[_music<3]

(Original post by Mister Dead)
Whilst I probably agree with you, saying that vegetarians live longer than meat eaters is not the same as saying that eating a vegetarian diet will make you live longer.

There are a whole host of other variables that might affect how long your average vegetarian lives.

I agree that there are a lot of variables that affect the vegetarian's lifespan, for example you can have the 'unhealthy' and 'healthy' vegetarians, however it probably would be true to suggest that a vegetarian diet would make you live longer than a diet including meat as it is known to increase risk of disease.

[badcheesecrispy]

(Original post by destroyerofsouls)
Newsflash - some animals eat other animals! It's happened for hundreds of millions of years and it will carry that way, and there is nothing you can do about it. In fact it is happening right now all over the world.

I do think however that if that guy is happy enough to cause physical harm to something that bears some physical resemblance to a human being, then he is certainly not the sort of guy I'd let babysit for anyone. But feeding a kitten to a snake being as bad as killing a human child? Lets not even start on that one...

I stick to what I said yesterday which is there is some heartless idiots on this thread. An ape (or chimp, cant remember which), has been proven to be superior in intelligence to a human in various ways, but of course humans still think they are better and have the right to kill animals, including their own kind for their own fun and games.

This isnt about killing animals for food, I dont agree with that either but it is nothing like this. Why are so many sickos on here so determined to normalize brutal and cruel things like killing kittens and puppies and ****ing others dead bodies?

Wtf is wrong with you all? I can see it is a debate and often debate can be ruthless in its context, but did you see much of a debate on whether it is ok to humanely euthanise a newborn child? Just shows the hypocrisy of humans, a fully grown cat is much more self aware and has much more of a personality and feelings than a newborn baby, yet people think its ok to kill one but not the other? Where are your minds at.

Yes I may be getting a bit emotional as I love animals but the fact some of you (mostly the posters who regularly post insensitive ****e- they arnt hard to spot) think this behaviour is ok, isnt sick and its fine to abuse baby animals for fun makes me very angry. Here I will say I'd be so tempted to smack some of you in the face in real life if you dared voice these opinions in person. I highly doubt any of you would though.

[Aspiringlawstudent]

(Original post by AvatarMew)
Murder is unlawfully taking away an animal's life (Humans are animals too.)

I'm afraid you are simply wrong as to the definition of murder.

Murder is when a man of sound memory, and of the age of discretion, unlawfully killeth within any country of the realm any reasonable creature in rerum natura under the King's peace, with malice aforethought, either expressed by the party or implied by law.

'Any reasonable creature in rerum natura' means only a human being that has life independent of the mother. It does not include any species other than humans, and does not include a invented ventre sa mere.

[Voleva]

(Original post by _music<3)
Actually, vegetarians generally live longer than meat eaters, and are less likely to develop certain cancers, so generally it is healthier. The only reason a vegetarian would be pale is if they neglect to take in sufficient nutrients.

Because vegetarians tend to smoke less.

[james22]

(Original post by badcheesecrispy)
As a pro animal rights person to a huge extent and owner of various pets, I couldnt read further than that first abhorrent post. Disgusting and dont want to think about it, call me what you want.

If you are a vegetarian then fair enough, if not then thats a bit hypocritical.

Feeding a kitten to a python for fun is the same as killing to eat because you are starving?

How many people in the western world (which is really what I'm refering to) are starving AND can only feed themselves from meat?

****ing horrible mate and I feel sick

..

[_music<3]

(Original post by Voleva)
Because vegetarians tend to smoke less.

I don't entirely believe that, but more importantly, I don't understand why you've quoted me, considering I didn't ask a question

[Cannotbelieveit]

I don't mind when animals are slaughtered for food, it is part of a very natural food chain.

However it makes my piss boil when people abuse and mistreat animals, because they have to suffer in silence, and have no way in which to defend themselves.

[MrsLovett112]

(Original post by Mister Dead)
I love this concept of 'humane' killing. How exactly do you make breeding something to be slaughtered 'humane'. It just sounds like a word tossed about by people that want to pull the wool over their eyes that they're a better class of killer.

I know what you mean but seriously, considering people have been farming animals and killing animals for yonks now, I'm not going to be the one to say that we shouldn't do it. I wouldn't nitpick into that and mention other stuff we've been doing since the dawn of man but hey, it's human nature to pick and choose I guess. But for me it's not all just about a humane killing, it's a humane farming method as well that is important to me. I don't know about you but I for one see a clear difference in farming an animal in a way that let's them live peacefully and farming an animal in a factory.

[kopite493]

becasue a cow/pig/lamb is born for the sole purpose of us eating it the other animal is not

[Sternumator]

I agree. If people were killing animals for sasistic pleasure then I probably wouldnt like them as much for it because I don't really want to be friends with peole who enjoy watching suffering but it shouldn't be against the law. I don't care one bit about animals anymore, I remember when I was about 8 I went fishing with my Dad and a little fish swallowed the hook and my Dad had to kill. I was really sad for along time and called my Dad a murderer. Now nothing bothers me, I watched the python video and felt no emotion, I could watch the most cruel video there is and I would think the people doing it were weirdos but I wouldnt care about the animal.

