Death, Lies, & Videotape

  • Thread starter Thread starter Marfran
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
On the farm, when we were 7 we were given a pig to raise on Easter, this pig was the sole responsibility of the 7 year old. The 7 year old was charged with providing everything this animal needed for it. Then the next year on good Friday the pig was killed and butchered and turned into the Easter ham. You do that and you will know where your food comes from. You do that and you will not hold the types of hypocrisy you mention above.

As for the logical fallacy that I see in people’s arguments. Go ahead and answer the question, why not? Why can’t I have pet cat that I love and still eat other animals?
I would think that doing that at 7 would create the detachment that would make it possible to say - ‘why not?’ — so I guess that is the answer - for you there is no reason why not… for many taking time to consider that question makes them consider that they would not be willing to kill an animal for food - so then they shouldn’t want someone else to do it for them.
 
No, this is not a case of reductio ad absurdum. I used an analogy to show that your claim is based on the unstated premise of “might makes right”. We’re clever tool using mammals, so we have the right to control and harvest other species.
Now you’re using the logical fallacy of called a straw man argument. I never said that because we’re clever tool using mammals we have the right to control and harvest other species. Just because you claim I said something, doesn’t make it true.

I said that these other species do not possess emotions, feelings, or comprehension on anywhere near the level that we do. If you herded humans into an encampment where they were well taken care of, but at the age of 20 (roughly the same human age to the age bovines are killed at) the people were removed en mass and didn’t return. We would know what was going on. These animals do not have the intellect and reasoning that humans have.

I am claiming that the arguments are based on the personification of animals that do not possess the human attributes being attributed to them. A cow will **** in water and then turn around and drink that water if no one stops it. This is not out of necessity. This is a cow in a giant pasture that walks over, craps in its water source, and then drinks the water. This animal does not have human emotions, cognition, or thought processes. So stop trying to convince me it does.

If you want to make an argument for animal cruelty, then do so without personification and I will listen. But this argument of animals deserving the same rights as humans is simply ridiculous because they are not humans. If you are going to make that argument then I think the other poster who is making a case for plant rights has a point. If animals can be given human rights than why can’t plants be given animal rights?

I liked burning your straw man, what’s the next logical fallacy you’d like to throw at me.

And just so you’re away using the Latin name for the fallacy doesn’t make you look smart or worldly, it makes you look arrogant and pedantic.
 
God **did not **make us predators. Please read Genesis.
The Bible is not a science textbook. I appologize for claiming that God made us predators, I was mingling science and theology. Allow me to correct myself. Why did God allow us to evolve as predators?
Our eyes are forward facing (binocular vision), as are other primates, for grasping branches and picking fruit from trees.
Oh, I see. So, we’re the only primate that eats meat?
Our teeth **are not **designed to eat meat.
Okay, how come only carnivores and omnivores have canine teeth. Herbivores do not possess canine teeth. Humans have canine teeth. Can you explain this to me, no theology allowed here.
All animals by design have all their equipment attached to their bodies.
Ahh the old humans use tools argument that was debunked in the 1960’s. There are gorillas (could be chimps or orangutans I’m not 100% certain) who dip sticks in honey, then dip the sticks into anthills, the ants climb on the stick and the gorilla eats the ants off the stick. Birds that eat shell fish catch the shell fish, fly them into the air, and drop them on a hard surface to crack the shells so they can consume the fish. Should I go on or is this enough proof that humans aren’t the only tool users out there?
Humans would have a difficult time **killing ** or hunting any animal without the use of tools, guns, arrows, snares, traps, etc.
And birds would have a difficult time eating shell fish. I guess you should go tell all those birds to stop ignoring their nature.
When is the last time you ate a steak without a knife and a fork?
Honestly, last night. It was between two pieces of bread and smothered in A1. It was really good, want me to save you some next time? And really, last time I was camping, I killed a rabbit by throwing a stone at it, then I whole roasted it. It makes the meat so sweet and juicy to burn the fur off and cook it in the sealed skin. Then I peeled by the skin, which came off easily once it was crisped, pulled it’s organs out with my hands and ate it with no tools. Okay, I cooked it first but that’s because man has been cooking his food so long he has evolved to eat cooked food. We have organs (i.e. the appendix) that we do not use anymore which at one time helped us digest raw meats.
Ground beef is ground by machinery, not our teeth. Animals eat their meat raw. If we were designed to eat meat why do we cook it? (Hint: E-coli, etc.) Vultures can eat all kinds of even rotting meat without getting sick because they have special enzymes in their stomachs. They were designed to eat meat.
We used to have those enzymes and organs. We still have the organs, they just don’t do anything. Man started cooking his food so many thousands of years ago that we have evolved to where we can’t eat raw meat anymore. It’s simple evolution.
I think that most people realize that we were** not designed **to eat meat.
I think that anyone who thinks that is small minded.
And anyone who follows the Bible would not use this argument.
And, anyone who attempts to use the Bible as a science book should wake up and smell the 21st century.
We, as in the passsage quoted from Scully, have used animals to survive in harsh conditions. This use granted to us by God after the Fall. But now, as we have evolved to not need animals as in the past, do we not have an obligation to God to be good stewards of the animals that He put us in charge of? If our use for them now only serves our vanity and luxury tastes is it still OK to use them?
First of all, I have made it very clear that I am not arguing that we should use animals for vain purposes. I do not consider eating meat a luxury taste. I think that it is perfectly morally acceptable to eat meat and here is why.

