Earthlings
0
I haven't even told you of my views of the matter, nor have I said that the movie isn't biased. All I've told you is that you are missing the point, and if you find the thread (or in this case, the movie) tl;dr, your comments are neither relevant or interesting, since the thread is about the content of the movie, not what You THINK You know (something that you undoubtedly do NOT know though).
The entire forum would appreciate you shrinking your ego enough to understand that.
The entire forum would appreciate you shrinking your ego enough to understand that.
0
Takerial
Lovable Teddy Bear
Ethil wrote...
Mr.Shaggnificent wrote...
Propaganda, like the movie you posted, do more harm than good. the idea is to push through their agenda by any means possible. they are designed to evoke such a strong emotional response that people refuse to listen to any other point of view, regardless of logic or common sense. you, ethil, by example of your responses to any who disagree, easily fall in to that category.
First of all, you haven't seen the movie, so you are not allowed to judge whether it is biased or not. Watching it would be the first step towards your opinion being interesting.
Second, even if the movie weren't biased but showed nothing but the truth, you would still take the complete opposite position and call it propaganda because that is the easier approach to take; as they say, ignorance is bliss.
Third, my responses to you do not stem from you guys eating meat and not caring about the animals, they come from you making ignorant statements about things that you most likely do not have a single ounce of factual knowledge about (something you need to back up a statement), and that you are just as biased as the ones that made the movie (something that makes your statements irrelevant).
It is not that I do not listen to your point of you, it is the fact that there is no logic, facts or common sense in them that makes me label them as irrelevant.
So, to summarize, watch the movie and then we can discuss Opinions about How animals in captivity should be treated, the very subject this thread is about (something you apparently missed when you thought it'd be cooler to just throw everything but your own insignificant knowledge out the window and call it all conspiracies and propaganda).
If you can not do this simple thing and thus refuse to be an actual part of the subject of the conversation, please gtfo. Thank you.
I watched the movie.
It is biased Propaganda made by people who are Vegans supported primarily by PETA and organizations that PETA supports.
It makes retarded statements like slaughtering animals is the same as the holocaust.
It sucks and is designed purely to get you feeling upset about something you shouldn't be getting upset about.
0
Takerial
Lovable Teddy Bear
Ethil wrote...
Takerial wrote...
Ethil wrote...
Mr.Shaggnificent wrote...
Propaganda, like the movie you posted, do more harm than good. the idea is to push through their agenda by any means possible. they are designed to evoke such a strong emotional response that people refuse to listen to any other point of view, regardless of logic or common sense. you, ethil, by example of your responses to any who disagree, easily fall in to that category.
First of all, you haven't seen the movie, so you are not allowed to judge whether it is biased or not. Watching it would be the first step towards your opinion being interesting.
Second, even if the movie weren't biased but showed nothing but the truth, you would still take the complete opposite position and call it propaganda because that is the easier approach to take; as they say, ignorance is bliss.
Third, my responses to you do not stem from you guys eating meat and not caring about the animals, they come from you making ignorant statements about things that you most likely do not have a single ounce of factual knowledge about (something you need to back up a statement), and that you are just as biased as the ones that made the movie (something that makes your statements irrelevant).
It is not that I do not listen to your point of you, it is the fact that there is no logic, facts or common sense in them that makes me label them as irrelevant.
So, to summarize, watch the movie and then we can discuss Opinions about How animals in captivity should be treated, the very subject this thread is about (something you apparently missed when you thought it'd be cooler to just throw everything but your own insignificant knowledge out the window and call it all conspiracies and propaganda).
If you can not do this simple thing and thus refuse to be an actual part of the subject of the conversation, please gtfo. Thank you.
I watched the movie.
It is biased Propaganda made by people who are Vegans supported primarily by PETA and organizations that PETA supports.
It makes retarded statements like slaughtering animals is the same as the holocaust.
It sucks and is designed purely to get you feeling upset about something you shouldn't be getting upset about.
Ok, good, you watched the movie.
Now to the point; do you think that it is ok to treat animal the way they are treated in the movie? Do you think it doesn't matter? Do you think your meat is tastier cuz it might have been tortured before? Or do you think that the industry (the ones that actually do treat animals bad) should be forced to treat the animals better and that this is worth focusing on? Would you mind paying slightly more to eat stuff you knew were from better animals?
Depends on the animal and it depends on what is happening to the animals.
More of the livestock animals, like cows and pigs tend to treated on a nicer and less cruel basis. The main problem with them, is not actually the treatment and slaughterhouse method of killing them, but rather the type of feed they give to them.
Things like corn is not good for animals (Or food consumption in general.) but a lot of people try to cut corners as it is cheaper to use as feed.
Most animals are not tortured before being slaughtered. Most of what is considered "problems" is aesthetic problems at best. As in "This doesn't look pretty" rather than "These animals are being tortured!"
