Are humans more important than animals?

[JaziandCo]

And that was either our fault to begin with or the basic cycle of life where things can't adapt and die out.

So, since it's our fault, if we die out, who cares about the millions of

 

>dogs

>cats

>rodents

>rabbits

>ferrets and other small mammals

>chickens

>turkeys

>cattle

>pigs

>sheep and other livestock

>domesticated birds

>domesticated fish and reptiles

 

that will die as well? If they aren't already doomed because of being in a tank or cage and actually manage to get outside, there are two things that will happen. Either the creatures will learn how to survive "out there" and will destroy existing habitats (dogs, cats, and rabbits for example), OR they'll be quickly killed by either the elements, starvation, or some other hungry animal they don't know to run from (livestock).

 

There are many more animals that would come to harm if we suddenly stopped existing today. Quite a few animals and even habitats hinge solely on the factor that we do take at least some amount of care of it.

 

 

Also, remember that all of those books are 1- fantasy, and 2- have animals that talk and operate like humans. They're anthropomorphic, in other words. In internet terms, "furries". That means they're what if books. "I know wolves don't talk or even operate like this, but what if they did? I can build an epic adventure/journey out of it!" The Sight/Fell, Warriors, Guardians of GaHoole, all of those authors will write that while they recognized that sort of thing doesn't happen, it'd be cool if it could exist. I wouldn't cite the fantasy stories of others when talking about animal intelligence.

[TikindiDragon]

And that was either our fault to begin with or the basic cycle of life where things can't adapt and die out.

Well, yes, it was. Because the animals relying on us for survival have been domesticated by centuries of contact with humans. But the fact is that if the human race were to suddenly vanish there's a bunch of species that really wouldn't fare too well.

[TheDarkCynder]

In my opinion, while we have already caused significant damage to this planet (and still are), it would most likely not turn out well if humans disappeared from the face of the Earth. There are so many invasive species and animals relying on human care that without humans, what damage is already done could take a downfall. Invasive plants taking over mass areas, animals with no natural predator in a certain area taking over... In the long-term though? Earth could be better without humans.

[Brave 7eart]

I agree.

[MousieBrown]

if there was a injured tiger and an injured human I'd save the human. I know that may seem crazy but in a long run tigers probably will hurt you if you stay around them. I love animals but I'd save a human though because it's one of us

[Snow Plow]

Yes, I admit that many animals rely on us. I don't think that humans should die out, or I'd have committed suicide early on. We should, however, get off our high horses and start to care about other species. Yes, cattle rely on us. And what do we do? We kill them, but before that, we torture them. We chop them up alive. I have looked into this, and it's true. Really, we should try to at least kill them humanely. My beliefs may well be skewed, but I find it to be wrong that hundreds of animals are tortured for a single human to eat them when they could easily eat something else. I'm not talking about those starving people who need cheap meat to live, or those people who are allergic to pretty much everything else.

Pretty much, I admit that some animals would die out if we went extinct. (I'm not saying that the world wouldn't be a better place after some amount of adaption - who am I to say whether or not it would be?) But those animals that we can save should be saved. The same goes for humans. Saving an animal over a human or a human over an animal, neither are wrong, at least in my opinion. I know that I'd choose an animal over a human, but I'm not going to yell at you who would save the human, because that's not a bad thing to do. Really what's wrong is to just let them die when you could have helped.

[Princess Artemis]

Yes, I admit that many animals rely on us. I don't think that humans should die out, or I'd have committed suicide early on. We should, however, get off our high horses and start to care about other species. Yes, cattle rely on us. And what do we do? We kill them, but before that, we torture them. We chop them up alive. I have looked into this, and it's true. Really, we should try to at least kill them humanely. My beliefs may well be skewed, but I find it to be wrong that hundreds of animals are tortured for a single human to eat them when they could easily eat something else.

We as a species do care about other species. Likely far, far more than any other species does.

