• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Do animals deserve a right to life?

Do they?

  • Yes

    Votes: 17 47.2%

  • No

    Votes: 18 50.0%

  • Don't care

    Votes: 1 2.8%
  • Total voters
    36
T

Toothpicvic

Banned
Joined
Oct 19, 2009
Messages
1,801
Reaction score
462
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
If your argument against abortion is biological (not spiritual), meaning that embryos/fetuses deserve a "right to life" because they are biologically alive (as is sperm), then why do animals not also deserve a right to life, as biologically they meet all the same criteria, if not moreso. Discuss.
 
Toothpicvic said:
If your argument against abortion is biological (not spiritual), meaning that embryos/fetuses deserve a "right to life" because they are biologically alive (as is sperm), then why do animals not also deserve a right to life, as biologically they meet all the same criteria, if not moreso. Discuss.
Click to expand...

Everything on this planet attacks and kills life in one form or another
in a perpetual cycle of earths organic matter.

Yes animals may deserve life as everything does but it is illogical to get emotional about it.
 
They have a right to life as long as they can maintain that right through force. When something bigger and stronger comes along that denies them that right, then.... they lose it.
 
Toothpicvic said:
If your argument against abortion is biological (not spiritual), meaning that embryos/fetuses deserve a "right to life" because they are biologically alive (as is sperm), then why do animals not also deserve a right to life, as biologically they meet all the same criteria, if not moreso. Discuss.
Click to expand...

Because I'm a human and they aren't.
 
Most animals are necessary for the ecosystem, Humans are more destructive in some cases. So. Abort humans, let the animals live. Well, only the ones that don't taste good.
 
I don't believe humans have a right to life. If we had rights, we wouldn't need laws.
 
Kal'Stang said:
So if some aliens came down in their space ship would it be ok to kill them just because they aren't human?
Click to expand...

I'm thinking if aliens came down in their space ship, we are in some deep doo-doo, as we might not survive that.....:shock:
 
If we weren't s'posed to kill animals they wouldn't be made out of meat. :mrgreen:

Ribeye's...mmmmmmmmmm.... :rofl
 
Partisan said:
Well put, Dude......;)
I think most animals deserve more of a chance at life than the scum I see on Third & Pine everyday.....;)
Click to expand...

Animals have two places in this world. One in an ecosystem, the other is next to the mashed potatoes. We just have to balance it out is all.
 
Toothpicvic said:
If your argument against abortion is biological (not spiritual), meaning that embryos/fetuses deserve a "right to life" because they are biologically alive (as is sperm), then why do animals not also deserve a right to life, as biologically they meet all the same criteria, if not moreso. Discuss.
Click to expand...
Let's start by having you explain this part.
 
Animals do have rights. They have the right to be shot in an efficient and dignified manner, they have the right to pick up the trail of the one's that bleed out from a less than perfect shot, they have the right to a proper marinade and appropriate side items, and they have the right to turn on those hippy idiots that try to interject themselves into the situation on their behalf(probably the best irony ever!).
 
Act that your principle of action might safely be made a law for the whole world.

- Immanuel Kant

Postulating that aliens whose intelligence and material resources in relation to humans was comparable to humans' in relation to animals came and decided to make use of our species in the same ways we have made use of animals, our only strong objection against their appropriation of us is that we have a will to live.
 
Last edited:
Kal'Stang said:
So if some aliens came down in their space ship would it be ok to kill them just because they aren't human?
Click to expand...
This is surprisingly appropriate. HEHE.
[ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CGabJHXCfBs"]YouTube- ET[/ame]
 
Ethereal said:
Because I'm a human and they aren't.
Click to expand...
Biologically there is no difference. Humans are just another type of animal. So unless your argument is spiritual, then I don't see where you're going with this.
 
Kal'Stang said:
So if some aliens came down in their space ship would it be ok to kill them just because they aren't human?
Click to expand...

Intelligent life, therefore, superior to non-human animals.
 
Toothpicvic said:
Biologically there is no difference. Humans are just another type of animal. So unless your argument is spiritual, then I don't see where you're going with this.
Click to expand...

I am a human, therefore, I am more loyal to humans than non-human animals. Even beasts understand the concept of loyalty to the species.

Also, there is a difference biologically, hence, the species designation.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom