|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Wed Aug 02, 2006 12:03 pm
Theallpowerfull I.Am And obviously, there are the Pro-Choice vegans who support groups like the Animal Liberation Front, who are willing to hurt humans in order to help animals escape captivity. How can you value animal life above human life to such an extent? It makes no sense. Actually there are many groups of naturalists and some believe that human interference is destroying the environment (crazy eh?) and so they believe that humans should not be involved in nature at all. There are groups that go even farther and put nature itself above the lives of humans. This isn't a commonly held belief but an understandable one. The only fatal flaw is that their interference and even existence is a contradiction. Hmmm.... I've heard of that before, but I thought it was an onion article! eek Uh-oh, no wonder the movement's losing momentum.. As for me, I believe in coexisting between human and enviroment, animals and enviroment. Humans are part of the kingdom animalia.... Thus I will not oust wild animals from their home.
|
 |
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Wed Aug 02, 2006 12:27 pm
Theallpowerfull Actually there are many groups of naturalists and some believe that human interference is destroying the environment (crazy eh?) and so they believe that humans should not be involved in nature at all. There are groups that go even farther and put nature itself above the lives of humans. This isn't a commonly held belief but an understandable one. The only fatal flaw is that their interference and even existence is a contradiction. I think the idea of partially isolating humans could work, but more as a way of controlling the amount of interaction humans have with the environment and making up for the population distribution. A small percentage of the planet covered by asphalt is okay. A large percentage is bad, and you can't expect other species to adapt the way humans (and pigeons) have. Humans want their cities and their malls, but they don't want deer eating their begonias and jaguars lurking above the sidewalks. We do isolate ourselves, but only from certain aspects of nature--people want to live with woods in their backyard, but they don't want to live in the woods. rolleyes There would be no problem with environmental impact if everyone lived in small towns and grew everything they ate in a little garden, but we demand more technology and a bigger world than just where we can ride our bikes to. And that requires more space than the planet can really handle, so to speak.
|
 |
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Wed Aug 02, 2006 12:51 pm
Honostly, i wouldn't mind living out in th emiddle of no where in a nice log cabbin. I would like some small bits of technology. I have to have my internet, running water, heatign and cooling. but thats it. no tv.
|
 |
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Wed Aug 02, 2006 1:16 pm
horay for MEAT!
hehe mrgreen
|
 |
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Wed Aug 02, 2006 8:48 pm
MiNdCaNdY horay for MEAT! hehe mrgreen I don't like meat! Unless if it's soy. Oh, don't worry, I'm not offended at all, just in case you were worried about that. I'm pro-choice in the matter that I don't give a damn whether I can control what you do or not... But that would be downright cool, I mean. AMAZING le CHAT! Super mind power! THE PUPPETEER! I'd use you to steal chocolate.
|
 |
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Thu Aug 03, 2006 9:11 am
..Le Chat du Noir.. MiNdCaNdY horay for MEAT! hehe mrgreen I don't like meat! Unless if it's soy. Oh, don't worry, I'm not offended at all, just in case you were worried about that. I'm pro-choice in the matter that I don't give a damn whether I can control what you do or not... But that would be downright cool, I mean. AMAZING le CHAT! Super mind power! THE PUPPETEER! I'd use you to steal chocolate. well, horay for CUCUMBERS! just didn't amuse me quite as much. wait... cucumbers... bedroom.... maybe that would work... *slaps himself* and i'm glad that if you had puppet master abilities you would use them for a noble cause. Chocolate is freaking awesome. 3nodding
|
 |
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sat Aug 05, 2006 1:21 pm
I.Am Please don't take this the wrong way Pro-Choice vegetarians and vegans, but I'm curious: How do you console those two views? On one hand, you support the legal killing of human offspring, on the other hand, you are against the eating of meat. I know that many, if not most, of you do not shove the no-meat thing down our throats, but I still have to wonder how you can actively support the killing of humans, however young and undeveloped, while simultaneously being against the killing of animals. Even moreso I have to wonder about vegan Pro-Choicers. I mean, you won't even eat a chicken's unfertilized egg, but killing a human fetus is okay? What's up with that? Do you somehow justify the human fetus as being worth less then the chicken egg? And obviously, there are the Pro-Choice vegans who support groups like the Animal Liberation Front, who are willing to hurt humans in order to help animals escape captivity. How can you value animal life above human life to such an extent? It makes no sense. I know I made directed questions even though there's only one Pro-Choice vegan in the guild right now, but that's just because it's a simpler format for me to write in. Especially considering that I know there -is- one in the guild who can directly answer the questions. sweatdrop Hmm... apparantly I can answer this unregistered. I wouldn't normally post in a pro-life guild (that's for sure) but I feel like I've got to defend myself. Firstly, I don't consider a fetus, human or otherwise, to be equal to an already living, breathing, independent animal. (human or otherwise.) An animal feels pain when killed, a fetus does not.