Recent content by dreiter

Newai countered your thought, and I have already answered why animal rights still apply when instituted by humans. Fair enough, I will stop after this post. I promise! :) This is wrong, as many recent animal studies have shown. The question is not if they can plan for the future, or if...

omg we have neils bohr on the forum!1!11!

That's great for those societies, but Japan/US are not hunter-gatherer societies, so this does not apply to us. Don't take my word for it, just look around a few minutes. From Wiki: "Vegetarian diets are usually rich in carbohydrates, omega-6 fatty acids, dietary fiber, carotenoids, folic...

Thomas, would you argue that animals (including humans) perceive death to be worse than pain? Because hunting is more than inflicting unnecessary pain, it is inflicting unnecessary death. There is no need to make tribes eat farm animals as you suggest. There is no need for the eating of...

And taken to extremes, we would get up every day with the goal of totally screwing our world over. You can't just ignore problems because you don't want to pay attention. If we did that then it would be the extreme. You say that the decision to eat meat is a matter of opinion, and that's...

This multi-quoting is a big hassle! :D Also I would like to bring in some ideas of another person, Gary Francione, because I think he has answered some of your points more succinctly than I would be able to... You are saying that rights can only be applied to humans, but this is a fallacy...

Very good points! Like I said, I am not arguing about extinction, I am arguing about the human right to kill other creatures, in this case intelligent sea mammals, but the argument works for any animal really. I don't see why an advanced civilization needs deer and elk hunting either...

I don't understand your question. We are debating whaling, are we not? Pros and cons? I think part of the problem is that we are having two separate arguments. One is about the feasibility of 'sustainable hunting' and the other is about the ethics of hunting at all. So which point are you...

Oh it has nothing to do with extinction, just subverting the greater good of the planet for someone's tastebuds.

Hmm, more like "based on hard science" but whatever you want to believe is fine...

Oh the tragedy! Now we will never know how much time we have wasted! :D

You know, people could just stop eating whales. Problem solved! I don't understand why some taste buds have to cause this much trouble. :rolleyes:

Agreed on all points, however if you take a utilitarian outlook, then you are very well justified by saying that killing for food is less immoral than killing for sport, since the food you get from killing provides a physical value, while in a sport the animal's meat is wasted as well as it's...

Well a 0.18 second Google search found me just the article I needed, and it is only one of many I have seen. YES, organic produce is MEASURABLY healthier than conventional produce. I really don't understand why people are so hesitant to this idea. "In summary, this analysis found more iron...

That is a good tech article but it is a little dated, as AMD Stream now supports OpenCL 1.1, which is a big step in GPGPU computing...