When will this cruelty stop? - Page 3

**Access** · #41 02-28-05, 10:18 pm

Not to mention the health problems associated with dissections. Formeldahyde
http://www.jtbaker.com/msds/englishhtml/F5522.htm
is _not_ safe, especially for non-adults. Suspected cancer agent, plus other effects, quite possibly severe.

Personally if I were being operated upon, I would rather be operated on by a surgeon who had trained with the real thing rather than a simulation. But not everyone taking biology is planning to be a surgeon, nor will they ever perform an autopsy or a dissection outside of the student 'lessons' themselves. For just about everyone, the simulations, photographs, or something of that nature should suffice just fine.

When I went to school, the dissections were done in large groups. I got pretty queasy cutting into anything back then, but by and large the guys in the class were lining up to be the one that got to cut things open. So it was never much of a problem for me. We did ducks and squids, the cats were reserved for the juniors and seniors.

**Access** · #42 02-28-05, 10:46 pm

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sparky

yeah, anything does go, i keep guinea bigs because their affection is comforting, and i derive pleasure from nurturing them. i also would not kill another human, as that is not only punishable by law, but i would also be shunned by my peers.

In some societies, killing a human (or even taking one's own life) would get you rewarded (vs. imprisoned) and cause you to gain respect among your peers (rather than be shunned). Even in some subcultures in the US, such as military subculture or crime subculture, this is true. Would you kill another person if you were a member of this or that subculture or an inferior culture that praised killers and murderers? Some things are just wrong, absolutely. No amount of social effects or consequences make them right. A good person only purposely kills if forced, self defense and things like that.

Even if you only believe in 'biological machines', empathy, wanting to help others, etc. can be explained in that way also. There have been past scientific studies done to demonstrate changes producing discomfort in one's brain, simply by watching other people being subjected to pain, etc. Empathy and caring for one another is a human thing, people are meant to feel those things 'by design'.

**dansamy** · #43 02-28-05, 11:19 pm

The majority of preserved specimens purchased by schools no longer utilize formaldehyde, due to its potentially carcinogenic effects. Lab specimen companies are aware of the concerns with formaldehyde. Their products are harder to sell if they still use it as opposed to a safer alternative preservative.

**Sparky** · #44 03-01-05, 05:38 pm

i probably would also refuse to kill a human as it would feel wrong to me, call it nationalism for my species

**Himino** · #45 03-01-05, 05:50 pm

But it wouldn't feel wrong to kill a defenceless animal??

**Sparky** · #46 03-01-05, 11:52 pm

no, not at all

**RubyPiggie2** · #47 03-02-05, 10:31 am

Quote:

Originally Posted by jaspers_girl

But it wouldn't feel wrong to kill a defenceless animal??

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sparky

no, not at all

OK, Sparky. What the hell, you don't like the fact of people being murdered/killed, but you'll allow the deaths of millions of innocent animals, that are defenceless and can't fight? You're a twisted dude, that's what I think. You come onto a forum that is rescue-friendly, anti-animal killing, pro-vegetarian, and you say things like this. I don't think anyone appreciates your comments, because I sure don't. Don't you realize we here are all for the wellfare of our animals? Not to hear some people saying that killing a poor, helpless animal is NOT BAD AT ALL.
Think about it. Take the number of animals killed, and then kill off that many humans. Our population would be extinct. That's bad, isn't it? Well how is it not bad that that many animals are being killed everyday, every week, every waking second? Is it ok since they are inferior to us? No, it's not okay.

**smileyface cavy** · #48 03-02-05, 03:58 pm

Oh my God that makes me want to cry-I'm really sensitive(sp) about pigs oh ick how sickening

**mncavylover** · #49 03-02-05, 04:42 pm

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sparky

being a non-spiritual person, i believe that animals and humans are merely self sustaining chemical systems. so in all logic i have no objection whatsoever to the dissection, or eating of any animals.

i do however disagree with hunting for sport, as it is a waste of resources

So, you think hunting is a "waste of rescources?" Please do elaborate on what resources. I think it is far more humane than raising animals in factory farms and slaughtering them--at least these animals are killed quickly, not injected with hormones, and they can live in the real world. I don't like hunting personally, but I do think it's better than the alternative that has become so common. So we're all just self-sustaining chemical systems? Self-sustaining isn't the right word, I don't think. It means we don't need to rely on anything or anyone else for what we need, which we do (at least now). In all logic, can't we just leave these "self-sustaining chemical systems" alone, since it is a "waste of resources" to gather them for research?

