting the natural order. But so is farming. And guns...

Right people, all meat now comes from bear-handed hunting only from now on. That should be enough of a challenge for awesomemans as well...

Sage, killing another person doesn't change anything in the world as a whole, but that's not a basis for it being morally acceptable.

2009-06-18 23:49:00

Author:
rtm223

Posts: 6497

Sigh...
I'm simply saying "If you have a problem eating a living being, you should have a problem eating any kind of living being.
Otherwise you're just a plain old hippocrate.

I don't recall him saying he has a problem eating a living being
He just said that it's wrong for humans to eat meat

2009-06-18 23:57:00

Author:
Dexiro

Posts: 2100

Sage, killing another person doesn't change anything in the world as a whole, but that's not a basis for it being morally acceptable.

Of course not, if someone could go out and shoot someone to death and just brush the blood off of their shirt like nothing happened they should be in a cell for life. Not many can live without constant worry of what they did.

2009-06-18 23:57:00

Author:
Sage

Posts: 2068

I don't recall him saying he has a problem eating a living being
He just said that it's wrong for humans to eat meat

Sir, i facepalm at you....
Let see if i can write it in a way you migh be able to understand.
Animal - a living being you kill to eat, he has a problem with that.
Plant - also a living being you kill to eat, he has no problem with that.
So if you have a problem with killing a living being for food you should have problem killing any kind of living being, or else you're just a hippocrate.
Do you understand what i'm saying now?

2009-06-19 00:10:00

Author:
Silverleon

Posts: 6707

Sir, i facepalm at you....
Let see if i can write it in a way you migh be able to understand.
Animal - a living being you kill to eat, he has a problem with that.
Plant - also a living being you kill to eat, he has no problem with that.
So if you have a problem with killing a living being for food you should have problem killing any kind of living being, or else you're just a hippocrate.
Do you understand what i'm saying now?

Well maybe he means...

Animal - A living, feeling, being you kill to eat, he has a problem with that.

Plant - A living, non-feeling, being you kill to eat, he has no problem with that.

I'm for neither sides, but I believe that's what he means.

2009-06-19 00:15:00

Author:
Whalio Cappuccino

Posts: 5250

Gah!
Ok, seems like you don't get my example with plant, so i'll used bug and insects for example this time.
Normally people don't eat bug/insects, but sometimes they do and no one has a problem with that, and in case you haven't noticed, they DO have a concience, they move, feel and such.

Also, don't tell me you've never squashed a spider, slapped a mosquiteo in your face/arm, or stepped on a roach or any other bug, because you know you have.
Now do i hear any complaints about killing bugs?
*gasps*
No???
But they're living beings, they move they breathe, they feel!
Then why is it different to kill a bug from killing an animal?
We kill bugs/insect like nothing, so just because they're bugs its ok to kill them?
Give it up even your name (Killian) has the word "Kill" in it.

You know you have killed living beings before, wether it be Plants, bugs, insects, or even small animals like mice/ rats and such.

2009-06-19 00:23:00

Author:
Silverleon

Posts: 6707

You know you have killed living beings before, wether it be Plants, bugs, insects, or even small animals like mice/ rats and such.

Hmm you make a good point, but like I said, I'm neither for or against the topic at hand.

2009-06-19 00:25:00

Author:
Whalio Cappuccino

Posts: 5250

You know you have killed living beings before, wether it be Plants, bugs, insects, or even small animals like mice/ rats and such.

I have killed many, many things before. For food or out of irritation as you have said. It clearly says in my initial post that I am not for, or against hunting or the slaughter of animals for other means. I am just pointing out that hunting and eating meat are both done for enjoyment rather than necessity. Why you are bringing bugs and plants into it is beyond me.

Oh, and after that "gasps" in your post, instead of "no" it should have been: Yes, many people oppose the killing of bugs as they are seen as animals and conscious animals at that. (http://www.news.com.au/heraldsun/story/0,21985,25655173-663,00.html) You are making it out to seem that I said that bugs were unconscious beings, which I never did.

2009-06-19 00:42:00

Author:
Killian

Posts: 2575

Gah!
But they're living beings, they move they breathe, they feel!
Then why is it different to kill a bug from killing an animal?
We kill bugs/insect like nothing, so just because they're bugs its ok to kill them?
Give it up even your name (Killian) has the word "Kill" in it.

