12' Python kills two year old [Archive]

spaceboots06

Jul 2, 2009, 12:23 PM

OXFORD, Fla. (AP) - A 12-foot pet Burmese python broke out of a terrarium and strangled a 2-year-old girl in her bedroom Wednesday at a central Florida home, authorities said.

Shaiunna Hare was already dead when paramedics arrived at about 10 a.m., Lt. Bobby Caruthers of the Sumter County Sheriff's Office said.

Charles Jason Darnell, the snake's owner and the boyfriend of Shaiunna's mother, discovered the snake missing from its terrarium and went to the girl's room, where he found it on the girl and bite marks on her head, Caruthers said. Darnell, 32, stabbed the snake until he was able to pry the child away.

"The baby's dead!" a sobbing caller from the house screamed to a 911 dispatcher in a recording. "Our stupid snake got out in the middle of the night and strangled the baby."

Authorities did not identify the caller and removed the person's name from the recording.

"She got out of the cage last night and got into the baby's crib and strangled her to death," the caller said.

Authorities removed the snake from the home Wednesday afternoon after obtaining a search warrant. Once outside the small, tan home, bordered by cow pastures, the snake was placed in a bag then inside a dog crate. The snake was still alive.

Darnell did not have a permit for the snake, which would be a second-degree misdemeanor, said Joy Hill, a spokeswoman with the Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission. He has not been charged, but Caruthers said investigators were looking into whether there was child neglect or if any other laws were broken.

Hill said the snake will be placed with someone who has a permit, pending an investigation into the girl's death.

http://www.knx1070.com/12-Foot-Python-Strangles-2-Year-Old-Girl/4718426

http://www.wftv.com/news/19915016/detail.html

There's really not much for me to say that the articles don't. I just think having a python and a baby in the same house is an accident waiting to happen.

12' python eating a goose
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EFCqFHjmQT4
""""""""""""""""""""" rabbit
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=F6gZE0MdaVY&feature=channel

jessica.

Jul 2, 2009, 12:25 PM

Agreed. Snakes + babies ... = Fail sauce.

spaceboots06

Jul 2, 2009, 12:28 PM

Agreed. Snakes + babies ... = Fail sauce.

Yeah, the guy didn't even legally own the snake. I don't know what is going through people's heads sometimes. :confused::confused::confused:

Sdashiki

Jul 2, 2009, 12:39 PM

Central Florida...with cows all around...baby mama...and her boyfriend...and his snake...

Sounds like C.FL to me.

:rolleyes:

Abstract

Jul 2, 2009, 12:40 PM

12' python eating a goose
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EFCqFHjmQT4

I watched around 2 minutes of that. :o

Couldn't they just feed the python something else? Surely a goose isn't a part of a python's natural diet anyway.

TuffLuffJimmy

Jul 2, 2009, 12:42 PM

I watched around 2 minutes of that. :o

Couldn't they just feed the python something else? Surely a goose isn't a part of a python's natural diet anyway.

like what? Nuts and berries?

bc008

Jul 2, 2009, 12:44 PM

I watched around 2 minutes of that. :o

Couldn't they just feed the python something else? Surely a goose isn't a part of a python's natural diet anyway.

I agree! I really dont understand how that doesnt fit under animal cruelty.. Or is that only Cats/Dogs?

This gives a bad reputation to Snakes when it was the owners fault..

eawmp1

Jul 2, 2009, 12:44 PM

Central Florida...with cows all around...baby mama...and her boyfriend...and his snake...

Sounds like C.FL to me.

:rolleyes:

LOL - you must live here also. It's like the Truman Show, just populated with Jerry Springer show rejects. ;)

spaceboots06

Jul 2, 2009, 12:46 PM

I agree! I really dont understand how that doesnt fit under animal cruelty.. Or is that only Cats/Dogs?

This gives a bad reputation to Snakes when it was the owners fault..

I know almost nothing about this topic but the goose is out of it's misery within five minutes. That's not too cruel if you ask me.

bc008

Jul 2, 2009, 12:49 PM

I know almost nothing about this topic but the goose is out of it's misery within five minutes. That's not too cruel if you ask me.

I agree that its good that the goose didn't suffer, but isn't that like saying I can go and kill my dog quickly and not have any repercussions?

arkitect

Jul 2, 2009, 12:51 PM

I know almost nothing about this topic but the goose is out of it's misery within five minutes. That's not too cruel if you ask me.

Five minutes? God that is way too long.
And everyone's on about the goose. What about the poor bunny in the other video? :(

If you're going to be eaten I wonder if it wouldn't be better getting chewed up by a large carnivore — lion or tiger? At least with those massive jaws you'll be out of your misery pretty quickly.

Pythons and other constrictors on the other hand. :eek: You'll have a very long time to consider the full horror as you get sloowly squeezed and then swallowed. Bleeegh.
*looks under table*
Snakes creep me out like nothing else. :o

TuffLuffJimmy

Jul 2, 2009, 12:51 PM

I agree that its good that the goose didn't suffer, but isn't that like saying I can go and kill my dog quickly and not have any repercussions?

There are certain animals and certain situations that make things like that legal. The goose was food, not a pet or a wild animal.

bc008

Jul 2, 2009, 12:54 PM

There are certain animals and certain situations that make things like that legal. The goose was food, not a pet or a wild animal.

Okay I guess that makes sense, but I wonder where that guy bought that goose to be considered "food".. blech

spaceboots06

Jul 2, 2009, 01:10 PM

Five minutes? God that is way too long.
And everyone's on about the goose. What about the poor bunny in the other video? :(

If you're going to be eaten I wonder if it wouldn't be better getting chewed up by a large carnivore — lion or tiger? At least with those massive jaws you'll be out of your misery pretty quickly.

Pythons and other constrictors on the other hand. :eek: You'll have a very long time to consider the full horror as you get sloowly squeezed and then swallowed. Bleeegh.
*looks under table*
Snakes creep me out like nothing else. :o

That snake specifically rejects frozen food. I would rather see an animal die relatively quickly versus starving to death!

