Discussion in 'Current Events' started by Svenmonkey, May 13, 2002.
You have to know arhar. He tends to joke around a lot
I don't have any opinion on this matter, but I just want to quote a scene from Sealab 2021.
*On the subject of sparks distrubing a home-made drug to the rest of the crew.*
Dr. Quinn: You can't just give these drugs to people, man! They've got to be tested on animals first! You can't test them on humans!
Sparks: WHY NOT!!!
Dr Quinn: Because, there's.....
Sparks: (Interrupting) Look, a rabbit doesn't need eye-liner. A hamster doesn't use lipstick. And a monkey doesn't need a pill to help him have hot monkey sex! It's people that have the problems! WE'RE the miserable ones! So, why shouldn't we test it on ourselves?!?!?!?!?
Dr. QuinnAfter about seven seconds of speechlessness) Hmm, I guess you've got a point.
Dr. Quinn: Yeah. Umm, give me a pill.
Ransac, cpa trash man
Mmmm... those weasels were pretty good. They tend to scream a lot though, especially while being cooked in the microwave.
Hey, let us not turn this into a flame war. Good thing those were rabid.
Did anyone see the article in Time about those remote control mice?! Plain and outright sickness.
Also, during the cold war, the government attempted to make cat suicide bombers. Dont forget about the indenciary bat attack during WWII. Human race is nuts.
Don't forget about training dolphins to remove underwater mines and other stuff...
If we're still doing that, I hope the dolphins get smart and push the mines over our way.
Actually, I don't know if we're still doing it. Just know that we used to.
Actually, it does. If a bull kills one matador, his three assistants come in and kill it. I'm not sure what happens if the bull kills all of them, but I'm pretty sure they'd still murder the bull.
>Alright, let's hear your views
[flamebaiting] When animals gain the right to vote, I'll concede them some rights. Preserving animals for our ecosystem is one thing, giving animals priveledges that they would have no concept of, is another. Remember, the number one priority of life is the survival of the species, and if that takes testing (and even cosmetic testing, because that makes people more willing to reproduce, hence furthering our species) so be it.[/flamebaiting]
so, children don't have any rights? (they can't vote too) actually, I sometimes begin to think that's the case when I see how some ppl treat their kids.
Cosmetic testing has nothing to do with survival of our species, just with the cosmetics industry making even more money :/.
Also how do you know what concepts animals can grasp? I'm pretty sure an animal which gets tortured feels the pain.
See, homo sapiens sapiens can *be given* the right to vote. That is what I meant, not can vote as in physically able to push a button.
And actually cosmetics *do* promote our species.
Think about it this way, if it weren't for cosmetics, there would be a lot of very (as opposed to just plain) unattractive people in the world, thus slowing down reproduction due to the lack of interest. As long as the homely can change their appearance to attract the same species for reproduction, thus furthering the species, what does one or a million blind and tumor-filled rabbits matter?
As for what animals can grasp, what does it matter. If they were able to grasp agriculture, law, writing, speech, and architecture, we would be the ones killed for food and tested on. But were not, so why would you care about what level an owl reads at?
If it weren't for cosmetics, maybe more of us imbecilic rich as **** americans who experience maybe 10% of the hardship that the rest of the world's pop. experiences and who don't realize that humans aren't supposed to have perfect [insert body parts] if they're having to deal with land mines and radiation would give up on sex and die, leaving the spiritually somewhat healthier rest of the world to reproduce and make humanity better.
So cosmetics suck as much as oil and tobacco/alcohol.
...Then there's the fact that cosmetics really don't do much of anything at all to particularly encourage breeding. Look at third-world nations. They don't seem to have any trouble overpopulating themselves, and they can't afford cosmetics or, for that matter, modern medicine!
And here in the United States, where women feel the need to "put their face on" in the morning, we have a comparatively tiny birth rate...
You're outright wrong, Baskil!
I wasn't going to post here because I haven't been following it from the beginning, but I just went back to the beginning and discovered that this whole thing started out about bullfighting. I had assumed that it developped into that for a short time.
Anyway, I have a question for the masses because I don't really think that most people here know what they are talking about factually. How many people here have ever been to a real bullfight? I have.
And Mr. X - they do too use horses.
Is it any more inhumane to slaughter cows for beef than to put them all out where it can be viewed? The bulls are raised with this end in mind.
