Post Reply
Page 8 of 10  •  Prev 1 ... 5 6 7 8 9 10 Next
3 years ago  ::  Mar 29, 2012 - 7:27PM #71
Erey
Posts: 19,171

Mar 29, 2012 -- 6:58PM, christine3 wrote:


Mar 29, 2012 -- 6:49PM, Erey wrote:


Mar 29, 2012 -- 5:32PM, solfeggio wrote:



'All animals are equal, but some animals are more equal than others.'


People really do believe that.


 


 




I believe that and I am not ashamed of it.  I am sorry, a cockroach is not equal to my dog (or your dog).  A sparrow is not equal to a tiger.  There is a hiearchy that exists because it makes sense.  Let me say before people get nuts that this does not mean that I advocate running around biting the heads off sparrows or stomping all over toads.  I don't.  I just mean that there are valid and usefull reasons that human societies value certain animals over others. 


Personally, I find this idea that all animals should be valued exactly the same to be completely unfeasible and really just ridiculous.  I am perfectly happy to intervene on what appears to be a lost dog.  I am not going to go too far out of my way for a rat that lives out in my yard. 


I think what should be advocated is a higher degree of care and concern for all animals.  not this mamby pamby idea that you have to declare a common house spider equal to a blue whale. 


I too like to feed the birds and squirells that live outside my home and I suppose by default I probably feed the rats too. 


I have given little creatures a helping hand because I could.  I could pick up the baby bird and place it on a higher branch.  I could stop for a toad in my path.  But some animals are more valued by me and valued by society.  For those animals I am willing to engage in more efforts for them. 




The Animal Farm was comparing animals to animals, not to cockroaches and spiders, lol.  Anyway, all of life deserves respect.  That is what to be equal means, equal respect.  Now as far as equal intelligence, we all know that different animals have different superior traits to others, different intelligence to others.  There are things that people in general don't even know about animals and where they appear in the cosmic life, but that's a different thread.





All life does deserve respect.  Although to be honest I have a very hard time respecting the mosquitos that bite me or any bugs that invade my home.  But given the ability I would not choose to get rid of all termites or mosquitos.  But I am not respectful of them in my home.


I do think you can eat meat and be respectful of the animal.  you certainly feel you can ride a horse while respecting the horse. 

Quick Reply
Cancel
3 years ago  ::  Mar 29, 2012 - 8:13PM #72
christine3
Posts: 7,665

Mar 29, 2012 -- 7:27PM, Erey wrote:



All life does deserve respect.  Although to be honest I have a very hard time respecting the mosquitos that bite me or any bugs that invade my home.  But given the ability I would not choose to get rid of all termites or mosquitos.  But I am not respectful of them in my home.


I do think you can eat meat and be respectful of the animal.  you certainly feel you can ride a horse while respecting the horse. 




Well, that was a nasty thing to say, and to judge.  I've known horses that wanted to give their human companions a ride.  It is all in the way they are treated.  Just as I want to take care of a horse, a horse wants to take care of me.  If you were around horses more you'd know that.  


I am not respectful of mosquitos in my home either.  But I have to say that to say your side of argument you pull it out to the extreme.


The Native Americans have been romanticized.  They killed and ate meat.  Sometimes they did it in horrific ways, whatever was easiest.  They appreciated food just like anybody.  They thought thankful thoughts with full bellies just like anybody.  Different tribes ate different food according to location.  East Coast were fishers and small game.  Plains Indians, if they were starving they'd eat their dogs and horses.  That would be when there was no alternative.  


I have to say that people should beware of reading one author.  They should read many authors and make their decisions about aboriginal Indians after taking in as much information as they can.  


Some tribes were very spiritual, others not.  It depended on their chief and holy man if they had one, and many generations of experiences.  Experiences will change people from happy people to not happy, to bitter, angry and revengeful.  There should be no blanket statements like I see sometimes on these posts about Indians.  


If you say what you heard, like Indians rivaled Genghis Khan as far as horse people, I don't think so.  Indians did not ride over America slaughtering each other to gain territory and power.  They didn't always have horses; that was later on.  Genghis Khan went village to village to eat captured herds and left people starve.  There are so many differences.  Any horse people handle horses, that's all that can be said.


Quick Reply
Cancel
3 years ago  ::  Mar 29, 2012 - 8:27PM #73
Erey
Posts: 19,171

Christine,


Sometimes I have a hard time following your posts.


What is evil of me to judge?  Evil that I have a hard time respecting the mosquitos that bite me or evil to say you can eat meat and respect animals?  I certainly believe you can eat meat in a respectful way.  Just as you might ride a horse in a respectful way.  


