1

Do you believe international animal rights laws should be introduced just like how there are human rights laws? IMO, clones are like animals since their not a creation of god or evolution and giving animals the same rights as humans would mean clones would also have the same rights as humans. But there is also things like whale hunting which would never happen if animals had the same rights as humans. Hopefully there is a poll on this topic as it is my first voting poll and lets see what you have to say...

Votes + Comments
(^.^)yes
19
Contributors
47
Replies
48
Views
7 Years
Discussion Span
Last Post by GrimJack
Featured Replies
  • 4

    [QUOTE=cwarn23;1098675]If you vote yes then animals should have the same rights as humans. If you vote no then things should stay as they are. And the third answer is for those who don't want to scratch their head to get an answer.[/QUOTE] What you are saying is that animals can … Read More

  • 6
    Narue 5,707   7 Years Ago

    [B]>IMO, clones are like animals since their not a creation of god or evolution[/B] Is this the underlying issue? Personally, I don't see a problem with treating clones the same as naturally born creatures of the same species. The end result is the same, so who cares what the process … Read More

  • Like letting [URL="http://search.leg.wa.gov/pub/textsearch/ViewRoot.asp?Action=Html&Item=535&X=111133218&p=11"]dogs into bars[/URL] or allowing small critters to sue a snake for terrorizing their families? I'm going to go enjoy some squirrel patties, before you and radicals(ALF/terrorist/asylum escapees) go off the deep-end and turn everything into a mess. Read More

  • let us base [U]our[/U] treatment of animals on the treatment of animals [I]by animals[/I] Therefore, we can eat them, alive if we want to, mutilate them parasitise them lay our eggs upon their paralyzed bodies so our young can eat them alive find any number of ways to make their … Read More

  • 3

    [QUOTE=cwarn23;1103408]I sorta disagree. My Definition - A clone is an organic product produced in a non natural way and without a god (like a machine but organic).[/QUOTE] "Cloning in biology is the process of producing populations of genetically-identical individuals that occurs in nature when organisms such as bacteria, insects or … Read More

0

I'm starting to believe you own something called the Daily Workbook of Inflammatory Issues and you're going through it page by page.

0

I'm starting to believe you own something called the Daily Workbook of Inflammatory Issues and you're going through it page by page.

What does that mean? Does that mean you think I have a book listing sensitive topics? No - I just question the world we live in.

[edit]
Now I think about it we could be in like a matrix and I must be like that guy who just didn't think think life was right. The one.
[/edit]

Edited by cwarn23: n/a

1

What does that mean?

It was mainly tongue-in-cheek but it seems like everytime I come to the Geek's Lounge you've come up with a huge topic, which in and of itself isn't a bad thing. It just seems like you drop ideas for the sake of instigating and then don't end up having an earnest discussion of the topic. Then it's off to something else...

0

The other topics are still open but nobody seems to be interested. I wonder why?

0

You did not explain your poll very well. Do you mean giving animals the exact same rights as humans? As opposed to giving animals absolutely no rights whatsoever?

The polarity of your question leaves much to be desired - then the 3rd option is meant to demean anyone who does not take either of the other 2 positions. In other words your poll sucks because it offers nothing of interest.

0

You did not explain your poll very well. Do you mean giving animals the exact same rights as humans? As opposed to giving animals absolutely no rights whatsoever?

The polarity of your question leaves much to be desired - then the 3rd option is meant to demean anyone who does not take either of the other 2 positions. In other words your poll sucks because it offers nothing of interest.

If you vote yes then animals should have the same rights as humans. If you vote no then things should stay as they are. And the third answer is for those who don't want to scratch their head to get an answer.

0

>> If you vote yes then animals should have the same rights as humans

As a result of the survival of the fittest, its impossible for animals
to have the same rights as humans, unless we don't wan't to survive or
commit some fallacy.

4

If you vote yes then animals should have the same rights as humans. If you vote no then things should stay as they are. And the third answer is for those who don't want to scratch their head to get an answer.

What you are saying is that animals can own property, demand a trial by their peers, grow their hair long, marry your sister, sue you for cannibalism, demand a translator when applying for public assistance.