Okay I guess that makes sense, but I wonder where that guy bought that goose to be considered "food".. blech

Yeah, I was wondering the same thing... :confused:

Oh, I'm taken aback. http://www.mcmurrayhatchery.com/index.html
I think that's supposed to be food for humans though... meaning an instant death via knife I guess.

iObama

Jul 2, 2009, 01:39 PM

Why don't you guys stop whining about animal rights and talk about the actual subject of a HUMAN - 2 years old, I might add - being killed.

EDIT: Nevermind. Just watched the video. Talk about both. ;)

Cabbit

Jul 2, 2009, 01:45 PM

iObama

Jul 2, 2009, 01:50 PM

Cabbit

Jul 2, 2009, 01:52 PM

Are you ****ing kidding me? You're disgusting.

How would you like a sheep to start stomping you when you are in the middle of eating a lamb chop. Please get real, food is food. You would rather the child went in a coffin to rot away to nothing.

iObama

Jul 2, 2009, 01:53 PM

How would you like a sheep to start stomping you when you are in the middle of eating a lamb chop. Please get real, food is food.

Not when it's your two year old daughter. You're just sick.

TuffLuffJimmy

Jul 2, 2009, 01:56 PM

:eek::eek::eek:

Jen, the child should be laid to rest. It doesn't matter how it died.

Cabbit

Jul 2, 2009, 01:58 PM

Not when it's your two year old daughter. You're just sick.

Sorry but be it myself or a child even my own if it's dead there is nothing to save, how would you like to be cut open after you finished a meal to retrieve bits of chicken, or as you placed the fork in your mouth some animal rights activist starts hitting you with a spade.

If a animal kills you, your dead nothing left your food. No good will in the world will safe you from that fate and sense tells you to let the victor have its prise. Yes it is difficult when it is a child of your own species but in the same light we kill lambs and other young animals for food.

spaceboots06

Jul 2, 2009, 01:58 PM

I think the owner didn't properly care for the animal

1.) By not feeding it enough

2.) By stabbing multiple times it afterwards

I call that animal abuse.

jessica.

Jul 2, 2009, 01:58 PM

I know almost nothing about this topic but the goose is out of it's misery within five minutes. That's not too cruel if you ask me.

5 minutes is a long time when you're being eaten alive.

Don't ask me how I know.

I recently watched a snake eat a rat in person. It scared the ***** out of me though I understand it is natural order. It's just creepy.

Cabbit

Jul 2, 2009, 02:00 PM

:eek::eek::eek:

Jen, the child should be laid to rest. It doesn't matter how it died.

To become worm food or to become snake food, where is the difference here, are you saying every time you kill a lamb for your meal it should be laid to rest instead of eaten.

spaceboots06

Jul 2, 2009, 02:00 PM

spaceboots06

Jul 2, 2009, 02:01 PM

To become worm food or to become snake food, where is the difference here, are you saying every time you kill a lamb for your meal it should be laid to rest instead of eaten.

Although I do agree with you in terms of not wanting to be stomped out by Sheep while eating a meal I don't agree with you on this one. I don't believe in God or anything but I think a proper burial would be appropriate.

Abstract

Jul 2, 2009, 02:01 PM

I know almost nothing about this topic but the goose is out of it's misery within five minutes. That's not too cruel if you ask me.

5 minutes of being killed is a long time.

It's like the feeling of drowning, except it lasts 5 minutes and the physically struggle also causes more pain. :o

Cabbit

Jul 2, 2009, 02:02 PM

5 minutes is a long time when you're being eaten alive.

Don't ask me how I know.

I recently watched a snake eat a rat in person. It scared the ***** out of me though I understand it is natural order. It's just creepy.

It is unsettling but far less unsettling that watching a cat toss the thing about many times and take bites out of it before eating. At least with a snake its cold and to the point no nonsense. Your crushed then eaten and usually your dead before you'll see the mouth dislodge.

spaceboots06

Jul 2, 2009, 02:04 PM

5 minutes of being killed is a long time.

It's like the feeling of drowning, except it lasts 5 minutes and the physically struggle also causes more pain. :o

I'll quote Hemmingway here,

Hemmingway on death: "The marvelous thing is that it's painless," he said. "That's how you know when it starts."

Abstract

Jul 2, 2009, 02:04 PM

If a animal kills you, your dead nothing left your food. No good will in the world will safe you from that fate and sense tells you to let the victor have its prise. Yes it is difficult when it is a child of your own species but in the same light we kill lambs and other young animals for food.

I kind of understand what you're saying, but I'd rather let the mother decide whether she wants her child to have a proper burial.

MacDawg

Jul 2, 2009, 02:04 PM

For such a snake to attack a human of any age at that size is rather odd that type of snake only needs to eat every few weeks so i would consider this a neglect issue by the owner.

Snakes gotta eat and if the child was dead the snake should have been left to finish its meal, just because the prey is a human, if its a dead human then it is food same as any other animal.

Keeping a large snake like this requires the owner to take responsibility for it, that requires regular feeding, cleaning, vet treatments for lice and worms and a adequate environment suitable to the size and power of the snake which this species i believe gets large enough to require its own room like a reticulated python.

How would you like a sheep to start stomping you when you are in the middle of eating a lamb chop. Please get real, food is food. You would rather the child went in a coffin to rot away to nothing.

Sorry but be it myself or a child even my own if it's dead there is nothing to save, how would you like to be cut open after you finished a meal to retrieve bits of chicken, or as you placed the fork in your mouth some animal rights activist starts hitting you with a spade.

If a animal kills you, your dead nothing left your food. No good will in the world will safe you from that fate and sense tells you to let the victor have its prise. Yes it is difficult when it is a child of your own species but in the same light we kill lambs and other young animals for food.

