- Jul 17, 2008
Abandon4093 said:lSHaDoW-FoXl said:Abandon4093 said:lSHaDoW-FoXl said:No, you replied to the one after it.And then the sentence later I said 'Ohh' and replied to it.
And now I just literally found out how to quote.The way you're posting is making the discussion needlessly confusing. You just have floating replies and sometimes it's hard to tell what they're in response too.
Condemning my bias and using your own is hypocrtical.
You didn't admit it until literally just now. Congratulations, hypocrite. Took you awhile.I'm not using my own, I'm admitting it. And my choice to eat meat has nothing to do with the discussion. It's context for me admitting that I'm being selfish by eating meat. So the practice of eat meat is selfish, a luxury food item that isn't necessary for survival.
What piece of inconsequential piece of information?
No, you THINK you're against animal cruelty.That I'm against animal cruelty, it kind of makes a good 2 thirds of your previous post moot.
What's that son, calling someone a cowardly hypocrite pisses them off enough to make them say rude things? I would have never guessed!
I haven't called you a coward.You've been doing it since before I called you a coward.
Born to be murdered in an outdated practice.
Meat is relevant to society. Fur isn't. Outdated, just like type writers.By that logic then the meat industry is an outdated practice. Which contradicts everything you've said thus far.
That sounds really pleasant. If there is reincarnation (and I'm sure there isn't) then you deserve nothing less than being skinned for that argument.
'Last person in the fucking world that should say that, hon'.More evidence of it being fortuitous that you're not in a position of power.
The fact that you have to tell your self you've got good arguments proves otherwise.Prove it, I've got rationale for all my arguments, you've yet to make a compelling argument against one.
This entire argument has been about morality. Where the fuck have you been?You want an argument on morality do you?
Then I guess it's a good thing I'm not a misanthrope. My point is once you start arguing the morality of something you're instantly going to fall flat on your ass because your existence alone causes a lot of immoral suffering. It's hypocritical.Same self deprecating bullshit every misanthrope touts.
How's this for context; you'll die. It doesn't matter what meaning you give your life or what context you give your actions. You're going to die in a mess of your own filth. Try and find some beautiful context for me there, please. We live in a bubble of abstract ideas and shallow diversions. I hardly think that justifies all the suffering we bring.Without humans there would be no context. Things would just happen because they happen. Our ability to contextualize is what makes us special.
Not just functions, but functions better.
Society is pure chaos. At least in this world without humans there'd be no pollution, population problems, over fishing, and slaughter. Animals have the opportunity to at least 'try' and live. we strip that away from them, and this is morally abhorrent.Depends on your definition of better, if pure chaos is your definition of better. Then yea.
We don't have humans introducing foreign animals to places they shouldn't be.
Tell that to all the Australians.That's a relatively minor concern and ecosystems recover quite quickly from such things in most cases.
That's not an argument. You wanted morality so here it is; the terrible things we do greatly out weigh the good things. A few 'fanastical' things being lost would hardly be a big price to pay.Or the fantastic stuff we do either.
Nihilist. Or so I consider my self to be one. I don't believe anything matters. But in spite of that I'm still against causing needless suffering. We're all going to be dead eventually, but that doesn't stop me from wanting to live a life without an incredible amount of suffering. I believe in ending suffering if only because of the privilege I have, and because it wouldn't feel right for me to say that other creatures should suffer something I'd be unwilling to.Then by your own admission fur doesn't matter.
That's my entire fucking argument against fur. We're changing and we're past fur. It's no longer relevant, meat is. Let it die.Sure morality changes depending on society, but so does everything. I'm not seeing how that's an argument.
I probably wouldn't even know I was gay due to the incredible amount of stigma against it. If I were to speak out against it, I'd be set on fire. It wouldn't matter if I was the greatest psychologist in the world; people will believe in whatever they want to. Trying to push for gay rights would fail, badly, with me being burned at a stake. People are only willing to make a change for the better when society is willing.And by your logic you'd have been fine and dandy with that. After all, you wouldn't want to argue against something that was socially relevant.
