like whales?

[dav.id]

I love you all for this topic. I think you're ready for your vegetarian kit http://www.goveg.com

Anyway, I've signed the aavaz online petition since a while. We were around 1 200 000 for a suspended period in the whales hunt. I've read last week that it wasn't enough and the hunt will continue until the next meeting in a one year.

hope & fear for the species.

[532nm]

Plants are alive and contain living cells too. Where are their rights?

[roland]

I guess you mised my point. until I or we keep killing and eating other animals we cant's tell others don't. it just difference of colture and not more than that. the western word think that everybody should fold up to their values and world-view. i mean ypou cant kill a mosquito that disturb you at the same time when you eating burger and say that those in Thailand who eating dogs are wrong or thos in Japan are bad couse they kill wales.

you're not really comparing a whale to a mosquito aren't you? can't believe you're point is like "hey the guys in the west kill mosquitos, we kill whales what's the difference?" ..

there are intelligent animals who have the ability to suffer or rather to feel suffering... and there are less intelligent animals who feel and think like nothing at all f.e. mosquitos..

furthermore there are animals who are threatened with extinction.. the japans hunt and kill these very intelligent and threatened animals and you're trying to legitimate it by saying that in other countries people kill mosquitos..

nothing but ridiculous..

Plants are alive and contain living cells too. Where are their rights?

humans don't have rights because they're alive and contain living cells.. it's because humans are a species which is able to feel suffering and consindering this fact it's unethical and obnoxious to harm such a species.. that's the consens on how people found the human rights...

not because we contain living cells..

[jessejames]

At what point is the intelligence/moral threshold crossed with animals?

[roland]

At what point is the intelligence/moral threshold crossed with animals?

don't understand your point.. do you mean where exactly the intelligence threshold is which determines whether it's unethical to kill a certain animal or not? .. hard to say of course.. but considering whales and dolphins it's pretty obvious that they know what's happening and are suffering incredibly much from beeing caged and killed.. they even suffer if you kill one of their fellows.. not like mosquitos or ants which are going to run over their dead fellow or eat him..

[jessejames]

Yes, that was my point. I've heard that slugs scream when salt is poured on them. Does that mean they feel pain? Is that enough for them to be considered across the threshold?

My point coincides with what uritotti wrote. Who would/will establish this threshold to abide by? And who's to say that's fair? Certainly I would think all animals would disagree with humanity's findings.

[uritotti]

I guess you mised my point. until I or we keep killing and eating other animals we cant's tell others don't. it just difference of colture and not more than that. the western word think that everybody should fold up to their values and world-view. i mean ypou cant kill a mosquito that disturb you at the same time when you eating burger and say that those in Thailand who eating dogs are wrong or thos in Japan are bad couse they kill wales.

you're not really comparing a whale to a mosquito aren't you? c

Yes I am, and why I'm shouldn't?!
Who decide that the whales have the right to live and the mosquito don’t?
You? Me? The human beings? Why? because the whales have flash and bones, because it more similar to us? We all have the same rights to live, we all feel pain.
You said because whales more intelligent. Who decide what is intelligence? The human beings again? How? Again just because those is more similar to us then others.
And if there are such a thing as universal intelligence who said that the dolphins are more intelligent than the pigs and the whales than the cows and the penguins than the octopus? It did an IQ test? And if it does did an IQ test and the whale have an better score than the pig, who decide that only the more intelligent animals should live?!
And if there is some true in that that only the more intelligent should live, why stop on the animal? lets do it on the humans either. Lets do IQ test to all human being and decide on a mark that who pass it live who don’t die. And why stop on the intelligence lets say that only the blonde with blue eyes live the others go to the gas chambers.
I have an blonde hair with grey-blue eyes. Woohoo lucky me!

[roland]

Yes I am, and why I'm shouldn't?!
Who decide that the whales have the right to live and the mosquito don’t?
You? Me? The human beings? Why? because the whales have flash and bones, because it more similar to us? We all have the same rights to live, we all feel pain.
You said because whales more intelligent. Who decide what is intelligence? The human beings again? How? Again just because those is more similar to us then others.
And if there are such a thing as universal intelligence who said that the dolphins are more intelligent than the pigs and the whales than the cows and the penguins than the octopus? It did an IQ test? And if it does did an IQ test and the whale have an better score than the pig, who decide that only the more intelligent animals should live?!
And if there is some true in that that only the more intelligent should live, why stop on the animal? lets do it on the humans either. Lets do IQ test to all human being and decide on a mark that who pass it live who don’t die. And why stop on the intelligence lets say that only the blonde with blue eyes live the others go to the gas chambers.
I have an blonde hair with grey-blue eyes. Woohoo lucky me!

you're kidding, right?

i haven't said a certain level of intelligence gives you human rights, f.e. the right to live.. i said it's the ability to suffer or rather to feel suffering.. if it would be intelligence which gives you the human rights we couldn't name it human rights cause obviously some humans don't reach a certain level of intelligence.. still no reason to refuse human rights to them... but all humans are able to feel suffering and that's why every human beeing has these rights..

that's why it's unethical to kill those animals because they feel the suffering.. by hunting them you cause serious suffer and morally you can't legitimate that.. otherwise you can legitimate the killing of a mosquito which attacks you because the fellow mosquitos won't even recognize the death of another mosquito and aren't according to actual research able to feel suffering..

Yes, that was my point. I've heard that slugs scream when salt is poured on them. Does that mean they feel pain? Is that enough for them to be considered across the threshold?

My point coincides with what uritotti wrote. Who would/will establish this threshold to abide by? And who's to say that's fair? Certainly I would think all animals would disagree with humanity's findings

.

scientists have methods to measure if a creature feels pain or not.. if the slug screams then it's perhaps obvious that they suffer and therefore it's unethical to pour salt on them.. cause you harm them and there's just no ethical reason to harm an animal except if its meat is needed as food in order to survive..

who this thresholds establishes? it's ethics.. no one has to follow the guidelines of ethics.. lots of things are done day by day even from governments which are unethical.. but usually findings in ethics lead to laws afterwards.. f.e. human rights