Humans, as an animal, have only one natural defense – our intellect. (Sure God gave it to us, but that’s not the point I’m making here.) This intellect allows us to not get eaten by animals which really should have wiped us off the face of the earth eons ago. We have become masters of nature: animals, plants, and earth by using this intellect. Why should we stop?

On top of all this. I really don’t care what you eat – why do you care what I eat?
 
Drawmack: It kind of doesn’t matter that an animal is not as smart as you. They are entitled to mercy too. God loves them too, He created them. Unborn human fetuses are not as smart as you and neither are the mentally retarded, people in comas, those who’ve had strokes, the senile… So if you use the reasoning that only the most intellegent have the right to life without imposed suffering and subjugation…

I can not imagine a 7 year old having to kill a pig. Having had to do that I can understand that that experience plays a heavy role in how you feel today–or don’t feel…
 
Humans make these creatures. We purposefully breed them, by the billions, to suffer and to be killed, and for no other purpose. We do not find them prancing about in the fields because God put them there–WE are manufacturing them.
I’m sorry, but we don’t bread them to suffer. I will agree with you that vealing is animal cruelty and I don’t eat veal because of that. However, the vast majority of animals that are raised for food are well taken care of. A healthy animal is worth way more than a sick one.
 
I don’t understand how this advances your argument that you should continue to eat meat. How about standing in solidarity with the poor and giving up the luxury meat that they can not afford to eat?
His argument was that we have become wealthy enough that we don’t have to eat meat. I was pointing out the flaw in his argument.
There is a very good article in the June, 2009, National Geographic, called The End of Plenty: The Global Food Crisis. It is a must read if you would like to understand how meat consumption affects the world globally, how resources that could go directly to people go to meat animals instead, and how even less food ends up in the mouths of human hungry because the affluent peoples just have to have that luxury meat.
Can you locate it on-line. I don’t subscribe to National Geographic because I don’t agree with some of their policies.
 
I find it ironic that** heart disease **is linked to animal product consumption. If we are supposed to eat meat, or drink cow’s milk, or eat cheese and eggs, then why does the fat build up in our arteries, often resulting in a fatal heart attack? Why are people who have survived this heart attack caused by plaque (from animal fat), told to change their diets?

For the posters who say* think with your head, and not your heart*…I say perhaps there is some God-given wisdom in your heart. Both your physical heart and the heart that you feel life with. And it is God who gave you both of your hearts.
I find it ironic that this is a fairly modern problem. Look at the diets of farmers in the 1800’s and look at their life spans (adjusting the average for all the infant deaths that had nothing to do with meat consumption). The average farmer lived into his 70’s or 80’s, ate a diet filled with meat, butter, milk, and eggs. And was healthy. This isn’t from consuming meat, it’s from sitting in cubicles, staring at computers all day and then coming home and parking it in front of the TV. Same is true for obesity. People aren’t having heart attacks from eating steak, people aren’t getting fat from eating steak, these things are happening because people are freaking lazy and are not working out enough.
 
