Do you support Animal Rights Issues ?

[Catchawave]

Poll question: Do you support Animal Rights Issues ?

Though I felt it necessary to start a poll, I need to clarify it's in my own private curiosity, and I speak for no other forum on DU. HOWEVER, further discussion is welcomed here:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topics&forum=231

[SteppingRazor]

1. Depends on the particular issue.

I'm for medical testing on animals. I'm against cosmetic testing. I'm for sweet, delicious steaks. I'm against fur.

Some parts of me hate the other parts. :)

[Catchawave]

6. It's not an easy subject, is it.......

..I'm addicted to meat, but prefer veg menus, but I would never call myself a veg*an.

I had two family members die as a result of animal testing ("well the monkey's didn't die, d'oh). Do you remember the 'smoking dogs'?

Guess we all need to pool our sources on rights for animals, huh?

:grouphug:

[flvegan]

2. Most definitely.

But then, you knew that.

[Catchawave]

14. Help me here Fl :)

If I missed your point, my apologies.

Guess I'm just reeling from DU joke/responses to AR/Veg subjects, which I question tolerance? Also, hoping to direct serious questions to the DU/VEg*an forum for serious discussion.

SO, I decided to post a poll. As you can see, I'm not real good at this, but hate the division that AR subjects bring to DU :(

[flvegan]

16. I was just answering your poll question, and affirming

that I do, most certainly, support animal rights issues. However, I know that you already know that, so I'm not telling you anything new. I'm always up for a bringing together of folks for discussion.

[Catchawave]

18. Thanks sweetie.....

IMHO, sometimes I think I'm paranoid on DU discussion threads, so I'm reaching here. That is to bring in compassionate posts? Newbies? Lurkers? I know there's a ton of peeps out there, on DU and and other blogs, who just gosh darn need to find compasionate like minds!

:kick: :loveya: :kick:

[tubbacheez]

3. Which animal right are we talking about?

Being either totally for all conceivable, or totally against all proposed, animal rights would strike me as very extreme.

[Catchawave]

19. Supporting sentient beings...?

As in avoiding intentional pain and suffering for profit?

Quite simple imo, I hope you agree?

[tubbacheez]

36. Well, you did simplify things.

However, that doesn't necessarily mean the subject itself simple. It's possible your post has oversimplified it.




Let's back up a bit. No matter how much people talk about "moral rights" or "God-given rights" or even "natural rights", in order to be legally enforcable all rights must be grounded in law. Rights are created and protected by the laws that spell them out.

In a democracy, this implies a majority consensus is willing to accept a bit of writing that says what the right includes.




So, are we proposing a new law that grants certain protected rights to animals (something beyond the existing crime of animal cruelty, which is merely a restriction upon humans without granting animals any specific rights)?

If yes, we must describe the rights in at least nominal detail. We probably need to define the scope of protected animals too.





To see an example of how non-simple the issue may be (or may become), take a brief look at the more familiar "human rights". In most contexts, there isn't just one.

The American Constitution, Bill of Rights, and other Amendments spell out many detailed rights for people... perhaps a couple dozen of them, depending where you draw the line between similar rights.

http://www.law.cornell.edu/constitution/constitution.table.html#amendments

The Universal Declaration of Human Rights (which the U.S. to my knowledge has yet to adopt) lists 29 rights.

http://www.udhr.org/UDHR/default.htm




My question, therefore, is neither dismissive nor obstructionist to the original post. I'm very open to discussing the creation and protection of animal rights.

What specific rights are being proposed? I was thinking maybe people would want to grant animals the right to die with dignity in the least painful manner possible. Another possible right would be to live in conditions as closely resembling a natural habitat as possible.

These things are available for discussion by all interested parties.





Your answer phrased as a right would be: the right to avoid intentional pain and suffering for profit. Suppose we wrote a law to protect that right. I'm not sure it could be adequately enforced. The prosecuting authorities would need to prove that 1). an animal experienced pain and suffering, 2). the pain and suffering were intentional, and 3), the pain and suffering was for profit.



So to me, at least, the catchall phrase "animal rights" is simply an umbrella term for a very complicated set of issues.

It's no different with "human rights".

[justinsb]

4. Most of the time

I saw someone on television once who claimed that killing a mosquito was the same (and ought to be treated the same under law) as first degree murder. I'm a vegetarian, an environmentalist and I don't wear fur but I don't go to the nutcase extreme on it.

[Union Thug]

5. Depends on your definition of rights....

Yes, animals should be protected from cruelty and their habitats preserved and protected against the transgressions of greedy humans.

