Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[Ed]

Wow that video is disturbing, how could all those people go by and not do anything. China must have one f'ed up culture, with that mentality a gut n chuck is a walk in the  park. If they have no respect for human life how can we expect them to respect the life of a fish.  

guess human life isn't as important when there are 1.3 billion in your country and poverty. Another reason why there is no decent fishing areas in China unless you travel to mongolia or something. I wouldn't go far and say that "china must have one f'ed up culture", because if you put it that way then most of European culture/North American Culture is even more f'ed up.

[Ed]

Ok...so if humans and animals are equal....I can assume you and your children will have no problem being the guiney pig for any new pesticides that need testing? You won't have a problem with threshold testing of it on your children to study long term effects?

Yeah...whatever...I'm pretty sure you would be barking about your 'HUMAN rights' pretty quick if that were to ever happen.

If you're trying to insult or downplay human behavior, I think it is unfair to call it being like an "animal" because in an environmental point of view i'm sure the so called animals create a lot less environmental impact. I don't think the North Atlantic Cod industry was wiped out because of the sharks were eating all the fish.

[Robert_G]

If you're trying to insult or downplay human behavior, I think it is unfair to call it being like an "animal" because in an environmental point of view i'm sure the so called animals create a lot less environmental impact. I don't think the North Atlantic Cod industry was wiped out because of the sharks were eating all the fish.

I won't disagree with this. As evidence shows...humans have the capacity to ruin the planet in ways that animals could not. However.....in no way does this have anything to do with people giving the same value to animals as they should be doing with other human beings.

When I say 'acting like animals'.....I mean the carnal sense as in the dominate buck who beats up the other 'boys' so he can have all the does. It's that type of behavior I'm getting at....In the same sentence I could put human greed and corruption on the same level......so in a sense....humans sometimes make 'carnal' choices that resembles animal type behavior.

How would you feel if you had to get into a fight with another man twice a day because those men wanted sex with your wife? I'm pretty sure you'd use your 'human rights' and call the police.
Animals in nature don't have that luxury....nor should they......they are ANIMALS....We are HUMAN...We are NOT the same.

[joshhowat]

Bait ban.

Problem solved.

[Robert_G]

I think the point being made, Robert, was that the animal testing that you are concerned about being imposed on humans (if we are indeed just another animal) should not be done to animals either!  The First Nations had a similar belief system whereby animals and humans were the same, both could change form from one to the other as they were both "spirits".  That is why, before a hunter dispatched an animal, he first thanked it for allowing him to capture it.  Animals deserved a level of respect they do not receive in a Judaeo-Christian world where man holds dominion "over every living thing that moves upon the earth."

How can you say that? Animal testing done as humanly as possible benefits mankind. I don't agree with animal testing for things like cosmetics because cosmetics are an EXTRA, and not a NEED. However, when it comes to pesticides and medical drugs, I want to know my family and friends and myself are going to be safe in taking them. If a bunch of rats have to die for that.....then so be it. All human beings are more valuable then rats....or any other animal.

And for the record....Man has held dominion over animals since mankind was created. Who are you to say otherwise or change that?

BTW....why on earth do some hunters do that? I've seen a few hunters who 'thank' the animal for allowing them to catch and kill it.
There is only One who should be thanked for whatever bounty you receive when hunting or fishing.....and I can assure you He is NOT the animal itself.

[clarki]

Laughably wrong and completely ignorant.

Not sure if this response is consistent with the admonishment to offer constructive criticism in your fishing report thread, marmot.

To believe that humans are not animals is consistent with a world view that Robert G., and many others, myself included, believe. That world view is not laughably wrong or completely ignorant, it is just different than yours.

[DanJohn]

Do you have any idea of the politicaly devastating possiblities that could come out of rubbish like this if it ever caught on?
It really erks me when people equate us (humans) with animals. We are not animals. We reason and have the ability to apply morality and ethics to our lives. Animals can not do that. Animals cannot reflect on past feelings and experiences.....only instinct.

Although....there is one guy for sure who would agree with you....his name was Adolf Hitler and he had no problem using humans for scientific experiments in the same way we test things on rats and such...ie cosmetics, drugs...etc..although he took it a step further and did experiments like surgery while the person was awake with no freezing and such...etc...etc.

As for wasting fish....I agree completely.....it's unfortunate that some waste our resourses like that.

