I agree, they should have just shot the thing in the head.

Is not sound to defend and accept intentional killing, abuse and cruelty as an established human way of life. Do not think that because hunting and meat eating was acceptable behavior since the Neanderthal that it is natural behavior. Eating meat is in fact learned behavior.

People should be concentrating their efforts on saving and preserving life, not ending it and finding excuses to defend their rights to kill and cause suffering. Once again; Any argument in defense of killing is not sound.

To promote, defend and endorse hunting and meat consumption is to promote, defend and endorse cruelty and murder.

When thinking of cruelty to animals the first animal that comes to mind is the red meat Dairy Cows are bred today for high milk production. For cows who are injected with Bovine Growth Hormone, their already high rate of milk production is doubled. Half of the cows in the national dairy herd are raised in intensive confinement, where they suffer emotionally from being socially deprived and being prohibited from natural behavior. Dairy cows produce milk for about 10 months after giving birth so they are impregnated continuously to keep up the milk flow.

Female calves are kept to replenish the herd and male calves are usually sent to veal crates where they live a miserable existence until their slaughter. When cows become unable to produce adequate amounts of milk they are sent to slaughter so money can be made from their flesh. The cows are kept in a holding facility where they are fed, watered and have their waste removed mechanically and are allowed out only twice a day to be milked by machines.

Before Cows are brought to slaughter, beef cattle are subjected to a branding called waddling, this painful procedure entails cutting chunks out of the hide which hangs under the animals' necks. Waddling marks are supposed to be large enough so that ranchers can identify their cattle from a distance.

80% of the 35 million red meat beef cattle slaughtered annually in the U.S. spend the last few months of their lives at slaughter house feedlots, overcrowded by the thousand into dusty, manure laden holding pens.

The air is thick with harmful bacteria and particulate matter, and the animals are at a constant risk for respiratory disease. Feedlot cattle are routinely implanted with growth promoting hormones, and they are fed unnaturally rich diets designed to fatten them quickly and profitably. Because cattle are biologically suited to eat a grass-based, high fiber diet, their concentrated feedlot rations contribute to metabolic disorders. At a standard beef slaughterhouse, 250 cattle are killed every hour. As the assembly line speeds up, workers are rushed. Prior to being hung up by their back legs and bled to death, cattle are supposed to be rendered unconscious. This ‘stunning’ is usually done by a mechanical blow to the head.

The procedure is terribly imprecise, and inadequate stunning is inevitable. The result of poor stunning is conscious animals hanging upside down, kicking and struggling, while a slaughterhouse worker makes another attempt to render them unconscious. Eventually, the animals will be “stuck” in the throat with a knife, and blood will gush from their bodies whether or not they are unconscious.

The inhumane treatment of animals is abominable, especially the inhumane treatment of animals for food. Most human beings will skip reading these cruelties because they are incomprehensible to the human mind but the relaying of these incidents are true and must be realized by the entire human race.

The small spaces in which animals are forced to live until they are murdered for our consumption and the cruel ways in which they are raised are as sadistic as Hitler’s German death camps. The consumption of animal life is appalling. The way humans search out new species to devour is nothing more than cannibalistic gluttony

Don't forget drs, lawyers, insurance companies, real estate people, ceos (and all the other c-os), stock market scum, you know all the leaches feeding off the suffering of people that actually work to produce something. I know cattle ranchers work their butts off.

How many head of cattle have you known? They don't have the same emotions. You contradict yourself in 8 sentances if we have the same emotions how can we have "unmatched empathy"? If they are the same they match if they are different they are unmatched. They have no self awareness if they look in a mirror they don't know what they are seeing. You say they can smell death, what does that mean, death has no oder, now blood it has a smell. how could they "know their fate" they don't know that there is a tomorrow. You fear death and think it is a bad thing so you think you are doing something bad to the animals. I do not fear death it is a release for the trials of life, and a confirmation of the joys. When I take an animals life for food I free it's spirit to move to the next level. I am because I have taken that life aware of the value of the food provided.

Animals are not aware. Humans are aware. Animals do not want to die they sense fear. Their is no value in an animals death. Killing is a sin.

No, silly. This little calf was targeted because it was half white and because Bill O'Reilly doesn't eat whites.

I believe in celebrating diversity. There's more than enough room for porterhouse and ribeye on my dinner plate...

Juzzman-all I can say to you is that I'm sorry for you for never having been at the receiving end of a pet's love. I am not assigning human emotions and processing to animals but I do suggest that they house emotions that are similar to ours. They bond, they form attachments, they are protective....some of them even try to smile as to mimic what they see in us.

Don't underestimate the emotional and intelligent depth of what you see as a lesser life.

Not self aware enough or they would notice they are eating their brothers and sisters.

Did you hear about the new organization PCATA?

People for the continued cruelty, abuse and torture of animals.

You sound like a member.

Actually, we are herbivors with omnivoric capabilities. Just in case we are experiencing famine we can eat anything that moves which is attributed to the superior design of these humanoid bodies. Did your professors say anything about the extreme self and God awareness potential that our bodies enable? The ability to make thoughtful compassionate choices? Or are we just animals abiding our senses?

Yes. Your biology teacher is right. Our bodies are capable of digesting muscle matter. We can also process grains, fruits, vegs, and dairy and sea foods.