You know you have killed living beings before, wether it be Plants, bugs, insects, or even small animals like mice/ rats and such.

You make a good point with the whole killing bugs thing, but i still don't understand what you were trying to say about people killing plants

Oh and i personally don't kill bugs for fun, i kill them because i'm petrified of them xD
I usually make an effort not to kill them though, especially if it's something cute like a bumblebee :3

2009-06-19 00:48:00

Author:
Dexiro

Posts: 2100

I was redirected here by Killian....

Silverleon, animals, bugs, humans, have thing called a NERVOUS SYSTEM. This allows them to feel, feel pain, feel dismay.... Plants don't have that.... The use of the term 'living' towards them means they're made up of organic cells, it doesn't go farther than that. In the end, other than the fact it isn't made artificially, plants aren't living at all.

2009-06-19 00:55:00

Author:
Astrosimi

Posts: 2046

@ Astrosimi:
Read my previous post...

@ Killian:
The reason i bring the bugs is again tha same reason, if you have a problem with hunting, which is basically killing animals, you should have a problem with the killing any kind of lvingin being, that's why i first brough the argument with plants, since you didn't get it ibrought the argument with killing bugs/insects and other small animals, which many seems not to have a problem with killing, even tho its exactly the same as killing an animal for fun...
Sheesh, how many times am i gonna have to explain that?

2009-06-19 01:02:00

Author:
Silverleon

Posts: 6707

Well i've just done some quick research and it turns out that bugs can't feel pain or emotions, so your argument is invalid

http://en.allexperts.com/q/Entomology-Study-Bugs-665/insects-feel-pain.htm

2009-06-19 01:07:00

Author:
Dexiro

Posts: 2100

Well i've just done some quick research and it turns out that bugs can't feel pain or emotions, so your argument is invalid

http://en.allexperts.com/q/Entomology-Study-Bugs-665/insects-feel-pain.htm

BANG! (Fistpump) That is how we DO IT!
http://rainbowsphere.oniichannoecchi.com/wp-content/uploads/2008/10/hi5.jpg

2009-06-19 01:13:00

Author:
Astrosimi

Posts: 2046

Well i've just done some quick research and it turns out that bugs can't feel pain or emotions, so your argument is invalid

http://en.allexperts.com/q/Entomology-Study-Bugs-665/insects-feel-pain.htm

You're still killing a living being, a conciousness, doesn't matter if it feels pain or not, you're still stopping the exisance of that being.
Or are you telling me if humans and animals didn't feel pain it would be okay to kill them?

Ok, so if people just shoot the animal directly in the head, so that they don't feel any pain that makes it okay then?
After all, they don't feel pain that way... >_>

2009-06-19 01:15:00

Author:
Silverleon

Posts: 6707

If no living thing feels pain or emotions, then yes it would be ok to kill anything

With no emotions noone is effected negatively by something dieing. The victim wouldn't have any fear, noone with any relation with the victim would feel sad, and the person who killed the animal wouldn't feel any guilt.
Life continues as normal

2009-06-19 01:17:00

Author:
Dexiro

Posts: 2100

... I must say, this topic went unexpectedly. I thought for sure it was a huge debate about what life is and what counts and a flame war that dould destroy it. Instead... it's an argument about bugs O_o.

I would be surprised, but at Gamefaqs... eh... those topics went derailed SO MUCH more then this ahs... >_>

2009-06-19 01:19:00

Author:
RockSauron

Posts: 10882

This has gotten way off-topic. Please stop arguing about bugs.

2009-06-19 01:19:00

Author:
Killian

Posts: 2575

You're still killing a living being, a conciousness, doesn't matter if it feels pain or not, you're still stopping the exisance of that being.
Or are you telling me if humans and animals didn't feel pain it would be okay to kill them?

Ok, so if people just shoot the animal directly in the head, so that they don't feel any pain that makes it okay then?
After all, they don't feel pain that way... >_>

I have to agree with this, however, CAN WE GET BACK ON TRACK!? THIS IS ABOUT HUNTING

2009-06-19 01:20:00

Author:
Astrosimi

Posts: 2046

I am on track!
I'm just setting examples, and comparison, without those posts i'm proving my point about hunting! >_<

Maybe you just want to change topic since you're loosing?

