peeriebryan Posted March 29, 2006 Report Share Posted March 29, 2006 "The Lobster Liberation Front" - have you ever heard the like. Read the article below to find out more....... http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/scotland/4858028.stm Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ally Posted March 29, 2006 Report Share Posted March 29, 2006 Lobsters have a soul to! Look at Pinchy, Homers overly pampered lobster in the Simpsons... Homer: *crying whilst devouring his former pet* Oh man, that's good. *sobs* Pass the butter. *cries again* Bart: Are you going to eat that all by yourself? Homer: *sniff* Uh-huh. Pinchy would've wanted it this way. *deep stuttering breath* My dear sweet Pinchy. (eats a large chunk of his now dead pet lobster) No more pain where you are now, boy...(snaps Pinchy in half, sucks out the meat) Oh, god, that's tasty. I wish Pinchy was here to enjoy this...Oh, Pinchy... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
turrifield Posted March 30, 2006 Report Share Posted March 30, 2006 I have no problem with killing animals for food and other resources provided it's done sustainably. I do object to deliberatley making animals suffer for the "benefit" of humans i.e. medical and cosmetic testing and intesive food production. So when animal rights activists (terrorists as the american government classes them) protest againts companies like Huntingdon Life Sciences I agree with them although I don't agree with some of the extreme tactics used. Lobster Liberation Front now that is also extreme! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
trout Posted March 30, 2006 Report Share Posted March 30, 2006 I have no problem with killing animals for food and other resources provided it's done sustainably. I do object to deliberatley making animals suffer for the "benefit" of humans i.e. medical and cosmetic testing and intesive food production. So when animal rights activists (terrorists as the american government classes them) protest againts companies like Huntingdon Life Sciences I agree with them although I don't agree with some of the extreme tactics used. Lobster Liberation Front now that is also extreme! I absolutely agree with animal testing in the name of progressing science - cosmetics are for no use other than the gratification of human egos! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Njugle Posted March 30, 2006 Report Share Posted March 30, 2006 RE; "LLF", i just about fell off my chair a year or so ago when it came on the news that activists were campaigning to ban angling because some university had identified that fish 'feel pain' HELLOoOO! If you swat a fly does it not bother the fly? If you stick a worm on a hook does it not wriggle like crazy? Oh, wait, that's what they were complaining about..... But seriously, cosmetic testing is absolutely abhorrent. Medicines? Well, i'm going to say something here that i don't support or beleive necessarily but, technically, shouldn't human drug testing be done on humans, or human tissue, or genetically engineered "guinea pigs" of human origin? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Styles Posted March 30, 2006 Report Share Posted March 30, 2006 I allways find it funny most folk think lobsters are red. When they are actually a dark purpley/blue. I hate animal activists as most seem to value animals over humans. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jimmy Jimson Posted March 30, 2006 Report Share Posted March 30, 2006 I allways find it funny most folk think lobsters are red. When they are actually a dark purpley/blue. I hate animal activists as most seem to value animals over humans. Or equal to humans? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
turrifield Posted March 30, 2006 Report Share Posted March 30, 2006 Why are the human species more valuable than other animal species? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pooks Posted March 30, 2006 Report Share Posted March 30, 2006 ... but, technically, shouldn't human drug testing be done on humans, or human tissue, or genetically engineered "guinea pigs" of human origin? We have prisons full of em! In fact I am surprised that there hasn't been a discussion on the Death Penalty yet. I am all for it providing that there is undoubtable, significant proven evidence. Perhaps even going to the extreme that the people have actually admitted the offences... Why lock these people up for the vast majority of their lives (in a prison block better equipped than many UK homes) when they have caused suffering to a great deal of lives? If we can't kill em then lets test em. As for Lobsters and animal rights folks. Some of it is understandable. A lot of it is over the top. Stick them in a field somewhere with high fences and they would soon be chewing the heads off of a baby Tammie Norie. It is all down to survival. Take dolphins for instance. Known to be one of the most clever, intelligent species on the planet. Didn't stop John West did it? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JAStewart Posted March 30, 2006 Report Share Posted March 30, 2006 PETA (People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals) piss me off because they are eco-terrorists. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HacksawDuggan Posted March 30, 2006 Report Share Posted March 30, 2006 Why are the human species more valuable than other animal species? Because we're the humans? I actually find it slightly disturbing that some people don't consider humans to be more important than animals. It's the natural order of things. All these conservationists worrying over all the changes happening to the planet without considering that we are part of nature too, species come and go all the time anyway and much of it is out of our hands.. Regarding cosmetic animal testing, as our Njugle said above, this is abhorrent and we're right to have banned iit, but anyone who can't support medical tests needs to rethink. We would be much worse off without it. A documentary I saw a while back stated that medical developments would be an estimated 40% of where we are today without the use of animal testing. I think anyone who would prefer this has slightly odd priorities. You never see too many animal rights activists volunteering themselves for clinical trials instead of animals. And quite rightly, I know i wouldn't like to test drugs for the first time ever. Look at the recent case where several men had a serious adverse reaction to a drugs trial. Without initial tests on animals this would be a much more common occurance. Certainly I wish there was not a need for this cruelty, but as it stands there is, and the good of our species must take precedence over others. Anyway, there are plenty of species I'd be quite happy to be clear of. You get good animals and bad animals. Good Animals PandasKoalas (look cute but I hear they're fierce and stinky)Those monkeys in Gibralta that steal folks fagscomedy dogs such as basset hounds and sausage dogs Bad Animals Big spiders and bugsSnakes, poisonous things in general. You can't trust 'emScorpions. No place in my boots or in this worldCrocodiles and other things that'll snaffle you I would probably include sharks here as well, but i think you should just stay the hell out of the water or you'll get whats coming to you. Divers and surfers. We'll get rid of them instead. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
turrifield Posted March 31, 2006 Report Share Posted March 31, 2006 Because we're humans? is a pathetic answer, to say that environmental destruction is natural is of course true but to claim that it is out of our hands is just plain wrong. The planet we depend on for our survival is changing rapidly due to human actions. We could well be the first animal(on this planet) to cause our own extiction and what in most rediculous is that we can see it coming but we choose to do nothing about it. Most important animal I don't think so, stupid, selfish, arogant. As for good and bad animals I take it thats a joke. You mention sharks as a "bad" animal but you don't mention bees, you are more likley to be killed by a bee than a shark but without bees there would be no polination therefore no food. You cannot say that one animal is better or more important than another we depend on all species for our survival. So we should protect them like we protect ourselves. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HacksawDuggan Posted March 31, 2006 Report Share Posted March 31, 2006 Keep da bees for their honey. I'd pinch their stingers though! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JustMe Posted March 31, 2006 Report Share Posted March 31, 2006 turrifield wrote You mention sharks as a "bad" animal but you don't mention bees, you are more likely to be killed by a bee than a shark But much more likely to be killed by a human. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JAStewart Posted March 31, 2006 Report Share Posted March 31, 2006 Name 6 reason we're better than chickens? you cant. A chicken doesn't join a drug gang, a chicken isn't racist and when a chicken goes home, he doesn't beat his hen. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.