Wow. Godwins law I guess eh?

But none the less.

Animals are a major group of multicellular, eukaryotic organisms of the kingdom Animalia or Metazoa.

Yes. Humans ARE animals. Im not concerned if you like it or not, it is a fact, and you cannot logically disagree with it. Because Humans have the ability of self awareness and mind like no other, does not negate the fact that we are still an evolution from a certain kingdom in the natural world. Because one animal has an ability that is unique to that speices does not make them their own kingdom. Although semantics, my point remains. And the only devastating possibilities that lay within my statement are by those who are unable to think about it with a little common sense. Is a salmon the same as my girlfriend? Sure, they are both animals, they could both be females, they both have eyes, they are both a life. Does that mean Id put the death of a salmon on the same level as the death of my lady? Of course not! Because Im not a radical extremist. The only people who could, or would take what I said to mean that are those extremists. And nothing I say will change their idea if that is how they look at things. As I said though, I do not favour the death of either example when it is needless.

And hitler? Again, godwins law. What a joke. Also, hitler was ONE OF THOSE RADICAL EXTREMISTS! Although, Germany did make major medical breakthroughs. But I assume that because I said that, you will take it to mean that I am in favour of and agree with what they did.

But now, after reading the rest of this thread, I see that you automatically jump to the idea that me saying Humans = Animals is basically Animals = Equal. Well, as I said, and you conviently misquoted out of context in order to start this little rant fest

"but I have always been of the mindset that we are ALL animals, and thus equal. Maybe not completely, but I do think the waste of a life is never morally acceptable."

To break it down. We are Animals (Scientific fact), and we all belong on this planet (My own idea.) As such, a waste of a life is that, a waste of a life. If that life serves a purpose, be it people living and completing goals to better the world (Or our idea of it) or a fish spawning, or providing nourishment to a person, bear, enviroment, then thats ok to. For someone to kill a fish for some roe and thats all is my idea of a wasted life. And thats all.

To believe that humans are not animals is consistent with a world view that Robert G., and many others, myself included, believe.

You can believe we are not animals all day long. Scientific naming says youre wrong. Thats all. If you mean that we are above other life forms on the food chain, or in terms of life worth, then I cant say you are wrong, as THAT is an opinion.

[Sandman]

How can you say that? Animal testing done as humanly as possible benefits mankind. I don't agree with animal testing for things like cosmetics because cosmetics are an EXTRA, and not a NEED. However, when it comes to pesticides and medical drugs, I want to know my family and friends and myself are going to be safe in taking them. If a bunch of rats have to die for that.....then so be it. All human beings are more valuable then rats....or any other animal.

And for the record....Man has held dominion over animals since mankind was created. Who are you to say otherwise or change that?

BTW....why on earth do some hunters do that? I've seen a few hunters who 'thank' the animal for allowing them to catch and kill it.
There is only One who should be thanked for whatever bounty you receive when hunting or fishing.....and I can assure you He is NOT the animal itself.

I can say it, Robert, because you mentioned cosmetics testing in your original response and pesticides in a subsequent post, neither of which I would argue is a "need." 

Now, it was not my intention to get into a theological debate with you, I respect your beliefs and you are welcome to believe what you like.  Who am I to say otherwise?  I am simply someone who has studies other belief systems and was only sharing one with you.  Not everyone on this planet believes the same as you, that "Man has held dominion over animals since mankind was created."  In case you missed it in my previous post, I was sharing a belief system of many First Nations people, who believe that man and animals are interconnected and share a common origin.  Their creation stories are very different from the Genesis story I quoted above.  The Sto:lo, in whose territory many of us live, believed that "...the world was mixed up until the three sons and daughter of Redheaded Woodpecker and Black Bear came into the world to make it right. They travelled through Stó:lô territory transforming people into resources like salmon, sturgeon, beaver, stones, mountains, and trees. Because the resources were once people, they are to be respected. The Stó:lô believe the original person’s life force still lives inside each animal and natural feature" ("Bridge Between Nations: A History of First Nations in the Fraser River Basin").  So it is not so much a case of people are animals, but rather animals are people too.  Such a belief system encourages a more respectful treatment of animals and the environment in general than one where man holds "dominion."  Many elders see the challenge facing the current generation is a result of the adoption of western values and the disconnect between this and theose traditional belief systems.