You are entitled to your opinion... even if it is totally whacked
Just stay the hell away from me and my family

Woof, Woof - Dawg http://homepage.mac.com/k.j.vinson/pawprint.gif

arkitect

Jul 2, 2009, 02:05 PM

At least with a snake its cold and to the point no nonsense. Your crushed then eaten and usually your dead before you'll see the mouth dislodge.

They don't have many pythons up in Scotland, do they? ;)

The snake may be "cold", but you or whatever is being eaten most certainly isn't.

jessica.

Jul 2, 2009, 02:06 PM

It is unsettling but far less unsettling that watching a cat toss the thing about many times and take bites out of it before eating. At least with a snake its cold and to the point no nonsense. Your crushed then eaten and usually your dead before you'll see the mouth dislodge.

Yes I get that, though my cat has never been outside so he's innocent and he prefers to lick his own balls.

That said, during my rat eating viewing the rat screamed. It felt it ... trust me.

arkitect

Jul 2, 2009, 02:06 PM

I'll quote Hemmingway here,

Hemmingway on death: "The marvelous thing is that it's painless," he said. "That's how you know when it starts."

And Ernest knew this, how exactly?
By watching bulls being slowly stabbed to death in Spain?
Buffalo trampling people in East Africa?

How exactly did he come up with that gem, and why do you think it's true?
:confused:

xUKHCx

Jul 2, 2009, 02:08 PM

Snakes gotta eat and if the child was dead the snake should have been left to finish its meal, just because the prey is a human, if its a dead human then it is food same as any other animal.

Erm

When Darnell found the snake wrapped around the girl, he stabbed it until he could pry it off the child while others called 911. Another snake, reportedly a 6-foot boa constrictor, was also in the house.

This suggests that the child was still in a believably alive state when they found them so to not attempt rescue would wrong.

Also from an authority standpoint having the child's remains so you can confirm it was the snake that killed the child rather than the parents with an attempted cover up.

As to the funeral arranges they should be sorted out at a later date rather right there and then in the emotional **** storm of a tragic event.

Abstract

Jul 2, 2009, 02:09 PM

Oh, it's true alright. The quote is basically saying from the day we are born, we slowly begin to die for the next 80 years. :)

Hemmingway or not, the quote itself is irrelevant, and just clouds the issue. ;) I hope that if anybody at this forum were to die of an unnatural cause, the excruciating pain would last far less than 5 minutes. Instantaneous would be desirable.

jessica.

Jul 2, 2009, 02:10 PM

Oh but if the snake is hungry and it has already eaten half the baby then may as well save on funeral costs and let it finish. That is, according to babyjenniferLB.

Cabbit

Jul 2, 2009, 02:11 PM

Although I do agree with you in terms of not wanting to be stomped out by Sheep while eating a meal I don't agree with you on this one. I don't believe in God or anything but I think a proper burial would be appropriate.

A simple tomb stone would suffice, and the snake will release the remains and being that it was a human the usual is for it to be regurgitated especially with diaper in toe those chemicals do not react well with acids and humans have always been a poor choice for any animal.

This animal must have been truly starving to want to eat that child and to treat it as if it is in the wrong or should not get its meal is wrong. One must try and remember all this fanciful heaven and hell are meant for the soul not the body. Once the mind is dead why devote all this time to the empty shell. Once dead if you died by an attack of an animal then you are food, ofc if this animal is meant to be around people then that status should be re-examined as is done with dogs that attack humans.
Though in this case the animal just required food and went for the obvious target, it went though the lengths of escaping then picking and tracking a stubble victim killing and then was in the process of eating.
The parents of this child never heard of locking the snakes door, locking the childs door or even closing the door never mind the use of a child monitor, a child getting bitten and squeezed will cry bloody loudly as snakes don't use fancy gags on there prey.

MacDawg

Jul 2, 2009, 02:13 PM

How would you like a sheep to start stomping you when you are in the middle of eating a lamb chop. Please get real, food is food. You would rather the child went in a coffin to rot away to nothing.

If the sheep thinks it can do it... bring it on...

Woof, Woof - Dawg http://homepage.mac.com/k.j.vinson/pawprint.gif

Sun Baked

Jul 2, 2009, 02:13 PM

Oh but if the snake is hungry and it has already eaten half the baby then may as well save on funeral costs and let it finish. That is, according to babyjenniferLB.

Why not wait a little longer for some clean bones and fertilizer for the garden?

spaceboots06

Jul 2, 2009, 02:14 PM

Oh but if the snake is hungry and it has already eaten half the baby then may as well save on funeral costs and let it finish. That is, according to babyjenniferLB.

I don't own a snake myself but can't snakes only eat either an entire thing or none of it at all? I don't think they can take bites.

Cabbit

Jul 2, 2009, 02:15 PM

Oh but if the snake is hungry and it has already eaten half the baby then may as well save on funeral costs and let it finish. That is, according to babyjenniferLB.

No you can still have a funeral you do it after a solider has been blown to bits after murdering many others in the name of god or country.
It is what many cultures refer to as the soul of the person you say good bye to at a funeral not the carcass.

jessica.

Jul 2, 2009, 02:18 PM

I don't own a snake myself but can't snakes only eat either an entire thing or none of it at all? I don't think they can take bites.
It is one bite but it takes time to move the thing down the body of the snake. It's not a *gulp* and it's gone.
No you can still have a funeral you do it after a solider has been blown to bits after murdering many others in the name of god or country.
It is what many cultures refer to as the soul of the person you say good bye to at a funeral not the carcass.

I understand what you're saying but to allow the snake to finish the job doesn't seem right either. This is little more than saying goodbye to their soul.

And soldiers who died in combat signed up to fight and while that does not mean they should die or deserve to, I'm not too sure the baby thought ... hey fuk yeah! A snake. When I go, I'm going to let it eat me.

MacDawg

Jul 2, 2009, 02:20 PM

Cabbit

Jul 2, 2009, 02:20 PM

I don't own a snake myself but can't snakes only eat either an entire thing or none of it at all? I don't think they can take bites.

