Rowan22 Posted June 18, 2011 Share Posted June 18, 2011 With hyperbole, I think truman was asking for an 'honest' answer, rather than one that ducks the salient points. Now we're getting closer to the truth. Will it salve your pink little sensitive underbelly if I keep reassuring you that yes, "working class blood sports like badger baiting and dog fighting are moronic too?" There is that better? The "honest" truth is that people who enjoy killing and torturing animals for fun are mentally ill sadistic inadequates. And, the consumption of either meat fish or fowl for purposes of nutritional value is of a completely different moral class. We tolerate a certain degree of moral ambiguity, if the good outweighs the bad in deciding what is and what isn't in the public interest. Eating fish, even a fish which attends sensitivity training and enjoys reading Milton, does not cause public outrage. Or the impression that we are condoning sadism does it? Badger baiting, dog fighting, Fox hunting do. Fishing does not, why because generally people take the "common sense" view that fish are so removed from our familiar attribution of sentience that eating them does not arouse the same sense of identification, whatever the analysis of the laboratory says. We don't need an expert to tell us that the mammal is terrified and suffering for the pleasure of freaks that compensate for their obvious lack of manhood/personhood by torturing defenceless animals. Whereas watching a warm blooded mammal have its intestines ripped out by a pack dogs, whilst a bunch of weak inadequate sadists look on and congratulate themselves on what "big men" they are. Are we clear now? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
max Posted June 18, 2011 Share Posted June 18, 2011 You should stick to the day job* or buy a pair of bigger shoes so we know when you're trying humour. *class? I honestly thought better of you than to stoop to exchanging insults. How times have changed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rowan22 Posted June 18, 2011 Share Posted June 18, 2011 I honestly thought better of you than to stoop to exchanging insults. How times have changed. Don't stoop the gentrification. It's the rights favourite way of claiming the moral high ground whilst advocating amorality. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
max Posted June 18, 2011 Share Posted June 18, 2011 Don't stoop the gentrification. It's the rights favourite way of claiming the moral high ground whilst advocating amorality. Talking of stooping, don't stoop to their level of insults, it does your arguments no favours. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mecky Posted June 18, 2011 Share Posted June 18, 2011 If Came ruin has said he wants to bring back hunting, he'll get defeated, and that will be 13 U-Turns, if not more, in the 13 months of this government. You know you're on a downer when your long-term press turns against you Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Obelix Posted June 18, 2011 Share Posted June 18, 2011 Talking of stooping, don't stoop to their level of insults, it does your arguments no favours. Something quite a few people on this thread could do with heeding I feel... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WeX Posted June 18, 2011 Share Posted June 18, 2011 If Came ruin has said he wants to bring back hunting, he'll get defeated, and that will be 13 U-Turns, if not more, in the 13 months of this government. You know you're on a downer when your long-term press turns against you how is putting something to the vote a u-turn? its a defeat if they lose but not a u-turn by any stretch of the imagination. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thetruth Posted June 18, 2011 Share Posted June 18, 2011 torie scum! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rowan22 Posted June 18, 2011 Share Posted June 18, 2011 Talking of stooping, don't stoop to their level of insults, it does your arguments no favours. Whereas I take the opposite view, that it is your average "rightist" who seeks to invalidate emotion and rationalise the emotive. Consciousness isn't an epistemological concept; it is an emotionally based causal system of valuing and reasoning. Reason doesn't define emotion out the equation. Emotion is the neurological basis for rationality. So getting "heated" about things which require passion is something I will not be told to tone down or repress into the form they feel comfortable with. What really grinds my gears is the sheer hypocrisy of their position. I'm actually being asked to justify my eating fish on the basis that "fish have feelings" by the same people who blithely dismiss the unemployed and alienated as "benefit scrounging scum" They wouldn't know what a joined up thought was if it jumped up and bit their fat behinds! It's laughable that when it suits them they can appreciate the (theorised) suffering of a fish, but in the next breath pour scorn on the suffering of "chavs" who they speak of as some kind of sub human category! If they want consistency, then fine let’s discuss the contradiction there? Why in this context are the feelings of a fish grounds for moral outrage. And then when discussing the suffering of a fellow human being they feel entitled to disparage and de humanise people for their vulnerability? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rowan22 Posted June 18, 2011 Share Posted June 18, 2011 Not at all,you inferred that angling was OK because the fish don't know fear or have emotion..Victoria's work may show otherwise....therefore why are you not in a huff about angling as you are about fox hunting? You have double standards..why? The real contradiction here is the fact that on the one hand you present fish as sentient as a justification for Fox hunting. I think you are confused you are negating your own premise. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.