The Comanches, I was very specific about the Comanches were the great horse culture of their time.  Yes they rivaled the Mongols.  and Yes they rode around the plains slaughtering other tribes.  I am well aware that they were very different and had a very different culture from say the Coshata indians or the Iriquos.  The Comanches were alot like some of the other plains indians, the Apaches for example.  The difference being the Comanches were more the winners and by default more ruthless.  The Comanches were pretty rough on the Apaches but perhaps they felt they had to be.  But the Apaches were rather similar in that they had a very horse-centric culture as well and they shared much of the same area when they could get away with it.  You could speak about both those tribes and a few others by calling it a "plains indian culture"



Quick Reply
Cancel
3 years ago  ::  Mar 29, 2012 - 10:19PM #74
christine3
Posts: 7,665

Mar 29, 2012 -- 8:27PM, Erey wrote:


Christine,


Sometimes I have a hard time following your posts.


What is evil of me to judge?  Evil that I have a hard time respecting the mosquitos that bite me or evil to say you can eat meat and respect animals?  I certainly believe you can eat meat in a respectful way.  Just as you might ride a horse in a respectful way.  


The Comanches, I was very specific about the Comanches were the great horse culture of their time.  Yes they rivaled the Mongols.  and Yes they rode around the plains slaughtering other tribes.  I am well aware that they were very different and had a very different culture from say the Coshata indians or the Iriquos.  The Comanches were alot like some of the other plains indians, the Apaches for example.  The difference being the Comanches were more the winners and by default more ruthless.  The Comanches were pretty rough on the Apaches but perhaps they felt they had to be.  But the Apaches were rather similar in that they had a very horse-centric culture as well and they shared much of the same area when they could get away with it.  You could speak about both those tribes and a few others by calling it a "plains indian culture"







Erey, when you said "you" can meaning that I can (eat meat, ride a horse) and respect.  It made it sound like I could eat an animal as easily as I could ride a horse.  Sorry, I didn't understand what you wrote the first time.  


What I'm trying to say about the blanket statement of using the word "rival" is that the plains Indians lifestyle wasn't like the Genghis Khan lifestyle.  Rivalling in what way? 

Quick Reply
Cancel
3 years ago  ::  Mar 29, 2012 - 10:38PM #75
Fodaoson
Posts: 11,162

Mar 29, 2012 -- 8:27PM, Erey wrote:


Christine,


Sometimes I have a hard time following your posts.


What is evil of me to judge?  Evil that I have a hard time respecting the mosquitos that bite me or evil to say you can eat meat and respect animals?  I certainly believe you can eat meat in a respectful way.  Just as you might ride a horse in a respectful way.  


The Comanches, I was very specific about the Comanches were the great horse culture of their time.  Yes they rivaled the Mongols.  and Yes they rode around the plains slaughtering other tribes.  I am well aware that they were very different and had a very different culture from say the Coshata indians or the Iriquos.  The Comanches were alot like some of the other plains indians, the Apaches for example.  The difference being the Comanches were more the winners and by default more ruthless.  The Comanches were pretty rough on the Apaches but perhaps they felt they had to be.  But the Apaches were rather similar in that they had a very horse-centric culture as well and they shared much of the same area when they could get away with it.  You could speak about both those tribes and a few others by calling it a "plains indian culture"







Horses were reintroduced, after a 10,000 year absence,  in the late 1600s. The Comanche’s, Cheyenne and Sioux were the most proficient riders, the Comanche’s by the late 1700s were superb light cavalry. Neither the east coast tribes nor the west coast tribes  developed into horseback fighters .   The Apaches did not attack or fight from horseback. They preferred to stalk on foot and were suburb quiet runners. Runners could navigate in the mountainous  areas  of the apache homeland  more stealthily than a rider could.  A band of dismounted apache warriors could keep pace with the US Mounted Cavalry for days.  The horse was better adapted to the wide open plains of the Great Plains regions than the deep forests of the East and west coastal regions  plains or the mountains that stretched from British Columbia to New Mexico  and the Sierras  of Washington through  New Spain(Mexico). Land forms influence the impact of the horse on Native American Cultures


All Tribes had no  difficulty eating horses, but preferred bison, Elk, Deer or other available wild game. The hore s just happened to be more useful for transport than food. Until  a decade after the Civil war bison were plentiful on the plains  and other game in the forests  and mountains.  Bison wer often killed by hearding of cliffs and into deep canyons with steep walls. 

“I seldom make the mistake of arguing with people for whose opinions I have no respect.” Edward Gibbon
Quick Reply
Cancel
3 years ago  ::  Mar 29, 2012 - 10:41PM #76
Esdraelon
Posts: 5,236

Mar 29, 2012 -- 10:38PM, Fodaoson wrote:


Mar 29, 2012 -- 8:27PM, Erey wrote:


Christine,


Sometimes I have a hard time following your posts.


What is evil of me to judge?  Evil that I have a hard time respecting the mosquitos that bite me or evil to say you can eat meat and respect animals?  I certainly believe you can eat meat in a respectful way.  Just as you might ride a horse in a respectful way.  