[TheChumWhisperer]

Bait ban.

Problem solved.

Bait bans encourage snagging, flossing, general beek behavior on the river, just look at what happens at the Cap in the fall.  I think a wool ban and a restriction on leader length would be 10x more effective..

[DanJohn]

I can say it, Robert, because you mentioned cosmetics testing in your original response and pesticides in a subsequent post, neither of which I would argue is a "need." 

Now, it was not my intention to get into a theological debate with you, I respect your beliefs and you are welcome to believe what you like.  Who am I to say otherwise?  I am simply someone who has studies other belief systems and was only sharing one with you.  Not everyone on this planet believes the same as you, that "Man has held dominion over animals since mankind was created."  In case you missed it in my previous post, I was sharing a belief system of many First Nations people, who believe that man and animals are interconnected and share a common origin.  Their creation stories are very different from the Genesis story I quoted above.  The Sto:lo, in whose territory many of us live, believed that "...the world was mixed up until the three sons and daughter of Redheaded Woodpecker and Black Bear came into the world to make it right. They travelled through Stó:lô territory transforming people into resources like salmon, sturgeon, beaver, stones, mountains, and trees. Because the resources were once people, they are to be respected. The Stó:lô believe the original person’s life force still lives inside each animal and natural feature" ("Bridge Between Nations: A History of First Nations in the Fraser River Basin").  So it is not so much a case of people are animals, but rather animals are people too.  Such a belief system encourages a more respectful treatment of animals and the environment in general than one where man holds "dominion."  Many elders see the challenge facing the current generation is a result of the adoption of western values and the disconnect between this and theose traditional belief systems.

Thanks for sharing that. I had a general idea of some FN cultures but nothing in depth at all. I will need to read up and learn more of this, as it really hits home for me.

And that is really a good way of putting it. Its not this species is better than that one, its just that we ALL deserve respect, and really some appreciation. Animals ARE people too!!! Thats something my girlfriend would say. Well, yell out wildly. Actually its something she HAS said.

[marmot]

Ok...so if humans and animals are equal....I can assume you and your children will have no problem being the guiney pig for any new pesticides that need testing? You won't have a problem with threshold testing of it on your children to study long term effects?

Yeah...whatever...I'm pretty sure you would be barking about your 'HUMAN rights' pretty quick if that were to ever happen.

Did I say that humans and the rest of the animal kingdom should be treated exactly the same or did I say that your statement about humans not being animals was laughably incorrect and ignorant?

Spend more time understanding the post and less time reacting to it.  Your understanding of animal intelligence falls short of what kids learn in highschool these days and your understanding of where humans sit within the animal kingdom falls short of what they are taught in grade school.  Your understanding of what differentiates humans and animals sounds more like what a preacher might say.

[marmot]

How can you say that? Animal testing done as humanly as possible benefits mankind. I don't agree with animal testing for things like cosmetics because cosmetics are an EXTRA, and not a NEED. However, when it comes to pesticides and medical drugs, I want to know my family and friends and myself are going to be safe in taking them. If a bunch of rats have to die for that.....then so be it. All human beings are more valuable then rats....or any other animal.

I will agree with you on this from a utilitarian standpoint.  You lost me when you started spouting off about god.

[marmot]

Not sure if this response is consistent with the admonishment to offer constructive criticism in your fishing report thread, marmot.

To believe that humans are not animals is consistent with a world view that Robert G., and many others, myself included, believe. That world view is not laughably wrong or completely ignorant, it is just different than yours.

The world view was not what I was referring to.  The notion that animals are not capable of anything more than instinct, is.  It is a belief held by many when we have scientific PROOF that animals exhibit complex behaviour, including learning.  It is ignorant and incorrect to say otherwise.

[Robert_G]

The world view was not what I was referring to.  The notion that animals are not capable of anything more than instinct, is.  It is a belief held by many when we have scientific PROOF that animals exhibit complex behaviour, including learning.  It is ignorant and incorrect to say otherwise.

I never said that learning and instinct weren't compatible, but complex behavior in animals in no way gives proof of them having the ability to reflect on past memories/experiences and the pondering of right and wrong.

[Robert_G]

I will agree with you on this from a utilitarian standpoint.  You lost me when you started spouting off about god.

That's because most people don't want to listen when the conversation has anything to do with Him.