should cats be shot for killing birds ???

[Delirious]

if you murder a dog compared to murdering a human...WHY is there such a contrast of punishment?

think about it

just dont get more concerned over your pets then the sacredness of human life...

 

[LoudMusic]

Where I live cats without properly displayed tags (on a collar) can and will be collected and terminated. But "hunting cats" is a bit ****ed up. You can't just spring that on them - they're not prepaired for such acts. Deer have been hunted for centuries and it's engrained in their instincts. Cats are more likely to approach someone than run from them.

 

[Danoff]

Part 1 : a single ability, one parameter of an IQ-like thing... not really important here
Part 2 : Bull****

Self Awareness is the key issue. Do you get upset when you kill a bug? No. Why? Not much of a brain. There is a point in intelligence that distinguishes some brains from others and at which point you start feeling bad for killing the creature. That point is self awareness (and the threshhold for and amount of pain invovled).

Any animal can still feel pain - and so it is morally reprehensible to torture an animal (I'm not saying it should be illegal, just wrong). But if death is quick and painless, and the animal would never become self aware (ie there was no conciousness lost) - then death isn't a big deal.

Think about it for a second. Ask yourself why you're ok squishing a bug and apply that to other circumstances.

 

[Delirious]

...ameobas can feel pain?

 

[Joey D]

Well as someone said, hunting wild cats like mountian lions or bobcats are perfectly fine in my opinion. I'm a pretty serious hunter so I like to see more things I have the ability to hunt, however it must be with in the limits and you must have the proper license to do so. Poacher are just idiots with guns shooting at everything, a hunter is someone who has taken a few classes to learn things, buys a license, and respects nature. I don't go out into the woods and blast at everything that moves, I go deer hunting and small game hunting, but I always make a humane kill (I don't go for unclean shots) and I always eat what I kill.

I don't know if you can eat a mountian lion or bobcat, but if I did I would certian try to eat it or at least get something useful off of it. I remember a guy that was hunting by me once killed a coyote for the helluva it and just dumped it's body, I was so pissed off by that I reported him to the DNR and he did get in trouble. But if you are going to kill something at least use something off of it.

 

[Max_DC]

Self Awareness is the key issue. Do you get upset when you kill a bug? No. Why? Not much of a brain. There is a point in intelligence that distinguishes some brains from others and at which point you start feeling bad for killing the creature. That point is self awareness (and the threshhold for and amount of pain invovled).

Any animal can still feel pain - and so it is morally reprehensible to torture an animal (I'm not saying it should be illegal, just wrong). But if death is quick and painless, and the animal would never become self aware (ie there was no conciousness lost) - then death isn't a big deal.

Think about it for a second. Ask yourself why you're ok squishing a bug and apply that to other circumstances.

You got me wrong in away; Look, it is normal that humans don't like to kill humans, if they are no danger for each other, especially in our society... Ok that is fact but that has nothing to do with "human life is worth more than the life of an animal", > Point of view ... but that is no general rule for this planet, it is the view of humans, and therefor no fact, more an opinon....
Take a human, hmm lets say a woman, shoot her from behind,... *bang* exitus; she will not suffer, she has no pain, and she can't say " Damn I'm dead, oh wonderful life, where are you!"... Why? Because she is dead....
Think about it for a second, then you'll realize that your point doesn't get us any further in this question....

 

[Danoff]

Take a human, hmm lets say a woman, shoot her from behind,... *bang* exitus; she will not suffer, she has no pain, and she can't say " Damn I'm dead, oh wonderful life, where are you!"... Why? Because she is dead....
Think about it for a second, then you'll realize that your point doesn't get us any further in this question....

But if death is quick and painless, AND THE ANIMAL WOULD NEVER BECOME SELF AWARE (ie there was no conciousness lost) - then death isn't a big deal.

The "loss" is not a loss of life, but a loss of conciousness. A loss of the experience of life.

 

[Flerbizky]

The "loss" is not a loss of life, but a loss of conciousness. A loss of the experience of life.

And tell me that a cat, in a garden, chasing a butterfly - or simply just soaking up the sun ISN'T experiencing life ?...

I mean - come on, that is THE example of sucking up life to the fullest.. And those we can shoot but not crack heads ?....

 

[Danoff]

And tell me that a cat, in a garden, chasing a butterfly - or simply just soaking up the sun ISN'T experiencing life ?...