We are also capable of setting our hair on fire. Just because we can doesn't mean we should.

I'm not a vegan but I am a humanitarian. Most folks (so we all have computers) here have no real need to hunt. Hunting is a sport and not a necessity.

I'm also not Jewish but I do support the kosher approach to meat-and how the animal lived and died. I think that is important.

Considering it was a biology class, what do you think was taught? No, we didn't discuss the biochemical mechanisms for your so-called god awareness. We may be aware but we are still animals. Mother nature designed us to eat meat - not to barely be able to get by on meat in extreme circumstances. Are lions on the savanna incompassionate? If you choose to not eat meat, knock yourself out. You are free to do what you wish. But you are denying your body something it needs.

When there is an overpopulation of deer in your area and they are starving to death in your backyard you may have a different opinion on whether or not hunting is a necessity.

Our boddies are not designed for meat. Your proffessor was misinformed.

Vegetation is what the human race is supposed to use to sustain their lives and in fact human beings do not have the proper teeth or digestion to properly consume flesh.

Human beings are capable of peeling fruits and vegetables like monkeys do they are not capable of using their teeth, fingernails, digestion and strength to hunt animals down, kill and eat them were they lie. Eating meat is a human choice it is not a biological health requirement or necessity.

Humans choose to cook vegetables they don’t have to cook them to eat them but humans do have to cook meat, even the FDA instruct us to do this for safety. Eating meat is not natural to human beings. In cases of eating raw fish like Sushi, Sushi takes certain amount of preparation as well. Humans cannot grab a fish and eat it raw. The steps in preparing raw fish require freezing fish at temperatures of -4 degrees Fahrenheit (-20 degrees Celsius) for seven days, or frozen at -31 degrees Fahrenheit (-35 degrees Celsius) for 15 hours, which kills any parasites. This is not natural and neither is the method used to skin and demeat animals is unnatural to human health especially when a human being must be careful not to get contaminated in the process. It is a known fact that in order to consume their prey, hunters must remove the bladder, bowels, anus and all sexual bacteria producing organs, even though you can be certain that the animal they are about to consume probably just digested those same Bactria ridden body parts while enjoying their last meal.

To define the fact that human beings should not be eating flesh, Dr. John McArdle, Psychologist and Director of the US National Growth and Change Study (funded by the National Institute on Aging), stated: “There is no basis in anatomy or physiology for the assumption that humans are pre-adapted to the vegetarian diet.” Considering this article was from 1991 when research on the subject was limited and the fact that Dr. John McArdle is a Psychologist and not a anthropologist, Biologist odontologist, Gastroenterologist or paleontologist his theoretical conclusions are based solely on the psychological aspect of flesh consumption .

Today there is scientific proof that Dr. John McArdle’s theory is wrong.

In a study on anthropology, it has been documented that the first humans on the Earth were herbivores. This fact is one of the accepted and established scientific theories in anthropology and biology as well as in studies provided by odontologists, Gastroenterologists and paleontologists

Dr Richard Leaky one of the world’s leading paleoanthropologists confirmed this fact in his many books on the subject.

The Food Revolution. 2010, The First Humans: Origin and Early Evolution of the Genus Homo, 2006, Origin of Humankind, 1996.

In Dr. Leaky’s study he shows that Human beings do not have the proper teeth for tearing into an animal's raw hide, or the strength, and claws to run after an animal, jump it, kill and eat it were it lies. For a human being to be a natural hunter all human beings would have the instinct to hunt and be able to eat raw meat straight from a freshly killed animal carcass the same way that animals do, meat requires teeth that are adapted more to cutting than to grinding. The ability to cut is determined by the slope of the cusps, or crests. Steeper crests mean the ability to consume tougher foods. From the study of human teeth alone, human beings were made to be vegetarians. Once again, Dr Richard Leaky one of the world's leading paleoanthropologists confirmed this fact in his many books on the subject.

The fact is that human teeth, saliva, stomach acid, and intestines are most similar to other plant-eaters, and dissimilar to carnivores and true omnivores. Human "canine teeth" are canine in name only.

Cardiologist William C. Roberts editor in chief of The American Journal of Cardiology and medical director of the Baylor Heart and Vascular Institute at Baylor University Medical Center in Dallas, says: Human beings and herbivorous animals have little mouths in relation to their head sizes, unlike carnivores, whose big mouths are all the better for "seizing, killing and dismembering prey," While nutrition specialist Dr. Milton R. Mills, associate director of preventive medicine for the Washington, D.C.-based Physicians Committee for Responsible Medicine (PCRM) says that: "Humans and herbivores extensively chew their food, whereas swallowing food whole is the preferred method of carnivores and omnivores.

National Geographic News February 18, 2005 released a report from the American Association for the Advancement of Science's in Washington DC. The study of meat in the human diet has concluded that human teeth are too big for the downsized human jaw and because of this most meat eaters need dental work. In the beginning of the human flesh eating diet, manmade tools helped humans in butchering their dinners. But when they advanced to cooking and using knives and forks it lead them to develop crooked teeth and facial dwarfing. Virtually any mammalian jaw in the wild that you look at will be a perfect occlusion—a very nice Hollywood-style dentition," said Peter Lucas, the author of Dental Functional Morphology. Bernard Wood, a paleoanthropologist at George Washington University says that eating meat is making human beings evolve into eating mush."

