Year 12s: what will be the first way you research your future options? >>

This discussion is now closed.

Check out other Related discussions

Foxhunting

Scroll to see replies

Well, I don't think we should have to humanise the fox to get the point across, it's alive and should have rights.

What about the fear of death and the exhausting chase(which can go on for hours)?
And if most of them get away, what's the point? Entertainment. And that just seems sadistic.

Reply 141

TheVlad

ayaan

Well, I don't think we should have to humanise the fox to get the point across, it's alive and should have rights.

Flowers are alive. Should they have rights?

What about the fear of death and the exhausting chase(which can go on for hours)?

I'm sure the fox would rather have the option of running away. If it so badly feared the chase, it wouldn't run.
Shooting them in their sleep is just not cricket.

And if most of them get away, what's the point? Entertainment. And that just seems sadistic.

The entertainment does not come from the pain the fox may or may not feel but from the human primeval instict to hunt things. Don't try to take away from humans that they are just animals who have instincts and urges.

Reply 142

Scheherazade

TheVlad

Flowers are alive. Should they have rights?

Don't be facetious.

TheVlad

I'm sure the fox would rather have the option of running away. If it so badly feared the chase, it wouldn't run.
Shooting them in their sleep is just not cricket.

Well obviously it doesn't want to die. And I still don't buy that being torn apart by dogs isn't more painful than being shot.

TheVlad

But animals don't have rights, surely they'd be better of being reminded that they're human, then?

Reply 143

TheVlad

ayaan

Don't be facetious.

I'm not. You can't say that things that are alive have rights but then refuse to extend this to plants, who are also alive.

Well obviously it doesn't want to die. And I still don't buy that being torn apart by dogs isn't more painful than being shot.

It doesn't want to die, yes. So is it cruel to let it have the chance of escape? erm you don't have to buy it. It is up to you to prove that it is more painful.

But animals don't have rights, surely they'd be better of being reminded that they're human, then?

Humans have rights. Humans are also animals. This does not mean that all animals have rights. Brush up on your logical fallacies.

Reply 144

NDGAARONDI

ayaan

Well obviously it doesn't want to die. And I still don't buy that being torn apart by dogs isn't more painful than being shot.

Well if you want, I'll set some tigers on to you and see how you would enjoy being shredded to pieces or have an alternative in being shot in the head. Shame velociraptors died out. :biggrin:

Reply 145

Revenged

am mysterified why people care about foxes... it must be the least important thing in the world!!!

yeah, i think it's a bit of a joke that posh people ride around on horses with dogs and horns to kill foxes but if that's their idea of fun let them have it... i dont even think they kill very many foxes doing this but they are pests after all...

however, i think what they do in spain when they watch bulls beening attacked with spears IS cruel, i had to watch a video of the stuff and it did seem a bit senseless but dont really see fox hunting as very similar at all... after all it's the dogs that kill the foxes not the people... they just blow on horns and ride around on horses

i dont really understand this intellectual discussion about animal rites because we kill millions of animals every day as meat for food every day and it's only these 'omg-i-killed-a-fly' vegans that actually care...

btw, is there anyone that actually does fox hunting that can explain what is the point in it because it seems a very wierd hobby to do

Reply 146

NDGAARONDI

Revenged

i dont even think they kill very many foxes doing this but they are pests after all...

My next door neightbour is a pest. Can I set a hound of dogs on her? :biggrin:

i suggest pesticide

TheVlad

I'm not. You can't say that things that are alive have rights but then refuse to extend this to plants, who are also alive.

But you can say humans have rights but refuse to extend this to animals?
And I do think plants have some rights- like not being taken to the brink of extinction.

TheVlad

It doesn't want to die, yes. So is it cruel to let it have the chance of escape? erm you don't have to buy it. It is up to you to prove that it is more painful.

How about you prove that it isn't? Reason would seem to suggest being bitten apart would take longer and be more painful than a good shot.

TheVlad

Humans have rights. Humans are also animals. This does not mean that all animals have rights. Brush up on your logical fallacies.

Yes but you seemed to be suggesting that humans are basically the same as animals, when you get down to it, so they should be excused from criticism for inflicting pain on the fox, however they are better than animals so the animal deserves no sympathy.

Reply 149

TheVlad

ayaan

But you can say humans have rights but refuse to extend this to animals?
And I do think plants have some rights- like not being taken to the brink of extinction.

Humans have rights because it suits them. For example, society agrees to your right to private property because all the people want to have that right to protection from theft. Animals are not included in this because they are not intelligent enough to agree to that sort of contract. A fox doesn't respect your rights does it?

How about you prove that it isn't? Reason would seem to suggest being bitten apart would take longer and be more painful than a good shot.

You are trying to ban something on the basis that it is cruel. Therefore you must prove that it is. The dogs go for the throat and the fox is dead within 2-3 seconds. You are also assuming that all shots are good, the foxes can be injured and slowly die over several weeks.

Humans have animal urges and insticts. But we are more powerful than animals and therefore are "better" than them.

Reply 150

TheVlad

ayaan

And I do think plants have some rights- like not being taken to the brink of extinction.

hmmm I just don't know what to say about this... I'll just sit on my sofa gently giggling.

Reply 151

Revenged

*SAVE THE TREES*

lol

Reply 152

thebucketwoman

ayaan

And I do think plants have some rights- like not being taken to the brink of extinction.
.

Plants do not have rights or their own purpose, they are there for human/animal benefit. We do have a duty, tho, to make sure we don't make plants become extinct, as this would be harmful to human/animal existence.

Reply 153

Scheherazade

Look, I didn't mean plants have rights in and of themselves, but they should be protected for the benefit of other inhabitants of the earth.

Reply 154

TheVlad

ayaan

Look, I didn't mean plants have rights in and of themselves, but they should be protected for the benefit of other inhabitants of the earth.

So why do animals have rights?

Reply 155

Revenged

if plants are for animal and human benefit then you could say that animals are for human benefit as well!

Reply 156

Scheherazade

They can feel pain etc. Plants, however aren't concious.

Reply 157

TheVlad

ayaan

They can feel pain etc. Plants, however aren't concious.

How do you know?

Reply 158

Revenged

ayaan

Look, I didn't mean plants have rights in and of themselves, but they should be protected for the benefit of other inhabitants of the earth.

but in order to protect these undangered plants you need to prevent the natural succesion, which all involves harming other species of plant. This is often involves scrub clearance, removal of grass or burning by fire. therefore you must do harm to save these rare speices.

If you left things to nature succesion would cause most land to become oak woodland causing the rare habitats that contain rare plants to be destroyed.