Intelligence = Compassion?? For animals?

By the way, I'm using Hitler as an example of someone who shows compassion for animals, yet... well you know.

Hitler wore a suit. All men wear suits. Therefore, all men are Hitler.

Yes, I know correlation does not mean causation. It's just an idea I've come across.

I don't wear a suit.

Nice try, Hitler.

Maybe Hitler knew that he would be reincarnated as an animal, so he promoted vegetarianism so he wouldn't be eaten by Jews.

Or maybe Hitler was just a good guy with a lot of bad press.

All animals are inherently evil.

I warned the Fantastic Mr Fox not to take that acid!!!

I personally don't think there's much of a correlation between intelligence and compassion (at least not for animals.) I consider myself a fairly intelligent person and I find the idea of "animal rights" to be absurb. Animals are food and pets and beasts of burden. Rice and cars don't have rights. Why do chickens?

Meanwhile, ever seen a handicapped kid with a puppy? Or a senile person? They act like it's a soap bubble that's going to pop. They're overflowing with respect and compassion for it.

Then how do you explain Uncle Ted?

That just defies explanation.

It's not about those with low intelligence (as it's plainly obvious dumb people love animals, too). I think the idea is more that people who are more intelligent are prone to see hypocrisies in certain lifestyles. I never understood animal rights. Animal cruelty is illegal. People who own pets have to keep them healthy. All that's good enough for me. HOWEVER, I do see a major problem with factory farms. I don't have a problem with eating meat, since it's necessary for your health, but there's a strange tendency for society to hold some animals above others, and cows and chickens seem to be at the very bottom. I'm not really comfortable with the fact that when I buy some BBQ chicken, there's a chance I'm paying people to treat them as cruelly as I've seen in factory farms.

But to get back on topic, perhaps the reason I've heard people say, "intelligent people are more prone to be compassionate to animals," is the fact that those who have changed the world through their intellect are also prone to adhere to a moral code (however straight or twisted that code might be) since strong moral conviction is quite a motivator. With moralistic philosophies comes the inevitability that an intelligent person will reason that it seems cruel to allow animals to suffer when it's not necessary. But this is just a theory.

Genius.

Without weighing in on one side or another, I'm pretty sure it has something to do with: a nervous system.

[/obligatory]

Fetuses have nervous systems and they don't have legal rights.

I was about to respond with: Lolwut

Why does compassion towards animal's have to translate into not eating them? I suppose I'm intelligent enough and I really do not care for most animals, I find them annoying. At the same time I don't want to see them abused or treated cruelly.

BUT I also see nothing wrong with eating animals either, my teeth show I am meant to have a omnivorous diet. And there are plenty of animals in this world who wouldn't hesitate to swallow any one of us whole, or tear us to shreds and savor slowly before we are all the way dead then come back to feast some on our rotting carcass later.

Also, why does vegetarianism have to translate into a person being some animal rights weirdo. I was raised vegetarian, I didn't have my first hamburger until I was fourteen and didn't start eating meat regularly until I was eighteen, now I still don't eat meat much (compared to others) I just don't like most of it really. It didn't have anything to do with being nice to animals, it was just the healthiest diet choice in my moms opinion.

I do think that anyone who is incapable of slaughtering, cleaning and cooking their meat from start to finish shouldn't eat meat. On a moral level I mean, not physically having the knowledge and experience under their belt. I don't mean I think everyone should hunt, but that if you know you don't have it in you to hunt even for survivals sake then you just need to shutup and go eat a carrot or something.

Also, this topic is funny to me because I just started reading Wicked yesterday and it is just really getting in to the Animal rights and oppression part. Sort of ironic funny to read all the posts with the book in mind.

I love animals! And they taste good too!

That greattt monty python line: "I love animals, thats why I like to kill 'em!"

I'm really really passionate about animal's rights. There should be no one abusing animals, or living with 60 cats in a two room apartment, or cows being hurt in a milking machine, or chickens being stuck inside a cage for their whole lives laying eggs. I wish the whole world could raise cows and pigs and chickens on a nice farm, where they can eat bugs and grass and hay and whatever they want. I know, however that that is not practical. I eat beef, chicken, pork, and meat in general all the time. I wish I could be choosy enough to only eat meat from 'free range' chickens or organic beef or something, but I don't. I know how I wish animals would be treated, but I know the reality. I would love harsher laws about animal cruelty and standards for meat factories. I'm not against slaughter houses, but I'm against low standards for animal lives in slaughter houses. I know the world needs meat. But can't it be procured in a pain-free way? I'm good with hunting too. It's not a lifestyle or activity I would ever participate in, but I know it brings people enjoyment, and I know that it helps control wild animal populations.

I'm trying to be a realist about this. I want no angry responses, because I think I'm being rational.

Canadian geese repopulate so fast that the Canadians shoot literally thousands of them each year and there's no real dent in the goose population. Each goose couple lays 3-8 eggs, probably twice a year, because a lot of animals are like that. Also they're real good at living where humans live because of our abundance of discarded bread products.

I'm not sure if you're accusing the original post of having any of those implications, but they don't. However, I would like to say I agree 100% with everything you said.

I agree with this 100%, as well. I'm glad I'm finding a few people who seem to be in the same boat as me.

uhg.

Fuck you, I'm happy I'm not alone on this. Just be happy it wasn't an angry response, fucker!!!!

I agree 100% with all of this. I also like making you look like a chode.

You'd have to outwit someone, first. You'd also have to be something other than text on a screen.

You can be compassionate towards animals, without believing in animal rights. The Republican speechwriter, Matthew Scully, wrote a book in which he bases his argument for animal protection not on rights, liberation, or ethics, but on mercy. He tells us, "We are called to treat them with kindness, not because they have rights or power or some claim to equality, but in a sense because they don't; because they all stand unequal and powerless before us. Animals are so easily overlooked, their interests so easily brushed aside. Whenever we humans enter the world, from our farms, to the local animal shelter to the African savanna, we enter as lords of the earth bearing strange powers of terror and mercy alike."

Has anyone had a chance to read the just released book Eating Animals by Jonathan Safran Foer?

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/natalie-portman/jonathan-safran-foers-iea_...

sticks and stones my friend.

i am happy it wasn't an angry response, and I'm glad someone agrees with me. I should stop being mean to you. I just annoyed me in chat the other night.

It's all good.

Though adorable now, one day Timmy the Sloth will resurrect an ancient demon and work to bring about Hell on Earth. Have respect for him, if you will, because when he is sucking the marrow from your shattered bones, he will show no respect for you.