Although some humans will suggest that the VAST majority of scientists maintain that humans are naturally omnivores this is not a true. The word vast means immense: the vast reaches of outer space. I do not have to look up such a statement when the statement itself is so ambiguous that no one could possibly know what the vast majority is thinking. This information could never be accurate unless ALL scientists in their chosen fields were asked this question and their answers were recorded.

Darwin himself said:

"At the period and place, whenever and wherever it was, when man first lost his hairy covering, he probably inhabited a hot country; a circumstance favorable for the frugivorous diet on which, judging from analogy, he subsisted." — Charles Darwin (The Descent Of Man, 2nd ed., 1874, page 156.)

French naturalist, Baron Cuvier, also put forth this view: "Fruits, roots, and the succulent parts of vegetables appear to be the natural food of man: his hands afford him a facility in gathering them; and his short and comparatively weak jaws, his short canine teeth not passing beyond the common line of the others, and the tuberculous teeth, would not permit him either to feed on herbage or devour flesh, unless those aliments were previously prepared by the culinary processes."

Swedish naturalist the Father of Taxonomy, Karl von Linne' (Linnaeus) (1707-1778) who introduced binomial nomenclature - naming plants and animals according to their physical structure: "Man's structure, external and internal, compared with that of other animals shows that fruit and succulent vegetables constitute his natural food."

Ernst Heinrich Philipp August Haeckel an eminent German biologist, naturalist, philosopher, physician, professor said: "Whatever part of the body we consider, we find upon the most exact examination that man is more nearly related to the higher apes (eaters of fruit and nuts) than are the highest apes to the lowest apes. It would therefore be unwarranted to regard man as constituting a (biological/anatomical) class by himself."

Anthropologists — no matter how far back in time they go — are unable to come up with any proof that humans have ever been naturally carnivorous. On the contrary, all the scientific evidence points to exactly the opposite conclusion, namely that we have always retained our obviously vegetarian diets, even when we are forced (as by an ice age, or a flood) to temporarily turn to flesh-foods for survival in emergency conditions.

It is quite obvious that the human state of mind is not inclined to eat flesh food the proof of this is the fact that all meat-eaters (other than the scavengers: vultures, hyenas,.) kill their own prey and eat it in its natural state but most humans have their meat slaughtered by proxy so they will not have to personally harm the animal or be offended by its death.

It is almost unheard of that a human being would eat meat in its original state, instead they age it, boil it, bake it, fry it, Grill it or broil it, making sure the meat is first suitably "tenderized", and is well-disguised with sauces, spices, and gravies. Even when consuming live animals, humans must fry or prepare the creatures first so their hearts will still be beating and their consumption will be safe.

The Study Of Digestion

Neal D. Barnard, M.D, a nutrition researcher and president of the Physicians Committee for Responsible Medicine. Tells us a vegetarian diet is healthier then a meat eating diet because Vegetables can be washed and peeled, but it is impossible to do that with fish or other meats. It is a known fact that meat eaters with high cholesterol levels find that they plummet after turning to a vegetarian diet. The fact is that their coronary arteries open up again. Their waistlines shrink, and their cancer rates drop 40 percent. A healthy vegetarian diet could revolutionize the rate of human survival.

To further reasons why not to hunt for meat, The American Cancer Society confirms with the McDougall report that: From our lips to our anus our digestive system has evolved to efficiently process plant foods. Digestion begins in the mouth with a salivary enzyme, called alpha-amylase (ptyalin), whose sole purpose is to help digest complex carbohydrates found in plant foods into simple sugars. There are no carbohydrates in meats of any kind (except for a smidgen of glycogen), so a true carnivore has no need for this enzyme – their salivary glands do not synthesize alpha amylase.

The human intestine is long and coiled, much like that of apes, cows, and horses. This configuration makes digestion slow, allowing time to break down and absorb the nutrients from plant food sources. Cholesterol is only found in animal foods – no plant contains cholesterol.

The liver and biliary system of a meat-eating animal has an unlimited capacity to process and excrete cholesterol from its body – it goes out, in the bile, passing through the bile ducts and gallbladder, into the intestine, and finally, out with the stool. Humans, like other plant-eating animals, have livers with very limited capacities for cholesterol removal – they can remove only a little more than they make for themselves for their own bodies – and as a result, most people have great difficulty eliminating the extra cholesterol they take in from eating animal products. This apparent “inefficiency” is because humans have evolved on a diet of mostly plant foods (containing no cholesterol), and therefore, they never required a highly efficient cholesterol-eliminating biliary system.

The resulting cholesterol buildup, when people eat meat, causes deposits in the arteries (atherosclerosis), in the skin under the eyes (xanthelasma), and in the tendons. Bile supersaturated with cholesterol forms gallstones (over 90% of gallstones are made of cholesterol).

About half of all middle-aged women who live on the Western diet have cholesterol gallstones. When studying the human digestive tract, medical researchers learned that a human beings and all herbivore stomach acid is twenty times weaker than that of meat-eaters. This makes meat hard to digest and there for it begins to rot and decay inside the body before it can be properly eliminated.