The Comanches, I was very specific about the Comanches were the great horse culture of their time.  Yes they rivaled the Mongols.  and Yes they rode around the plains slaughtering other tribes.  I am well aware that they were very different and had a very different culture from say the Coshata indians or the Iriquos.  The Comanches were alot like some of the other plains indians, the Apaches for example.  The difference being the Comanches were more the winners and by default more ruthless.  The Comanches were pretty rough on the Apaches but perhaps they felt they had to be.  But the Apaches were rather similar in that they had a very horse-centric culture as well and they shared much of the same area when they could get away with it.  You could speak about both those tribes and a few others by calling it a "plains indian culture"







Horses were reintroduced, after a 10,000 year absence,  in the late 1600s. The Comanche’s, Cheyenne and Sioux were the most proficient riders, the Comanche’s by the late 1700s were superb light cavalry. Neither the east coast tribes nor the west coast tribes  developed into horseback fighters .   The Apaches did not attack or fight from horseback. They preferred to stalk on foot and were suburb quiet runners. Runners could navigate in the mountainous  areas  of the apache homeland  more stealthily than a rider could.  A band of dismounted apache warriors could keep pace with the US Mounted Cavalry for days.  The horse was better adapted to the wide open plains of the Great Plains regions than the deep forests of the East and west coastal regions  plains or the mountains that stretched from British Columbia to New Mexico  and the Sierras  of Washington through  New Spain(Mexico). Land forms influence the impact of the horse on Native American Cultures


All Tribes had no  difficulty eating horses, but preferred bison, Elk, Deer or other available wild game. The hore s just happened to be more useful for transport than food. Until  a decade after the Civil war bison were plentiful on the plains  and other game in the forests  and mountains.  Bison wer often killed by hearding of cliffs and into deep canyons with steep walls. 




I would suggest that past events have shown that when pushed to the limits man will eat whatever is edible.

Quick Reply
Cancel
3 years ago  ::  Mar 29, 2012 - 11:00PM #77
Fodaoson
Posts: 11,162

Yes and evidence is that people will eat snails, testicles, tongue, possum, craw fish(mudbugs) catfish, and  deep fried Twinkies. In 1846 the Donner party ate their dead . In 1972 in “El Milagro de los Andes”   survivors of a a Uruguayan place crash survived 79 days in the snowy mountains by eating  dead victims of the crash

“I seldom make the mistake of arguing with people for whose opinions I have no respect.” Edward Gibbon
Quick Reply
Cancel
3 years ago  ::  Mar 29, 2012 - 11:15PM #78
Esdraelon
Posts: 5,236

Mar 29, 2012 -- 11:00PM, Fodaoson wrote:


Yes and evidence is that people will eat snails, testicles, tongue, possum, craw fish(mudbugs) catfish, and  deep fried Twinkies. In 1846 the Donner party ate their dead . In 1972 in “El Milagro de los Andes”   survivors of a a Uruguayan place crash survived 79 days in the snowy mountains by eating  dead victims of the crash




The two exact events I had in mind whan I posted that.


But the other....duh? ...they are all a staple down here in the south....i could add a few things...Cool

Quick Reply
Cancel
3 years ago  ::  Mar 29, 2012 - 11:55PM #79
solfeggio
Posts: 9,474

What humans seem unwilling - or simply unable - to acknowledge is that our species is nothing more than one small twig on the great tree of life (to use the words of acclaimed biologist Stephen Jay Gould.)  We are not that important.  And thinking that we are is what has caused us to ruin our world and make life miserable for uncounted billions of our fellow animals.


Making sententious pronouncements about how a spider's life is not equal to that of a tiger, or a sparrow does not count the same as a dog are not only ridiculous but serve no purpose whatsoever.


Life is life.  If a creature is alive and sentient and can feel pain and doesn't want to die, then that is all we need to know.


The spider deserves to live his life just as much as any person, or tiger or sparrow or dolphin or toad or any other creature does.


To kill sentient creatures like cows and pigs and chickens, or horses or dogs, or whatever animal takes our fancy, for no other reason than we think we want to eat their flesh is morally wrong.  Animal exploitation, whether or not it is termed 'humane' is simply not morally acceptable.


 

Quick Reply
Cancel
3 years ago  ::  Mar 30, 2012 - 12:11AM #80
mountain_man
Posts: 40,294

Mar 29, 2012 -- 11:55PM, solfeggio wrote:

What humans seem unwilling - or simply unable - to acknowledge is that our species is nothing more than one small twig on the great tree of life ...


Most humans, the exception being religious extremists, readily admit we are just one of many species that occupy this planet. What some are unwilling to admit is that we, like many other animals, eat other animals for food. We are omnivorous.

Moderated by Merope on Mar 30, 2012 - 08:47PM
Dave - Just a Man in the Mountains.

I am a Humanist. I believe in a rational philosophy of life, informed by science, inspired by art, and motivated by a desire to do good for its own sake and not by an expectation of a reward or fear of punishment in an afterlife.
Quick Reply
Cancel
Page 8 of 10  •  Prev 1 ... 5 6 7 8 9 10 Next
 
    Viewing this thread :: 0 registered and 1 guest
    No registered users viewing
    Advertisement

    Beliefnet On Facebook