(jk)

You know?
Thi could easly been avoided if you could've just let my nice little short post alone, but nooo you wanted a full explanation...
And thus here we are XD

Anywho, admit it, if you think any kind of hunting hunting, which is killing an animal for any good or bad apparent reason is wrong you should feel the same about killing/hunting ANY kind of living being, or as said before, you're just a hippocrate!

2009-06-19 01:27:00

Author:
Silverleon

Posts: 6707

Anywho, admit it, if you think any kind of hunting hunting, which is killing an animal for any good or bad apparent reason is wrong you should feel the same about killing/hunting ANY kind of living being, or as said before, you're just a hippocrate!

Yes, but my point is that I never said otherwise. When referring to animals, I meant all animals.

2009-06-19 01:30:00

Author:
Killian

Posts: 2575

You're still not making any sense Silverleon

I don't understand why people who are against hunting should feel bad about killing plants...

Plants (and bugs as i've discovered) don't experience emotions or pain so it's perfectly fine to kill them if you need too. It's not comparable at all to killing animals that DO feel emotions and pain.

2009-06-19 01:31:00

Author:
Dexiro

Posts: 2100

2009-06-19 01:35:00

Author:
Silverleon

Posts: 6707

If I feel bad about killing something that can consciously decide what to do, and I don't feel bad about killing something that is little more than a biological function (ahem plants), that doesn't seem hypocritical. Destroying thought - bad, destroying life that has no thought - not bad.

2009-06-19 01:55:00

Author:
Loius

Posts: 342

Tch, you guys still don't get it, the whole point of my posts is not to prove wether killing plants/ bugs is as bad as killng animals...

Btw, you guys aren't even making any statements for your cause, just making answers to defend from mine, kinda like i'm attacking you and you can only defend and not attack, come on people, don't just base your statements to defend from mine.

Speaking of which, is anyone even on my side?
Or is it like 20 people vs me alone?

2009-06-19 02:03:00

Author:
Silverleon

Posts: 6707

I'm not sure i really understood which side you were on Silver xD

2009-06-19 02:08:00

Author:
Dexiro

Posts: 2100

Kinda in both...
Look, as i said before, killing for fun/ or just to kill something is bad and shouldn't be done.

Killing for food or so the animal doesn't kill you first is "ok", never said it was "good", just that it was reasonable.

Look, i'm going to put another example, don't respond according to it since its just an "example"

Fishing, as simple as that.
Or do you think going fishing to a pond to get some fish to eat is evil and moraly wrong?

2009-06-19 02:17:00

Author:
Silverleon

Posts: 6707

If people didn't kill for fun, we wouldn't have videogames! Except Noby Noby Boy.

2009-06-19 02:52:00

Author:
qrtda235566

Posts: 3664

Just an FYI, I haven't read through every single post in this thread yet.

But here's my 2c:

Hunting is a part of who we are as human beings. Like it or not, we've evolved towards eating meat. A simple look at us biologically will reveal this to be true: our digestive tract is far shorter proportionally than herbivores, we have many pointy teeth that're geared towards eating meat, the digestive enzymes we produce are not as efficient at breaking down plants, etc.

Now that's not to say that you couldn't survive without eating meat or animal products, it's just that you'd need a far greater amount and variety of food to match the compounds you can synthesize from meat.

Also, not wearing any animal products and wearing only synthetics: How are synthetics made? Factories... factories upon factories which means destroying entire ECOSYSTEMS to clear room for them, and all the toxic and non-biodegradable waste they produce.

Plenty of animals die to grow crops, too... millions of insects and small animals are killed via insecticides and during the process of harvesting. Hunters are routinely contracted to protect the crops from wild animals. To create farm land we also have to destroy and morph entire ecosystems to the crops' needs.

You cannot survive as a living thing in this universe without affecting the life of another. If you can live a vegan lifestyle, good for you, but understand that it's a luxary and doesn't put you on the moral high ground. There is NOTHING immoral about eating to survive, and anyone that argues otherwise needs a healthy slap of reality.

Because once again, a vegan lifestyle means you consume far more to live healthfully, spending far more money, and leaving a greater footprint on the environment. Live it if you can afford to, but if everyone did we'd drive our entire planet to extinction eventually.

2009-06-19 04:32:00

Author:
Foofles

Posts: 2278

Who is to say what is right and what is wrong? The real violence occurs when people start declaring moral absolutes rather than letting men make their own decisions.