At risk of being flamed from my brothers and sisters involved in PETA I must honestly say that, on the other hand, I am an omnivore and eat a lot of chicken, some fish and occassional beef and pork (not so much these days).

But lately I've been debating whether it wouldn't be more responsible for me to drop the factory meat all together and go out on seasonal hunting trips (my dad has been inviting me - and I haven't done this since I was 12 years old).

[Catchawave]

7. It's really about conscience, isn't it?

I've been involved in animal protection issues since 1985, yet the hunters HAVE NEVER SUPPORTED US IN GETTING RID OF FACTORY FARMS !

Why is that? Sorry, Union Thug, I'm not picking on you, just venting my frustration. :hug:

Edit: spelling

[RebelOne]

13. Well, I am going to pick on him.

Because in my opinion, hunting is cruel. Especially, if an animal is wounded and not recovered. That deer dies a very slow and painful death.

[Catchawave]

15. Hunters will deny that fact.....

...nor will they support animal protection. I'm just sick to death of hunters right now, because they're protecting their ego's, not the animals.... :(

[Union Thug]

35. I don't disagree with you about...

irresponsible hunters. But not all hunters are booze-fueled rednecks, slogging miserably through the underbrush.

Many of the most prolific and thoughtful hunters that I have known were involved in the 'deep environmental' movement. For example, some of those that one might associate with Earth First! that I knew of back in the early 90's and pagans I hung out with(esp Asatruar) were ferociously adamant about hunting protocols and responsibility.

That you are frustrated with a certain group of hunters is understandable. But all that I would ask is that you understand that not all hunters are cut from the same cloth.

[Union Thug]

34. Not just hunters...most people eat meat without ever

considering these issues.

Why HUNTERS don't consider this, I don't know. I've considered it and that's as far as I can go. =)

I am against factory farms for many of the same reasons you are as well as for the exploitation of labor that routinely happens in relation to them. I would LOVE to live in a world where small, community farms were thriving and we interfaced with the farmers at the local market.

[Ian David]

8. I'm against fois gras

Because:

1) You have to force-feed geese
2) It doesn't taste that good anyway

If you could make a "reduced-cruelty" fois gras (and sell it for about half the price) I might actually buy the stuff.

But veal.. veal is so good, I don't really care what they do to the cute little baby cow. Just keep the veal coming. But stop wasting it in "breaded patties." That's senseless.

Oh, and I'm against greyhound racing.

[Catchawave]

21. Veal is a tortured baby animal.......

...and you don't have to be AR/Veg*an to to give that up. Really. Just saying....



Edit: Dead calf in the photo. So sorry if I ruined your (generic) appetite, but it's what's on your plate too :(

[Ian David]

22. That's ok. I always feel a little guilty anyway

Just waiting until they can grow veal inside a genetically modified watermellon.

[OneBlueSky]

9. most of the time, I actually prefer animals to humans . . .

I've learned more about life from my canine and feline friends (unconditional love, forgiveness, patience, simplicity, living in the moment, etc.) than any from any humans I've ever known . . .

[BiggJawn]

11. You said it!

Never been deliberately fucked-over by an animal, and I wish my girlfriend felt the same way about me that her dog does...

[Catchawave]

23. Oh OneBlueSky....you get it.....

...you really, really get it. :hug:

[Deja Q]

10. Corporate executives should have rights?

:shrug:

[Lilith Velkor]

32. Those aren't animals, they're machines.

So no, they don't have rights.

[Kraklen]

12. Yes.

Assuming it doesn't interfer with the rights of humans.

For example, I think people should be able to eat meat, where fur, test drugs on animals, and practice cultural traditions involving animals.

I'm fully behind any movement to insure that animals are treated as humanely as possible.

[cheeseit]

17. Yes, most certainly!

[livinginphotographs]

20. Yes.

"I am in favor of animal rights as well as human rights. That is the way of a whole human being." - Abraham Lincoln

[Maru Kitteh]

25. That's the sig in my email :-)

Some of my other faves:

Can you really ask what reason Pythagoras had for abstaining from flesh? For my part I rather wonder both by what accident and in what state of soul or mind the first man did so, touched his mouth to gore and brought his lips to the flesh of a dead creature, he who set forth tables of dead, stale bodies and ventured to call food and nourishment the parts that had little before bellowed and cried, moved and lived. How could his eyes endure the slaughter when throats were slit and hides flayed and limbs torn from limb? How could his nose endure the stench? How was it that the pollution did not turn away his taste, which made contact with the sores of others and sucked juices and serums from mortal wounds? It is certainly not lions and wolves that we eat out of self-defense; on the contrary, we ignore these and slaughter harmless,tame creatures without stings or teeth to harm us, creatures that, I swear, Nature appears to have produced for the sake of their beauty and grace. But nothing abashed us, not the flower-like like tinting of the flesh, not the persuasiveness of the harmonious voice, not the cleanliness of their habits or the unusual intelligence that may be found in the poor wretches. No, for the sake of a little flesh we deprive them of sun, of light, of the duration of life to which they are entitled by birth and being.
-Plutarch


