Canada Seal Slaughter begins

[Dustin Kesselberg]

And that's what I call hypocrisy.

How's that?

 

[Darth Rotor]

See the previous links posted. Even the people who support this "hunt" admit that it has nothing to do with keeping the populations of the seals down.

So what?

You are still arguing from emotion, and dlacone responded with facts, which you attempted to discredit with emotive reply.

I don't derive from the previous posts that Canadian Law is being broken. Have I missed a trick here?

DR

 

[Dustin Kesselberg]

So what?

You are still arguing from emotion, and dlacone responded with facts, which you attempted to discredit with emotive reply.

I don't derive from the previous posts that Canadian Law is being broken. Have I missed a trick here?

DR

I'm arguing from facts and emotion. A double whammy. I've either refuted the facts the people who support this massacre have presented or explained how they have no relevance. I don't see how there's anything left but dumb people repeating the same arguments I refuted last week.

 

[D'rok]

Explain how beating a seal to death isn't immoral. I've already explained how it is.

I'm sure it is immoral for you. Not everything that you dislike is a universal moral law. Your moral outrage misguided in this case. These seals (the relatively few that actually are killed) suffer significantly less than animals in the industrial meat industry. Shall I show you gruesome abbatoir pictures to fuel your outrage, or do seals have some kind of special moral status?

There is nothing immoral about killing other animals to use/eat them if it is done responsibly. It's a bloody business to be sure. Can you suggest a better method for killing them? You might have a leg to stand on in that case.

So the fact that the population is large is an excuse to do it? I could use the same argument in defense of murder for humans since there are after all 6 billion of us..

If you used the same argument in that fashion it would be called Equivocation.

 

[D'rok]

I'm arguing from facts and emotion. A double whammy. I've either refuted the facts the people who support this massacre have presented or explained how they have no relevance. I don't see how there's anything left but dumb people repeating the same arguments I refuted last week.

I've been refuted? It must've happened when I wasn't looking. I am just a dumb Canadian after all.

 

[Lonewulf]

Do you empathize with the grass when you step on it? Do you shed tears for a mosquito that you smash? I'm wondering why you think humans should feel empathy for all living things, especially since most non-humans don't empathize with us.

And I wonder why you continually assume that all animals are the same. Or that a cow, chicken, or pig is the mental equivalent of a blade of grass.

Do you have any rational justification to show that my cat is the mental equivalent of a mosquito? Show studies, please.

Either that, or shut the hell up and stop making these irrational, downright moronic comparisons that even a retarded 10-year old kid could refute.

And if you really do insist that a cat is the mental equivalent of a blade of grass, or a mosquito, then I'll just have to bid you good day, as you obviously are not worth the time of day, much less a supposedly "rational" debate.

There's something I've learned on these forums (and others like it): People that advocate inhumane treatment of animals, or say that they're "cool with" inhumane treatment can make all the irrational and downright dumb comparisons and use all the fallacies that they like. But who do people gang up on? The vegetarians, or people that simply advocate humane treatment. It doesn't matter if arguments are equal, the vegetarians or people that are for actual ethical treatment of animals always get attacked, because, of course, caring about animals is some sort if social injustice or somesuch.

(Of course, there's also the fact that everyone is ganging up on Dustin in particular, so I'm being unfair in this particular case; Dustin has it comin')

 

[aggle-rithm]

Beating seals to death and butchering them where they lay is what I'd call "blood thirsty". Deal with it.

The term "blood thirsty" describes motivations, not actions. I doubt that many of the hunters are motivated by a desire to kill for killing's sake. Fortunately, that sort of twisted mind is fairly rare in this world.

 

[Lonewulf]

The term "blood thirsty" describes motivations, not actions. I doubt that many of the hunters are motivated by a desire to kill for killing's sake. Fortunately, that sort of twisted mind is fairly rare in this world.

Whereas, killing for money's sake is considered rather twisted.

At the least, if their prey is humans.

 

[Darth Rotor]

Whereas, killing for money's sake is considered rather twisted.

At the least, if their prey is humans.

I kill rats and mice, and other vermin. The motivation is the health and safety of my family.

Do you have a problem with that?

DR

 

[thaiboxerken]

And I wonder why you continually assume that all animals are the same. Or that a cow, chicken, or pig is the mental equivalent of a blade of grass.

I don't and neither did I make any statement as such. Danish said that ALL living things should be empathized with, so that's why I mentioned grass. He's repeatedly failed to demonstrate why.

Either that, or shut the hell up and stop making these irrational, downright moronic comparisons that even a retarded 10-year old kid could refute.

I'll tell you what. Make me shut up. Oh, and do try to actually read the thread before making such silly assumptions about my arguments.

 

[thaiboxerken]

Whereas, killing for money's sake is considered rather twisted.

At the least, if their prey is humans.

Yes, and?

 

[aggle-rithm]

I kill rats and mice, and other vermin. The motivation is the health and safety of my family.

Do you have a problem with that?