If it is wrong to kill, then it is wrong to defend myself from the psychopath chainsaw murderer.

If it is wrong to lie, then it is wrong for me to lie to the nazi officer about the Jews in my attic.

If it is wrong to "hurt" or "interrupt" nature, then our whole existence is a sin.

Nature is just another abstract human idea that has been taken advantage of by animal rights groups. Morals are just the projection of empathy onto the world.

If you really want to improve the world, give everyone more freedom. Don't stop people from killing things. It will just lead to more violence and killing. It's all a vicious cycle, whether you be fighting for "good" or "evil."

2009-06-19 06:02:00

Author:
Code1337

Posts: 3476

If it is wrong to kill, then it is wrong to defend myself from the psychopath chainsaw murderer.

No, in that case it would be wrongest to intentionally kill the psychopath chainsaw murderer before attempting other methods of subdual, and least wrong to kill the PCM as a last resort.

If it is wrong to lie, then it is wrong for me to lie to the nazi officer about the Jews in my attic.

Is it more wrong to lie, or more wrong to kill? You would be killing if you revealed them. I find it hard to believe that lying and killing would be equally despicable; and in fact I believe that lying to save lives would be a morally good action.

If it is wrong to "hurt" or "interrupt" nature, then our whole existence is a sin.

I'd like to suggest that, as part of nature, it is impossible for us to naturally disrupt nature. It is only when a foreign element is introduced that we can hurt nature - whether that be stupidity, stubbornness, malice, whatever; the foreign element itself is the sin, not the human responsible.

Nature is just another abstract human idea that has been taken advantage of by animal rights groups. Morals are just the projection of empathy onto the world.

Yes.

If you really want to improve the world, give everyone more freedom. Don't stop people from killing things. It will just lead to more violence and killing. It's all a vicious cycle, whether you be fighting for "good" or "evil."

I don't think more violence and killing would be acceptable. Regardless of its good or evil.

2009-06-19 08:26:00

Author:
Loius

Posts: 342

I will put an arrow through a deer in a second, have it processed and be eating deer sausage and deer burgers in about a week.

The first deer I got with a bow laid down on the ground behind the tree I was in and the wound was not critical. I had to walk up to him while he looked at me and put another arrow in him. He jumped up and ran about 10 feet before getting his rack snagged in the limbs of a fallen tree. He died about 5 seconds later. I felt bad that it went that way and would have preferred killing him on the first shot, but the sausage and burgers were still just as good.

2009-06-19 15:55:00

Author:
rz22g

Posts: 340

My point is that we all support the killing of animals indirectly for our own pleasure.

Indirectly.

Don't wake people from their sleep. Don't break people out of their shells.

2009-06-19 16:06:00

Author:
Unknown User

Even in Biblical days it was never morally "wrong" to hunt. It was always the motivation behind hunting that mattered the most.

It was never "morally" wrong from the Bible's standpoint to hunt or eat meat (if that's what you're basing morals on), but hunting just for the enjoyment of killing WAS considered wrong. People were expected to treat animals with kindness.

It all comes down to a concience matter, and what your own motivations are - which means this kind of discussion is difficult to argue based on the diverse beliefs here.

I PERSONALLY enjoy eating meat, but unless necessary wouldn't want to hunt because I hate the thought of killing animals myself. I have moles in my yard destroying the grass.... I got traps for them but when they came in the mail and I realized it entailed putting spikes through the moles I never used them. I figured I would rather have a messed up yard than put spikes through a mole.

2009-06-19 16:26:00

Author:
CCubbage

Posts: 4430

Hunting is the only reason we lasted through the Ice Age

Hunting: 1
PETA: 0

2009-06-19 17:25:00

Author:
Aurongel

Posts: 221

Ive never been on a hunt myself but i do come from a family who used to hunt, on my Dads side of the family, my Aunt and her husband own a house in the country where they used to hunt and keep hunting dogs but they don't do it anymore. I dont agree with fox hunting and my Aunt never participated in fox hunting she used to hunt game birds but i dont see anything wrong with hunting game birds. Fox hunting is cruel though.

The village where i live the Butcher hunts rabbit and pheasant and puts them up outside his shop for purchase.

