R.P. on animal cruelty?

[Joe3113]

my example was that it doesnt matter.

You think you can dismiss objectivity with your personal opinion? I'm sorry, that is not possible.

it doesnt matter to me if a deer is killed by a human or another animal.

Death is not the issue. This issue is rights. You claim animals don't have any rights. I show that they have some rights, depending on emotive ability/species.

and like i said, i think it's more honorable for a human to kill his food himself than to eat a processed hormone laden cow which was grown to be slaughtered.

Again, killing, in and of itself, is not the issue.

breaking news... yet again, that had nothing to do with my point.
just because we are part of the animal kindom, exactly HOW does that mean the rules we give other HUMANS other applies to the animal kingdom?
how does that make OUR RULES to EACH OTHER apply to the animal kindom AT ALL?

Again, you claim animals don't have any rights. I show that they have some rights, depending on emotive ability/species.

we are part of the animal kindom but we give HUMANS, HUMAN LAWS.

On what basis do you apply laws to humans and not animals? If you read my previous post, you would know that arbitrary distinction of humans from all other species, is unfounded in objective observation.

being part of the animal kingdom has nothing to do with HOW WE GOVERN EACH OTHER.

I was under the impression that rights were inherent, rather than granted by others. Perhaps not under the old Soviet Union, but certainly under the US constitution.

bears can not be held liable for breaking into a car and stealing a-pic-a-nic baskets.
squirrels can not be held liable for peeing in public.
sharks can not be held liable for drug trafficking.

I made this exact point in my 'Animal Rights Logic' post. Rights are inherent but can only possibly be respected by those capable of their comprehension. A bull cannot possibly comprehend the rights of another, but another may comprehend the rights of the bull.

uh huh. well... so you're implying that the founding fathers didnt establish rights for it's citizens when they founded the country...

Yes. They didn't establish rights. They statutorily ensured those rights which were already inherent.

it was rockefeller... or rothschild.

It has been speculated that the constitution of the planned world government, would provide rights, but those rights would be granted by government rather than inherent and inalienable. You claimed, in a previous post, that rights were granted from human to human. These are the views held by certain members of those who call themselves the 'elite', as evidenced by their public statements.

you are simply in a corner and have nothing else to say other than the "animals have feelings too" argument

My argument is clearly stated in my previous post, but I will repeat: There is no logical basis for a distinction between humans and animals, other than distinctions based on objective observation. On the other hand, I have provided you with evidence to suggest it is likely that some species experience agony in the same way as humans, particularly those who are closer to us on the evolutionary scale.

 

[nosebruise]

lawl.

 

[TaxProtester]

Hey curlz31,
I would stop wasting time arguing with nosebruise. He/she doesn't use logic. Over my past 15 years of being vegan, I have learned that talking to people like this is simply a waste of time and energy. No matter what one says, it isn't going to matter. They are going to continue to disagree with you over and over and over. Why? Because they don't use logic and reason. You can continue of course, I just think you are wasting your time, IMO.

 

[GoldMemberStandard]

I'm don't eat animal products and really don't like animal cruelty but I also think that the federal government doesn't have the power to right laws regarding the issue. What I do like about Ron Paul is his opposition to farm subsidies for corn, milk etc which are some of the biggest causes of animal cruelty. The overproduction of milk and the artificial market for corn as cow feed because of its subsidization are two of the most serious issues regarding animal cruelty.

 

[amartin315]

So this might be more of a federal issue than you think, and I would like to see Ron do a liberty report on this. Is there a way to request that? Check out this article:

https://theintercept.com/2018/03/02...-for-laws-to-force-stores-to-sell-their-eggs/

Rep King of Iowa has tried to get a law passed saying states cannot discriminate against another state's eggs based on whether they were raised in cages. This sounds like a commerce clause power to me. California tried to outlaw caged egg production. Iowa farmers didn't like that and want to be able to sell their caged eggs in California. Whether you like it or not, isn't that a power in the constitution?