Animal Rights

"I said it was unhealthy, and you convinced me it was in moderation, although I still am willing to bet you eat more than is healthy."Ok, that comment was really unnecessary. I live a very healthy lifestyle, and eat everything in moderation."Civilized-What is your definition? Ants and termites make civilizations. If you define it as having the characteristics of a human civilization, that is like claiming women shouldn't have rights because they are not the same as men.Character-How do you know animals don't? I have already proved they make moral decisions, why isn't that character?Capacity for wisdom?"Let's not get off topic, as the backbone of this debate is "natural." Pro seems to think that "natural" is the same for all animals. However, this is wrong. You seem to mention ants several times, and how they commit genocide. Well, that is natural to them. That is their instinct. Does that mean that is human instinct to commit genocide? No. Ants live in the ground, and in trees. Do humans naturally live in trees? No, of course not. Do humans naturally live in houses? No, but this is what makes humans different. Humans invent, they build, they question. Humans don't act on instinct. They act on what they want to do, when they want to. Once again, you cannot compare what is natural to an animal to what is natural to humans."Con is making up random reasons to separate animals and humans. We might as well say that someone in a coma can be butchered and eaten because they have none of those traits, same with children or those with dementia. There is no single criteria to separate animals and humans."I am not making things up. I am using common sense. As you can see, humans and animals are VERY different. I'll use an example. Do animals have analytical thought? Do animals have recorded history? Do animals have economies? Do animals have art? Do animals have intricate language? Do animals worship? Do animals bury its dead? It is extremely illogical to think that humans and animals are the same. They are very different. A disabled person is a human, and typical humans do not eat other humans. That would be murder and cannibalism. Humans (in their right mind) do not kill and eat other humans. "Animals can suffer, and feel pain, so deserve rights."As I have showed, when animals are slaughtered they are instantly dead. No pain at all. No pain, no suffering. Also, I see you support abortion. Why does your logic only apply to animals? Shouldn't humans be put before animals? Abortion is murder.Murder- The unlawful premeditated killing of one human being by another. [1]Fetuses are beyond no doubt human. It has human cells, human genetics, and it is alive. Don't believe me? Well, take this from NARAL (a pro-choice organization): "There is simply no doubt that even the early embryo is a human being. All its genetic coding and all its features are indisputably human. As to being, there is no doubt that it exists, is alive, is self-directed, and is not the same being as the mother–and is therefore a unified whole." [3]. Also, fetuses can in fact feel pain at just 8 weeks. [2] I find your logic very backwards. Animals deserve rights, but human fetuses don't? I would like to you explain this, because I do not get your logic here."In addition, most people have a desire to reproduce. That is an instinct you cannot control. One cannot decide to stop being that way because there are too many people on earth and reproducing is unethical. Humans are also instinctive in many ways. All of our traits have a genetic purpose."Yes, I will admit that humans have some instincts. But, these instincts are general in every animal: to reproduce, and eat. That's it. Overall, humans have free-will. Humans decide what job they want, when they get up, what exactly they want to eat, where they want to go, what they want to do. However, animals are very programmed, and act on practically pure instinct. For example, ants wake up, go out get food, bark, leaves and bring it back to the nest, do that all day, eat, sleep, then repeat. Another example is bees. They wake up, collect pollen, and bring it back to the hive all day, only to produce 1/12th of a teaspoon of honey in their lifetime. I also extend all of my arguments that I have made previously in my argument."And again, since when did babies not have rights? They don't have a moral compass. Even if you are right, either we are allowed to butcher people in a coma, babies, and people with severe mental illness or animals get rights."I extend my arguments made further up in the post. Fetuses, according to you, should not have rights. I believe you misunderstood why I was mentioning things that make humans different. I was mentioning them to show that animals and humans are different, and you cannot compare what is natural to an ant to a human. They are two VERY different animals. "No, those animals should never have existed. They are unnatural breeds. The cow is descended from the aurochs, which died off hundreds of years ago. Pigs are descended from wild boars. Tell me that those animals enjoyed being in cages. If a man is born into slavery, isn't it stupid to say that you shouldn't free him because that is what he is used to? I think all sheep, cows, and pigs should die off. There is no reason those species should even exist, except maybe in poor communities where grains will not grow."Not quite getting it with the first part. Just because something has evolved doesn't make it "unnatural." Once again, you cannot compare cows and humans. Cows naturally sit around and eat grass all day. Humans do whatever they want. They have no instinct. I never said that they should not exist. They absolutely should exist. "http://en.wikipedia.org...... Let's see, being withstrained, watching other animals die, (And animals mourn their dead, it would affect them) http://news.yahoo.com......) seeing blood be spilt, sounds like suffering to me, not to mention the jarring transport in stuffed trailers."I will repeat this again, when animals are slaughtered, they don't feel pain. Your source shows that animals don't watch each other get killed. The cows and the slaughter house are in two separate locations. You also mention that animal transport is suffering. I am often uncomfortable during long trips, does that mean I am suffering? No. Also, my Grandpa owns horses, and he transports them all the time. The horses aren't sad, they aren't suffering, they are actually very happy and friendly. "Because animals can still psychologically suffer during slaughter. Not to mention living conditions in factory farms. And I am willing to bet your "humane meat" isn't as good as you think it is. http://www.humanemyth.org...;I have showed that animals do not psychologically suffer during slaughter, as they do not see each other being killed. As I have mentioned before, I am for SOME animal rights. I believe that the animals should live in better living conditioned, but that is it."And animals have the right not to be treated as property"Your dog is your property right?"Killing is wrong, regardless of whether or not it is painful. If I killed you in your sleep, that is ethical, right?"That is murder. Also, it is natural to eat meat. Killing others isn't."And by your logic, it is ethical for a doctor to involuntarily euthanize patients because they don't feel pain."I am not quite sure how a doctor would involuntary euthanize someone. I will repeat myself again, you cannot compare animals to humans in that way. Killing animals for food is natural. It is what other animals do, and it is what we have done since the beginning of time. Killing humans is not natural and is essentially murder.Sources:[1]: http://www.google.com...[2]: http://www.abortionfacts.com...[3]: http://www.abort73.com...