2009-06-19 18:24:00

Author:
PlayBeyond

Posts: 123

No, in that case it would be wrongest to intentionally kill the psychopath chainsaw murderer before attempting other methods of subdual, and least wrong to kill the PCM as a last resort.
... and people are going to think about this as he's coming at them with a chainsaw? Doesn't seem fair to me. :/

Is it more wrong to lie, or more wrong to kill? You would be killing if you revealed them. I find it hard to believe that lying and killing would be equally despicable; and in fact I believe that lying to save lives would be a morally good action.
But you've created that yourself, it was never put in any holy text. Which helps prove my point that man creates his own sort of morals out of his empathy.

I'd like to suggest that, as part of nature, it is impossible for us to naturally disrupt nature. It is only when a foreign element is introduced that we can hurt nature - whether that be stupidity, stubbornness, malice, whatever; the foreign element itself is the sin, not the human responsible.
That's interesting, because I would say that all those you listed are extremely present in nature. Goats get in fights all the time. Sheep are extremely stupid. Donkeys can be extremely stubborn.

I view us to be nature so to claim that we are destroying or disrupting nature seems like complete drivel to me.

I don't think more violence and killing would be acceptable. Regardless of its good or evil.
Agreed with you there.

2009-06-19 18:28:00

Author:
Code1337

Posts: 3476

My point with the chainsaw is if one is a person who's really really worried about that sort of thing, that's what should be crossing one's mind. If I was armed with a lethal weapon against a chainsaw maniac, I'd probably just unload on them until they stopped twitching. I'd save my life and that of whoever else they were gonna maniac, I would tell myself afterward.

While those qualities are present in nature, they are not present to a detrimental degree - sheep are prey, donkeys... do donkey things. But when humans get it in their head that wooden furniture is teh bombz and level a forest ... that's greedy/ignorant. Then when they hear how many species they extinctified, and then do it again - that's stubborn, stupid, careless, greedy, etc.

I think I should just say 'With great power comes great responsibility', nyuk nyuk nyuk.

2009-06-19 19:59:00

Author:
Loius

Posts: 342

does the size of the animal matter

have you ever caught a fly and took a wing off of it.
or taken the legs off a daddy long legs spider.

how come the size of the animal plays such a role in people caring if someone is torturing it.

or maybe its only animals that can make noise that society doesnt like people to torture.

it worst to kill a deer to eat it or cut down a two hundred year old tree to make a piece of lumber

how come vegitarians dont mind killing plants
is it again becuase they dont scream

hunting should never be banned government shouldnt tell you what you can eat by forcing you to go to a store to buy what animals that the government found morally exceptable to kill.

the government should also not ban what plants people are allowed to harvest.

prohibition is a dangerous thing and usually leads to deaths due to the fact that you are forcing people to be criminals

hunting wild animals should be fine as long no one is doing it in excess as was done to buffalo. That is basically why you need a liscense so you can limit people from hunting excessively and wastefully

government needs to think long and fhard about the reprocussion of an all out ban of anything. Regulation is a much safer path than prohibition.

2009-06-19 20:16:00

Author:
deboerdave

Posts: 384

Exactly my point!
Dave actually gets what i've been trying to say!
Bravo, he got ever single one of my points.
He among others seem to get what i've been saying since i entered this discussion.

2009-06-19 21:09:00

Author:
Silverleon

Posts: 6707

I'm still completely oblivious to what either of you are trying to say xD

2009-06-19 21:19:00

Author:
Dexiro

Posts: 2100

You hunt for food. It's nature.

However, if someone wants to hunt purely for fun, who am I to stop them? True, I wouldn't do it myself, I love animals. I even love spiders, and would never think of harming or killing one. But then again, just like with everything, it's all down to personal choice. Just like smoking, drinking, abortion, euthanasia, you know, it's called logic.

However, there is one exception - clubbing baby seals. That's just ****ing evil.

2009-06-19 21:23:00

Author:
KoRnDawwg

Posts: 1424

Did anyone know that a species of pigeon went extinct because of hunting for fun? Over 1,000,000 of these birds were killed. Just a quick fact.

2009-06-19 21:27:00

Author:
EchoEchoOneNine

Posts: 61

People only feel bad when they feel a connection to the animal; though my pet rabbits were killed I would have no problem eating a rabbit that I had not known and that someone else had killed.

When you have no emotional attachment to an animal then it's just food and food is fuel.

Hunting is a sport and when moderated it can actually help the balance of nature.