[1] I don't eat meat because an animal has thoughts and feelings, and I think it's wrong to cause that animal harm for no good reason.[2] And that's still only one reason I'm vegetarian! I'm also a vegetarian for environmental reasons. When we eat meat, we create a demand for more animals to be bred and killed.[3] All those animals are a HUGE drain on our resources and create tons of waste. We're talking massive environmental damage. And, just as an overpopulation of farm animals is bad news... so is an overpopulation of people. No, I don't see people or animals just as faceless numbers. Far from it. They are living, feeling, creatures. And I beleive that each of them deserves a life where they have the basic resources they need to live happily. By not controlling the population, We're basically screwing the next generation. Honestly, I would rather see every child born a child that will be loved, cared for, and given a decent life. I'm for quality over quantity. I don't think we can keep living the way we do much longer and not expect to seriously screw things up for our grandchildren. MY way of caring about the unborn is by caring about and for the environment. Another reason I have is, well, a bit frank. Frankly, an animal is not attached to my body, feeding off of my nutrients without my consent. Therefore, in my opinion, killing a fetus is self defense, and killing a cow for meat that you don't need is murder.[4] A woman is allowed to kill a rapist that uses her body against her will for a few minutes, so I think she should be entitled to abort a fetus that uses her body for nine months. Nobody forces me to give blood to save lives, nobody forces me to donate organs to save lives, so I don't think anyone is entitled to live inside my body without permission. The animal in a slaughterhouse is not threatening to take away my career, my education, or my personal freedom. In many cases, a fetus is. Even though it doesn't mean to and has no will. You can't say that allowing a fetus to feed off a woman without her consent is giving it "equal rights." I'm pro-choice and vegetarian because I believe in compassion. I don't equate abortion with murder. I don't think that an embryo is more important than an independant organism JUST because that embryo happens to be human. I beleive that there is a difference between things that are alive, living, thinking and feeling, and things that are just alive or soon will be alive. And being feminist[5] pro- choice[6], I support your right to choose NOT to have an abortion, if you want. I support your right to beleive that a fetus is alive and has value. I support your right to express that beleif. HOWEVER, When somebody tries to take away that choice, I won't stand for it. That's the only reason I dislike pro-lifers and call them anti-choice. Because many of you would make it illegal for me to have an abortion, or would put restrictions on my right. I also have problems with a lot of the reasoning behind your opinion[7], with some of the ways you spread your message, and I don't tolerate those. [8] I'm pretty pacifistic for the most part, but I will stand up and fight for MY right to life when somebody wants to compromise it. So... I hope you understand my reasons for being vegetarian and pro-choice, and why the two are not at odds. (And about vegans... I think they just think it's wrong for humans to use and enslave animals for their will. But I HAVE met pro-life vegans who wouldn't even kill a parasitic insect, so...) [1]Source: (Yeah, it's in pro-choice guild. But come on, at least they made an entire library of logic to back up their claims. Give us some credit.) http://www.gaiaonline.com/guilds/viewtopic.php?t=3716053[2]Eating it isn't a good reason. I do just fine without eating meat. I'm not saying everyone else needs to stop, I'm just saying that in this society, we [3]Think you're helping to keep those numbers down by eating meat? Don't kid yourself. They just breed more to keep up with the demand for meat you cause by eating them. [4]See sig. [5]Feminist: A person (male or female) who beleive in equality for men and women. [6]Not "pro-abortion", because I think forcing an abortion on someone is just as wrong as not allowing them an abortion, and not "anti-life" for obvious reasons. [7] Thinking women need to be "protected" and can't make choices, thinking sex is immoral unless in a certain context, wanting to punish the woman, and, in SOME, but not ALL cases, just beleiving what you were told without researching or questioning. [8] Taking advantage of vulnerable young women, purposely misinforming people, calling us names, various forms of misogyny, legally imposing your morality on others, and using guilt and graphic pictures to sway people. (Although MANY vegetarians are guilty of those last two. And I don't approve of those tactics, even if they DO make people stop eating meat or at least question it.)
