Wednesday April 4, 2007, 11:05 am
funny to have a quote from a speciesist at the beginning of this article...

Wednesday April 4, 2007, 10:20 pm
I would Save My dog Before I would save a Stranger, But if I was Starving I would Eat a Strange Dog Before I would Eat A human. Is That Bigotry or Speciesism? I Don't Think so, I see it as Pragmatic Survival Instinct; I Trust My Dog more Than a Stranger; but I Trust the cleanlyness of dog meat more than human besides The Extreme Social Stigma Associated with Cannabalisim Makes it Unsafe Unless You are The Next to Last Human Left on Earth.

Thursday April 5, 2007, 12:29 am
i think you are very logic here rod.

Thursday April 5, 2007, 1:40 pm


According to philosophers Tom Regan and Peter Singer all animals have inherent rights and we cannot assign them a lesser value due to their irrationality and assign a higher value to humans that do not behave rationally (e.g. infants and the mentally impaired). Singer's philosophical arguments against speciesism are based on the principle of equal consideration of interests: The principle of equal consideration of interests is extremely egalitarian: as such, it opposes not only racism and sexism, but also speciesism and some forms of nationalism.
I am a bit confused about it but I think Speciesism is a discrimination based on membership to a species, just as racism and sexism . Anti-speciesism, therefore, is as necessary as anti-racism and anti-sexism.

Thursday April 5, 2007, 1:47 pm
you are correct mercedes, but the problem with singer is that he doesn't see the problem to eat a non human if s/he had a nice life & does not suffer while being killed. He also has no problem with killing an infant or retarded human.
The list with what he agrees with is actually very long & included having sex with a non human... as long - of course - as they agree... hmm...

Thursday April 5, 2007, 8:13 pm
disagree. make up your mind. are humans 'just like' other organisms and not special, or are we special? the same people who say that we are not special, should also agree that in nature as a general rule species discriminate against other species. not because a species thinks it's better morally than another, but simply because a species is more interested in perpetuating its own rather than other species, given the choice between the two. sorry this isn't eden (which such people don't believe in anyway) but nature involves killing and death and isn't all cuddlypuff and rainbows. i think it's natural to favour your own species, but not natural to favour groups within your own species based on arbitrary and cultural lines like on the basis of colour, gender and nationality. racism and sexism is different from speciesm because the discrimination is based on an unnatural 'idea' of superiority, rather than biology.

Thursday April 5, 2007, 8:50 pm
If anything separates us from nonhuman animals, it is our capacity for not only making humane choices to our own species alone, but to all other known and unknown species as well, may they be intellectually advanced or not, human or nonhuman. By choosing to respect the lives of other sentient beings, by refraining from abuse, cruelty and consuming them, WE are demonstrating OUR HIGHER STANDING in NATURE by those VALUES of HUMANITY. Thus, the practice of humane living is not only a healthy choice, it is also a humane choice that sets us apart from others in the animal kingdom whose diets and choices are based on necessity and instinct rather than on conscious humane choice.

Friday April 6, 2007, 12:15 am
nuraini,
humans are all special, the same all non humans are.
In nature, species discriminate other species (speciesism), races discriminate other races (racism), people of a certain age discriminate those of a different age (ageism), & so on. This has been lasting for ever. The same way war has, rape has, etc. Is this a reason to accept it? NO WAY!
No one ever mentionned earth is the garden of eden. This is the reason why we have to stand up & fight against whatever is ethically incorrect.
Slaughterhouse for one are part of nature, but that doesn't mean it is ok to have them. The same way prisons are part of nature, but are worse then better.
It's natural to drive a car, to hike, to eat raw, to exercise, to breathe, to talk, kill, to whatever... the list is endless... but within this list, some things are ok since they are not hurting anyone around, others are not since they are taking away one basic right that all the inhabtants of the earth have: being alive & free.
i think you're praizing "Nature" too much dear by simply including the nice little birds singing & the flowers blooming, omitting that buildings & concrete are part of it. It's just too easy... & excuzes everything!
Btw why would it be "natural" to consider one specie superior to another, if it is not toward a race or gender? Your thoughts don't make any sense.

Friday April 6, 2007, 5:00 am
I don't want to go into a debate on this. I just "feel" as an abuse that "non-human animals" are considered as inferiors. I can envisage in some extreme cases of "force majeure" that they are used by humans, but it makes me feel very bad. In no way can I accept any attempt to their welfare and-or dignity, and I'm trying to be as vegetarian as possible...

Friday April 6, 2007, 6:59 am
It really is a no brainer....
What it all comes down to is that anything that promotes the notion of separateness in the long run does more harm than good. It isn't that differances are bad but rather the inferance that can arise from it. The inferance or notion of us and them... separateness. It is the idea of separateness that allows us to do harm because we don't then see the other.. whether animal or human.. as having the same needs. Compassion and the good that it does arises when we see what is that we share, when we see the commonality. At the heart of any ism is always the notion that one thing is better than the other and that is the idea that has to be gaurded against.. accepting such an idea blindly... because that is what allows harm and pain to occur.

Friday April 6, 2007, 7:05 am
And Nick is right........ the only thing that really elevates us from any other life form is our ability to make the right .. the compassionate choices. It is our ability to think clearly and act in a "humane" fashion that places us in that higher level. Otherwise we have no more grander purpose than even the lowiest of beings. All creation is equally noble...... we just have the ability to make it a little more noble an existence for all things.

Friday April 6, 2007, 8:17 pm
The underlying concept is the same, what sociologists refer to as "the other." It matters naught to whom this "other" is applied, for it can come in the form of ageism, sexism, genderism, racism, religionism, ethnocentricism, and many other forms, but the underlying concept is the same: to identify a group who is different, thereby marking them as non-members of "the us." Those in "the other" are thereby de-valued, allowing "the us" to act in any manner towards "the other."

In other words, it suspends basic social rights. If a being's basic social rights are suspended or declared null, then they may subjected to any kind of treatment and it is excusable and even justified by "the us." After all, "the other" are "just" whatever, they are not worthy of any consideration. Slaves usually fall into this category, and while there are still some humans on the planet trafficked as slaves, this activity has been declared socially unacceptable and at least technically illegal. The same does not apply to animals; they are still in the class of "slave," and therefore, "the other."

In summary, it isn't so much the type of "ism" that is important, but the underlying concept that group after group has been targeted and victimized by prejudices - prejudices that are used to justify discrimination against them in some form or another.

Those who buy animals in order to eat them are engaging in the practice of slavery on a daily basis. Those who keep these beings captives until they are sold and murdered are accomplices in the cycle. They are "the other" and humans are "the us."