As for animals like baby calves that are used for veal. They are put into a box or tied down not to be tortured, but so their meat will remain tender. They are treated relatively well and because they didn't know anything other than being in the box, it's not like they actually care about being in it.
The other side of the issue, is that the more cramp conditions are being forced to try and meet with the food consumption of the population. It would be nice for them to treat them like pets before killing them, but that isn't realistic in the industry due to demands. So they are forced to treat them as humanely as possible while giving some ground.
The animals are rarely tortured by any means.
On the other hand, animals like chickens are stupid, mean, gluttonous creatures and I don't give a fuck what happens to them as long as it doesn't make me sick and it tastes like chicken.
All in all, while the problem that the movie tries to proclaim is not really a problem. Industry standards don't really allow for animals to be tortured and such so it's not like you're finding a roving problem of factory people whipping the shit out of an animal for shits and giggles.
0
Ok, change "torture" to "ill-treated" if that suits you better.
And concerning the movie; I am pretty sure that the narration and opinions expressed in the movie is biased, BUT, any fool can see that the footage is not something that is staged. Considering the equipment and facilities used we can easily draw the conclusion that this isn't really the average joe farmer that does this but pretty well-established industrial facilities owned by pretty large companies, and there is surely not just ONE facility of those companies that treat the animals that way.
Just wanted to put that in there.
And concerning the movie; I am pretty sure that the narration and opinions expressed in the movie is biased, BUT, any fool can see that the footage is not something that is staged. Considering the equipment and facilities used we can easily draw the conclusion that this isn't really the average joe farmer that does this but pretty well-established industrial facilities owned by pretty large companies, and there is surely not just ONE facility of those companies that treat the animals that way.
Just wanted to put that in there.
0
Takerial wrote...
We do treat them like animals. Prey animals become food for animals higher up on the food chain. That's the way survival works you know. Being sad that they are beating treated as food is silly as that would mean you are against the idea of survival.
Lol, though we can discuss what place humans hold in the "food chain". I'd say we're pretty much outside it. All other creatures live in ecosystems that give and take an equal amount of each other; if the system is disrupted, all creatures will lose. Humans are not like that, we Only take, and if the ecosystem is disrupted by us, we construct and breed a knew one, just in captivity.
Mr.Shaggnificent wrote...
Like i said before, livestock have it way better than wild animals when it comes to getting eaten. i still say it beats being chased down, terrified, and then ripped apart and eaten alive.And I dunno about that man, I'd much rather live my life free and have a small chance of getting eaten than having to stay inside a small cage for the rest of my unnaturally short life. Ofc they dun know that, but for us that does it shouldn't even be a question.
We could even compare it to this; chose to live your life as you do now and suddenly die in an accident, or live your entire life in a sickbed, with no visitors, eating crappy food, and then die even earlier than you would if you had that accident.
0
I've had a philosophy class where an animal right's activist was once a guest speaker. I've also studied Peter Singer and wrote one of two term papers on the topic...so here are my two cents.
Slaughterhouses exist because they are the cheapest way to turn animals into food. If not for slaughterhouses, meat would be, as Singer said, "a prerogative of the rich." (Only the rich could afford to eat meat)
It's widely believed that humans are omnivores. However, this speaker that I listened to claimed that humans were herbivores. His logic was that our incisors' were to bite down on hard fruits, and that humans do not have a carnivore's instincts. For example, if you look at a squirrel, could you hunt it down and eat its raw flesh? Would you want to?
I doubt the herbivore argument because even the earliest of humans were shown to hunt mammoths for food.
Here is the hardest part. To justify eating meat, which justifies the existence of slaughterhouses, one must condone cruelty to animals. This however, is done all the time. Lab rat testing is commonplace, and that is most definitely an act of cruelty. The arguments that justify animal testing would justify an orphaned human baby to be submitted for lab rat testing (Singer), and one would be crucified for doing that.
In the end, humans are cruel to animals. It's how we justify the many things we do to them, which includes eating their flesh.
Slaughterhouses exist because they are the cheapest way to turn animals into food. If not for slaughterhouses, meat would be, as Singer said, "a prerogative of the rich." (Only the rich could afford to eat meat)
It's widely believed that humans are omnivores. However, this speaker that I listened to claimed that humans were herbivores. His logic was that our incisors' were to bite down on hard fruits, and that humans do not have a carnivore's instincts. For example, if you look at a squirrel, could you hunt it down and eat its raw flesh? Would you want to?
I doubt the herbivore argument because even the earliest of humans were shown to hunt mammoths for food.
Here is the hardest part. To justify eating meat, which justifies the existence of slaughterhouses, one must condone cruelty to animals. This however, is done all the time. Lab rat testing is commonplace, and that is most definitely an act of cruelty. The arguments that justify animal testing would justify an orphaned human baby to be submitted for lab rat testing (Singer), and one would be crucified for doing that.
In the end, humans are cruel to animals. It's how we justify the many things we do to them, which includes eating their flesh.