I would think that doing that at 7 would create the detachment that would make it possible to say - ‘why not?’ — so I guess that is the answer - for you there is no reason why not… for many taking time to consider that question makes them consider that they would not be willing to kill an animal for food - so then they shouldn’t want someone else to do it for them.
This I will agree with. If someone is going to eat meat they should be able to deal with exactly what it is they are eating. People who have to hide from the fact that it’s an animal shouldn’t be eating it. If the only way you can enjoy meat is to “forget” that it comes from an animal, then you are being a hypocrite and I hate hypocrisy.
 
No one cares what you eat.*** You ***came here on your own volition and joined these discussions.
Yes, but I didn’t start the discussions. Someone who cares about the fact that I eat meat started the discussions. If no one cared what I ate then they wouldn’t start discussions telling others that eating meat is wrong.

This is also a logical fallacy boy we’re just ripe with them today.
 
Okay, how come only carnivores and omnivores have canine teeth. Herbivores do not possess canine teeth. Humans have canine teeth.
You got that science wrong! And many people do–so don’t feel alone. Not everyone is a dentist or a dental zoologist. Certain herbivores, do posses canine teeth–for example the horse and the antelope. Primates are frugivorous. The canine tooth is named for its position in the jaw. It is identified by a single long anchoring root. In the human jaw it is the stablest of teeth. It was named by man, not God.
 
Drawmack: It kind of doesn’t matter that an animal is not as smart as you. They are entitled to mercy too. God loves them too, He created them. Unborn human fetuses are not as smart as you and neither are the mentally retarded, people in comas, those who’ve had strokes, the senile… So if you use the reasoning that only the most intellegent have the right to life without imposed suffering and subjugation…
You are now comparing animals to unborn human fetuses to animals. Are you intending to imply that animals deserve the same rights as an unborn human? If this is your stance then can I ask you some more questions? Does an unborn fetus deserve the same rights as a born human child? Does a born human child deserve the same rights as an adult human (of course aside from the parenting and things like that – I’m talking basic human rights here)? So, are you implying that an animal deserves the same rights as a human?

This ladies and gentlemen is the problem with emotional appeals and staw men. That animal is not capable of the cognition which humans are capable of. In fact human children are capable of this cognition by about the age of two or three. You walk at a two or three year old with a mean look and a raised hand, they will cower from you because of their cognition. The same is true for the mentally retarded, stroke victims, etc. Animals do not possess this type of cognition. Sure an abused animal will cower from its abuser, but a human child will cower from aggressive behavior even if they never witnessed it before. Please stop personifying the animals, they are not people. They are not capable of the type of cognition that people are capable of.

The straw man that you used was that I spoke of man’s intellect and you’re speaking of man’s intelligence. These are not the same thing. Intellect encompasses much more than intelligence does.

Bang, bang, bang – another logical fallacy bites the dust.
I can not imagine a 7 year old having to kill a pig. Having had to do that I can understand that that experience plays a heavy role in how you feel today–or don’t feel…
Well, maybe you should imagine it. In the days of the caveman right up through the Native Americans of the 1800’s and probably some primitive peoples even today children began hunting small game at a very young age. It was both to teach them to hunt and to teach them were food comes from and the proper respect to pay to that food.
 
Can you locate it on-line. I don’t subscribe to National Geographic because I don’t agree with some of their policies.
I posted this in another thread. You are free to locate it on your own. That’s why I gave you the date of the publication. If the topic so interests you, you are free to do your own research.

The purpose of this thread is to engage in meaningful discussion about the film footage. If anyone feels the need to do additional research, by all means go ahead. The internet does make it easier to locate materials.
 
You got that science wrong! And many people do–so don’t feel alone. Not everyone is a dentist or a dental zoologist. Certain herbivores, do posses canine teeth–for example the horse and the antelope. Primates are frugivorous. The canine tooth is named for its position in the jaw. It is identified by a single long anchoring root. In the human jaw it is the stablest of teeth.
Our incisors are pointed for ripping and tearing not flat for grinding and mashing. We have the teeth of an omnivore. What is a frugivore? (With references please) If you’re going to tell me that people do not have the teeth of an omnivore I’m going to have to insist on references.
It was named by man, not God.
Can I have a stupid statement of the day plaque please?
 
I posted this in another thread. You are free to locate it on your own. That’s why I gave you the date of the publication. If the topic so interests you, you are free to do your own research.