 

Not all cattle that are slaughtered are cut up while still alive. I know some are, but I gather this is not something that happens in all slaughterhouses everywhere. So to state that as if it were standard policy is somewhat misleading. To further state that it is torture, which is generally a punishment or an act to extract information, is quite wrong. No one wants to punish cattle. It isn't pleasant, no doubt, it isn't pretty, but it is also not made more painful than it needs to be.

 

You're vegan?

[arabian sparkle]

Just gonna say that if humans weren't here,the domestic species would learn to live as they did millions of years ago.All animals,as we know,still have that natural instinct.Dogs can still hunt,cats can still hunt,horses know how to run from stuff,ferrets still run wild,same with pigs.It would take humans to die before that would kick in though, because they don't need the natural instinct.When you think about it,feral cats and dogs are considered wild.If we died our buildings where they lived will still exsist.

[Snow Plow]

We as a species do care about other species. Likely far, far more than any other species does.

 

Not all cattle that are slaughtered are cut up while still alive. I know some are, but I gather this is not something that happens in all slaughterhouses everywhere. So to state that as if it were standard policy is somewhat misleading. To further state that it is torture, which is generally a punishment or an act to extract information, is quite wrong. No one wants to punish cattle. It isn't pleasant, no doubt, it isn't pretty, but it is also not made more painful than it needs to be.

 

You're vegan?

I'm not vegan. I'm vegetarian, but not for this reason. What I was aiming at is that we should at least try to get animal products from the places that you mentioned that treat animals well.

I seem to have misunderstood the meaning of torture. I meant that it was causing them extreme pain without need. Sorry for not looking that up. While it's not a standard policy, it happens very often, more so than you'd think. There are stun machines, but they tend to be outdated/not work/other things that happen to it and the cattle to make it not work. There have been interviews with lots of slaughterhouse workers saying that the cattle were fully conscious and bellowing in pain. Basically, it is made more painful than it needs to be. There are ways to kill animals humanely, it just costs more.

[TheComingUp]

Well, the way I see it, animals are more important. We're killing them off for food (or unnecessary sport) to live. Most humans aren't seeing the value in these animals, and think they're here just to eat. Without animals, (this is just me) most of us would starve. I'm more of a carnivore than a vegetarian, so I would definitely starve. But I don't see these animals as just a food source, I understand that they are living creatures.

[Princess Artemis]

I'm not vegan. I'm vegetarian, but not for this reason. What I was aiming at is that we should at least try to get animal products from the places that you mentioned that treat animals well.

I seem to have misunderstood the meaning of torture. I meant that it was causing them extreme pain without need. Sorry for not looking that up. While it's not a standard policy, it happens very often, more so than you'd think. There are stun machines, but they tend to be outdated/not work/other things that happen to it and the cattle to make it not work. There have been interviews with lots of slaughterhouse workers saying that the cattle were fully conscious and bellowing in pain. Basically, it is made more painful than it needs to be. There are ways to kill animals humanely, it just costs more.

I understand what you were getting at. It isn't that some people are intentionally causing more pain than necessary, they are doing so out of negligence. Something needs to be done about that, though I've read it's hard to do when there aren't enough inspectors to go around.

[PacketMonkey]

Just gonna say that if humans weren't here,the domestic species would learn to live as they did millions of years ago.All animals,as we know,still have that natural instinct.Dogs can still hunt,cats can still hunt,horses know how to run from stuff,ferrets still run wild,same with pigs.It would take humans to die before that would kick in though, because they don't need the natural instinct.When you think about it,feral cats and dogs are considered wild.If we died our buildings where they lived will still exsist.

Dogs would never have existed if we were not in the course of today's history.

 

[JaziandCo]

Just gonna say that if humans weren't here,the domestic species would learn to live as they did millions of years ago.All animals,as we know,still have that natural instinct.Dogs can still hunt,cats can still hunt,horses know how to run from stuff,ferrets still run wild,same with pigs.It would take humans to die before that would kick in though, because they don't need the natural instinct.When you think about it,feral cats and dogs are considered wild.If we died our buildings where they lived will still exsist.