|
 |
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sat Aug 05, 2006 1:42 pm
sachiko_sohma La Veuve Zin I.Am Uh, even if you aren't physically harming a person, I would think that driving them out of business and ruining their lives is tantamount to it. And it's not as though they are going to be crying a whole lot if someone dies in the fire they start. Unless it's an animal. If abortion were criminalised, would you feel bad for the people who made their living providing abortions who now had to get other jobs? No, i'm sure they can find pently of other jobs. If they were real doctors and had medical training, i'm sure they'll find something. And what about the live and death cases like the mom is dying? I'm sure they won't banned those cases. Are you so sure, though? Abortion is a terrible thing. I'm pro-choice, but I don't know that I could have one, even if I needed it. BUT passing a law against abortion is basically saying that a woman does not own her own body and cannot make her own decisions. I hate to use the "slippery slope" argument, but how can you safely say they won't outlaw abortion, even when the mother's life is in danger? I.Am No, the animal is not feeding directly off of you. The fetus isn't taking all that much from you. At the very least, not compared to what you would be taking from them. My mom is a nurse*, and one of the biggest rules in her job is that you cannot say when another human being is or is not in pain.** You can't just say that the woman isn't suffering. I could go on about things that happen even in "normal" pregnancy that you would never even think or forcibly subjecting a human to, but that's a different argument. *Critical care, before you say anything. **The humans she treats are born people with fully formed nerves and brains and are often able to say they're in pain, before you say anything. Quote: The point, though, is that, since you believe that animals deserve life, whether the fetus is a person or not should be completely irrelevant to you, because you support all lives, person or not. Unless they are human fetuses. As I've already stated, I beleive in not harming things that are physically capable of feeling pain. I also beleive it's not wrong to harm other living things that are doing harm to you, consciously or not. I also do not beleive in placing one thing's right to life, bodily domain, and freedom from pain above another's. Quote: can somewhat understand using the "bodily integrity" arguments, but then again, that is largely about comfort. And if it's okay to kill human fetuses for comfort, why should it not be okay for me to kill animals for comfort? I'm not even just killing them; I'm also eating them, and using their fur or skin, preferably I'm also using their bones, I use their guts to make hagus and other sausages, their blood to make blood pudding, and so on and so forth. Unlike abortion, I'm not just killing them and throwing them away, I use every possible part I can. At least, that would be preferable for me. I'm against hunting for fun, by the way. As previously stated, I do not beleive in killing animals when there is no need. Hunting to keep populations in check? Fine by me. Killing an animal for survival? Not sure I could do it, but I don't think you're a bad person for it. Killing thousands of animals in slaughterhouses to feed people with no nutritional need for it? That's where I draw the line. I beleive it's morally wrong to eat meat, so I don't. But I have no right to force someone else not to, even though I think they're a murderer.
|
 |
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sat Aug 05, 2006 1:47 pm
Ebony the Peacian Vampire Ebby could never be a vegetarian/vegan. She loves meat too much. .________.
"OMG Ebby! You're pro-life! You eat meat! Hipocrite!"
Um, no. There is a difference between killing an animal without causing it any pain or misery for nutrition and survival, and opposing a surgical process that ruthlessly tears a human child to shreds for mere convenience. God, I hope you're joking! See my post about the FETUS not being capable of feeling pain. And you bet your a** those animals feel pain. They have nerves. They have brains. They think and feel. They kick and scream and cry and s**t themselves and die in agony. I REAALY tried to avoid personal attacks, but you are either deeply misinformed in biology or just a disgusting hypocrite. When I see people like this, it reaffirms my deep suspicions that a lot of pro-lifers really are all about forcing their sexual standards on everyone else, and ruining the lives of any woman who dares disobey.
|
 |
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sat Aug 05, 2006 4:45 pm
Quote: I support your right to beleive that a fetus is alive and has value. No, you don't. You choose to bring about legal sanctions to abortion that stand in the way of this pro-life ideal. The only choice you support is your own. Quote: They are living, feeling, creatures. I'm cool with animals and all. I'm really cool if you're against meat because of factory farming or because of how they're treated or how the meat has been processed, but animals are not people. They also wouldn't hesistate to devour us if given the oppurtunity (if they were aggressive and carnivorous). I repsect the food chain, if anything.
|
 |
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sat Aug 05, 2006 4:49 pm
But you know, now that you've POSTED here, you're being infected. My views on sexuality are slowly going to confine you, because my task is to make sure the only reason people have sex is to make babies! Not only that, I'd like to implant mind control devices in women so they can't make their own choices anymore. They will become my robots and I will choose everything for them, because I'm evil like that. If you support abortion being legal, then yes, you are pro-abortion, sorry. If you support abortion being legal, than in the case of abortion, you are anti-life just as I am anti-choice. Again, I'm sorry if this is an inconvenience to you, but when it comes down to it, you support choice over life. You're hardly one to talk about calling people names, considering you come into our guild and accuse us of misogyny and using guilt and graphic pictures to sway people (go on, look at how many of us post pictures of aborted fetuses and go, ZOMG POOR BABEH!). I'm glad to know that you, like myself and many of my friends in here, are a feminist. I'm happy for you that your morals are legally enforced at the moment, but trying to keep them that way is just as bad as us trying to get ours legally enforced.
Also...