A human can be healthy without killing animals for food. Therefore if he eats meat he participates in taking animal life merely for the sake of his appetite.
-Leo Tolstoy

We should live in harmony with Earth not conquer it.. or the animals. The other members of the National Football League say I'm in the minority.. but they are. A majority of the world is vegetarian.
-Former Steelers football Player Glenn Scolnick

[livinginphotographs]

27. Hey, veganistan!

Long time no see. Someone was actually asking about you today...

[smbolisnch]

29. Veganistan!

That was me askin.....just wondering where you have been! :hug:

[Catchawave]

31. Hi Veganistan!

:yourock:

[jobycom]

24. Lately I've been opposed to the right of free speech for my cat

Darned thing won't shut up at night! Other than that, I love her, though. And I definitely support her right to plead the fifth!

[4_TN_TITANS]

26. Absolutely for animals rights.

I think that stems from having basic compassion for other living things - people or animals. Over the 4th of July, my brother-in-law (Repub)and my daugher were shooting fireworks. They shot what they had and my daughter ran back in to get more. While he was waiting, my bro-in-law began torching ants on the ground for absolutely no reason, seemingly to enjoy watching their little bodies shrivel up from the flame (power trip?).

That's a fundamental difference between Dems & Repubs - compassion. Whether it's an animal or a homeless person or somebody disabled, the bulk of compassion lies with Democrats. To Repubs, disadantaged people are just as expendable as the lowly ant.

I don't remember the actual Bible verse, but years ago I did a sermon on a verse that said that a man's heart could be judged by how he treats his animals - the bottom of the list of any man's family.

[magicmax]

37. That is so true about compassion

Or it should be. Animal rights issues seem to have taken a back burner these past several years, what with all of the events. Fur didn't used to be too cool when worn by celebrities, but there's not such a stigma any more. (I guess that goes for smoking too, actually.) The thing that has really bothered me is the astounding negative press an animal rights or environmental event gets these days. And, as I become more paranoid, I believe that it is no accident. Seldom do you hear about Greenpeace or Peta or the HSUS doing something right.
If we "use" animals for food, we can still lower the cruelty factor. Animals for testing---I don't know. It is dangerous to test on animals, thinking a positive result would affect humans likewise. A lot of the medical testing on animals is redundant and unnecessary. The government likes to give grant money for projects where animal testing is used. And how well are the labs monitored?
It seems that, as a society, instead of becoming more empathetic to all beings, we are becoming less so, regardless of party affiliation. And that could be our downfall.

"The greatness of a nation, and its moral progress, can be judged by the way its animals are treated." Gandhi

[shockra]

38. Great comments.

Welcome to DU. :hi:

[Warren DeMontague]

28. Yes. Including Humans. Many people wish to forget that we are animals too,

but we are.

I believe in practicing compassion, maximizing it whenever possible, towards other sentient life. That said, I eat fish and occasionally some poultry, but prefer the free range, organic kind. Haven't eaten red meat in years and personally I think it's helped my health immensely.

I find fur personally abhorrent, but then I find big honkin' SUVs personally abhorrent as well.

But I'm not real big into telling other people what to do. Medical testing on animals? I think it should be done only for serious medical purposes and with the maximum compassion possible, but I'm certainly not in favor of "banning" it- bad idea, I think.

I think factory farming is bad for everyone- the animals, the environment, the consumer.

That said, I don't sign on to the PETA agenda, or their positions, or their tactics. I lived with animal rights activists in college, so I know all I need to about where they're coming from.

[Bucky]

30. Animals have the right to "Get in mah Belly!"

I don't approve of chimpanzee testing or whale hunting or allowing crazy people to keep apartments full of underfed cats. I support anti animal cruelty laws. But don't ask me to give up meat. I'm not willing to eat anything I'm not willing to kill.

[shockra]

33. On eating animals.

Since the tongue is apparently the most evolved part of a human (speaking ability) people seem to think taste is King as well.

If you don't make sacrifices to the God of Taste, you might lose the ability to speak! :sarcasm:

(I can think of a few politicians I'd like to test a STFU Rice diet on.) :P