They bite to kill or paralyse the prey like a cat does and to get the initial grip wile they wind the coils. When i refer to half eaten it is more appropriately partially swallowed or prepared for swallowing.
Which for a snake may take minutes to hours depending on the prey item, shadowing something wider than your mouth and possibly half the size of you is not a easy task and snakes can take even days to finish this process until of course some do gooder comes along and sees pigs legs and thinks the thing has eaten a human and cuts it open as is the case in many cases of humans killing these animals just after they have eaten and are essentially defenceless in the hope that the possible human is still alive or for some burial.

jessica.

Jul 2, 2009, 02:23 PM

Cabbit

Jul 2, 2009, 02:24 PM

Datellne - Central Florida Court

Boyfriend: "But your honor, me and the baby's momma thought it would cruel to stop this 12' python from eating the baby... after all, you gotta eat, right? I mean, it was just doing what comes naturally, and after all, the baby was gonna die and just rot anyway... what a waste."

Judge: "Are you ********ing kidding me!"

Woof, Woof - Dawg http://homepage.mac.com/k.j.vinson/pawprint.gif

I suppose in our view a judge would see it that way and there is also the circumstances involved here that suggest to me more that the snake was starved and given a free path to the child. These animals really don't like eating humans and are more than happy to be provided food even the large reticulated pythons do not really eat humans and in captivity associate us as easy meal providers not easy meals.

MacDawg

Jul 2, 2009, 02:30 PM

I suppose in our view a judge would see it that way and there is also the circumstances involved here that suggest to me more that the snake was starved and given a free path to the child. These animals really don't like eating humans and are more than happy to be provided food even the large reticulated pythons do not really eat humans and in captivity associate us as easy meal providers not easy meals.

I am not for randomly killing snakes... well, erm, yes I am really :o

But I don't think the snake should be given a free pass because the baby's momma's boyfriend was a dipsh*t for keeping and mistreating an illegal 12' python in the house with the baby.

If the python wants to catch and eat a pig out in the wild... go for it...
Now I understand the python didn't choose to be in the house... tough luck on that one

Charge the boyfriend... kill the snake... bury the baby... send the momma to therapy

Woof, Woof - Dawg http://homepage.mac.com/k.j.vinson/pawprint.gif

Cabbit

Jul 2, 2009, 02:40 PM

I am not for randomly killing snakes... well, erm, yes I am really :o

But I don't think the snake should be given a free pass because the baby's momma's boyfriend was a dipsh*t for keeping and mistreating an illegal 12' python in the house with the baby.

If the python wants to catch and eat a pig out in the wild... go for it...
Now I understand the python didn't choose to be in the house... tough luck on that one

Charge the boyfriend... kill the snake... bury the baby... send the momma to therapy

Woof, Woof - Dawg http://homepage.mac.com/k.j.vinson/pawprint.gif

Why should the snake die, it done nothing wrong here. It killed to eat, it did not kill for the fun of it.
And the boyfriend and mother should be charged for both animal and child neglect. This situation would not have occurred with proper care to both parties involved here and the issue is to some dips big snakes look appealing because there "cool" when like with most animals they should learn to look after the smaller more tame version before venturing into man killer size.
This type of snake would require its own room that is a full room in the house and to be fed some large prey items as it grows, it is a common case of the owner being out of his depth and his partner the mother of the child is responsible as well.
Flipping heck if i dinny feed my cats at 5pm on the dot i hear it all day from my partner and slithers(ball python 2 foot) needs his weekly mouse, and here's the thing these large snakes eat every week or month or some of the much larger ones only eat every 6 month so it is pretty major neglect there to not feed it past its usual feeding time as most snake owners that have picked up a book will tell you, you must try feeding it before it is due a feeding to gauge apatite.

redwarrior

Jul 2, 2009, 02:43 PM

Why should the snake die <snip>
Any animal that kills a human should be killed, humanely, IMO.

spaceboots06

Jul 2, 2009, 02:47 PM

jb1280

Jul 2, 2009, 02:51 PM

Any animal that kills a human should be killed, humanely, IMO.

Or any "domesticated" animal that attacks a human. Should the pitbull that attacks a person be put down? Yes.

It's a bad situation for all parties involved, but what should happen.

On the subject as exotic snakes as pets - Animal domestication is a rather long process and owning a python is a particularly short-sided judgment on all accounts.

MacDawg

Jul 2, 2009, 02:51 PM

No, but really, the snake was just hungry.

Understood

Changes nothing

Woof, Woof - Dawg http://homepage.mac.com/k.j.vinson/pawprint.gif

spaceboots06

Jul 2, 2009, 02:55 PM

Understood

Changes nothing

Woof, Woof - Dawg http://homepage.mac.com/k.j.vinson/pawprint.gif

Okay, let me expand.

I don't think anyone holding authority in terms of executing living things or not would think that it's acceptable to sentence an animal to death because it ate a child.

Actually, I'm not sure anymore.

I was looking at your post and the paw print made me think about aggressive dogs. Do they put them to sleep if they've "committed a crime"? Or do they put them down to sleep because it's not in their nature to act that way... and it is in a python's nature to act that way... I mean, you can change a dog's behavior to be "good" but pythons will always be "bad" because that's what they do.

Sorry if I wasn't too clear in what I wrote just now, I can't think of another way to write it.

Cabbit

Jul 2, 2009, 02:56 PM

Or any "domesticated" animal that attacks a human. Should the pitbull that attacks a person be put down? Yes.

It's a bad situation for all parties involved, but what should happen.

On the subject as exotic snakes as pets - Animal domestication is a rather long process and owning a python is a particularly short-sided judgment on all accounts.

There is a difference here mammals like pitbull dogs and bears once they have a taste for a animal like human or similar they will seek it out. Snakes go for the easiest prey item to swallow regardless, though have a preference to the inbuilt prey items such as mice for many species.