DR

Poor little vermin...*sniff*

 

[Lonewulf]

I kill rats and mice, and other vermin. The motivation is the health and safety of my family.

Do you have a problem with that?

Naw.

Though personally, I prefer "no kill" methods of extraction.

Poor little vermin...*sniff*

I never got why there's so much hatred towards rats and mice vs. other animals. They get into your house without understanding private property, act according to their own instincts, and then go for the nearest food source without really thinking of it as "theft".

Anything can be considered "vermin". If a stray starving dog wandered into my house and scavenged it for food, I could call it "vermin" and then justify torturing it for a while before killing it, because "vermin == bad, period".

Hell, some humans have been referred to as "vermin". Some pretty awful things were justified for that reason...

I don't and neither did I make any statement as such. Danish said that ALL living things should be empathized with, so that's why I mentioned grass. He's repeatedly failed to demonstrate why.

And you consider grass an animal... why?

Get off the special grass, dude.

(Though if you have a quotation/reference, I'd be happy to look back and correct my mistaken presumption on Danish's claims)

I'll tell you what. Make me shut up.

You're right, my ignore button goes underused far too often.

Oh, and do try to actually read the thread before making such silly assumptions about my arguments.

I don't have to make "silly assumptions", I see the same tripe you're spouting off here, as you spouted off when we had this discussion before.

Yes, and?

If "blood thirsty" implies something is bad because someone kills just for the sake of killing, and "killing for money" is implied to be bad because someone kills just for the sake of money, I draw a parallel of negativity, but not definition.

 

[thaiboxerken]

Again, I did not say grass was an animal. Grass are living things though. The Danish said all living things should be empathized with, not just animals. Why do you build straw men?

 

[Darth Rotor]

Naw.

Though personally, I prefer "no kill" methods of extraction.

We used a cage trap for a squirrel who got into the house, and a racoon.

Hell, some humans have been referred to as "vermin". Some pretty awful things were justified for that reason...

The death penalty comes to mind, but I don't find it awful, more a pest control deal. Jeff Dahmer made plague infested rats look good by comparison.

Again, I did not say grass was an animal. Grass are living things though. The Danish said all living things should be empathized with, not just animals. Why do you build straw men?

Because he was thinking about dead grass?

DR

 

[Lonewulf]

Again, I did not say grass was an animal. Grass are living things though. The Danish said all living things should be empathized with, not just animals. Why do you build straw men?

Quote exactly where he stated that all living things should be treated the same, please. Until then, I'm not the one building strawmen.

I recall when you continuously claimed that I was claiming this exact same thing in the argument that we had earlier. It was a strawman then, so I'm willing to think that it's a strawman now. Unless you have evidence to the contrary?

We used a cage trap for a squirrel who got into the house, and a racoon.

Personally, I like mice and rats. I know I'm somewhat a minority on that opinion.

The death penalty comes to mind, but I don't find it awful, more a pest control deal. Jeff Dahmer made plague infested rats look good by comparison.

I'm against the death penalty for several reasons.

But here's some more examples in mind for comparing people to "vermin": Jews (who, yes, were eliminated out of a sense of "pest control"; the nazis thought that the jews were detrimental to a society, and thus they needed to "purify" it) come to mind.

Another thing that comes to mind: The extermination of many people in Rwanda. I recall that the Tutsies were compared to "cockroaches".

It's often seen as justifiable to kill someone when you dehumanize them to the point of becoming mere "vermin". The word itself just has the connotation of "unwanted". There are many unwanted people in society... yet some, we tolerate because they don't actually break any laws.

And if they do break laws, it's only the heinous ones that we truly "punish" by storing them in cramped quarters where they get anally raped and given AIDS, but hey, we don't care; they're vermin.

I just find it interesting how, when we talk about getting rid of rats, we use downright painful solutions and then call it "getting rid of vermin". But when we kill unwanted cats and dogs, we're all "painless" about it (except when we stuff them into overcrowded gas chambers...), and call it "euthanizing", to make it all sound pretty and flowery. The English language is funny.

 

[Gord_in_Toronto]

How's that?

Definition:

IN BRIEF: Insincerity by pretending to have qualities or beliefs not really held.

Europeans are picking on the actions in another country without applying the same considerations to things they do.

 

[Ryokan]

Definition:

IN BRIEF: Insincerity by pretending to have qualities or beliefs not really held.

Europeans are picking on the actions in another country without applying the same considerations to things they do.

Don't know why you say Europeans.... We Norwegians are certainly European, and very known for killing seals and whales. The seal cullings are non-commercial, though, but we do eat the whales.

 

[thaiboxerken]

Quote exactly where he stated that all living things should be treated the same, please. Until then, I'm not the one building strawmen.

We weren't even talking about treating things the same. We were debating his claim that all living things should be empathized with. Try and keep up.

 

[Lonewulf]

We weren't even talking about treating things the same. We were debating his claim that all living things should be empathized with. Try and keep up.

Okay. THEN QUOTE IT.

I asked you to quote the specific statement several times. You have not.

Try to keep up, would you?