Its experiencing it, but in a much more limited capacity due to its lack of self-awareness. It's brain capacity limits its ability to experience life by orders of magnitude - and so the loss of expereince is much greater when a human is killed.

I'm surprised you went there because I'm surprised that someone might think that a cat could experience life to any meaningful extent compared to humans.

I mean - come on, that is THE example of sucking up life to the fullest.. And those we can shoot but not crack heads ?....

No it is not the example of sucking up life to the fullest. It is the fullest extent that a cat is capable of, but there is much more to life than the animalistic behavior of frolicking in the sunlight chasing butterflies.

Killing a cat is like killing a cow. It should have a purpose. It should be done in a way to limit suffering. It should be done ONLY to one's OWN animal or to one that is not owned. But neither is a great loss.

 

[Flerbizky]

I'm surprised you went there because I'm surprised that someone might think that a cat could experience life to any meaningful extent compared to humans.

I'm not... We've got cats and I'm fairly sure they do...

No it is not the example of sucking up life to the fullest. It is the fullest extent that a cat is capable of, but there is much more to life than the animalistic behavior of frolicking in the sunlight chasing butterflies.

So a cat, enjoying life to the fullest, is less important than someone sitting on a dirty matress sucking up crack and calling that experiencing life ?...

And I know I'm exaggerating but I'm sure you get my point...

Killing a cat is like killing a cow. It should have a purpose. It should be done in a way to limit suffering. It should be done ONLY to one's OWN animal or to one that is not owned.

Agreed...

But neither is a great loss.

We don't know.. The cat might be lost or on it's way home....

 

[Danoff]

I'm not... We've got cats and I'm fairly sure they do...

I've had cats as well. They had personalities and quirks - but they experienced only the most base form of life. Their primary concern was to feel good, stay fed, and chase whatever looked interesting. That's a limited mind.

So a cat, enjoying life to the fullest, is less important than someone sitting on a dirty matress sucking up crack and calling that experiencing life ?...

Yes. A cat, enjoying its life to the fullest it is capable still experiences reality in a much more limited capacity than a crack addict.

 

[PS]

...ameobas can feel pain?

omg, don't give us this crap. You know full well that an amoeba is a single celled organism that doesn't do anything but infect others.

 

[TwinTurboJay]

Maybe a concentration camp for the cats caught without homes, instead of shooting them...brand them, and then pen then in abandoned mines or the like !

 

[PS]

Yes, then those pesky cats will learn their lessons. 💡

 

[Flerbizky]

Yes. A cat, enjoying its life to the fullest it is capable still experiences reality in a much more limited capacity than a crack addict.

Each to his own then I guess

 

[Max_DC]

Its experiencing it, but in a much more limited capacity due to its lack of self-awareness. It's brain capacity limits its ability to experience life by orders of magnitude - and so the loss of expereince is much greater when a human is killed.

I'm surprised you went there because I'm surprised that someone might think that a cat could experience life to any meaningful extent compared to humans.



No it is not the example of sucking up life to the fullest. It is the fullest extent that a cat is capable of, but there is much more to life than the animalistic behavior of frolicking in the sunlight chasing butterflies.

Killing a cat is like killing a cow. It should have a purpose. It should be done in a way to limit suffering. It should be done ONLY to one's OWN animal or to one that is not owned. But neither is a great loss.

I think the word "worth" is the problem here... and I say it again : POINT OF VIEW... the life of any human by itself is not worth ANYTHING, nothing you see? For humans it is, but not for animals, plants or this planet or the universe. So if you kill animals you can justify it with " I don't care" " I need its meat" "It's a boring day" but you can't say the life of a human is worthier than the one of an animal; because what comes next ? Your analogy points in a bad direction; On the top there is a healthy intelligent 25 year old man/woman, who can enjoy life to the fullest, then there the younger and older ones, then the not so smart ones and the weak&ill people, then the handicapped etc etc... add races and different religions and welcome to Naziworld !
That is no attack, I just want you to realize, that your definition of a worthy life is very dangerous...

2nd thing : you make a scientific fault : If I ruin your hormon balance with medication, you sit in the corner like a zombie, without any drive and positive emotions, and your only sentence will be "I wanna die"; then I take a kitty next to you, let it jump around and play... then I tell you who has more dimension... A human being is nothing more than an animal with a good working brain, that has mainly developed, because evolution made us "talk" because of the anatomy of our Larynx..... the genetic difference between men and women are bigger than between a male(female) human and a male(female) chimp ....