It depends on where you get your meat. Some slaughterhouses are cruel, some places are quite humane about killing. Just like abortionists, eh? When I see people like you, it reaffirms my deep suspicions that not everyone can actually listen to another point of view and instead shut their minds off and spout accusations without putting much thought into it.
|
 |
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sat Aug 05, 2006 4:50 pm
Well, let talk about pain shall we? The pain most peopel talk about when refering to a fetus inability to feel is that of emotional pain. IE, it's inability to comprehend said pain. The problem with that is it does not make abortion more moral, it makes it more questionable. "It can't comprehend the pain it feels, so it dosn't matter" The fetus can in fact feel pain very early in pregnancy. "pain" is actualy a state of mind. It is the reaction to stimulous. Our jerking our hand away form a hot burner is not pain. The initial reaction in the prain that makes us go "Ow" is. Feti have the capapbility to react to stimulus, but they do not have the capapbility to comprehend it as we do. In other words, a reflex. hat really all there is, reflex. And we still react the same way for the rest of our lives, the only diffrence is that we can comprehend this relfex and put a name to it. The most recent study of this was doen in 2005. During 2005-SEP, a meta-study -- a review of existing medical studies -- into fetal pain -- was conducted by six medical personnel and reported in the Journal of the American Medical Association (JAMA).
Medical News Today reported:
"The review found that a fetus's neurological pathways in its brain that allow for the 'conscious perception of pain' do not function until after 28 weeks' gestation. The researchers concluded that women seeking abortions before the third trimester of pregnancy should not be subjected to the risks of administering anesthesia to the fetus -- which could cause bleeding, breathing problems and other complications, including death -- for the woman."
A firestorm of criticism came from pro-life groups who claimed that the review of existing reports was biased. One of its six authors is the medical director of the abortion clinic at San Francisco General Hospital. The lead author, who is a medical student and lawyer, once did legal work for NARAL, an abortion-rights group, for eight months.
JAMA Editor-in-Chief, Catherine DeAngelis, is a Roman Catholic who opposes abortion. She said that she had received dozens of "horrible, vindictive" e-mails condemning her for publishing the review.
Alan Leff, a University of Chicago pulmonologist and editor of the Proceedings of the American Thoracic Society, said, "The standard for disclosure in medical and scientific journals is not your politics ...There's no obligation to tell people what your mind-set is ... as long as the data is sound and gathered objectively."http://www.religioustolerance.org/abo_pain.htmThe bold print speaks out. The fetus lacks the ability to comprehend the pain. This in no way means it can not feel it. Sorry. I fail to see abortion as self defense. Unless the pregnancy came about through rape. But, when a woman makes a conscious desention, and consents to the act of sex, she is saying she understands the possible out comes. You can try the arguemnt "I consented to sex, not pregnancy" but that dosn't fly. You made a consiouce desition that has an outcome you may not like. You agree to the acyt, it is errispobcible to try and avoid the out come. Correctign the out come is diffrent, abortion is mearly cuttign the stirng to try and avoid the responcibility you now have int he creation of another human life. Feminist? Are oyu sure? You beleive you are femenist because you agree with abortion? I find that insulting to true feminist. You beilive a woman needs to have an abortion to be equal in scociety? I certainly hope not. Scociety needs to change its self so that a woman can still be equal and stay a woman. You are proabortion. Yo agree with the legalisation of abortion. This makes you pro-abortion. Need i pull out the dictionary? Points 7 and 8 The only thing I think you can use as a generalisation is the name calling. None of us have used disgusting pictures, none of us have misinformed people, none of us beleive in punishing a woman for becoming pregnant (we beiliv ein holding her to her responcibilities, call that punishment if you like, but that logic is relitive). None of Us have taken in advvantage of vulnerable young woman. We all feel woman are poerfectly capable of protecting them selves, but killing an innocent does not fall under that protection. (the fetus is guilty of no crime other then existing.) Very few of us beleive sex is immoral.
|
 |
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sat Aug 05, 2006 5:04 pm
PhaedraMcSpiffy And you bet your a** those animals feel pain. They have nerves. They have brains. They think and feel. They kick and scream and cry and s**t themselves and die in agony. Depend son the slaughter house. Some don't care, others actualy use quick painless methods. Most are hard blows to the head using an air-pressureised hammer that liquifie the brain when they hit, the animal feel no pain. If they do, its minimal at most.
|
 |
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sat Aug 05, 2006 6:46 pm
Vegetarianism has nothing to do with valueing life unless you want it to.
I've been a vegetarian for a year and a half before. I simply didn't want to eat meat, for both health reasons and because I didn't particularly like the taste. Now I'll eat fish and avians, but I try not to touch red meat.
Animals are cuddly and everything, but I'm an animal to. And I need food. domokun
If you're going to degrade pro-choicers, can't you find a way that makes more sense?
|
 |
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|