My point being that this snake has no interest in human prey items just the child was there and the animal was starving, with given care and correct feeding this animal would not attack a human nor have any interest in attacking a human again.

redwarrior

Jul 2, 2009, 02:58 PM

There is a difference here mammals like pitbull dogs and bears once they have a taste for a animal like human or similar they will seek it out. Snakes go for the easiest prey item to swallow regardless, though have a preference to the inbuilt prey items such as mice for many species.

My point being that this snake has no interest in human prey items just the child was there and the animal was starving, with given care and correct feeding this animal would not attack a human nor have any interest in attacking a human again.
I wouldn't care. I would've killed it with my bare hands before anyone had the opportunity to "rule" on it. But that's just me.

MacDawg

Jul 2, 2009, 02:58 PM

I don't think anyone holding authority in terms of executing living things or not would think that it's acceptable to sentence an animal to death because it ate a child.

I find it hard to fathom anyone NOT thinking it is acceptable to kill an animal that ate a child.

My point being that this snake has no interest in human prey items just the child was there and the animal was starving, with given care and correct feeding this animal would not attack a human nor have any interest in attacking a human again.

Finally something we agree on

But that does not change the fact that the snake killed the baby and you advocated just letting it finish it's meal... 'cause that's what snakes do.

Woof, Woof - Dawg http://homepage.mac.com/k.j.vinson/pawprint.gif

bartelby

Jul 2, 2009, 03:00 PM

I find it hard to fathom anyone NOT thinking it is acceptable to kill an animal that ate a child.

Woof, Woof - Dawg http://homepage.mac.com/k.j.vinson/pawprint.gif

It's an animal, it has no morals.
Just instinct to eat.

rdowns

Jul 2, 2009, 03:02 PM

Snakes gotta eat and if the child was dead the snake should have been left to finish its meal, just because the prey is a human, if its a dead human then it is food same as any other animal.

Are you effin' kidding me? What the hell kind of warped mind would even think of that let alone conclude that? Could be the most twisted comment I've ever seen in the forums.

MacDawg

Jul 2, 2009, 03:02 PM

It's an animal, it has no morals.
Just instinct to eat.

I am not passing judgement on its moral guilt or innocence

Woof, Woof - Dawg http://homepage.mac.com/k.j.vinson/pawprint.gif

bartelby

Jul 2, 2009, 03:04 PM

I am not passing judgement on its moral guilt or innocence

Woof, Woof - Dawg http://homepage.mac.com/k.j.vinson/pawprint.gif

If people put themselves and others in danger how is this the animal's fault?

MacDawg

Jul 2, 2009, 03:05 PM

If people put themselves and others in danger how is this the animal's fault?

I am not saying it is the python's fault

Woof, Woof - Dawg http://homepage.mac.com/k.j.vinson/pawprint.gif

jessica.

Jul 2, 2009, 03:21 PM

If people put themselves and others in danger how is this the animal's fault?

It's not. But the point is (my point at least) the python should have never been in that house with that child.

spaceboots06

Jul 2, 2009, 03:38 PM

Image to illustrate a 22 foot that would still not consider a human a meal, were not very advertising you know.

Yeah, it must be super hard to digest shoes, lmao...

LizKat

Jul 2, 2009, 03:55 PM

It's an animal, it has no morals.
Just instinct to eat.

As humans we have our own instinct (as some other animals --notably elephants-- also have) to protect our dying and even our dead young, if only for a little while before we turn back to our daily routines.

Of course the snake acted on instinct. It suffered from ravening hunger and applied itself successfully to escaping, hunting and killing something it meant to eat. But it is not human instinct to let any wild animal "finish off" a human being attacked as a food source. And human instinct must trump snake instinct when it comes to resolving what to do after one discovers one's dead child in the mouth of a live snake. To the snake, the child was food. To a human, the child was a dead human being and absolutely not food for a pet snake.

So human instinct dictated to take the child's body from the snake. Our social mores and usual rituals commemorating a death among us would also dictate taking the child's body from the snake. That's what happened. Doing that was as right as anything in the aftermath of that grotesque incident could have been made right.

Not feeding the snake was wrong. Not securing it properly was also wrong. The snake was not wrong to kill the child. But the man was not wrong to seize the dead child from the snake.

Cabbit

Jul 2, 2009, 03:55 PM

Yeah, it must be super hard to digest shoes, lmao...

It's actually the lack of anything but bone on most of us, or the extreme obesity of others.
Most animals want something with a bit of meat on it including snakes. Why put the energy into swallowing a large pray item with very little substance only to do it again a week later when you could eat a large prey item like a deer with a lot of substance and not need to eat for the next 6 months.

killerrobot

Jul 2, 2009, 04:08 PM

As far as deaths go, I would put python strangulation up there with drowning to death as the worst way to go.

Poor kid. Poor mom. Poor snake. Poor boyfriend. That's how I would rank my empathy for those involved.

bobr1952

Jul 2, 2009, 04:09 PM

Central Florida...with cows all around...baby mama...and her boyfriend...and his snake...

Sounds like C.FL to me.

:rolleyes:

<sigh> How true....

Dagless

Jul 2, 2009, 05:14 PM

Any animal that kills a human should be killed, humanely, IMO.

See I don't think so. An animal can be trained to some degree to not harm a human. But if an animal is hungry they're only acting on natural impulses and IMO that isn't a reason to kill an animal. It'd be like killing a human for acting humanely.
Should animals put us on trial for eating them?

It's a sad story but the blame completely lies with the father on this one. Chuck the animal in the wild if it has the right instincts, if not put it in a sanctuary somewhere it belongs.

But anyways. Snakes don't crush their meals do they? I thought they tightened their coils to cause a cardiac arrest? And that they only choke if they get around the neck.

Cabbit

Jul 2, 2009, 05:24 PM

See I don't think so. An animal can be trained to some degree to not harm a human. But if an animal is hungry they're only acting on natural impulses and IMO that isn't a reason to kill an animal. It'd be like killing a human for acting humanely.
Should animals put us on trial for eating them?