TrueOur own personal morality dictates all of our actions.
Sleep. Eat. Fuck. Yup, so different. The only difference is that humans like to romanticize everything with a bunch of bull shit.But my life will have been.
Let me translate everything you just said. Shallow distractions, abstract bull shit, pretension, and two things that animals can do, but to a lesser degree. Oh, and last time I checked most people aren't making discoveries, exploring, and taking things apart. Animals are always testing their limits. It's called living.Entertainment, spiritual enrichment, questions for the sake of questions, discovery, exploration, testing our limits and our desire to take everything apart just to see how it works.
I'll file that under the 'abstract bull shit' cabinet.The fact that we understand a concept such as value makes it so.
I'm not trying to be dark and edgy. I'm trying to say that value is nothing but an abstract idea that isn't worth anything outside of humanities little bubble that's made completely out of bull shit.Ohhhh, so dark and edgy. It's not like I read that on every awkward kids myspace page's "about me" section like 6 years ago.
Without human life what would this world be? Pure chaos without an ounce of culture, history or direction.Remember when you said that not too long ago? Well, funny because you sound exactly one of those atheist humanists who go on about science and humanity, as if they're extraordinary spiritual experiences. Okay, Thunderfoot. Want to show us clips of how beautiful life is while you monologue about how amazing and spiritual science is?Ohhhh, so dark and edgy. It's not like I read that on every awkward kids myspace page's "about me" section like 6 years ago.
You see, that's the problem I have with humanity. We're like a mentally handicapped child looking at a glass of colored water, assuming that just because it's colored that it's something more than water, that it somehow has more meaning. Even with no religion, people try to be spiritual. It's sad really. George Carlin said it best. Society is built around bull shit. Not too much, but just enough.
And as far as I'm concerned, the humans have brought far greater chaos than animals ever will. It's true that you need to fear for your life every second as an animal. but us humans, holy fucking shit, now that's chaos.
We have guys running into theaters shooting people. We have wars. We have bombs. We have missiles. We have riots. We have all these people walking around, driving cars, taking planes, taking trains. We've got Laws, crimes, businesses, charities. Can you please tell me again about this 'pure chaos'.
Culture and history doesn't give our lives any more meaning. They're merely distractions. I love history and it's a good thing to consider, but I'm not going to pretend it gives our lives meaning nor value. The world would definitely be different without humans. But that's not necessarily a bad thing. It's just something that's unknown to us. So perhaps you're just scared.
Missed the point. We're in no place to argue what is and isn't moral with all the amount of suffering we cause. That's the point. Or does my notion that you're not too important hurt your feelings?No, you're just being nihilistic and self deprecating.
What are you? 12?
All morality is subjective, that's the point.
Sounds just about right.Then your entire argument has been meaningless.
A fair price to pay.And all the great things we bring too.
They'd integrate, regardless. Having a city destroyed by a war doesn't stop people from rebuilding it.Which wouldn't have the faintest notion of how things had changed anyway. Except the billions of animals that now depend on us for their survival because of domestication. They'd probably have a gay old time trying to reintegrate into the wild.
Because I'm against suffering.A moral stance...OHMAIGAWD! More morally based decisions?Does it matter? No, probably not. I'm not going to pretend that it does.
Yea, it's not like I said at anypoint that by my own personal morality that I'm opposed to animal suffering or anything is it?But what I do know is that regardless of how nothing matters, absolutely everything can feel pain. We can't fix every single issue; but we can fix one at a time.
That's the same argument you called a piece of shit earlier on. So no, apparently it's not 'no shit'.No shit.