Then why are hundreds if not thousands of cats dying early deaths from FIV, FeLV, and from attacks by other predators such as raccoons and skunks? Why are entire bird populations dying out because the feral cats are killing them before they meet their own deaths? Why are there so many dogs dying from parasites and infections, mange and malnurishment, because people "let them free"?

 

What about all of the things that live in cages and tanks with no way out? Rabbits, rodents, ferrets, fish, reptiles, even insects? Will you condemn them too?

 

 

 

The truth of the matter is that our domestic species wouldn't even exist in the wild naturally, and because of that, they can't. Even if they can learn to live out there, they'd be nothing better than an invasive species that would wipe out entire ecosystems because they don't belong.

[TikindiDragon]

Then why are hundreds if not thousands of cats dying early deaths from FIV, FeLV, and from attacks by other predators such as raccoons and skunks? Why are entire bird populations dying out because the feral cats are killing them before they meet their own deaths? Why are there so many dogs dying from parasites and infections, mange and malnurishment, because people "let them free"?

To be fair, Jazi, cats do survive quite well when they've gone feral. I've heard of several large communities of feral cats in London that have been there for years. They're only getting the numbers of feral cats down by a concerted effort to capture, spay and release them.

 

Some dying from disease and attack by larger predators happens even in wild species. And the only places where cats ahve been a threat to entire species have been small islands. They've not wiped out any 'entire bird populations' in continental places like the States. Or even large islands like the UK, where they've been allowed outside even as pets for centuries.

[JaziandCo]

To be fair, Jazi, cats do survive quite well when they've gone feral. I've heard of several large communities of feral cats in London that have been there for years. They're only getting the numbers of feral cats down by a concerted effort to capture, spay and release them.

 

Some dying from disease and attack by larger predators happens even in wild species. And the only places where cats ahve been a threat to entire species have been small islands. They've not wiped out any 'entire bird populations' in continental places like the States. Or even large islands like the UK, where they've been allowed outside even as pets for centuries.

True, there are certainly places that will support feral cats, continental states and uk. I was mainly referring to those islands, yea. Mostly the Steven's Island Wren, but there are other reports of feral cats damaging populations of birds, small mammals, and small marsupials in Australia and New Zealand. I wouldn't call those "small islands"... well maybe NZ, but not Australia.

 

Disease and predator attacks happen in all species, but domestic animals that aren't used to dealing with life in the wild are going to fall victim faster than those that have grown up there. I highly doubt a herd of cows are going to survive nearly as long as a herd of deer in the same area.

 

[Xocowolf]

Well…yeah, she did overreact.

But, she had a point. Tigers are in a lot of trouble right now, from several different directions (poaching and habitat encroachment being just two), and frankly, the world would be a fair measure more sucktastic if tigers were to disappear.

So, what is she doing? Is she giving money to Project Tiger? Is she adopting a tiger in a reserve?

One thing that's rather disturbing is that China is actually breeding tigers, like veal calves, for the Oriental medicine trade. This is a step up from buying their carcasses off the black market, in that the poaching of wild tigers will probably drop off as a result, but something sticks in my craw about raising tigers strictly for slaughter. In much the same way as American Quarterhorse breeders are breeding and raising their animals for the slaughterhouse as well (what do you think Halter horses are bred for?).

Both practices make me go . I think, "You're a sick #¡§@?∞, you know that?" I get a little more disgusted with capitalism, where everything from apples to the air we breathe to human body parts are for sale.

At the same time, I totally get the OP's point, as well. Humans are important, there are starving people everywhere (not just in Africa), and as Ronnie James Dio said, when we stop caring for each other it's time for the human race to disappear.

To me, I wouldn't choose one over the other. I'd find a way to help both. There are so many ways to do good for a multitude.

How does one help tigers and Quarter horses and people? Push for fair trade practices, for one. Seek out and patronize companies and businesses in the humanosphere that believe in human rights, global responsibility and humane treatment of animals. Give them your money, in preference to companies that don't (be sure to write the latter and tell them why you're not giving them money). If nothing else, write them and say, "Hey, I love what you're doing, great job, keep it up!" You'd be surprised how much sincere praise can lift a person's spirits and make their commitment that much stronger.