It's a sad story but the blame completely lies with the father on this one. Chuck the animal in the wild if it has the right instincts, if not put it in a sanctuary somewhere it belongs.

But anyways. Snakes don't crush their meals do they? I thought they tightened their coils to cause a cardiac arrest? And that they only choke if they get around the neck.

They choke till the prey is to weak to resist, in most cases with the larger animals there weight crushes there bones.

rick3000

Jul 2, 2009, 05:25 PM

Sad story, but obviously the parents aren't that smart. Snakes and babies don't mix.

But anyways. Snakes don't crush their meals do they? I thought they tightened their coils to cause a cardiac arrest? And that they only choke if they get around the neck.
It depending on the snake, different species kill differently. Some cause cardiac arrest with venom, others (aka - constrictors) crush their prey first.

dukebound85

Jul 2, 2009, 05:31 PM

Snakes gotta eat and if the child was dead the snake should have been left to finish its meal, just because the prey is a human, if its a dead human then it is food same as any other animal.

WTF thats messed up. There is NO way I would let a snake eat my child if it had already killed it. My child would DESERVE a proper burial.

and yes, I do have a python

redwarrior

Jul 2, 2009, 05:33 PM

WTF thats messed up. There is NO way I would let a snake eat my child if it had already killed it. My child would DESERVE a proper burial.

and yes, I do have a python
If you were in this position, heaven forbid, what would you do to the snake?

Dagless

Jul 2, 2009, 05:35 PM

They choke till the prey is to weak to resist, in most cases with the larger animals there weight crushes there bones.

Ah, duly noted.

dukebound85

Jul 2, 2009, 05:36 PM

If you were in this position, heaven forbid, what would you do to the snake?

I'd kill it

Just like I would kill a dog that would ever bite my child...old yeller style

My sympathy for animals only lasts until they inflict harm

With that said, my python is only 2 feet long and only can eat mice. There is no reason at all to own a 12' snake.......only asking for trouble like this ESPECIALLY when you have a baby

redwarrior

Jul 2, 2009, 05:37 PM

I'd kill it

Just like I would kill a dog that would ever bite my child...old yeller style

My sympathy for animals only lasts until they inflict harm
I agree with you. It's about the sanctity of human life, not punishment for an animal.

rick3000

Jul 2, 2009, 05:43 PM

Cassie

Jul 2, 2009, 05:48 PM

I'd kill it

Just like I would kill a dog that would ever bite my child...old yeller style

My sympathy for animals only lasts until they inflict harm

With that said, my python is only 2 feet long and only can eat mice. There is no reason at all to own a 12' snake.......only asking for trouble like this ESPECIALLY when you have a baby

I agree with you. It's about the sanctity of human life, not punishment for an animal.

I'm having trouble understanding why a lot of people think they're "above" animals in terms of life value. Could someone explain this to me?

EDIT: beaten by the above poster, but my question remains.

dukebound85

Jul 2, 2009, 05:48 PM

I'm curious how you all would feel about a hunter that is killed after shooting an animal? Someone shoots a bear, and another bear kills them. It's the same situation but the human provoked the attack.
Are people any more important than animals?

yes, people are more important than any animal

I think the snake was acting on instinct and the parents are the one at fault for being such idiots.

it was and the parents are at fault

snake needs to be put to rest however. killing a human is a death sentence for any animal...instinct or not

just as lions that kill are shot, so should this snake

everything any animal does is "instinct"

I'm having trouble understanding why a lot of people think they're "above" animals in terms of life value. Could someone explain this to me?

are you really being serious?

rick3000

Jul 2, 2009, 05:56 PM

I guess some people like animals more than others. Is a serial killer really worth more than a loyal dog or any other animal?

(I honestly don't care, but I am interested to see what people think about this.)

redwarrior

Jul 2, 2009, 05:57 PM

I'm having trouble understanding why a lot of people think they're "above" animals in terms of life value. Could someone explain this to me?

I believe the Bible. (Yes, I went there:D.) I am above animals. I eat animals, they don't eat me.:cool:

MacDawg

Jul 2, 2009, 05:58 PM

Are people any more important than animals?

Yes

I think the snake was acting on instinct and the parents are the one at fault for being such idiots.

Nobody disagrees with this

Woof, Woof - Dawg http://homepage.mac.com/k.j.vinson/pawprint.gif

Cassie

Jul 2, 2009, 05:58 PM

are you really being serious?

Completely. How is the value of life measured to you?

killerrobot

Jul 2, 2009, 06:04 PM

yes, people are more important than any animal

You realize that people are animals too.

Kingdom: Animalia --> Subspecies: Homo sapiens sapiens

That said, there is a difference in the food/predator chain. Usually we kill snakes, not the other way around.

Cabbit

Jul 2, 2009, 06:07 PM

I believe the Bible. (Yes, I went there:D.) I am above animals. I eat animals, they don't eat me.:cool:

Your bible teaches all live is equal does it not, regardless i firmly believe all life is equal and humans are no different to any other animal and when you start getting these delusions that one type of life is is more equal than another you start to go back down some paths we have been before.

How soon is it before we say all life is equal but humans are more equal than other life.
How soon before all humans with blue eyes are more equal than humans with brown eyes.
How soon before all white humans are more equal than black humans.

Careful about this path we have been down it to many times, as soon as you start valuing one life over another you can take that and put it on anything that makes you better than something else.

Dagless

Jul 2, 2009, 06:07 PM

I eat animals, they don't eat me.:cool:

But they can and they're programmed to eat meat. A famished Great White Shark wouldn't wait a second in eating you, just as you (diet depending) wouldn't wait a second to eat a meat product if you were hungry and was the only thing available to you.

Usually we kill snakes, not the other way around.
But it can happen and it does happen. Nature has it that way.

The food chain isn't linear. It's a friggin spider diagram.

