Go Back   I-Mockery Forum > I-Mockery Discussion Forums > Philosophy, Politics, and News
FAQ Members List Calendar Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
maggiekarp maggiekarp is offline
noob 4eva
maggiekarp's Avatar
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Texas
Old Mar 19th, 2007, 07:51 PM        Better Dead than Raised by Humans
http://www.cnn.com/2007/WORLD/europe....ap/index.html


Bah! I'm sick of this foolish notion that humans are somehow outside of nature. Also, that no one besides me seems to have noticed the "universal cuteness gene" survival thing that causes mammals to adopt outside of their species. If a dog adopts a litter of kittens, it's cute, but if a human bottle-feeds a baby bear it's SICK.


If they don't want the bear I'll take it, just sayin'.
Reply With Quote
  #2  
Emu Emu is offline
Level 29 ♂
Emu's Avatar
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: Peoria, IL
Old Mar 19th, 2007, 07:56 PM       
Animal activists are cunts.

All of them.

Ever.
Reply With Quote
  #3  
Jeanette X Jeanette X is offline
Queen of the Beasts
Jeanette X's Avatar
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: in my burrow
Old Mar 19th, 2007, 11:26 PM       
What the fuck is wrong with this dickbrain? Does he think they should end all the captive breeding and rehabilitation programs too, because, heaven forbid, they be raised by humans?

Idiots like this set their own cause back twenty years every time they open their mouths.
Reply With Quote
  #4  
derrida derrida is offline
Member
derrida's Avatar
Join Date: Sep 2003
Old Mar 20th, 2007, 01:03 PM       
I've seen polar bears in zoos, and they are most definitely not happy creatures, unless someone wants to tell me that swimming or pacing in a tight circle for a couple hours is what polar bears are supposed to do. Huh, I guess this means that I'm saying that humans are outside of nature. Well, for polar bears we sure are, except for when they eat us. So, there's really no compelling reason to keep pb's in zoos except to shock little kids and jaded people into signing up with greenpeace or sea shepherds. I think there are better ways to do that.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #5  
Emu Emu is offline
Level 29 ♂
Emu's Avatar
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: Peoria, IL
Old Mar 20th, 2007, 07:08 PM       
Who are you to judge whether an animal's "happy" or not? You make the tacit assumption that they would somehow be "happier" out in the wild. Oh man, getting fed every meal and lying around all day instead of starving in the arctic circle, what a horrid life I YEARN FOR MY FREEDOM.
Reply With Quote
  #6  
Grislygus Grislygus is offline
Ancient Mariner
Grislygus's Avatar
Join Date: Jun 2006
Old Mar 20th, 2007, 07:27 PM       
Awright, the man's an ultra pro-animal extremist, so he doesn't have the ability to properly express himself. It's kind of like having Down's Syndrome.

Anyway, what he was trying to point out was the idea that it's not entirely healthy for animals to be hand raised by humans. This is why the San Diego Wild Animal Park uses vulture puppets to feed and nurture California Condor hatchlings.

However, when an animal is a bad parent, you pretty much have to hand raise the newborns. With that in mind, the guy's not really proposing any alternatives or being useful in any way. So he's basically just bitching.
Reply With Quote
  #7  
kahljorn kahljorn is offline
BANNED
 
Join Date: May 2000
Location: NO
Old Mar 20th, 2007, 07:33 PM       
yea id say it's safe to say that he missed the point entirely.

Here's a comparitive analogy:
"What do you mean the house isn't firesafe? You mean there's a chance of it lighting on fire in the future and it could kill the people inside? Maybe we should burn it now to save the fires time you don't want him waiting outside for years' while you guys suffer in an inhospitable house"
"what do you mean she has lukemia should we kill her she would be left alone in the wild you know mamma don't want no sick bitches"
"It is better to kill an extinct species to preserve it's phenotypical extinctness than it is to captivate an extinct dying species that there aren't many others of in existence"

i think it is funny in a way because most animal rights philosophies have to do with treating animals with the same type of respect you'd treat a human. The same people usually say that about everything. They seem more Darwinian for whatever reason.
Reply With Quote
  #8  
theapportioner theapportioner is offline
Mocker
theapportioner's Avatar
Join Date: Feb 2003
Old Mar 21st, 2007, 11:51 AM       
Quote:
Originally Posted by Emu View Post
Who are you to judge whether an animal's "happy" or not? You make the tacit assumption that they would somehow be "happier" out in the wild. Oh man, getting fed every meal and lying around all day instead of starving in the arctic circle, what a horrid life I YEARN FOR MY FREEDOM.
We should lock you up in a box and you get to sit around all day for the rest of your life. Oh yeah, we'll feed you too. Enjoy!

Polar bears need to roam hundreds of miles. As derrida says, the polar bears in zoos are miserable. If you want, you can determine this empirically by giving it prozac, but anyone with half an emotional intuition can figure this one out.
Reply With Quote
  #9  
derrida derrida is offline
Member
derrida's Avatar
Join Date: Sep 2003
Old Mar 21st, 2007, 12:08 PM       
Quote:
i think it is funny in a way because most animal rights philosophies have to do with treating animals with the same type of respect you'd treat a human. The same people usually say that about everything. They seem more Darwinian for whatever reason.
I think it's safe to assume that most animal rights activists support euthanasia as applied to humans too. I don't know where Darwin comes in but it seems to me like the number one historical influence on animal rights philosophies is J.S. Mill and utilitarianism.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #10  
kahljorn kahljorn is offline
BANNED
 
Join Date: May 2000
Location: NO
Old Mar 21st, 2007, 02:06 PM       
It's darwinian because they are saying for whatever reason it's completely necessary that the polar bear be completely natural and be capable of surviving on its own for what ever reason even though they know naturally he was abandoned and naturally it couldn't survive on its own.
Reply With Quote
  #11  
Spectre X Spectre X is offline
Rating: Yes.
Spectre X's Avatar
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Dutchland
Old Mar 21st, 2007, 08:08 PM       
Wow, so this guy's answer to a violation of the animal protection codes or whatever basically entails an even more flagrant violation of that code?

It should have been left to die, because that's what happens in the wild? THAT IS NOT WHAT ZOOS ARE ABOUT, GOD DAMNIT.
__________________
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chojin
everybody knows that pterodactyls hate the screech of a guitar :o
Reply With Quote
  #12  
kahljorn kahljorn is offline
BANNED
 
Join Date: May 2000
Location: NO
Old Mar 21st, 2007, 09:07 PM       
Yea. The way I'd look at it is uh any animal in a zoo is going to be unnatural anyway and it's not exactly good to go out into the wild and steal and healthier more wanted baby bear or to capture a wild adult bear ;(
Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

   


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 09:56 PM.


© 2008 I-Mockery.com
Powered by: vBulletin
Copyright ©2000 - 2020, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.