- Jun 22, 2008
- 24,580
- 21,289
- AFL Club
- Geelong
fish dont have the same level of consciousness as mammals. they are virtually no different from plants so no its not even remotely as cruel.
so basically a pre-1967 aboriginal?
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
fish dont have the same level of consciousness as mammals. they are virtually no different from plants so no its not even remotely as cruel.
pain is heightened for creatures with rational minds as more pain is needed to persuade such creatures to act in a specific way (as such creatures have a mind of their own). Thus Creatures that pretty much only act on intuition have no need for a pain sensation (or happiness sensation or any emotional feeling for that matter). Rational conscious minds only really developed in land based creatures because we have time to think and make a decision about how to react to potential threats we see off in the distance. i.e there was an evolutionary benefit for rational thinking in land based creatures. Fish have no reason to develop conscious rational minds because they can only see things a couple of metres ahead of them and thus always need to react instantaneously to threats. Thus fish have very little consciousness. Dolphins and Whales are an exception because they evolved from creatures that were once land based.Has it been proven that fish don't feel pain? My understanding is that it is still up for debate. In any case, 'virtually no different from plants' seems a bit of a stretch to me.
im married to one although she only drinks wine so it aint really a problem.Don't have a beer with a biologist anytime soon!
There's not many things that go around in circles that aren't boring.Don't understand the glamour attributed to horse racing, it's ****ing boring
Wow. That is one of the most racist posts I have read on BF.so basically a pre-1967 aboriginal?
yeah you might want to delete this post before too many people see it.so basically a pre-1967 aboriginal?
Subject to that elusive Flora and Fauna Act that actually doesn't exist.I think he/she is making the point that indigenous folk were legally animals 50 years ago.
Subject to that elusive Flora and Fauna Act that actually doesn't exist.
fair enough. that makes more sense.I think he/she is making the point that indigenous folk were legally animals 50 years ago, so maybe 50 years from now we will have a different view of fish.
as per usual you focus on the wrong issue. Its not whether its immoral. its why people care about something that is so utterly stupid as horse racing that is the real issue. The Immorality of it is just a subset of the broader overall stupidity.
Statistics show that nearly all horses in the race will experience bleeding in the lungs, while 50% of horses racing will experience bleeding in the windpipe. 89% of these racehorses will have stomach ulcers. All will be thrashed by a whip.
Will another horse collapse and die after the race like the two that did after the Melbourne Cup in 2014? Or die after breaking a leg like Red Cadeaux in the 2015 Melbourne Cup race? Stats show that approximately every 3 days, a horse will die on the racetrack in Australia.
During training, these horses spend approximately 22 hours of every day alone in a stall the size of a bedroom, resulting in digestive and behavioural abnormalities. They are drugged to mask the pain from being overworked, and fed food with unnaturally high energy content.
The average ‘career’ of a racehorse is 3 years, after which they are ‘discarded’. Every year, 10000-25000 ‘discarded’ racehorses who didn’t ‘make the cut’ are slaughtered for dog food.
Happy Melbourne Cup day.
Update: Regal Monarch has died after a 'horror fall' at the 2017 Melbourne Cup
I don't know, it seems like you're having a bet each way, as it were.In that case purchasing the meat adds to their sales, and therefore they purchase more and kill more. I'm talking about meat that has already been purchased and would otherwise go to waste.
We don't need horse racing to live.But the same can be said of the meat sitting in the fridge down at Coles. All those animals have already been killed for consumption and undergo no further suffering, they're just conveniently sitting there to be picked up.
If that was HHHs intent I apologize.I think he/she is making the point that indigenous folk were legally animals 50 years ago, so maybe 50 years from now we will have a different view of fish.
We don't need horse racing to live.
If that was HHHs intent I apologize.
Sorry again HHH, your post was a bit too cryptic for this old fella, bit slow on the uptake sometimes, as soon as fleabitten pointed it out I thought yep probably got the wrong end of the pineapple there.It certainly was. Aboriginals were basically classed as flora before the 1967 referendum.
The economic/industrial impact it has means we'll continue to treat horses in an inhumane way for many years to come.We don't need horse racing to live.
Yes we do. There has never been a non-meat eating society in human history.We don't need to kill animals to live, it's just a matter of where your ethics lie.
I'm sure vegans would feel inclined to disagree.Yes we do. There has never been a non-meat eating society in human history.