Animal rights = human rights is retarded and make no sense.

Votes + Comments
Quite
Exactly!
1

What you are saying is that animals can own property, demand a trial by their peers, grow their hair long, marry your sister, sue you for cannibalism, demand a translator when applying for public assistance.

Animal rights = human rights is retarded and make no sense.

I was mainly referring to things like animal abuse and hunting of animals. Animals have emotions too you know. While they may not be the same as us humans, they should be treated with the same respect as a human is treated. And yes I would agree animals should be allowed to demand a trial by their peers when/if we can communicate with them. But as you know we can't talk to animals and vice versa so humans have to speak for the animals. And I suspect species like wales we will never see again due to this lack of respect. So if you think evolution should just take its toll then go ahead and vote no.

6

>IMO, clones are like animals since their not a creation of god or evolution
Is this the underlying issue? Personally, I don't see a problem with treating clones the same as naturally born creatures of the same species. The end result is the same, so who cares what the process was?

That whole "clones are like animals" is both nonsensical and rather mean spirited. Animals are a "creation of god or evolution", so if clones are not a "creation of god or evolution", why are they like animals? Your logic doesn't follow. Further, you've already apparently passed judgment on clones and deemed them lesser beings, which makes all of your arguments reek of pushing a movement that you don't truly believe in to feel better about yourself or look better in other people's eyes. Quite selfish, in my opinion, and it has nothing to do with the topic of animal (or clone) rights.

>I was mainly referring to things like animal abuse and hunting
>of animals. Animals have emotions too you know.

Do lions care how the zebra is feeling when they hunt it down and devour it? Probably not. Your question goes against the natural order.

>they should be treated with the same respect as a human is treated.
Spoken like an idealist tree hugger with no grasp of reality. There's no respect in the animal world between species, only fear. Prey fears a predator. We can fear predators too in the certain situations where we become prey, but otherwise we're at the top. Respect is an empty concept in nature, because it ultimately comes down to fear. Prey may respect predators, but only because of fear. Predators probably don't respect prey anymore than we respect a hamburger. It's hard to respect your food as an equal, ne?

>And I suspect species like wales we will never see again due to this lack of respect.
It's not lack of respect, it's stupidity. Using up more resources than you have results in the resource running out. For example, you don't need to respect oil to realize that it's a finite resource and use it judiciously.

>So if you think evolution should just take its toll then go ahead and vote no.
I refuse to place myself in one of your extreme positions. Your poll is a classic logical fallacy where the only option that doesn't make the voter appear evil is the one you believe in. A discussion would be far more amusing than a fixed poll.

2

Like letting dogs into bars or allowing small critters to sue a snake for terrorizing their families?

I'm going to go enjoy some squirrel patties, before you and radicals(ALF/terrorist/asylum escapees) go off the deep-end and turn everything into a mess.

1

It just doesn't make much sense to give a chicken elaborate rights and then eat it.

My thought about animal rights is not to treat them as humans, but to treat and/or kill them humanly -- animal rights does not prohibit slaughtering chickens for food, but rather raising them so that they are not always in pain, starving, living in swallow, etc. I read a report not long ago about some sick cows that were taken to the slaughter house, some could only crawl in because they were so ill and in pain. I've seen news reports on TV about horse farms where the horses were without food and water, they were so skinny that we could see the outline of all their bones. And we see similar reports about a dog breeder. These are the kind of things that need to be stopped.

As for clones -- IMO a human clone should be treated just like any other human. How would we know that someone was a clone ? Does a clone wear a big C on his/her forehead, similar to the H (for hologram) that Rimmer has on the sitcom Red Dwarf? When you pinch a clone does he not cry? When you tickle a clone does he not laugh? When you cut a clone does he not bleed ? Does he not have fingerprints, or finger nails that grow, or hair that grows?

1

Interesting thread and I thought vegetarians had all the answers.

Is this the underlying issue? Personally, I don't see a problem with treating clones the same as naturally born creatures of the same species. The end result is the same, so who cares what the process was?

Well as for why somebody would care about the process is that clones are like machines. They can be created and programmed then destroyed for spare parts. However they still are organisms but a low level organism and what does that describe - animals. However if every organism was treated as a human then there would be no problem with producing clones.

Do lions care how the zebra is feeling when they hunt it down and devour it?

Except there is one difference between lions and humans - intelligence. And it is intelligence that is going to doom us all because we mass hunt. So far it sounds like more people prefer evolution to go through its natural process until humans are the only species left on the earth. Now I think about it after reading this thread perhaps it is the concept of money that has made things terribly bad because people can buy as many hunted animals as they want where as in the olden days people would have to go into the fields and actually shoot some animals instead of buying. But anyways I am starting to see why animals don't have the same/similar rights as humans (Natural instincts).

2

>Well as for why somebody would care about the process is that clones are like machines.
That's the whole point. I don't see clones as being inferior, while you clearly do. I think it's blinding you.

>However they still are organisms but a low level organism and what does that describe - animals.
Your arrogance is most impressive. You talk about respecting animals, then turn right around and call them low level organisms. Methinks my original post hit the nail on the head.

>So far it sounds like more people prefer evolution to go through its
>natural process until humans are the only species left on the earth.

If you're going to construct a straw man, at least use your superior human intelligence to make it somewhat reasonable.

2

Most civilized countries already have laws against cruelty to animals. Only Japan allows the brutal slaughter of whales.

Edited by Lardmeister: n/a

1

All countries allow the brutal slaughter of animals, some just don't allow humans to do it, and it has nothing to do with improving the general animal condition and has everything to do with hating on sociopathic humans.

0

When you pinch a clone does he not cry? When you tickle a clone does he not laugh? When you cut a clone does he not bleed ? Does he not have fingerprints, or finger nails that grow, or hair that grows?

Don't know. Never met one. :icon_razz:

However they still are organisms but a low level organism and what does that describe - animals.

How so? Who has defined them as low level? What does that mean? And do they agree with you?

However if every organism was treated as a human then there would be no problem with producing clones.

Well, there goes Cancer research, disease control, pest control. Our world will be a better place when dangerous bacteria can run rampant because, as an organism, it's treated as a human. And mosquitoes...

Except there is one difference between lions and humans - intelligence.

And clones have no intelligence...


Animals don't have 'rights'. They don't vote. Humans can place restrictions on treatment by humans, but they cannot bestow rights on animals. It's ludicrous.

-1

>> Except there is one difference between lions and humans - intelligence

And , humans have thumbs, they can walk with 2 feet, they do not
have as much as body hair( usually ), humans teeth are a lot weaker,
we do not have as long and visible tail (usually), our babier aren't
as cute, and we aren't as friendly( usually).

Edited by firstPerson: n/a

Votes + Comments
WOW THIS IS SUCH AN INTELLIGENT COMMENT
1

Well, there goes Cancer research, disease control, pest control. Our world will be a better place when dangerous bacteria can run rampant because, as an organism, it's treated as a human. And mosquitoes...

lol. I never thought of it that way before. From what I am reading on this topic I guess some animals/organisms should have some rights but not the same rights as humans. Interesting to see how the world would be like with animal rights laws. But yea - from that quote I can see why other organisms don't have the same rights as humans.

0

Keep in mind that multiple births are clones - eg idntical twins or greater are clones. If you disagree, define your terms.

0

Keep in mind that multiple births are clones - eg idntical twins or greater are clones. If you disagree, define your terms.

I sorta disagree. My Definition - A clone is an organic product produced in a non natural way and without a god (like a machine but organic).