That's still speciesism considering the plight of humans over the plight of other life forms. Consider your own plight because you are the rib steak and you are the Syrian rebels. Rescue yourself and rescue the millions of material conditioned creatures you will become from their endless suffering.

Those that intentionally kill are all mindless. Animals are not mindless.

Hmm. A syllogism:

Those that intentionally kill are all mindless.

Animals are not mindless.

Therefore, animals do not intentionally kill.

That makes sense, since there is absolutely no record of an animal intentionally killing another animal for food, mating privileges, or whatever.

/sarc

I said animals are not mindless. The only species that intentionally kill ARE humans therefore; Those that intentionally kill are all mindless. (meaning; without intelligence.)

Animals kill not with intent but from instinct.

Animals do what comes natural to their nature. An Animal acts on instinct, when they are hungry they eat whatever food is available. Animals do not hunt people down for the sport, pride or pleasure in it, like humans do.

When one animal preys on another animal, it does not do anything wrong, nor does it violate the rights of the other animal because it is doing what comes natural to nature. There is nothing in this act that a human being is required to prevent. When animals are being killed and hunted by humans who have the free will choice NOT to kill and hunt this is a violation against nature and therefore it is morally unjustified.

The natural world exists without the interference of human beings or civilization. The natural world is the material world, surrounding humankind and existing independently of human activities. The elements of the natural world are mountains, trees, animals, human animals and rivers. They are not the activities performed by human animals. These activities, like hunting making up words and labels, are individual and come from free will thought and imagination. The oxford dictionary states that: Natural means: existing in or caused by nature; not made or caused by humankind. In Webster dictionary 10a and 11 it states: growing without human care; not cultivated existing in or produced by nature: not artificial living in or as if in a state of nature untouched by the influences of civilization and society. The American Heritage dictionary states that natural is existing in or formed by nature. Genuine, authentic. Not affected by man or civilization; uncultivated; wild, organic, unrefined and unprocessed.

In other words, human beings are a part of nature, but their actions and the creations from their imaginations are not. The human mind is natural for it is organic. The creations human beings make from their thoughts and imaginations are not natural for they distort and alter nature through the birth of their inventions. Also, the materials used for human inventions are natural. What human beings do to altar those materials are not.

To understand what is natural, you must think about what is naturally in the world without the interference of human manipulation and persuasion. A sharp stick is natural. To sharpen a stick is not. A rock is natural a hammer is not.

Human laws, rules, creations and actions are not natural.

Human beings are very natural, their flesh, bones, blood, organs and thoughts are natural but their behavior and what they do with their thoughts, is not. Natural is storms, bacteria, mountains anything made from nature that is not altered in any way. If you have to sharpen something you are altering its state of being the same goes for building anything.

The actions and inventions of Human kind come from natural imagination and natural free will. These things are natural because we are bone with them. We are not born with the materials to create the things we see in our minds.

The things man creates are unnatural to man and to nature and the choices mankind makes from their free will is also not natural to nature. Nature reacts and responds instinctively. Nature does not choose her actions but mankind does.

The wooden chair was once a tree, the tree is natural the chair is not. The chair is manmade. A bowl of cherries is natural. A cherry pie is not. A cherry pie cannot exist without the help of man. You do not find cherry pies or wooden chairs in nature.

Like all non – human animals, Nature does not select what move she will make next for nature does not comprehend the outcomes of her actions. Mankind does not have to go to war, eat meat, hunt, poach or create destructive weapons and technologies. Mankind chooses by their own free will to go to war, eat meat, hunt, poach or create destructive weapons and technologies.

These choices are not natural. The wind, storms, volcanoes and Earthquakes are natural for they are spontaneous reactions to environmental changes. Tools, weapons, cars, boats, planes, houses, buildings, furniture are unnatural for the natural materials that they were made with were altered.

Non human animals and Nature respond to the elements surrounding her. Animals like humans have the opportunity to select where they want to go, what toy they want to play with and what odors smell good, but they do not have the mind capacity to understand what they are selecting. If it smells good they want it. If it tastes and feels good they want it. If it scares them, they will either hide from it or attack. These reactions are not free will. Only mankind has free will.

Free will is the capacity of rational thought to choose a course of action from various alternatives. Animals act instinctively they use their senses to guide them. Not having free will choice does not make an animal mindless or less intelligent than a human being. On the contrary, animals use sound practical judgment that is independent of specialized knowledge and training, animals respond using normal native intelligence. Free will has little to do with intelligence. Free will has to do with, desire, pleasure, power, purpose and volition.

An animal acts on instinct and instinct has little to with automatic response. Instinct comes from intuition, inclination, tendency, experience and inner wisdom. As I said before, animals make their decisions through their senses. Sight, sound, taste, touch and smell. Humans make their decisions through selfish desires, greed, arrogance, ignorance, fear, pleasure, compassion and amusement. Human beings have the capability of knowing outcomes before they happen, just by remembering the outcomes of the past. Human beings no fire burns, war and hunting kills and cruelty causes suffering.

Unlike animals, human beings can formulate the outcome of their actions before making free will choices that allow them to engage in, promote, emulate and participate in activities that they know will cause destruction and harm. Animals react without any precise analyzations.

In both Webster and American Heritage dictionaries Definition #2 Free will is the freedom that human beings have to make choices that are not determined by prior causes or by divine intervention. Even in the Oxford dictionary it states: the power of Free will is the power of acting without the constraint of necessity or fate; the ability to act at one's own discretion.