I don't say factory farming is cool. I just don't attack them because it's relevant to our society and anything I say isn't going to stop them from eating meat. Common fucking sense, kid. Should learn a thing or two about it. It's too early to demonize them. And if we lived back when fur was mandatory I wouldn't be demonizing those people either. For a guy that loves arguing on how valuable context makes us you sure have a grasp of it. The context of why don't demonize meat eaters while demonizing people that wear fur should matter a hell of a lot more than the fact that I only demonize one of them. Maybe it's not so much that I'm a supposed 12 year old nihilist (your half right though, congrats) but that you're oversimplifying the two issues and undermining the role that society plays.Again, no shit. I've not been against your prioritising, I've been against your hypocrisy. You know, your ability to say one set of animal killers are cool beans because society says so whilst simultaneously demonising another set because society doesn't like them anymore.
Life doesn't matter. And my reasons for believing that aren't simply because 'LIFE IS NOTHING!' (Slits wrists) No, I'm just a very cynical person that has absolutely no spirituality. At all. You're quite right that I do moralize while saying that morality doesn't matter. The honest truth is it's just hard for me to turn my back on my ethics. Even if they're completely pointless. I'll continue to moralize; but if anything I can at least acknowledge that there's no reason behind them. In regards to this, I'm not going to argue against being a bit of a hypocrite.I feel sorry for the guy who you have to educate. Hypocritical values followed by a notion that morality doesn't matter whilst moralizing a subject and then saying all life is meaningless because *pouty face*
The person I'd be educating would only know of the ethics that are involved. Nothing else. Anything past that are my views. Believe it or not, but when people don't piss me off I'm not a completely abhorrent person.
Try closing your pie hole and actually waiting for me to actually complete a thought, k'ay?Thanks for the history lesson, I'd never heard of Rosa Parks before... how does this effect anything I've said.
I have been fighting, hon'. I've been fighting against their ethics. It's just unreasonable to take on the entirety of factory farming. You really don't understand the notion of biting more than you can chew, do you?Keyword here being fighting, not saying "You guys are cool beans because society says so"
Then I guess to be kind I'll just say it was a misunderstanding. It happens.You wouldn't believe it from what you've said.
Because as I said, in a society that eats meat, that's just not going to happen. Not yet anyway. Fur is different because a lot of people are against fur. And because of that, we can end it. Society is sick of fur. And because of that, we can move past it. It's not attacking a weak enemy, it's paving the way forward for a better future.
I hate factory farms. They're relevant to society, so I can't argue against them. All that can be done is arguing for better ethics. I can't stop people from eating meat, but I'm sure better ethics for animals is something everyone can get behind. Well, except for the odd ball that thinks helping animals is standing in the way of humans, somehow. I am, however, fine with their existence despite what I think of them. Because they're relevant to todays society. It's too much of a big part of our culture. Just like fur once was. So, to clarify:And like I said before, no issue with a person choosing a battle. But to be okay with a very similar practice because it's relevant to society is hypocritical.
I hate factory farming, but I'm fine with their existence. Because society isn't ready to move past them. I'm not capable of that much hatred, and that's why relevance matters. It's hard to hate that many people, so you just have to accept it and fight -one small thing at a time - to making things better for everyone and everything. I'll be probably be dead before we move past factory farms. But oh well, one small issue at a time. Fur is past it's time. Norway banned fur, so I might be around to see it die. I guess that's another reason why it pisses me off. Because with people trying to keep fur around, I might not be given that privilege either.
Because I truly believe we're ready to completely end fur. Save for a few nations here and there. I feel that we've reached that point in time.So why can't they strive for better ethics in the fur industry?
Personally that's all I'd be interested in.
Then I apologize for calling them evil. I guess what I mean to say is that they're spoiled, backwards, and barbaric. Save for the few people that wear fur because they're just backwards and barbaric.Would I wear a fur coat? No, don't think it'd suite me anyway. Doesn't mean I'm going to call people evil because they do wear fur coats.Honestly, I don't know what the hell I did to make it do that. This is why I don't do quotes, I simply don't understand it.lSHaDoW-FoXl said:How the hell do I reply to that mess?
It would take me freaking ages to sieve through all of that to find out what sentences are yours and what are mine.
How the hell do you expect me to respond to that?