The purpose of this thread is to engage in meaningful discussion about the film footage. If anyone feels the need to do additional research, by all means go ahead. The internet does make it easier to locate materials.
Nah, I’m good really. You suggested I read something supplemental, so I asked for a link and then you told me to do my own research. By all means you are welcomed to stop making references to outside resources if you’re just going to use them as an excuse to tell other people to do their own research.
 
Have you ever walked in a pair of horse shoes??? Yikes!!! And what would you do with the two extra ones? 😃
If I had several inch thick “toe nails” on the bottoms of my feet with the exposed skin tucked neatly away, I suppose I could handle horse shoes…
 
Well, maybe you should imagine it. In the days of the caveman right up through the Native Americans of the 1800’s and probably some primitive peoples even today children began hunting small game at a very young age. It was both to teach them to hunt and to teach them were food comes from and the proper respect to pay to that food.
My point exactly–we are no longer cave men, we are well beyond primitive, we have developed alternatives to meat (and healthier ones at that). Now that we are more advanced, more civillized, we can let go of the primitive ways.
 
Nah, I’m good really. You suggested I read something supplemental, so I asked for a link and then you told me to do my own research. By all means you are welcomed to stop making references to outside resources if you’re just going to use them as an excuse to tell other people to do their own research.
Why should I do your work for you??? If it interests you, look it up.
 
I find it ironic that** heart disease **is linked to animal product consumption. If we are supposed to eat meat, or drink cow’s milk, or eat cheese and eggs, then why does the fat build up in our arteries, often resulting in a fatal heart attack? Why are people who have survived this heart attack caused by plaque (from animal fat), told to change their diets?

For the posters who say* think with your head, and not your heart*…I say perhaps there is some God-given wisdom in your heart. Both your physical heart and the heart that you feel life with. And it is God who gave you both of your hearts.
Heart disease is not simply linked to meat cosumption. There are amino acids found only in meats beneficial to the heart. Don’t lecture me on this, I have a tiny bit of experience in this. Do you know what I did when my dog became really sick with heart problems? I took her off her heart medication that the doctor prescribed and put her on an amino acid called taurine. That taurine kept her heart strong and I didn’t have to keep her on her heart medication anymore. At least until nothing could help her ailing heart anymore. Cats go blind and have serious heart problems without taurine. How do I know this? Glad you asked!!! I knew of a vegetarian that my vet once told me about. Her cats started coming in with premature blindness, eye problems, heart problems and other minor problems. He didn’t find out the woman was vegetarian until much later, but when he found out, he also found out her cats were on vegetarian diets too. She refused to feed them meat, presumably because it was “cruel”, even though she knew it would cause health problems in her cats. She even refused to give them meat even after the vet told her she had to or the problems would escalate. Talk about using your heart? Was this vegetarian using her “heart”? More and more animals are finding taurine to be beneficial to their diets, especially those with heart problems - especially carnivores, insectivores, and omnivores. Humans? I’m not sure, but since I myself have prolapsed mitral valve and slighlty elevated BP, I’d be willing to bet that taurine would help me as well. I just don’t eat enough meat to get the proper amount, so I’d have to supplement. There are other beneficial amino acids found only in meat that benefit other areas of the body as well. Too much meat is your culprit, not meat in general. Don’t present biased false facts to support your case, some of us can see through it and it decreases credibility. Which is why I won’t listen to or even chuckle at some of the earlier posts trying to “prove” a totally veg diet is beneficial and “supposedly” good for the soul.

I’m sure you’re aware that plants have certain components that are fatal to the heart too. Your arguments are weak, you make a blanket statement above as if putting a single piece of meat in your mouth will cause a heart attack, and then don’t give any basis to it. Too much meat is a problem, just like eating too much of the foxglove that grows in your garden - which by the way, is toxic even if you ate a tiny amount.

God not only gave us a heart but a brain too, and reason is the result of using that brain. If you don’t use reason and use only your “heart” (which I’m becoming more and more convinced is purely emotion that you’re trying to get us to use), then you will never see the truth in things. Emotion should flow as the result of using reason, and if you have a strong emotion to people killing animals for food, then don’t eat meat. If you have a moderate to moderately strong emotion to eating meat, then eat meat in the proper proportions. But in all cases use reason, lest you fall into a trap that will be difficult to get out of. Emotion can be cause for a slippery slope if left unchecked.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top