[lightbird]

We as a species do care about other species.  Likely far, far more than any other species does.

From what I heard in a lecture on the evolution of morality, humans are pretty much the only species with a generally present ability to extend empathy beyond the limitations of our own species.

 

Speaking of animals that evolved in proximity to humans, did you know that the head and pubic lice separated from their mutual ancestor due to geographical "separation" when body hair receded from the bigger part of the human body? :B /shot

Edited August 6, 2011 by lightbird

[Kestra15]

Speaking of animals that evolved in proximity to humans, did you know that the head and pubic lice separated from their mutual ancestor due to geographical "separation" when body hair receded from the bigger part of the human body? :B /shot

Cool.

 

Just to point out the utter impracticality of humans now being removed from Nature, and if it were to happen this planet would cease to exist as we know it, or in any form we could understand. Why?

 

For Humanity to be removed from the scene now, it would have to be an event that wipes out *every single one of us.* All Humanity. If it was something instantaneous, then it would have to be an ELE (Extinction Level Event), so it wouldn't just kill off Humanity, but a massive chunk of the rest of the species currently inhabiting the Earth - so we're thinking asteroids as per the dinos.

 

Even if it was a slow death, like a disease that was super-contageous and only affected humans, then there would be all those relics of Humanity hanging around. If we're all dead, what would happen to things like nuclear reactors? Without us to maintain and regulate them, eventually some or more will go critical, and suddenly we have Chernobyl-level events kicking off around the globe. That's going to go do some damage. All these domestic pets suddenly having to become feral will certainly be an issue. There's the damage the remnants of Humanity would cause as they slowly died as well, especially the more desperate and militarily-minded ones. All those stockpiles of biological agents, the massive tanks of petrol sitting around ready to ignite on a hot summer's day...

 

The second option would cause less damage in the long-term (if measured in centuries) but it is beyond ignorant to think that if Humanity disappeared everything would Just Get Better. A new world order would appear - after all, the top of the food chain would have just been knocked out, along with plenty of rungs beneath it.

[Snow Plow]

One thing that's rather disturbing is that China is actually breeding tigers, like veal calves, for the Oriental medicine trade. This is a step up from buying their carcasses off the black market, in that the poaching of wild tigers will probably drop off as a result, but something sticks in my craw about raising tigers strictly for slaughter. In much the same way as American Quarterhorse breeders are breeding and raising their animals for the slaughterhouse as well (what do you think Halter horses are bred for?).

Both practices make me go . I think, "You're a sick #¡§@?∞, you know that?" I get a little more disgusted with capitalism, where everything from apples to the air we breathe to human body parts are for sale.

I'd like to point out that you seem to think that horses and tigers are superior to cattle. You're fine with cattle being slaughtered for food, yet not horses? Tigers I can understand - they're endangered. And I admit that I dislike the idea of horses being raised for food, but it's more a cultural thing, I think. In America, horses are pets/friends, not food. You can't expect everyone to think that way, and you can't really defend that opinion unless you're against the slaughter of all animals. Really, I'd protect the horses over the cattle, too, but I'm not going to call cultures that eat horses sick because we're doing that same to cattle, pigs, and chickens. Honestly, I hate the idea that anything is born to die, but that's the way things are. My morals have to be changed and compromised for me to be accepted/accept society as a whole. Otherwise, I'd have to hate nearly everyone, including most of my closest friends.

[JaziandCo]

I'd like to point out that you seem to think that horses and tigers are superior to cattle. You're fine with cattle being slaughtered for food, yet not horses? Tigers I can understand - they're endangered. And I admit that I dislike the idea of horses being raised for food, but it's more a cultural thing, I think. In America, horses are pets/friends, not food. You can't expect everyone to think that way, and you can't really defend that opinion unless you're against the slaughter of all animals. Really, I'd protect the horses over the cattle, too, but I'm not going to call cultures that eat horses sick because we're doing that same to cattle, pigs, and chickens. Honestly, I hate the idea that anything is born to die, but that's the way things are. My morals have to be changed and compromised for me to be accepted/accept society as a whole. Otherwise, I'd have to hate nearly everyone, including most of my closest friends.