Cabbit

Jul 2, 2009, 06:09 PM

You realize that people are animals too.

Kingdom: Animalia --> Subspecies: Homo sapiens sapiens

That said, there is a difference in the food/predator chain. Usually we kill snakes, not the other way around.

No Snakes are a more powerful predator above us but as you may know usually predators don't kill other predators, there is a unspoken rule.
You would never see a lion eat a tiger unless most rare, and though some snakes eat other snakes these are a real minority.

TuffLuffJimmy

Jul 2, 2009, 06:09 PM

To become worm food or to become snake food, where is the difference here, are you saying every time you kill a lamb for your meal it should be laid to rest instead of eaten.

You're being terrible. People are NOT lambs. People are NOT food. A child, no matter how they died, deserves to be put to rest.

No Snakes are a more powerful predator above us but as you may know usually predators don't kill other predators, there is a unspoken rule.
You would never see a lion eat a tiger unless most rare, and though some snakes eat other snakes these are a real minority.

LOL!
You do realize there is a bit more keeping tigers from eating lions, or vice versa, like say geography. There is no unspoken rule between what eats what. birds eat snakes, snakes eat birds. There's no moronic, made up, fictitious rule in play here.

dukebound85

Jul 2, 2009, 06:10 PM

Completely. How is the value of life measured to you?

sorry but this is too silly for me to answer. no offense Cassie

You realize that people are animals too.

Kingdom: Animalia --> Subspecies: Homo sapiens sapiens

That said, there is a difference in the food/predator chain. Usually we kill snakes, not the other way around.

whats your point exactly? if it's to equate an animal to a human, it's not a good point

No Snakes are a more powerful predator above us but as you may know usually predators don't kill other predators, there is a unspoken rule.
You would never see a lion eat a tiger unless most rare, and though some snakes eat other snakes these are a real minority.

that whole post is incorrect

as a species, humans are the most powerful predator bar none

as far as a "rule" that predators dont eat predators, I really suggest you do a little more research. It's not uncommon at all

Peterkro

Jul 2, 2009, 06:11 PM

Any animal that kills a human should be killed, humanely, IMO.

Why?

iObama

Jul 2, 2009, 06:13 PM

How soon is it before we say all life is equal but humans are more equal than other life.
How soon before all humans with blue eyes are more equal than humans with brown eyes.
How soon before all white humans are more equal than black humans.

Get off your soapbox, Ghandi. :rolleyes:

dukebound85

Jul 2, 2009, 06:14 PM

Your bible teaches all live is equal does it not, regardless i firmly believe all life is equal and humans are no different to any other animal and when you start getting these delusions that one type of life is is more equal than another you start to go back down some paths we have been before.

How soon is it before we say all life is equal but humans are more equal than other life.
How soon before all humans with blue eyes are more equal than humans with brown eyes.
How soon before all white humans are more equal than black humans.

Careful about this path we have been down it to many times, as soon as you start valuing one life over another you can take that and put it on anything that makes you better than something else.

this is a complete red herring by the way

TuffLuffJimmy

Jul 2, 2009, 06:14 PM

I'm curious how you all would feel about a hunter that is killed after shooting an animal? Someone shoots a bear, and another bear kills them. It's the same situation but the human provoked the attack.
Are people any more important than animals?

I think the snake was acting on instinct and the parents are the one at fault for being such idiots.

That's ridiculous. Of course people are more important than animals. WE ARE PEOPLE

Cabbit

Jul 2, 2009, 06:14 PM

You're being terrible. People are NOT lambs. People are NOT food. A child, no matter how they died, deserves to be put to rest.
When a human is killed by a animal such as a snake the carcass is a food object and there is nothing to put to rest, just rotting flesh and bone that whether digested in the stomach of a snake or dissolved in the ground by worms the result is the same.
Put to rest is a term used to console the families of people that have died, it means nothing other than delaying the decaying process for a while and then putting the carcass into a coffin so that it will take a unnaturally long time to decompose.
And unfortunately a person in the coils of a snake is the same as a lamb on your plate, it is a food item once dead.

spaceboots06

Jul 2, 2009, 06:15 PM

I'm having trouble understanding why a lot of people think they're "above" animals in terms of life value. Could someone explain this to me?

EDIT: beaten by the above poster, but my question remains.

Because we have more potential.

You're being terrible. People are NOT lambs. People are NOT food. A child, no matter how they died, deserves to be put to rest.

LOL!
You do realize there is a bit more keeping tigers from eating lions, or vice versa, like say geography. There is no unspoken rule between what eats what. birds eat snakes, snakes eat birds. There's no moronic, made up, fictitious rule in play here.

Mmmm. The King Cobra eats other snakes and other King Cobras regularly.

Cabbit

Jul 2, 2009, 06:18 PM

That's ridiculous. Of course people are more important than animals. WE ARE PEOPLE

You are animals as well and are no more important that any other animal. We evolved the ability to kill better than other animals and to multiply out of control nothing more, take away the weapons and the power and you are a animal like any other.

TuffLuffJimmy

Jul 2, 2009, 06:18 PM

Put to rest is a term used to console the families of people that have died, it means nothing other than delaying the decaying process for a while and then putting the carcass into a coffin so that it will take a unnaturally long time to decompose.
Exactly. It's for the family.

And unfortunately a person in the coils of a snake is the same as a lamb on your plate, it is a food item once dead.

no it isn't. Not to me. Not to the family. And not ****ing legally.

killerrobot

Jul 2, 2009, 06:19 PM

whats your point exactly? if it's to equate an animal to a human, it's not a good point

What's your point exactly that humans are more important than ANY animal, given that humans are animals?

(I do agree humans are more important than snakes, mainly because the food chain says so most of the time. - I just think you could've phrased what you said a little better - perhaps I could've as well.)

@ragged
Agreed. Humans aren't invicible.