Animals hunt by nature it is their instinct, they do not have the ability to formulate thought as humans do. When one animal preys on another animal, it does not do anything wrong, nor does it violate the rights of the other animal because it is doing what comes natural to nature. There is nothing in this act that a human being is required to prevent. Animals do not need to altar nature or camouflage their appearance to get their food, nor do animals need to use tools and weapons. Animals do not skin or gutter their prey with tools, nor do they cook it, season it, or tenderize it with any instruments such as knives, skewers, pots and pans.

Animals jump their prey and subdue it by biting its neck and ripping it apart where it falls victim to their attack.

Animals that use tools, use rocks, leaves, twigs, sticks, and branches while also using the natural ability of their hands, paws, mouths, strength and teeth to define and maneuver them. Guns are not natural, nor are they in line with animal made tools. Guns, bows and arrows are manipulations of natural materials. Rocks, leaves, twigs, sticks, claws, teeth and branches are natural without alterations.

Hunting is not natural to humans and neither is consuming meat. Hunting and meat eating are human choices. They are activities that humans have adjusted too over the years.

When animals are being hunted by humans who have the free will choice NOT to hunt this is a violation against nature and therefore it is morally unjustified. If human beings were natural hunters and meat eaters, they would have the speed, strength and cunning for it, as well as the teeth, claws, and digestive track needed to kill and consume raw flesh in its purest state, (fur, bones, innards and all.)

For hunting and fishing to be a natural human act, human beings would have to live in the wild (Or live in the ocean, rivers, streams, swamps, or lakes) while being able to jump their prey and murder it and eat it with their bare hands, strength and teeth alone. (No seasoning, tenderizing, guttering, cooking, or skinning would be necessary.)

All human hunters would be able to prepare and consume their meat naturally, without the help of tools and manmade devices that come from the imaginings of the human mind.

lol

Wow another long essay huh? And basically just repeating yourself too huhReverend Marie Carew, wow well I guess that’s one way to convince people by droning on and on at them religiously lol

“It is time the human race acted humane. It is time that manKIND looked into the eyes of all animals, fish and insects and said; “You and I are one.” What human beings do to one life, they do to all life. This is called the interconnected web of existence. We are all made from the same earth, breathing the oxygen from her trees, while struggling to survive in this place we each call our home.”

Seriously? You honestly believe that? Lol well good luck trying to convince other humans that their life is equal in worth to a insect, I can see it now

“dam I accidentally squashed a bug, well looks like life in prison for me” lol

Well either that or

“hey I just killed a human, oh well no big deal their lives are worth the same as an insect” lol

You miss the point....again. To be enlightened you must think and act with higher conscious and higher awareness.

As an enlightened being I can spot the darkness in a human soul as well as sensing the darkness in a negative energy field.

Most places were human beings have been are surrounded by negativity.

This is the residue left behind from human actions. All negativity from the past actions of humankind remain on this earth influencing mankind to repeat and continue the mistakes of the past.

This negative energy that surrounds human kind is the imprint of the darkness that lies within their mortal soul.

Positive progression will only develop when positive advancement takes the place of negative repetition.

The point? Ha there is no point to all the “metaphysical” stuff you are talking about, there is no soul, negative and positive are entirely subjective and as for you being “enlightened” well keep that up I’m sure your “positive aura” must be such a wonderful addition to your character lol

Indeed positivity is worth emulating. Right and wrong are subjective. Negative and positive are not.

Subjective means existing in the mind; belonging to the thinking subject rather than to the object of thought. Right and wrong is a matter of opinion but negative and positive are what they are and neither will ever change.

Negative is the act of denying. Negative will always lack in positive affirmative qualities, such as enthusiasm, interest, or optimism. Negativity will always be marked by features of hostility, withdrawal, or pessimism while being Positive is acceptance of all things. Positive will always lack in all anything negative for to be positive you must always move in a beneficial direction without negative outcomes.

The point you do not see in my writing is quite clear.

Rather than trying to ignore, deny or outright not care where the meat your eating came from,

Rather than making jokes and cynical remarks about the animals fate,

Rather than using negative response as a substitute for discussing the topic at hand without copping an attitude and claiming dominance over the value of animal life,

I want people to face their cuisine choice square in the eye and say:

"I am at peace knowing that I contributed to your pain, anguish, torment suffering and death, for no matter what suffering you endured to feed me, the pleasure you give me when I smell and taste you is worth every cruel thing you ever had to endure by human hands."

"I am at peace knowing that I contributed to your pain, anguish, torment suffering and death, for no matter what suffering you endured to feed me, the pleasure you give me when I smell and taste you is worth every cruel thing you ever had to endure by human hands."

Oh is that all? Well sure I can do that, that’s easy hell it’s a little known or cared for fact but the suffering is what really brings out the taste lol

It reminds me of that old saying “meat is murder! And murder tastes pretty dam good” lol

I am glad you feel that way, should your life amount to that fate.

Ah Reverend Marie Carew, well that just makes me feel all better knowing you’re glad for me what with you being the positive one, and fortunately for me I won’t have to worry about that fate as killing and eating humans is against the law in practically every country on the planet. But hey if it makes you feel better I do have another quote, it’s from George Orwell and I think it fits here

“All animals are equal, some are just more equal than others” lol

Yes and he did not mean human beings. That was a great book.