Quote:

Originally Posted by dansamy

Susan, yes, I was raised a particular way and as an adult I do have the option to follow a different course. However, I view animals as something that Man was given dominion over by God. While I do not perceive them as unintelligent, I do see them inferior to Man's superiority. You, if you are a radical, may term that "specism" and make it equivalent to racism. I am not now, never have been, and do not foresee myself becoming a vegetarian. It is not a choice that I will select. I am perfectly capable & well-disciplined enough to forego meat if I chose to do it, but I choose not.

You can choose whatever you'd like, dansamy--I'm perfectly acceptimg of that fact. However, when it comes to us having dominion over animals (assuming for the moment that I agree), that never included the brutal torture and malteatment that animals are receiving today. I do not agree that we are given dominion over the animals, as we are animals, too. Does that mean we have dominion over one another, thus slavery all-around? It's a confusing concept.

I mean no disrespect or harm in these statements, although I must admit I'm being a little harsher than usual. I apologize for any offense that may occur.

**Sparky** · #50 03-02-05, 05:23 pm

i disagree with hunting for SPORT. trophy hunting as people call it. also, i have every right to be on this board, i enjoy caring for cavies, so i come here for the available information. and this particular section, is about debate, argument, discussion, i'ts perfectly reasonable for me to post here

**Access** · #51 03-02-05, 05:39 pm

Dominion or control over animals, that's an illusion. On a whole we are dependent on animals much more than they are dependent on us. We depend on animals as a food source, as a labor source, or for specific tasks (laboratory testing, sight/smell, etc.) Superiority is a man-made idea. Many pets are 'in control' of their owners, not the other way around.

**Sparky** · #52 03-02-05, 06:18 pm

thats a common misconception, animals can control malleable people, and yes, humans are in fact superior, we are vastly more apt and intelligent, and we have opposoble thumbs. the only reason we are dependent on animals is because we have learned to control them to our advantage

**DocDolittle** · #53 03-02-05, 06:38 pm

So, gorillas and apes have opposable thumbs, does that mean they also have control over all animals? No? Didn't think so.

**ChadWPB** · #54 03-02-05, 07:15 pm

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sparky

thats a common misconception, animals can control malleable people, and yes, humans are in fact superior, we are vastly more apt and intelligent, and we have opposoble thumbs. the only reason we are dependent on animals is because we have learned to control them to our advantage

OK, I'll put in you in a room with a tiger for an hour or two. We'll see who is superior then.

I'm sure the tiger would find you quite "malleable".

**DocDolittle** · #55 03-02-05, 08:10 pm

Yes, I agree Chad. I don't understand why you continue to come to a guinea pig forum when you don't care at all for animals.

**Sparky** · #56 03-02-05, 08:30 pm

i've explained it many times, i enjoy taking care of guinea pigs, so i come here for information, i also came into this forum to discuss some things. alos Mr. Dolittle, yes monkeys do have opposable thumbs, but they are not as intelligent as humans, which was the focus of my point. and as for you chad, no i couldnt fight a tiger hand to hand. but were you to release me and a tiger into 100 acres of land, i'm certain i could win. (and before you argue that point you should know that i help run a childrens survival course during the summer)

**DocDolittle** · #57 03-02-05, 08:49 pm

Quote:

Mr. Dolittle

That would be a miss Dolittle.

Quote:

i couldnt fight a tiger hand to hand. but were you to release me and a tiger into 100 acres of land, i'm certain i could win.

You could seriously tell us that if we released you and a tiger into a few hundred acres of primitive land that you could fight a tiger, hand to hand, with all of your cunning and wit? I find that rediculous.

Quote:

and before you argue that point you should know that i help run a childrens survival course during the summer

Ah, so you teach young children how fight of wild animals with their bare hands? Impressive, teaching innocent children how to kill. Most survival courses I've heard of teach you how to find clean water and signal for help, not how to kill an animal.

User Name		Remember Me?
Password