“He goes out at night with his big boots on
None of his friends know right from wrong
They kick a boy to death cos he dont belong
Youve got to humanise yourself

A policeman put on his uniform
Hed like to have a gun just to keep him warm
Because violence here is a social norm
Youve got to humanise yourself

Re-humanise yourself
Re-humanise yourself
Re-humanise yourself
Re-humanise yourself

I work all day at the factory
Im building a machine thats not for me
There must be a reason that I cant see
Youve got to humanise yourself

Billys joined the national front
He always was a little runt
Hes got his hand in the air with the other cunts
Youve got to humanise yourself

Re-humanise yourself
Re-humanise yourself
Re-humanise yourself
Re-humanise yourself

I work all day at the factory
Im building a machine thats not for me
There must be a reason that I cant see
Youve got to humanise yourself

A policeman put on his uniform
Hed like to have a gun just to keep him warm
Because violence here is a social norm
Youve got to humanise yourself

Re-humanise yourself…”

The police: re-humanise yourself

Good article.

I don’t know what else to say

There.com vs. Second Life Of all of the emerging Internet media that are discussed in the tech press, social virtual worlds have made one of the more notable splashes in the past year. Second Life has been alternately celebrated and slammed. There was …

Strangely enough, PETArds always swallow after giving a blowjob from what I’ve heard.

No dairy. No eggs. But they’ll down a mouthful of baby batter faster than a bowl of tofu.

Great ‘art’ display tho, it makes people think and that’s the important thing.

Now to stray completely off topic:

For the non-meat eating crowd:

DID YOU KNOW that recently it was scientifically proven that plants can feel stress?

Can’t hurt the animals cause it’s cruel, can’t hurt the plants cause it’s cruel.

What’re you gonna eat now?

(PS: I’m all for letting animals have a good comfy life before we eat them… But I’m still gonna eat them. But PETA isn’t about that really, is it? Not AT ALL judging what PETA does to get in the news and draw attention to Teh Evil Meateaters. While killing animals “To save them”.)

“So by the logic, likewise, human-human murder, rape, deceit, torture, etc are equally rational.”

No, they aren’t. Such things are choices and not biologically engrained like omnivorism is. Animal instincts are biologically engrained and are therefore not moral choices on the part of the animal.

“Looks like nature selected us to strangle each other (then metabolize each others’ meat).”

Opposable thumbs were designed for tool use. Our hands are actually LESS effective weapons than claws and fangs. And you’re a dumbass if you honestly think that humans can safely eat other humans. You must never have heard of a prion disease called Kuru that resulted from human cannibalism in Papua New Guinea??

“Humans have “ethics”. Ah and where do those “ethics” come from…? The ego, and the morality of the day.”

Basically your saying that morality doesn’t exist and is totally subjective while at the same time trying to argue the morality of using animals as food or research subjects. I’d venture that this PETard thinking comes just as much from ego as you claim other moral belief systems do. Typical PETArd doublethink.

“if some day humankind creates synthetic substances (much like today vitamins/pills/etc) that provided equivalent nutrient and taste of animal meat, would you still go around hailing how wonderful it is to be able to slaughter animals to eat?”

Which we haven’t done yet. You are asking us to cross a bridge that we have yet to cross, if ever. And even if we can make such a sci-fi miracle pill, what makes you so damn sure we’ll even be able to produce enough of it to feed 6 billion people? Even with eating animals and plants large swaths os the human world already go hungry. Maybe you’d be whistling a different tune if you lived in Ethopia, frex?

“Evolution by definition doesn’t end. Humans may one day no longer have any reason to torture animals to death, except for fun. In other words, humans could evolve to lose their carnivorous biological nature as they find other ways to provide equivalent bodily supplements.”

Once again, we haven’t done this yet.

“if one wishes to produce a medicine for humans, why doesn’t one experiment on the most logically appropriate, accurate, and useful model available on earth, the best candidate organism for the job: the human body?”

Actually, we do that toward the end stages of a drugs development with the consent of the people involved(at least in reasonably democratic societies).