Here are some of his other quotes.

Man is the only creature that consumes without producing. He does not give milk, he does not lay eggs, he is too weak to pull the plough, he cannot run fast enough to catch rabbits. Yet he is lord of all the animals. He sets them to work, he gives back to them the bare minimum that will prevent them from starving, and the rest he keeps for himself.

"Now, comrades, what is the nature of this life of ours? Let us face it: our lives are miserable, laborious, and short. We are born, we are given just so much food as will keep the breath in our bodies, and those of us who are capable of it are forced to work to the last atom of our strength; and the very instant that our usefulness has come to an end we are slaughtered with hideous cruelty.....The life of an animal is misery and slavery: that is the plain truth.....Man is the only real enemy we have

“The essence of being human is that one does not seek perfection.”

If you want a picture of the future, imagine a boot stamping on a human face—for ever.”

The creatures outside looked from pig to man, and from man to pig, and from pig to man again; but already it was impossible to say which was which.

“Four legs good, two legs bad.”

“In the face of pain there are no heroes.”

Well of course he didn’t but I do think it fits especially when people like to tell me humans and animals are equal, now as for your quotes let me see you had 4 from Animal Farm and 3 from 1984 both of which were good books although I must admit I recently read Down and Out in Paris and London which I thought was very good. anyway I do like that you omitted the final version of the quote “4 legs good 2 legs bad” as the final version is “4 legs good 2 legs better” but that is near the end of course

And do you know what that means?

I know what I think it means, but why don’t you tell me you think it means first? As I’m sure your idea will be far more enlightened then mine

George Orwell was no fan of the human race. He hated snobs and dictators.

"4 legs good,2 legs better" meant humans should act better then animals. This is why he made the animals act like corrupt totalitarians at times using stupidity in place of intellect it is also why in chapter four boxer says: "'I have no wish to take life, not even human life.” He was trying to show the levels of humanity through the characters.

In The Road to Wigan Pier he said:

“A human being is primarily a bag for putting food into; the other functions and faculties may be more godlike, but in point of time they come afterwards. A man dies and is buried, and all his words and actions are forgotten, but the food he has eaten lives after him in the sound or rotten bones of his children. I think it could be plausibly argued that changes of diet are more important than changes of dynasty or even of religion....Yet it is curious how seldom the all-importance of food is recognized. You see statues everywhere to politicians, poets, bishops, but none to cooks or bacon-curers or market gardeners.”

To address your comment;

"It reminds me of that old saying "meat is murder! And murder tastes pretty dam good" lol, fortunately for me I won't have to worry about that fate as killing and eating humans is against the law in practically every country on the planet."

Although murder and eating human flesh is against the law that does not save anyone from the fate of an animal.

Alfred Packer was an American gold prospector and convicted cannibal in 1874. He murdered and ate 5 humans.

Jeffrey Dahmer was a convicted cannibal in 1994. He murdered and ate 15 humans.

Albert Fish was a convicted cannibal in 1936. He murdered and ate 15 humans.

Ukrainian Andrei Chikatilo was a convicted cannibal in 1994. He murdered and ate 50 humans.

Mauerova family of six were convicted cannibals in 2007. They murdered and ate 2 humans.

Armin Meiwes was a convicted cannibal in 2001. He murdered and ate 1 human.

Police estimate that around 10,000 people in Germany alone eat human flesh and many thousands around the world," said Rudolf Egg, a criminologist in the German central criminal service.

Right so you bring up six examples and that is supposed to show something? all it shows are that the odds of being killed and eaten by a cannibal are extremely low, hell I’d have more chance of being struck by lightning so in effect that’s a non-issue, also your copy and pasted quote from the German Criminologist was just kind of lazy I mean you didn’t post a link so I could check that claim, for all I know you made it up or he may be just another veggie fanatic who wants everybody to stop eating meat and so decided to scare people with such a claim. But lucky for me I did a Google search and found you to be lying as his exact quote from the book The Encyclopedia of Serial Killers (page 35) was “there are several hundred people with cannibalistic tendencies in Germany alone, and many thousands worldwide”

No odd is a low odd especially if you are the victim.

As Steinbeck said: “The best laid plans of mice and men often go astray.”

Although I have not read the book you mentioned: The Encyclopedia of Serial Killers, I own these. They are great books and the Doctor is mentioned in each one.

Here are your links: They are great books. The Doctor is mentioned in each one.

http://www.amazon.com/Born-Evil-Cannibalism-Serial-Murder/dp/0312978901/ref=sr_1_6?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1334848307&sr=1-6

http://www.amazon.com/Eat-Thy-Neighbour-History-Cannibalism/dp/0750943734/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1334848039&sr=8-1

http://www.amazon.com/History-Cannibalism-Cultures-Survival-Psychopaths/dp/0785821589/ref=sr_1_2?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1334848554&sr=1-2

So what do you think George Orwell meant? You never did say.

Incidently, those are not the only examples of established canibles. As you said, those were just six examples and between those six cannibals they only ate 93 humans.

