To LUGNET HomepageTo LUGNET News HomepageTo LUGNET Guide Homepage
 Help on Searching
 
Post new message to lugnet.off-topic.debateOpen lugnet.off-topic.debate in your NNTP NewsreaderTo LUGNET News Traffic PageSign In (Members)
 Off-Topic / Debate / 11444
11443  |  11445
Subject: 
Re: Lobster Bisque (was: Did animals have rights before we invented rights?)
Newsgroups: 
lugnet.off-topic.debate
Date: 
Sat, 7 Jul 2001 06:12:43 GMT
Viewed: 
1291 times
  
In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Daniel Jassim writes:
I say if you must eat them, at least kill them swiftly before tossing them
in the boiling water.

Honest question-- is this possible? I know that killing lobsters
"incorrectly" makes them poisonous to eat.

Why miss opportunities to be humane? It's good self
discipline and shows character, in my opinion.

Completely agree. However, since I don't kill my own cows, I feel quite
morally distant from the act of their death-- But I certainly would advocate
being as humane as possible.

I think if people are going to eat meat (or not), they'll appreciate it more
if they know where it comes from.

While it may be beneficial for their learning, and help them in other
aspects of life, I think it will do nothing but devaluate their enjoyment of
meat itself. Just want to make that clarification if that's not what you
already meant.

I challenge all meat eaters reading this post to visit a slaughterhouse
sometime in the near future. I'm not saying, and never said before, to give
up meat but I know going to a slaughterhouse may spark some outrage. Perhaps
it will change the opinion about how animals should be treated.

I don't think any of us agree that animals aren't poorly treated-- again,
it's merely dissassociation. The more we disassociate with it, the less
immoral we feel.

Hmmm. Well, here's my rule about ownership and it works for me:

  If you didn't make it...
  If you didn't buy it...
  If it wasn't made or bought and then given to you...
         --then--
  It does not belong to you.

I don't believe in the notion of "finders-keepers."

Alright then, poor example. Let's suppose I was given a button to push. I
was told that pushing the button would give me food, and was asked to push
it. It gave me food as promised. However, unbeknownst to me, the button was
*also* mutilating children when I pressed it. Was I immoral? No. *BUT*, if I
ever found out that it *was* mutilating them, and I *still* pressed it, then
I *am* immoral. Better example?

DaveE



Message has 2 Replies:
  Re: Lobster Bisque (was: Did animals have rights before we invented rights?)
 
(...) Sure you were. Weren't you purposely neglecting to consider the source of the food? :-) Chris (23 years ago, 7-Jul-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
  Re: Lobster Bisque (was: Did animals have rights before we invented rights?)
 
(...) Really? That's something I didn't know (but then again I dislike all seafood anyway so I know very little about it). Just out of curiousity, how does it make them poisonous? Is there some sort of drastic chemical change that happens when (...) (23 years ago, 7-Jul-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Message is in Reply To:
  Re: Lobster Bisque (was: Did animals have rights before we invented rights?)
 
(...) I say if you must eat them, at least kill them swiftly before tossing them in the boiling water. Why miss opportunities to be humane? It's good self discipline and shows character, in my opinion. For example, when an old and sick or dying pet (...) (23 years ago, 7-Jul-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

244 Messages in This Thread:
(Inline display suppressed due to large size. Click Dots below to view.)
Entire Thread on One Page:
Nested:  All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:  All | Brief | Compact

This Message and its Replies on One Page:
Nested:  All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:  All | Brief | Compact
    

Custom Search

©2005 LUGNET. All rights reserved. - hosted by steinbruch.info GbR