SortOf said:
I think its ok to eat animals, as long as there not human like such as apes and monkeys. Cows, pigs, chickens, turkey, rabbits and things of that nature are all ok. I however don't think something like a dog, or cat should be eaten because it possesses a certain level of intelligence.
Its ok for animals to have rights, to an extent, as long as they don't impose on the rights of humans or cause inconvenience for them. But nothing is going to stop me from picking up a hamburger, eating bacon and eggs for breakfast, or having a steak on a night out.
Actually pigs are more intelligent than both cats and dogs on average, with cats being pretty much at the botton of the IQ table with the animals you listed. To simply not eat certain animals due to their intelligence, well then, that would open up alot of animals for eating while stop other commonly consumed animals for eating.
I think part of it boils down to culture in your country(as all countrys will have certain animals that are more acceptable to eat than others, for example is quite acceptable to eat dogs in china, whale in japan, and horses in germany, but these sorts of animals are not really acceptable in places like england etc), and what animals are commonly kept as pets, as i do believe that when people keep a particular type of animal as a pet they appreiciate it alot more for it is and refrain from eating its species/type.
I think its fine to eat any animal though as long as it has been specifically raised for human consumption in a humane and morally correct enviroment/conditions and also killed in a humane mannor, and its species is not rare or endangered or anything- even better if its species itself was specifically bred for human consumption like the modern cow or sheep. Then you can apply intelligence if you want, although alot of farm animals are a heck of a lot more intelligent than people give them credit for like pigs, which is why i stopped eating pig as i just didn't like the thought of eating one of the most intelligent animals in the world that is so close to us in so many ways- but thats another story.
Animal rights is important, to say though animal rights is only worth upholding when it doesn't create inconvenience for people is such a vague thing to say it could be used to justify all mannor of bad things for example chickens should be battery farmed because it creates cheap chicken meat, and if it was stopped chicken meat prices would go through the roof and be inconvinient for people, which would be just wrong- theres nothing good about a battery chickens life whatsoever, and they have no basic needs attended to them for like enough space to turn around and take more than one step in front of them.
So no, i dont think that animal rights should just be applied when it is convinient enough for people. I think it just be applied logically with an awareness of morality involved. For example, unlike strongvoicesforward here, i do think people should have the right to farm animals for human consumption, but on the other hand i think if they are to be farmed for human consumption they should be done so in a humane and morally correct mannor with the animals in question basic need properly attended too(i.e. enough space, good diet, social requirements met, keep in good health etc).
True, we evolved to eat meat along with our veg, and to raise a human child on a diet of veg and meat plus associated foods once weaned off the breast is still by far the best way to raise a healthy child, but we should still do so in a morally correct and humane mannor as far as the animals are concerned because we are human beings and we know the we have the ability of such awareness over such things and thus i think we should use it, not just applied to when it is convinient for us, but when the animal chosen for consumption has its best interests at heart too for the length of its life too
.