2

let us base our treatment of animals on the treatment of animals by animals
Therefore,
we can eat them, alive if we want to,
mutilate them
parasitise them
lay our eggs upon their paralyzed bodies so our young can eat them alive
find any number of ways to make their existence painful to our benefit

observed objectively, and, compared to "mother nature"
chickens
cattle
sheep
antelope

every animal fixated upon by humans has it good, in a relative sense, we kill rapidly, stress hormones toughen the meat
if I were a thinking fly, I would prefer to be swatted - than be injected with a poison that liquefies my intestines and have them sucked out of my body before I had a chance to die

And Cwarnie old bean

I sorta disagree. My Definition - A clone is an organic product produced in a non natural way and without a god (like a machine but organic).

can you demonstrate any involvement by this god person in my birth,
Don't want rant, dogma et al, just want proof of your postulate.MS programmers left their names in the windows code
IBM programmers left pictures in chip masksWhere is the easteregg that the making stuff god left in the mask
every bacterium on the planet is the product, duplicate, of an adult cell : Define non natural,
and which one of these god things?
All the god books admit to the existence of other gods, Aside; "Though shalt have no other god before me" is a clear statement of the existence of other godsso which god is the making stuff godif the rest of us "Festivus for the rest of us, thank you George" chose the wrong god, not a making stuff god, do we become unable to procreate?
I have to ask, because of god followers, everybody seems to be procreating about the same, whichever god they like,
the pantheists arent doubling up, seems a bit of a shame, if you have 2 gods shouldn't you get twice as much stuff

Edited by almostbob: n/a

0

What's this about animal cruelty? I get mice in the house from time to time. Traps don't work - they're sneaky (or should that be squeaky?) varmints, so I use poison. Do I like the idea of a slow painful death - to be honest I couldn't give a fig, especially as the little sods make holes in my sofa and eat my chocolate.

In the wild, dogs'll eat their own faeces, so I stopped buying dog food and fed the miserable sod his own sh*t. It didn't last long, I forgot all about the second law of thermodynamics.

Don't get me started on spiders.

/edit

And another thing, what's all this about clones? I say kill 'em. Kill 'em all. I haven't slept properly since seeing Pennywise in IT. "They all float down here"

Edited by diafol: n/a

0

I think the humane treatment of animals - insofar as we should not cause unnecessary distress or pain - is a reasonable standard for law, but otherwise I'm a proponent for the use of animal resources to support and advance human lives.

But no to human rights for animals.

Basically I'm mostly in agreement with AncientDragon so far.

3

I sorta disagree. My Definition - A clone is an organic product produced in a non natural way and without a god (like a machine but organic).

"Cloning in biology is the process of producing populations of genetically-identical individuals that occurs in nature when organisms such as bacteria, insects or plants reproduce asexually. Cloning in biotechnology refers to processes used to create copies of DNA fragments (molecular cloning), cells (cell cloning), or organisms. The term also refers to the production of multiple copies of a product such as digital media or software." Twins are genetically-identical individuals and therefore fit the definition of clones.

Your belief or your feelings about what you want the 'clone' to mean is valueless - we communicate by using words as they are commonly defined. There is no communication if you use your own randomly created definition of words.

0

"Cloning in biology is the process of producing populations of genetically-identical individuals that occurs in nature when organisms such as bacteria, insects or plants reproduce asexually. Cloning in biotechnology refers to processes used to create copies of DNA fragments (molecular cloning), cells (cell cloning), or organisms. The term also refers to the production of multiple copies of a product such as digital media or software." Twins are genetically-identical individuals and therefore fit the definition of clones.

Your belief or your feelings about what you want the 'clone' to mean is valueless - we communicate by using words as they are commonly defined. There is no communication if you use your own randomly created definition of words.

That reminds me - star fish. Their produced the same way clones are. So yea clones would be exactly like starfish making them just as part of evolution as us humans are. So I can see why human clones would have exactly the same rights as humans because they are still part of the same evolutionary process. Thanks. That word asexual reminded me a few things from biology where a organism can reproduce by splitting or in this case cloning.

0

That reminds me - star fish. Their produced the same way clones are. So yea clones would be exactly like starfish making them just as part of evolution as us humans are. So I can see why human clones would have exactly the same rights as humans because they are still part of the same evolutionary process. Thanks. That word asexual reminded me a few things from biology where a organism can reproduce by splitting or in this case cloning.

Yes - it reminds me that we gave up immortality to have sex - worth it?

This topic has been dead for over six months. Start a new discussion instead.
Have something to contribute to this discussion? Please be thoughtful, detailed and courteous, and be sure to adhere to our posting rules.