Though some people may take offence I just don't see the point in being a vegetarian; people at school who are vegetarians say how they're saving the planet (a minority maybe?) I just get myself a double helping of meat...

Also on animals becoming extinct, if they don't have a use in nature then it's a big meh from me; it's called natural selection and if an animal is failing it's because another species is better.

2009-06-19 21:27:00

Author:
Shermzor

Posts: 1330

I think I should just say 'With great power comes great responsibility', nyuk nyuk nyuk.
We don't have great power, that's my point. We're just another mutation, just another species. Species die all the times, that's what nature does. 99% of all species that have ever existed are extinct, they're gone. We didn't kill them all. It's called evolution and survival of the fittest. Other species are merely unfit to survive, so they die out. That's how it works.

Not saying we should go and kill animals for fun, but just don't call it something it's not. Don't make your morals absolute. It just leads to problems.

And as for us pretending to have great power, we are just another part of nature. Species that do well will survive, others won't. Just let nature be. Humans are animals too, so let people enjoy being a part of nature. It's what we do best.

2009-06-19 21:49:00

Author:
Code1337

Posts: 3476

does the size of the animal matter

have you ever caught a fly and took a wing off of it.
or taken the legs off a daddy long legs spider.

how come the size of the animal plays such a role in people caring if someone is torturing it.

or maybe its only animals that can make noise that society doesnt like people to torture.

No, but I think intelligence plays a role. The truth is that it's a world where it's every animal for themselves, and since humans aren't particularly strong animals we live in packs, which builds trust and morals and such. If humans were strong enough to survive on our own, then killing other humans wouldn't even be a big deal.

We don't have great power, that's my point. We're just another mutation, just another species. Species die all the times, that's what nature does. 99% of all species that have ever existed are extinct, they're gone. We didn't kill them all. It's called evolution and survival of the fittest. Other species are merely unfit to survive, so they die out. That's how it works.

Not saying we should go and kill animals for fun, but just don't call it something it's not. Don't make your morals absolute. It just leads to problems.

And as for us pretending to have great power, we are just another part of nature. Species that do well will survive, others won't. Just let nature be. Humans are animals too, so let people enjoy being a part of nature. It's what we do best.

But we do have incredible power. Much more power than a lion or a deer. We could destroy Earth if we wanted to. We can clone. We can manipulate life for our benefit. That's power. I can see it being possible in the future to alter reality. Whatever reality is

2009-06-19 22:16:00

Author:
qrtda235566

Posts: 3664

But we do have incredible power. Much more power than a lion or a deer. We could destroy Earth if we wanted to. We can clone. We can manipulate life for our benefit. That's power. I can see it being possible in the future to alter reality. Whatever reality is

I meant power in the divine sense, but I agree with the statement above.

2009-06-19 22:32:00

Author:
Code1337

Posts: 3476

Did anyone know that a species of pigeon went extinct because of hunting for fun? Over 1,000,000 of these birds were killed. Just a quick fact.

Did you take that from that book The Wringer or whatever it is called? The one where they wring the pigeon's necks?

2009-06-19 23:35:00

Author:
qrtda235566

Posts: 3664

Did anyone know that a species of pigeon went extinct because of hunting for fun? Over 1,000,000 of these birds were killed. Just a quick fact.

The passenger pigeon?

It's not so much "hunting for fun" as it was greatly unregulated commercial hunting. They were hunted and captured in high numbers for commercial purposes and nobody thought anything of it since there were billions of the birds around. They were sold as cheap food, live targets for skeet, etc.

It's widely debated whether the commercial hunting was the primary cause of its extinction, but I'm sure it played a role. One thing to note was this was before any regulations in hunting were in place by the government. .. regulated hunting is essential to maintain an ecosystem.

2009-06-19 23:50:00

Author:
Foofles

Posts: 2278

LBPCentral Archive Statistics

Posts: 1077139 Threads: 69970 Members: 9661 Archive-Date: 2019-01-19

Datenschutz

Aus dem Archiv wurden alle persönlichen Daten wie Name, Anschrift, Email etc. - aber auch sämtliche Inhalte wie z.B. persönliche Nachrichten - entfernt.
Die Nutzung dieser Webseite erfolgt ohne Speicherung personenbezogener Daten. Es werden keinerlei Cookies, Logs, 3rd-Party-Plugins etc. verwendet.