““There’s no rational basis for saying that a human being has special rights. A rat is a pig is a dog is a boy. They’re all animals.”

No, I didn’t say that at all. I said humans do what is in their natures which…is to make choices. Some of those choices are illogical sure(such as vegetarianism lol!). An animal does what is in it’s nature…which is to act on instinct unless interfered with by humans(and interfering with other plant and animal species is in our nature btw).

Look, you’re trying to argue morality from a nihilistic and relativistic point of view. But that’s not going to work because a true nihilist wouldn’t actually care about animal rights the same as they don’t care about the human rights concept of humanists or the God-given rights concept theists or the animal rights concept of PETA. Personally, I think you PETArds just secretly want to fuck chickens instead of eat them. lol!

An average human thumb and index finger, when joined by each respective finger of the other hand, and made form an open circular shape with maximum circumference is about the size of the average neck based circumference of a human of the same age. Looks like nature selected us to strangle each other (then metabolize each others’ meat).

To all you pro animal-torture, animal-murder people: if some day humankind creates synthetic substances (much like today vitamins/pills/etc) that provided equivalent nutrient and taste of animal meat, would you still go around hailing how wonderful it is to be able to slaughter animals to eat?

One thing to remember is that humans (or ancestors) were not always omnivores, and not always carnivores, and not always herbivores, and not always either. Evolution by definition doesn’t end. Humans may one day no longer have any reason to torture animals to death, except for fun. In other words, humans could evolve to lose their carnivorous biological nature as they find other ways to provide equivalent bodily supplements. If either disease is eradicated or computational models are able to predict biomolecular outcomes sufficiently such that experimentation is no longer necessary, they could also lose the need to experiment on non humans. To simply say that at this point in time it may be in our “nature” to do it doesn’t mean it should be done. Perhaps it’s necessary to evolve to a better point in human history. Who knows. It may also have been necessary to build societies based on brutality, slavery, etc, at the dawn of human history in order to eventually have the capability of constructing societies based on less brutal and fairer societies in existence today. Who knows. But to argue that a particular means is evident or that it’s naturally possible today misses the point.

“WITHOUT ANIMAL RESEARCH WE HAVE NO MEDICAL SCIENCE”
Entropy Nikolaidis, I have yet to witness a single anti animal-torture animal-murder person ever dispute that. It is a bit disappointing though that humans are apparently too dumb to understand biochemistry, biophysics, and everything in between that their only recourse to torture animals to death, often to produce a result they don’t even know how to explain, but just “works”. Now then, one must ask: if one wishes to produce a medicine for humans, why doesn’t one experiment on the most logically appropriate, accurate, and useful model available on earth, the best candidate organism for the job: the human body? Six billion of them. No shortage there. Oh, right, the answer is because humans are “better” than that. Humans have “ethics”. Ah and where do those “ethics” come from…? The ego, and the morality of the day.

I’m guessing you wouldn’t volunteer your family and friends to be experimented on to make my life better and my friends’ and families’ lives better, which is too bad because I would have hoped you’d have more compassion for your species. Tsk tsk.

Maybe we can experiment on your own pets then? Family dog? Wait a minute now, why is a rat ok to torture to death but not the family dog? Not cute enough? Doesn’t obey the slavemaster’s commands so readily? Not on the same level of “worth” as living beings, I suppose (reminiscent of when historically and even still today, human races regarded those of other races the same way). I’ll neglect the glaringly obvious fact that it’s about human ego/morality/ethics much like I’ll neglect the fact that some cultures eat dogs for food while others dine alongside rats, who they see as reborn ancestors — all as proof of the truth of justifications you make. The issue has never been a question about how much human progress could be made by the unquestionable torturing of animals to death.

And you have the audacity to call someone not wanting another living animal to live its entire life from birth in a reinforced concrete/steel cage (with fake, painted scenery on the walls) a looney? That’s absolutely outrageous.

Actually if anything all those quotes the antithesis of looney. Just as an example, even Second Lulz Vigilante who loves t-bone steak has proven this one, in not so many words:

“There’s no rational basis for saying that a human being has special rights. A rat is a pig is a dog is a boy. They’re all animals.”