 

[PS]

Ultimately, nothing is terribly worth anything to anyone, so why not destroy Earth itself?

Oh wait, we're already doing that. Nevermind.

 

[Danoff]

the genetic difference between men and women are bigger than between a male(female) human and a male(female) chimp ....

I think I was the one that brought that up in the first place.

I think the word "worth" is the problem here... and I say it again : POINT OF VIEW... the life of any human by itself is not worth ANYTHING, nothing you see? For humans it is, but not for animals, plants or this planet or the universe. So if you kill animals you can justify it with " I don't care" " I need its meat" "It's a boring day" but you can't say the life of a human is worthier than the one of an animal; because what comes next ? Your analogy points in a bad direction; On the top there is a healthy intelligent 25 year old man/woman, who can enjoy life to the fullest, then there the younger and older ones, then the not so smart ones and the weak&ill people, then the handicapped etc etc... add races and different religions and welcome to Naziworld !
That is no attack, I just want you to realize, that your definition of a worthy life is very dangerous...

You're reading things in to what I wrote that aren't there. There is a major jump between self-awareness and otherwise. Everything else is very minor. As soon as the creature is aware of its existance and perhaps mortality - killing it becomes a much more awful act.

 

[Joey D]

Ultimately, nothing is terribly worth anything to anyone, so why not destroy Earth itself?

Oh wait, we're already doing that. Nevermind.

Wow so I guess you should create a virus called Shevia to kill off everyone while you and a 100 other people live in an enclave in the middle of Kansas. With in 27 weeks everyone on the planet will be infected and it will only be the tree huggers left to rule the world mother nature intended. Mean while to test the virus you kidnap beautiful women and dope them up to see the effects.

 

[PS]

What movie did that come from?

But I'd give it a try. Sounds kinda fun.

 

[Flerbizky]

I've had cats as well. They had personalities and quirks - but they experienced only the most base form of life. Their primary concern was to feel good, stay fed,

And your Primary concerns differs where ?....

Again - I rest my face....

 

[Joey D]

What movie did that come from?

But I'd give it a try. Sounds kinda fun.

Try what book, I'll give you a cookie if you can figure out which one.

 

[Danoff]

And your Primary concerns differs where ?....
Again - I rest my face....

I already outlined what I live for in one of the religion threads... and you're ignoring the fact that cats don't really have secondary concerns.

 

[PS]

Try what book, I'll give you a cookie if you can figure out which one.

Micheal Crichton?

 

[Joey D]

Micheal Crichton?

Nope. Tom Clancy's Rainbow Six.

 

[Flerbizky]

I already outlined what I live for in one of the religion threads... and you're ignoring the fact that cats don't really have secondary concerns.

No. I overlooked it somewhere...

Does a crackhead have a second concern ?...

 

[PS]

Nope. Tom Clancy's Rainbow Six.

*gasp*

I knew I should have read past page 244.

[edit]

Can someone rename this to "pointless talking thread" ?

Or can we debate over whether or not this thread is pointless, but we'd still be debating over it so it wouldn't be pointless, but it's ultimately serving no beneficial purpose other than debating its' own existence?

 

[Max_DC]

I think I was the one that brought that up in the first place.



You're reading things in to what I wrote that aren't there. There is a major jump between self-awareness and otherwise. Everything else is very minor. As soon as the creature is aware of its existance and perhaps mortality - killing it becomes a much more awful act.

Sorry but that "awareness" thing is just an excuse for humans.... Every animal that runs away in fear, wants to live, is aware of its existence and its mortality...
And the Nazi ideology has the same roots as your theory, which of course doesn't mean that you have the same ideas.... Humans should accept that they kill individulas for several reasons, but it is just wrong to excuse this behavior with attributes like "worth".... that is like religion : it makes life easier, but is far away from reality...

 

[ledhed]

Sorry but that "awareness" thing is just an excuse for humans.... Every animal that runs away in fear, wants to live, is aware of its existence and its mortality...
And the Nazi ideology has the same roots as your theory, which of course doesn't mean that you have the same ideas.... Humans should accept that they kill individulas for several reasons, but it is just wrong to excuse this behavior with attributes like "worth".... that is like religion : it makes life easier, but is far away from reality...

I'll keep that in mind next time I chase down some pork chops.

 

[Famine]

Every animal that runs away in fear, wants to live, is aware of its existence and its mortality...

Or is obeying a primitive hormonal response which far overwhelms its limited ability to rationalise. As indeed humans often do too.