Replies

I thank you for admitting that you consider other animal species to be of lesser importance than the human animal one. Maybe that can be food for thought for you as the years progress. Our technology continues to improve regarding understanding animals' thoughts, and even communicating with them. I don't know if you saw Star Trek IV ("Save the Whales"), or Project X (Apes that communicate with sign language), or Day of the Dolphin (a George C. Scott movie about dolphins with which we can communicate), but I did. Meanwhile, Japan is developing technology enabling folks to communicate better than ever with cats and dogs. Laugh all you want but slaveholders centuries ago laughed when told that blacks might someday be able to do advanced mathematics.

As for: >>>Cloning involves many scientific processes and testing on animals. Do you think that is humane?<<<

If it enables us to produce animal flesh for consumption without killing, of course. The make-up or other cosmetics that you use caused considerable pain to animals during its developmental stage, but perhaps you aren't phased by that fact. For some reason, you are much more concerned with the fetus of a species which already has 6 billion living & viable representatives on this planet. It's unfortunate that you feel that way, but I've raised the issues and shall leave it at that. However, if you had been born an animal or if you had instead emerged as a basically still nonsentient & unborn fetus, which would you prefer to be judging from how they're treated on this planet? At least the fetus's soul goes to Heaven if exterminated, according to your beliefs. Meanwhile, I have no memories of what I endured even during my first year of life, let alone when I was a fetus. Living animals go through hell for our vanity and if anything warrants right-to-lifers' sometimes impressive energies and fundraising efforts, I think it's God's OTHER creatures.

As for what percentage of the 65% of Republicans who are PRO-CHOICE care more about born animals than unborn fetuses, I don't know the data on that. But I do know that pro-life platforms are serving as liabilities for the Republican Party's politicians, although I encourage us all to wait and see how today's elections go before we potentially resume with these discussions.

For some reason, you are much more concerned with the fetus of a species which already has 6 billion living & viable representatives on this planet.

Yes, and you are obviously much more concerned with all other species. That makes up a much greater number of life on this planet than humans alone. You can not justify killing of children by saying that their soul will go to heaven anyways.

Laugh all you want but slaveholders centuries ago laughed when told that blacks might someday be able to do advanced mathematics.

This is not even comparable. Black people have the same DNA as all other humans whether caucasian, hispanic or asian. They are of our species.

If it enables us to produce animal flesh for consumption without killing, of course.

Why is it justifiable to put animals through the inhumane treatment of scientific testing for our consumption purposes? Who is to say these animals will not die during the experimental phase? Therefore perfecting cloning of animal flesh, will be more inhumane IMO because not only will we kill the animals, but also put them through torture beforehand. Sounds a bit to me like Nazis experimenting on Jews in concentration camps if you want to compare the animals to humans.

Meanwhile, I have no memories of what I endured even during my first year of life, let alone when I was a fetus.

Levels of pain are not measured by how much one remembers. It is a proven fact that the fetus feels pain when it is aborted just as animals feel pain when killed for food. However I'm sure the animals aren't being killed by their own mother by having its brains sucked out only because she finds it to be a nuisance to her. We, humans, are omnivores. We are biologically made to eat meat. If nature's plan was to have every animal live, and not eat another, then we would not be designed the way we are. Your arguments clearly state that YOU are the hypocrite. You are so concerned about the animals, but could not care less that parents are murdering their children. You obviously do not have a respect for all life as most humans do. Eating does not constitute having a disrespect for life no matter how you attempt to construe it to be so. Also, what do you eat? Obviously cloning is not a reality right now. Do you eat dirt? You can't eat animals, that is wrong. You can't eat plants, they are living beings. How do you know THEY don't feel pain? The point is, you can not compare killing animals for food and killing babies for convenience.

I thank you for admitting that you consider other animal species to be of lesser importance than the human animal one. Maybe that can be food for thought for you as the years progress.

Is that what you wanted to hear? Yes, I will gladly admit that I strongly believe we are the dominant species. We have a duty to OUR species before any other. Every species has a natural instinct to protect it's own before another. Unfortunately you seem to have been born into the wrong one.

Ok. Apparently the natural system that you believe in is a disneyesque, communism-of-the-kingdoms-styled world, where all species have an equal right to exist and all share in a universal balance with each other. Unfortunately, that system has never and will never exist on earth. Balance itself is exactly the opposite of what the natural world is based on.

The fact is, when one species gains an evolutionary advantage over another, that species thrives because of its advantage, and its population expands as the others who compete with it shrink. The system then moves back towards equilibrium through occurrences like starvation, because when a species expands too quickly its food supply usually does not, and also through higher predators, whose populations expand with those of their prey. This tendency for the system to suddenly change, and then to rebalance itself is the hallmark of a competetive, dynamic system. In such systems the competitors who have the greatest advantage and talents will thrive. Others, with less advantages and in competition with the superior competitors, are either eliminated or reduced until they develop new advantages.

The right to life is a right that exists inside human society, not in the natural order outside of that realm. Any belief in equality of the species, i.e. "all animals are created equal" is a direct contradiction of the natural order. Make no mistake; the right to life is a right of mankind and not a universal animal principle.

Look, I know you can feel their pain and all, but there is neither a scientific nor a religious principle you can cite in saying that an animal has the same right to live as you or I.