Tokis-Phoenix
Regular Member
So you do not agree with killing animals for food consumption?
Well wether you like it or not, if people stopped eating animals tomorrow, thousands of species of animals(domesticated or semi domesticated) would go extinct. 'Tis true. Its already an issue that thousands of species of animals, which although most have been reared for hundreds, even thousands of years, are facing because they are no longer been reared by farmers because better animals have been bred that produce more of what the public desires(i.e more meat, more fat, more milk, more wool etc)- people want lower prices for their food you see.
So by your reasoning, you would be happy is thousands of species of animals went extinct because people no longer ate them?
Wether you like it or not, in the vast majority of cases, when an animal exceeds its uses for people, they no longer want it or care for its survival.
Take this article for example, right how hundreds of endangered species of african animals are thriving in america because of hunting programs, you cannot deny the fact though that thousands of the animals that have been bred under this program would no longer exist if they didn't have it;
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/americas/4689428.stm
I dont agree with the animal cruelty side of it, but then again if it means drastically increasing the survival of a particular species, im with it. And you cannot deny that animals rarely ever kill other animals humanely by our modern day standards- that lion could be tucking into that zebras stomache before its even had its last breath. Animals kill other animals, and human being been just another animal thats evolved to kill other animals, we kill other animals like any other animal.
Of course though, we have the ability to do it humanely, and to also raise the animal in a morally correct mannor in the first place, which is what im on about, but otherwise i dont have a problem with killing most animals as long as they are not rare or endangered and have been bred/raised with the intention of being killed.
For example, although im against many of the aspects of whaling/killing whales, i also dont agree with whaling because the animals are not bred or raised to be killed and we do nothing to support the species by killing them. But for farm animals like many species of cows or pigs for example, their species simply wouldn't exist unlike whales if we no longer had a need to kill them as many species of them would not be able to survive without us if they were in the wild.
No farmer will want to have a wild herd of uncontrolable cows breaking down fences or mowing through his crops/trees if all they are going to do is inevitably put him into debt if he doesn't seriously reduce their numbers. Its said that a confined species of almost any species of animal needs at least 250 of its kind so it can breed and overcome the serious effects of desease, inbreeding and predators- if you are to have 250 wild cows on your land you will need an incredible amount of spare land for themselves to support themselves on, which the vast majority of farmers do not have.
So you see what i am saying, if we stopped consuming many of the thousands of semi domesticated/domesticated animals out there, they would simply go extinct? Would you really want to be responable for somthing like that?
Another example is fox hunting, its very similar to the endangered african animal in america hunting debate. While fox hunting was legal, many farmers encouraged foxs on their land because they had a logical reason too. There many "rules" to fox hunting as far as the farmer was concerned, for example no farmers killed fox's during their breeding and cub raising seasons so there would always be numerous large quantitys of foxs around.
No the government and animal activists have made fox hunting illegal over here, farmers no longer have a reason to have foxs around, so hundreds of thousand of them are being shot and poisened- overall, despite the animal activist intentions being honorable, they have vastly contributed to the killing of hundreds of thousands of foxs.
Foxs have far more to fear of cars than the hunter and his dogs. You could also say foxs have far more to fear of animal activists than cars.
Would you get your drivers liscense and drive a car in the knowledge that you will drastically increase the chances of you running over many species of animals in your car-driving life time?
Well wether you like it or not, if people stopped eating animals tomorrow, thousands of species of animals(domesticated or semi domesticated) would go extinct. 'Tis true. Its already an issue that thousands of species of animals, which although most have been reared for hundreds, even thousands of years, are facing because they are no longer been reared by farmers because better animals have been bred that produce more of what the public desires(i.e more meat, more fat, more milk, more wool etc)- people want lower prices for their food you see.
So by your reasoning, you would be happy is thousands of species of animals went extinct because people no longer ate them?
Wether you like it or not, in the vast majority of cases, when an animal exceeds its uses for people, they no longer want it or care for its survival.
Take this article for example, right how hundreds of endangered species of african animals are thriving in america because of hunting programs, you cannot deny the fact though that thousands of the animals that have been bred under this program would no longer exist if they didn't have it;
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/americas/4689428.stm
I dont agree with the animal cruelty side of it, but then again if it means drastically increasing the survival of a particular species, im with it. And you cannot deny that animals rarely ever kill other animals humanely by our modern day standards- that lion could be tucking into that zebras stomache before its even had its last breath. Animals kill other animals, and human being been just another animal thats evolved to kill other animals, we kill other animals like any other animal.
Of course though, we have the ability to do it humanely, and to also raise the animal in a morally correct mannor in the first place, which is what im on about, but otherwise i dont have a problem with killing most animals as long as they are not rare or endangered and have been bred/raised with the intention of being killed.
For example, although im against many of the aspects of whaling/killing whales, i also dont agree with whaling because the animals are not bred or raised to be killed and we do nothing to support the species by killing them. But for farm animals like many species of cows or pigs for example, their species simply wouldn't exist unlike whales if we no longer had a need to kill them as many species of them would not be able to survive without us if they were in the wild.
No farmer will want to have a wild herd of uncontrolable cows breaking down fences or mowing through his crops/trees if all they are going to do is inevitably put him into debt if he doesn't seriously reduce their numbers. Its said that a confined species of almost any species of animal needs at least 250 of its kind so it can breed and overcome the serious effects of desease, inbreeding and predators- if you are to have 250 wild cows on your land you will need an incredible amount of spare land for themselves to support themselves on, which the vast majority of farmers do not have.
So you see what i am saying, if we stopped consuming many of the thousands of semi domesticated/domesticated animals out there, they would simply go extinct? Would you really want to be responable for somthing like that?
Another example is fox hunting, its very similar to the endangered african animal in america hunting debate. While fox hunting was legal, many farmers encouraged foxs on their land because they had a logical reason too. There many "rules" to fox hunting as far as the farmer was concerned, for example no farmers killed fox's during their breeding and cub raising seasons so there would always be numerous large quantitys of foxs around.
No the government and animal activists have made fox hunting illegal over here, farmers no longer have a reason to have foxs around, so hundreds of thousand of them are being shot and poisened- overall, despite the animal activist intentions being honorable, they have vastly contributed to the killing of hundreds of thousands of foxs.
Foxs have far more to fear of cars than the hunter and his dogs. You could also say foxs have far more to fear of animal activists than cars.
Would you get your drivers liscense and drive a car in the knowledge that you will drastically increase the chances of you running over many species of animals in your car-driving life time?