Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Posted (edited)

I’m familiar with intestine compression, espesially if I OD on legumes.

Edited by TIB
  • Replies 3.5k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Posted

This is what a ate today after some easy intervals.

What I don't understand is that I took this picture and it was 4MB and bikehub only allows 3.something MB. So I sent this picture to my friend so that he can send it back to me and then the picture lost its size??

 

Like Myles said, digital compression. Rather than sending pics around to make them smaller in future, what you can do is to take a screenshot of the photo, crop out all the bits around the edges you don't want, and voila - you a have a compressed image.

Posted

Nice straw-man red herring [figure that's more appropriate], but "I dont live my life based on whataboutalisms" Neither you nor I am a starving Somali child. 

 

Let's reframe this: Bad Guy goes and robs a liquor store. A struggle breaks out and the proprietor gets shot and killed. At Bad Guy's first court appearance he gets up and proclaims "Morality is subjective. It's my personal choice to rob and kill. It fits within my moral framework. Who are you to judge?"

 

How do you respond?

a) "It's your choice. Who am I to judge your actions?"

b) "No. Personal choice does not extend to situations in which your actions cause suffering to others."

Poor example. Law and morals are very different topics. There is a law against killing people, otherwise a lot more people would do it, I can assure you. Eating animals is a moral choice (that the VAST majority of humans have no problem with).

Posted

Poor example. Law and morals are very different topics. There is a law against killing people, otherwise a lot more people would do it, I can assure you. Eating animals is a moral choice (that the VAST majority of humans have no problem with).

No. I’m not talking about his trial. I’m talking about the morality of his actions. Not legality.

Posted

So what's the game then, Patch? 

 

We can't know the mind of a non-human animal, thus their suffering does not deserve moral consideration. Neither can we know the mind of another person, thus their suffering does not deserve moral consideration. 

 

Empathy allows is to understand our actions from the victim's perspective. 

Humans are separate from nature, mostly due to our intelligence. In nature animals are killed all the time in horrendous ways. The fact that this happens tells me that animals do not suffer in the same way that we understand suffering. Its like when you cut yourself and you only feel the pain once you actually see the injury. Animals do not have that capability due to their lower intelligence. As a result we do not need to give animals the same moral consideration as we give humans. They do deserve consideration and respect, but not to the same degree as humans.

Posted

Humans are separate from nature, mostly due to our intelligence. In nature animals are killed all the time in horrendous ways. The fact that this happens tells me that animals do not suffer in the same way that we understand suffering. Its like when you cut yourself and you only feel the pain once you actually see the injury. Animals do not have that capability due to their lower intelligence. As a result we do not need to give animals the same moral consideration as we give humans. They do deserve consideration and respect, but not to the same degree as humans.

Humans are not separate from nature. We are of nature. I’m not sure how you arrived at that.

 

We can objectively know that animals have the capacity to suffer. From physical pain to emotional distress (e.g. zoochosis). They can act in an altruistic fashion. They can understand fairness. These are all traits of sentience. All animals aren’t intelligent in the same manner, but are equal in their capacity to suffer.

 

We do not need to fret about giving animals the right to vote, only that their life and freedom is not ours to take.

Posted

Humans are not separate from nature.

 

only that their life and freedom is not ours to take.

so why do lions then have more rights than us? why can they just kill as they please?

Posted

so why do lions then have more rights than us? why can they just kill as they please?

 

Where did I say that?

 

The intelligence that you referred to allows us to make conscious and reasoned decisions about our actions. Thus, if we can live healthily and happily without harming our fellow earthlings, we have a moral imperative to do so.

Posted

Who gave you the right to apply your ethics and moral code to others?

 

Don't you do the same when you condemn a murderer or a rapist? Or do you indulge them their subjective moral framework? You can't have it both ways. You can't claim that I'm forcing my moral code on others, but condemn others when you see them causing others to suffer. 

Posted

Don't you do the same when you condemn a murderer or a rapist? Or do you indulge them their subjective moral framework? You can't have it both ways. You can't claim that I'm forcing my moral code on others, but condemn others when you see them causing others to suffer.

Did you just compare meat eaters to murderers? Thats a **** album dude.

 

Anyhow. Murder is against the law. Eating meat upsets vegans, its not illegal.

Posted

Did you just compare meat eaters to murderers? Thats a **** album dude.

 

Anyhow. Murder is against the law. Eating meat upsets vegans, its not illegal.

 

Nice side-step, but I'd like to see an answer. 

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Settings My Forum Content My Followed Content Forum Settings Ad Messages My Ads My Favourites My Saved Alerts My Pay Deals Help Logout