It is hypocritical to not want animals killed for other purposes. Unfortunately I think people will believe meat eating is wrong before they believe there is nothing wrong with the python video. People eat meat from age where they are too young to make moral judgements and so they tend to carry on without ever giving it much thought. If they do think about it they often use the flawed food chain excuse. I was suprised when kill it cook it eat it was on about the number of people who never really think of meat as an animal. I the arguement op made would be one for becoming a vegitarian rather than a hunter. It wouldnt suprise me if eating meat is banned in 50 years.

[Sternumator]

(Original post by kopite493)
becasue a cow/pig/lamb is born for the sole purpose of us eating it the other animal is not

The purpose (whatever that means) can't make any difference. If as the kitten was being born the owner said "I declare this kitten is for the purpose of snake food" would it have been ok?

[Sternumator]

What do people think of this?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0BIpxW8tbWY

[kopite493]

(Original post by Sternumator)
The purpose (whatever that means) can't make any difference. If as the kitten was being born the owner said "I declare this kitten is for the purpose of snake food" would it have been ok?

nope because its a kitten not food where as the animals mentioned are food

[Mister Dead]

(Original post by Sternumator)
What do people think of this?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0BIpxW8tbWY

It's a man killing a rabbit for food... meh. What do you think about it?

[Aeonstorm]

Back to the OP's question: There is a difference between the pleasure in eating meat and the pleasure in feeding a kitten to a python. The first is a pleasure not associated with death, and if the eater knows the terrible conditions that the animal he is eating has suffered in life, he can only be deemed immoral in that he enjoys the pleasure of meat more than his aversion to the animal's suffering. However, by taking pleasure in feeding a kitten to a python, he is actively taking sadistic pleasure in the suffering. In contrast, the person eating the meat may feel disgusted at the animal's suffering but may still eat the meat because he/she enjoys it so much. So it is the feeling of the person in regard to the actual suffering which differs here.

Now, of course, the meat-eater may still be immoral or amoral, but not necessarily sadistic, and to an extent all people are immoral but most people are not sadistic. Hence someone who does willingly feed a live kitten to a python does not fit well in society.

Furthermore, there are arguments vindicating in part the meat-eater; for example, there is no direct correlation between individual demand and market supply; in other words, becoming a vegetarian is arguably going to have little to no effect on how many animals are actually raised and killed in unwholesome ways. You may like to think yourself as saving one cow out of a million (by not buying steak every week for a year, for example) but you do not see this cow because it is actually bits of many cows, and something like a 1% growth in demand for steak could raise the number of cows killed by thousands upon thousands. In this sense, considering the vast statistics and more importantly, the combination of the statistics with the lack of personal connection, you can see how any disgust at the living conditions of cows is purely an intellectual concern and not an empathetic one. This does not remove immorality of course, but makes it passive and means that the person is not necessarily as depraved a person as he/she otherwise may be. This is just the same as you not being a depraved person for refusing to give all your money to charity to help starving African children, but if a starving child came to your doorstep, you would have to be very cold-hearted and cruel not to give them food because of the immediacy of the situation.

[Sternumator]

(Original post by kopite493)
nope because its a kitten not food where as the animals mentioned are food

They are food if you eat them.

[ohirome]

(Original post by lukas1051)
Feeding a kitten to a python is not the same as eating meat. As the owner of a pet, you have the responsibility to not create suffering. Pythons can be fed on humanely killed animals such as mice and other animals. I have pet lizards and tarantulas - I would never feed them a live mouse because it creates unnecessary suffering where alternatives are available.

While it is certainly debateable, in my opinion eating meat is morally justifiable - it is a part of nature, the animals are killed humanely, meat makes up an important part of our diets. Im not going to go into details, it is a point I have considered thoroughly and have come to my own conclusion on, but the point is that intentionally causing an animal to suffer, for your own amusement, is sick.

Humans are not designed to eat meat. There are numerous things which we lack when compared to natural meat eaters. Its commonly though that animals are killed humanely in order to feed us humans, but that is generally a bit of a myth. Cows are routinely stunned or shot a number of times before they die, simply due to shoddy handling by the abattoir workers. It isn't an important part of our diet, hence why so many people live happier and healthier lives without it. Its important if you want it to be important.

The fact that we produce way more meat than we actually need should be enough to challenge anyones views that its morally fine to eat it. This argument far too often comes down to peoples preference for chomping on a steak rather than seeing the big picture.

[ohirome]

(Original post by Sternumator)
They are food if you eat them.

You could apply that to humans too. Cats are not an everyday source of food, nor should they be.

[kikukaede]

Because killing something for anything other than food or otherwise improving you or your offsprings' chances of survival is unnatural. Cruelty is an exclusive human trait.

I understand where you think you are coming from, but there is literally no way to justify unnessecarily causing suffering to an animal or another human for that matter.

Also fyi, I've just recently 'converted' (if you will) to vegetarianism and I don't think eating meat is inherently wrong, and neither does my boyfriend who has been veggie all his life - when people make that claim its just silly, thats like saying a leopard killing an antelope is 'evil'. On the other hand condemning millions of pigs to horrific slow and terrifying deaths just so humans can consume a food group we don't even require a lot of IS wrong.

[Ice Constricter]

(Original post by Aspiringlawstudent)
It is impossible to 'murder' an animal.

Anyone that knows what murder is can tell you that.

I agree, dunno why you were negged for simply stating the law.

Yes fellow law student, murder is defined in common law as the unlawful killing of a human being not animals or other non humans.

So OP its impossible to 'murder' an animal considering that murder is only a legal concept, however its obviously possible to kill an animal, but doing that falls under a different offence not murder.