Losmuertos,

Your Reply is on the last page. Post #138.1

1 Tim 2:12

Ol' Bobby is throwing out scriptures now. I like how Christians and their 38,000 sects can pick and choose what and how to interpret the sanctified knowledge of the Bible to suit their sin. Read James and listen to what he says about the tongue and how it is better to rip it out than lose everything...this applies to what the tongue tastes as well as what it says.

HippyBiker - I don't think that was the point he was trying to make.

The point he was trying to make is that he feels inadequate and inferior to women.

Or maybe he holds traditional beliefs. And honestly, none of us in this lifetime will know which of us is correct. It will be what it will be and we'll find out later on.

His traditional beliefs are against womens rights. These traditions must not be defended, accepted or condoned.

HippyBiker,

The truth behind all Bible interpretations are not conclusive nor are they an ultimate truth that all human beings agree on.

With an estimated population of 6.9 human beings on the planet, it would be ludicrous to take a handful human scholars and say that their meaning for something was absolute and correct when they had no direct knowledge of the issue they were explaining.

In the logical end, all meanings of the Bible are speculations and not direct knowledge.

If the Bible is indeed the one true ultimate guide to life then all life would agree on its doctrines and there would be no need for so many different translations. (The Great Bible, The Douay-Rheims Bible, The King James Bible, The New Living Translation, The Tanakh, The New International Version, God’s Word, The Darby Bible, The Book Of Mormon, The Quran and The New American Standard Bible, Gideons and The English version.)

All of these Bible's were translated from the same original scriptures yet they all belong to different religions that alter them to fit their needs.

There are no true experts or theologians. The Bible is all conjecture, hearsay, speculation and individual interpretation. None of us know the actual gospel truth. All we know is our own gospel truth for the authors of this document are dead and cannot verify the words.

Even the original scriptures are not intact, nor are they complete. Some are even lost and will never be found , while others were so old and badly worn that they either could not be read due to fading inks or they crumbled at the touch of human hands.

If you do not interoperate the Bible’s words in a compassionate and loving way, then you do not understand the truth behind God's and Christ’s actions.

The Bible was written by human beings, it is a story that relays one human theory concerning the development of creation.

Zero tolerance!

1 Tim 2:12

Romans 14:15 : If your brother is distressed because of what you eat, you are no longer acting in love. Do not by your eating destroy your brother for whom Christ died. Do not allow what you consider good to be spoken of as evil. For the kingdom of God is not a matter of eating and drinking, but of righteousness, peace and joy in the Holy Spirit, because anyone who serves Christ in this way is pleasing to God and approved by men. Let us therefore make every effort to do what leads to peace and to mutual edification. Do not destroy the work of God for the sake of food. All food is clean, but it is wrong for a man to eat anything that causes someone else to stumble. It is better not to eat meat or drink wine or to do anything else that will cause your brother to fall.

So whatever you believe about these things keep between yourself and God. Blessed is the man who does not condemn himself by what he approves. But the man who has doubts is condemned if he eats, because his eating is not from faith; and everything that does not come from faith is sin.

This statement clearly states that the strength of one's faith can drive them to sin. Killing any life is a sin. God tells them one must look beyond faith to make the right decisions even if those decisions may seem weak to others.

Wow, "Reverend" Marie, that's way out there. I guess you conveniently choose to ignore the part where God gives us dominion over the animals, for our sustenance and well-being. But then you also choose to ignore and disobey other parts of the Bible, as indicated by your moniker....Well, no sense sticking around and arguing with you, as I'm sure, YOU, and only you, are all-knowing and oh, so perfect..

God gave no one dominion. Man took dominion. Read your Bible.

BobW-3215303.

Although I understand you have a limited vocabulary, learn to speak when spoken to, for the scripture you keep quotong makes you appear inadequate and inferior to women.

And your reply makes you appear angry and defensive.

I am not angry, I am appalled and offended that a man of this century would DARE quote such a scripture.....This Annie, if you are a women, was meant for ALL women kind. If you are NOT offended you should be. This inadequate man needs much counseling.

BobW-3215303.

Sorry for the spelling error, the scripture you keep quoting makes you appear inadequate and inferior to women.

You see, Rev Marie, that's the problem I have. No one, and you seem to be a glaring example of it, can just accept another's belief. We all have to "fix" everyone else. As I said before, in this lifetime, we will not know which is correct. Maybe in the afterlife, we'll find BobW is right.

And yes, I am a woman, and I don't have to live with Bob, and I don't feel the need to "fix" him, so I am not offended. I am able to accept all manner of people - including your religious beliefs, with which I do not agree - because my parents taught me not to judge anyone. Enough said. I wish you all blessings.

BobW-3215303 is not putting fourth his beliefs, he is pretending to be superior to women and he is not.

Bob I assure you is not right. In fact he is VERY wrong it does not take the afterlife to realize he is a dominating prejudice man.

I do not place judgment on him, I speak truth. The truth stands alone bold and in defense of all those that speak it.

It is you I believe that is judging me.

Read the Bible Tim 2:12. It was this arrogant male mindset that made women stand up for their rights.

If you would like me to explain Bob's quote I shall.

Bob does indeed need fixing.

To clear up your judgment theory I must say that man must individually care what man does.

Alone each human being stands as their own judge and jury. It matters not what others think of them.

I do not care what others think of me, it is of greater value to care what you think of yourself.

