Ethical dilemma

[joe-90]

It's not an opinion. Evolution DOES play a part. City life is different - the pack is dispersed and that is why city life is unhealthy. In the city you can life next door to a neighbour for 20 years and never speak. Does that happen where you live Peaps?

 

[joinerjohn]

Perhaps the ALF haven't actually killed another, but they certainly sent letter bombs.(if not them, then a splinter group, very much based on the ALF) Hypothetical I know, but what if one had killed someone? Would you still be singing the praises of an organisation using terror tactics? What do you mean? Mink liberation is a no brainer? The mink went on to decimate wildlife in the areas they were released in . It caused more environmental damage to local eco systems than a farmer could have caused with a years supply of red diesel, but your ok with that?

 

[ladylola]

The release of mink is definately an own goal. They should have painted the animals really to make their fur unusable.
Or
another dilema
assuming they couldn't take the mink away and release them in their natural habitat should they have either left them there, released them with the full knowledge of the destruction they would cause to the local wildlife or maybe killed the animals themselves but mutilate or burn the bodies to render them useless to the fur trade? I.e. the death of a few saves more and potentially ruins the business they were being exploited by.

 

[alumni]

It's not an opinion. Evolution DOES play a part. City life is different - the pack is dispersed and that is why city life is unhealthy. In the city you can life next door to a neighbour for 20 years and never speak. Does that happen where you live Peaps?

If they realised how little human life means to him, then probably.

 

[peaps]

What is your position on animal rights then Peaps?

The abolitionist approach to animal rights maintains that all sentient beings, humans or nonhumans, have one right: the basic right not to be treated as the property of others.
Our recognition of the one basic right means that we must abolish, and not merely regulate, institutionalized animal exploitation—because it assumes that animals are the property of humans.
Just as we reject racism, sexism, ageism, and heterosexism, we reject speciesism. The species of a sentient being is no more reason to deny the protection of this basic right than race, sex, age, or sexual orientation is a reason to deny membership in the human moral community to other humans.
We recognize that we will not abolish overnight the property status of nonhumans, but we will support only those campaigns and positions that explicitly promote the abolitionist agenda. We will not support positions that call for supposedly “improved” regulation of animal exploitation. We reject any campaign that promotes sexism, racism, heterosexism or other forms of discrimination against humans.
We recognize that the most important step that any of us can take toward abolition is to adopt the vegan lifestyle and to educate others about veganism. Veganism is the principle of abolition applied to one’s personal life and the consumption of any meat, fowl, fish, or dairy product, or the wearing or use of animal products, is inconsistent with the abolitionist perspective.
We recognize the principle of nonviolence as the guiding principle of the animal rights movement. Violence is the problem; it is not any part of the solution.

http://www.abolitionistapproach.com/


Although I'm only human and fall short of the philosophy when it comes to violence. But abolitionist is the path I'm walking.

 

[gremlin16]

peaps are you a Fruitarianism or just a fruitcake

 

[peaps]

I can understand your point of view peaps for what it's worth and whilist I don't think it's completely wrong to eat animals (they eat each other after all) I always believe they should be treated decently and with consideration.
I'll put forward another question in the same vein if I may-
let us suppose there is a death penalty and a man kills a child, it's a clear case with overwhelming evidence of his guilt and he is hanged.
Now at the same time a horse tramples another child killing that child, and again all the evidence is there to prove beyond a doubt that the horse did it. Do we hang the horse?

If anyone is unsure try watching a film called The Hour of The Pig . It's set in medieaval France and starts with the excecution of a donkey for murder , which indeed was the case in those times animals were treated in that respect equally to humans. The film is a black comedy and centers around a trial of a pig for the murder of a child.

We still execute animal when they bite... Thanks for the reply it was welcome.

I understand that people eat meat, my children included. I chose not to eat meat and educate others to why.

 

[joinerjohn]

peaps, I just have to ask this. Do you have a dog or cat? (not as a pet, that would be against your ethics, but as a companion)
If the answer is yes, Do you force vegetarianism upon your dog/cat? If so, can you explain your reasoning for trying to turn a carnivorous animal into a vegan? Is this not against the animal's rights?

 

[joinerjohn]

Although I'm only human and fall short of the philosophy when it comes to violence.

So you condone violence when trying to make your point?

 

[peaps]

Although I'm only human and fall short of the philosophy when it comes to violence.

So you condone violence when trying to make your point?

Slow down, I'm trying to get on top of previous posts.

I don't condone violence against a person to make a point.

 

[peaps]

peaps, I just have to ask this. Do you have a dog or cat? (not as a pet, that would be against your ethics, but as a companion)
If the answer is yes, Do you force vegetarianism upon your dog/cat? If so, can you explain your reasoning for trying to turn a carnivorous animal into a vegan? Is this not against the animal's rights?

Yes we have many rescue animals that include cat's and dogs. The dogs are on a raw meat diet and the cat's eat meat also.

 

[gremlin16]

The dogs are on a raw meat diet and the cat's eat meat also

Please excuse my ignorance, but where does the meat come from.

 

[joinerjohn]

Although I'm only human and fall short of the philosophy when it comes to violence.

So you condone violence when trying to make your point?

I don't condone violence against a person to make a point.

But you say you fall short of the non violent philosophy. I can only assume you yourself would use violence to make your point?

 

[peaps]

Perhaps the ALF haven't actually killed another, but they certainly sent letter bombs.

People reported to be the ALF have sent hoax letter bombs, there is a difference.

(if not them, then a splinter group, very much based on the ALF)

More like the same people using a different name to fit their agenda?

Hypothetical I know, but what if one had killed someone?
Would you still be singing the praises of an organisation using terror tactics?

It wouldn't have though, would it..?

What do you mean? Mink liberation is a no brainer? The mink went on to decimate wildlife in the areas they were released in . It caused more environmental damage to local eco systems than a farmer could have caused with a years supply of red diesel, but your ok with that?

The damage to the local eco-systems were already done long before the ALF turned up. We have farmers of the day and hunters to thank for that.

The release of mink is definately an own goal. They should have painted the animals really to make their fur unusable.
Or
another dilema
assuming they couldn't take the mink away and release them in their natural habitat should they have either left them there, released them with the full knowledge of the destruction they would cause to the local wildlife or maybe killed the animals themselves but mutilate or burn the bodies to render them useless to the fur trade? I.e. the death of a few saves more and potentially ruins the business they were being exploited by.

It wasn't an own goal in fact, the ALF played a vital role in ending fur farming in this country.

By the time the ALF came about American Mink already had a hold on our countryside. In the early war years mink farmers released all their mink except their breeding stock and went to war. With farming comes accidental releases and escapes, so why would you bring such an aggressively invasive animal onto an island..? It didn't help that they only real weapon we had was hunted and poisoned to almost extinction, this was the otter.

Now the otter are on the up we see a decline in the mink population, practically in the Black country, studies suggest.


Animal rights utilitarianism and abolitionism theory are hotly debated at the moment. But utilitarianism was the buzz word of the day.

We can see that years later local eco-systems are recovering, mink are reducing and we no longer have fur farms. So it was a success. So to sacrifice the few to save much more could be argued. Not all animal rights people will agree but I can't help it that the movement is diverse.

 

[peaps]

Although I'm only human and fall short of the philosophy when it comes to violence.

So you condone violence when trying to make your point?

I don't condone violence against a person to make a point.

But you say you fall short of the non violent philosophy. I can only assume you yourself would use violence to make your point?

You will have to define violence.