Agreed on the meat thing, at least. Meat is meat, doesn't matter if it comes from a cat or a cow. Just because we own cats and treat them like our family doesn't mean that they're somehow superior and less of an option for us overall. We just empathize with them because we accept them into our families. In other places, the reverse may be true. The cows could be thought of less viable a meal than a cat.

 

Even if you would say it's because pet animals are more intelligent, that's not entirely true. Pigs are supposed to be smarter than dogs, and I happen to quite enjoy ham and bacon, because somehow that's supposed to be more "okay".

 

Tigers are endangered animals, yes, but raising any animal strictly for meat is not necessarily cruel. I hate the meat industry as a whole, but not every place is bad and some places do make sure that the animals died quickly and painlessly. Not every chicken farmer cuts off the bills of the chicks, for example. Also remember that most creatures in the wild aren't hunted humanely by their fellow wild animals. If you watch videos of lions or wolves hunting, you'll occasionally see their prey struggle to get on its feet while the lions/wolves are eating it's organs. At least we as humans make sure most of our food is dead before chowing down, with the acception of some sushi meals.

[Lila]

We need to respect animals for what they provide us, even if they cannot respect us. If we have been given the advantage of a more highly developed brain, we should use it wisely and not selfishly. This planet, however it was made, was surely not made for just us, since clearly there have been creatures before us and creatures that will come after us.

 

If you watch videos of lions or wolves hunting, you'll occasionally see their prey struggle to get on its feet while the lions/wolves are eating it's organs. At least we as humans make sure most of our food is dead before chowing down, with the acception *exception of some sushi meals.

 

If we have empathy, then why defend cruel actions by saying "But the animals do it this way"? That would be merely undermining our own intelligence, not a strong defense in my opinion. I know you weren't implying that, but the quote prompted me.

 

[JaziandCo]

Tigers are endangered animals, yes, but raising any animal strictly for meat is not necessarily cruel. I hate the meat industry as a whole, but not every place is bad and some places do make sure that the animals died quickly and painlessly...

 

I was talking about animals being raised by humans as a food source and how that was much more humane than what wild animals do. Watch a cat kill a mouse, then tell me that humanely raising and killing an animal for food is somehow more cruel than the death it will die by another predator.

[Snow Plow]

I was talking about animals being raised by humans as a food source and how that was much more humane than what wild animals do. Watch a cat kill a mouse, then tell me that humanely raising and killing an animal for food is somehow more cruel than the death it will die by another predator.

...It really depends on how it's killed. Many cattle are chopped up alive - their hooves and organs taken out while they are fully conscious. That's just as bad as a cat playing with its food, you can hardly say that we're better.

 

Edited August 7, 2011 by Snow Plow

[JaziandCo]

...It really depends on how it's killed. Many cattle are chopped up alive - their hooves and organs taken out while they are fully conscious. That's just as bad as a cat playing with its food, you can hardly say that we're better.

then tell me that humanely raising and killing an animal for food is somehow more cruel than the death it will die by another predator.

 

I wouldn't count chopping up a cow alive as humane. I would count a swift blow to the head or jugular, however, rather humane as long as it killed it in one shot. Without it writhing on the floor in pain. Just boom, dead. Which does happen at more organic places than the main meat industry.

 

So yes, I would count that was much better than a cat playing with and torturing its victim.

[Snow Plow]

True. Also, though, cats don't always play with their food. They can just get on with it and kill it quickly. Also, in that scenario, the mouse usually had a reasonable life beforehand, whereas animals that are raised for food don't really get great lives. Most often, they are extremely crowded and get food that makes them sick. Not to say that this is always the case, but in most commercial companies, it happens. How an animal is killed is one thing, how it's treated in general is another.