Man must individually care what man thinks and does, for man alone must take responsibility for mans own actions.

What others think of an individual’s opinion is unimportant. All opinions are only valid to those who speak them and those that believe them as their own individual truth.

Maybe we should start slaughtering "unintelligent" humans as well? Oh, I forgot, we already have a system of "survival of the cruelest" that's in full swing... never mind.

I hear you HippyBiker.

Geesh.

My guess is that you are a Universalist. Am I right?

I am a Jeslibrian.

It's no shame...your life is now a great success and you will be rewarded eternally for your intelligence and kindness. Good for you.

Me not you :I didn't go to McDonald's.

I went to our local produce stand and bought a bunch of really fresh stuff-and then I went home and mixed it up with feta cheese and oil and vinegar. A yummy Greek salad topped off with stale garlic bread (AKA croutons).

Best cow I never ate!

Best cow I never ate!

Tell me about it. I think I ate some of that cow last night.

Cow does not appear to be gender specific.

A cat is a cat, a dog is a dog...(hamster, horse, bird) and the gender and species only seem to matter when it comes to eating them?

Technically speaking plants are living organisms as well. All the PETA types in the world do not seem to care about the plants and their feelings. There is this thing called a food chain, and the best equipped & evolved life-forms are at the top. Hogs are not the lovable creatures made popular in children's fables. Bovines are not the smartest of animals either.

As long as there is humans, animals will be slaughtered for consumption. It is not a crime, and they are not in danger of extinction by any means. I respect those who desire to remain vegetarians, because it is there choice, however, too many treat non-vegans as some form of ethical criminal. Everyone is entitled to their choice of diets, even if it involves consuming lesser lifeforms. Until vegans decide to stop consuming other lifeforms, they are actually being hypocritical by slaughtering leaves of lettuce, which is also a living creature which may or may not have feelings. A line must be drawn and assert humans as having greater value than a farm raised bovine.

ALL Killing is a sin.

It is only logical to assume that all life suffers when harmed, including plant life, but human and animal life suffers the most for human and animal life have a central nervous system and plants do not.

Because human beings cannot survive without killing other life form, they must be considerate to all the life forms that must suffer at their hands. Even when picking fruits and vegetables you must never damage and destroy the leaves and vines thus stressing the plants that are working so hard to produce the food that will grace your table.

Eliminating plagues and infections from human society is in no way equal to eliminating animals for food, sport, pleasure and survival. These Issues do not cross nor do they even remotely compare to the topic at hand. The fact is It is not necessary for Animals to suffer at human hands when plants, non flesh plants, fungi and protists are already suffering human survival.

It is a known fact that nature provides for all of our needs without the destruction of animal life.

The Earth created vegetation as a means of food, protein, clothing, shelter and medicinal sources to help maintain human lives.

The animal life on the planet cannot provide human beings with everything they need to survive on this earth but plant life can. Because plant life leaves us their seed, this allows human beings to replenish their species naturally, while allowing the natural progression of nature to evolve and thrive without the interference of population control, breeding, bloodshed and species extinction.

There is nothing wrong with eating meat except that it takes innocent life from the earth, sometimes in barbaric ways, it usurps other life forms rights, it causes great suffering, it is not necessary to eat meat and it puts human health and wellness at a risk as well as evolutionary design and environmental balance. One of the highest mortal sins in this world is the way the human race discards the needs of the environment and the Earth’s animal kingdom. This is an injustice of the greatest proportion.

Some hunters and meat eaters feel that nature put them on top of the food chain and because of this they say nature gave them her consent to kill.

The top of the food chain is actually the sun, which provides the energy for everything on the planet. Then comes all green plants because they make their own food. Every organism requiring air is dependent on plants for oxygen (which is the waste product from organic materials such as carbohydrates, from carbon dioxide, water, and inorganic salts and food (which is produced in the form of glucose through photosynthesis).

Plant eaters are the second largest biomass in an ecosystem and animals that eat blood flesh make up the third largest biomass

The last element of the food chain is bacteria and fungi that convert dead matter into gases such as carbon and nitrogen to be released back into the air, soil, or water. These are called decomposers. Decomposers are necessary since they recycle the nutrients to be used again by producers.

To simplify the food chain this is the list of most important to least.

The sun provides food for grass and vegetation,

The grass is eaten by a Herbivore,

The Herbivore is eaten by an Omnivore

The Omnivore is eaten by a Carnivore

The Carnivore is eaten by a Predator.

Animals are not human food. Human beings make them food. No human being has the authority to say what a species was put on this Earth for. The purpose of all life is not ours to judge. Those that feel animals are a food source are speaking from arrogance not intellect or factual knowledge.

All life has feelings an no other life form can prove for a fact that they do not.

The National Geographic states that the herbivore cow is an extremely intelligent Research has shown that cows clearly understand cause-and-effect and this is a sure sign of advanced cognitive abilities.

Cows can learn how to push a lever to operate a drinking fountain when they're thirsty or to press a button with their heads to release grain when they're hungry.

Cows have been documented to mourn at the deaths and separation from those they love, even shedding tears over their loss. The mother-calf bond is particularly strong, and there are countless reports of mother cows who continue to frantically call and search for their babies after the calves have been taken away and sold to veal or beef farms.

People that defend killing and cruelty would be on the top of the loon list.