Anyway, that is some of the rationalle behind it. Does that make it right? I really don't know, but I can tell you my opinion and experience. But to be honest, I want to see if anyone else has been to a bullfight before I comment any further.
(ok then, i rescind my statement about the discontinuation of horses...hey, that makes it even crueler)
In bullfighting, they torture the bull for the sole purpose of making it mad, then they kill it painfully.
For meat, they simply bash the skull in, and because bovines aren't the most intelligent creatures, they probably have no idea what's about to happen.
Maybe I'm missing something, if the end result is the same, what is the difference really? Is it the torture that troubles you? Both of the processes end in the animal being killed. If you were truly for animal rights, you would be just as outraged at both, and would be pointing out that the world can get by on food that is not animal based or whatever PETA is shoving down our throats at the time.
So now we all have to be at extreme ends of the spectrum?
Causing suffering in any species= bad.
Causing death as long as it's quick and painless= regrettable but alright, so long as it's for necessary things such as food.
I, for one, enjoy a good steak now and then, but that doesn't mean I would like to torture my food, now does it?
You really have never been to a bullfight, have you ?
Okay, my question stands. Who here has been to a bullfight? For those of you who haven't, let me give you a bit of how it works. I'm neither condeming it or condoning it. I'm just trying to explain it. And, I must add, I'm hardly an expert, so if I get a few details wrong, please simply correct me, but in order to speak intelligenly about bullfighting, it helps to have some idea of what it's all about.
The bull is released into the arena. The Picador rides out on horseback and uses a spear. The bull charges the side of the horse, which is well armored, and the picador spears it in the neck. The purpose is to weaken the neck muscles so the head will be heald lower.
After the Picador, the bandarilleros enter and attach the bandarillos to the bull's neck. These are barbed wooden sticks that are decorated. I'm not 100% sure what their purpose is. There are 3 bandarilleros each with two bandarillos per bull.
Finally, the Matador enters the ring. He encourages the bull to charge the cape. There are a number of different manuevers used and different types of passes that the Matador attempts.
Once the bull is warn down, the Matador will use his sword to kill the bull. The objective is to insert the sword in the precise location to kill it instantly. That doesn't always happen and it is sometimes necessary to stab the bull multiple times, but that isn't the objective and a Matador that doesn't make a clean kill is likely to be booed.
So, the purpose of the "torture" is not to make the bull angry, but to make the Matador's job easier so that a clean kill may be made. Anyone who has ever seen the running of the bulls in Pamplona can tell you that the charging of the bull isn't so much from anger. In fact, the angry bulls in Pamplona are the ones that stay behind and don't want to follow the group. The people out in front of the bulls are in very little danger of being trampled since the bulls aren't really chasing them, and in almost no danger of being gored. The people behind the bulls need to be careful if one does get angry.
But I digress. I've had people tell me that the bull doesn't have nerve endings in that area and can't really feel it. I don't know if I buy that. Regardless, the stabbing of the bull does have a purpose.
The kill itself is not supposed to be painful. It is supposed to be quick and painless. If done properly, it is probably quicker than being bashed over the head.
Now, having said all of that, I have to say that there was something about the whole thing that was a bit disturbing. I'm sure I would feel the same way, or possibly even worse, if I saw cattle being slaughtered. Was the bull in pain? I don't know, but I don't think the bull would have been acting any differently if it hadn't been speared. It just would have been harder to make a clean kill.
Regardless, there is a lot more sport than you might imagine in bullfighting, but it is more in the sense of gymnastics than fencing, for example. It's not man vs. bull so much as the bull being a prop (maybe that's the part I find disturbing). Of course, the bull does often wound the man and the bull survives occasionally and is allowed to live out its life.
Anyway, form your own opinion, but make it an informed one.
Hey, where've you been, Baskil?
So far, nothing's been related to the "survival of the species". Bullfighting and cosmetics don't really fit the bill.
Bullfighting to me seems kinda dopey, unless someone's actually using the bull carcass afterwards for something. It's basically sport at an animal's expense, when you're 90% sure of the outcome and that the human's not going to be hurt. Kinda like hunting with a multi-shot type of gun
Can't remember where I read it, but there was something about that the cows are not always fully "dead" when the skinning process or whatever's supposed to come next after the killing step.
Separate names with a comma.