@jessica
Let me know when a snake develops an atomic bomb.;)

spaceboots06

Jul 2, 2009, 06:19 PM

You are animals as well and are no more important that any other animal. We evolved the ability to kill better than other animals and to multiply out of control nothing more, take away the weapons and the power and you are a animal like any other.

Wrong.

Our brain is infinitely more advanced than anything else that we know of.

+ From a bible point of view we have spirits.

Cabbit

Jul 2, 2009, 06:22 PM

Mmmm. The King Cobra eats other snakes and other King Cobras regularly.

Yes perhaps my statement there about predators eating others was a bit to broad, but i stand by the main point i was trying to make. Geography aside a predator such as a lion would rather avoid a fight with another large predator, and snakes are also the same.
There is no need for a lion to hunt a lion when there is a gazelle.

Peterkro

Jul 2, 2009, 06:23 PM

Wrong.

Our brain is infinitely more advanced than anything else that we know of.

+ From a bible point of view we have spirits.

The key words here are "that we know of".

dukebound85

Jul 2, 2009, 06:24 PM

Oh, so you mean humans aren't animals? Especially scientifically speaking?

I was trying to point a minor flaw in your first argument. You can't have a=b, and say that b>a.

I do agree humans are more important than snakes, mainly because the food chain says so most of the time.

not all animals are created equal so once again, what point are you trying to make?

Yes perhaps my statement there about predators eating others was a bit to broad, but i stand by the main point i was trying to make. Geography aside a predator such as a lion would rather avoid a fight with another large predator, and snakes are also the same.
There is no need for a lion to hunt a lion when there is a gazelle.

Wrong again. You realize more prides fight and kill each other with each other than you think. This is very common among animals of the same species and animals of other species for territory and a multitude of other reasons.

Please try and research before you make these claims

TuffLuffJimmy

Jul 2, 2009, 06:24 PM

You are animals as well and are no more important that any other animal. We evolved the ability to kill better than other animals and to multiply out of control nothing more, take away the weapons and the power and you are a animal like any other.

you really think a human is the same as a water bear (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Water_bear)? After all we're both animals. People have a sense of kinship with other people. Hell I lay my dead dogs to rest, why shouldn't I just let them rot outside for the crows to eat?

Would you mind if your body were abused after death? After all it's just a body. Why can't your coroner have a little romantic encounter with your lifeless body? Or would you mind if your body were strung up a tree, or used as a scare crow?

Yes perhaps my statement there about predators eating others was a bit to broad, but i stand by the main point i was trying to make. Geography aside a predator such as a lion would rather avoid a fight with another large predator, and snakes are also the same.
There is no need for a lion to hunt a lion when there is a gazelle.

duh. That's because it would be dangerous for a large predator to try and eat another large predator. They would put up a fight and leave the predator damaged. It's not because they have any sort of predatory understanding, or silent agreement.

The key words here are "that we know of".

It actually isn't. It's entirely irrelevant whether a child's body should be laid to rest or eaten based on whether or not a smarter animal exists.

Note that there is no smarter animal on earth, or most likely in this solar system.

spaceboots06

Jul 2, 2009, 06:25 PM

Yes perhaps my statement there about predators eating others was a bit to broad, but i stand by the main point i was trying to make. Geography aside a predator such as a lion would rather avoid a fight with another large predator, and snakes are also the same.
There is no need for a lion to hunt a lion when there is a gazelle.

Yes. But when did a baby become more dangerous than another snake? I don't know the meat to bone ratio of a baby or adult but I'm guessing it chose the baby because it was easy to digest. I'm also not sure if a 12' snake can gulp down a full sized person.

The key words here are "that we know of".

So when we know of animals that are more intelligent / more creative / better problem solvers then I'll withdraw that statement. But those "key words" aren't really key words.

dukebound85

Jul 2, 2009, 06:28 PM

here is one quick search to show that yes, predators do commonly fight and kill each other

http://news.bbc.co.uk/earth/hi/earth_news/newsid_8120000/8120712.stm

Cabbit

Jul 2, 2009, 06:28 PM

Wrong.

Our brain is infinitely more advanced than anything else that we know of.

+ From a bible point of view we have spirits.

The bible is a 2000 year old book written by some men perhaps smoking weed or aiming to write down some folk tales, it is nothing more. Just because our brain is better does not mean we are better.
Lions have bigger teeth that us so they are better at biting.
Snakes can eat extremely large animals compared to there head size so they are better at swallowing.
Or we can take it into humans, my professor has a PHD so he is more intelligent than me as i am only working on a honors degree so he must be better than me.
My mother is a high school drop out so there for i am better than her and she is a lower animal.
My eldest cat has different yelps depending on food, move, go out, or leave me alone, yet the youngest cat rolls about in the dirt(and may be "special") there for the eldist cat is superior.

TuffLuffJimmy

Jul 2, 2009, 06:29 PM

I'm also not sure if a 12' snake can gulp down a full sized person.

It cannot. A twenty foot long snake probably couldn't do it either, our shoulders are too much of an issue.

spaceboots06

Jul 2, 2009, 06:29 PM

here is one quick search to show that yes, predators do commonly fight and kill each other

http://blog.taragana.com/n/lions-form-street-gangs-to-win-turf-wars-95356/

I think you wrote that just now.
just kidding =P

dukebound85

Jul 2, 2009, 06:30 PM

I think you wrote that just now.
just kidding =P

i have since quoted the bbc link that that blog referenced

The bible is a 2000 year old book written by some men perhaps smoking weed or aiming to write down some folk tales, it is nothing more. Just because our brain is better does not mean we are better.
Lions have bigger teeth that us so they are better at biting.
Snakes can eat extremely large animals compared to there head size so they are better at swallowing.
Or we can take it into humans, my professor has a PHD so he is more intelligent than me as i am only working on a honors degree so he must be better than me.
My mother is a high school drop out so there for i am better than her and she is a lower animal.
My eldest cat has different yelps depending on food, move, go out, or leave me alone, yet the youngest cat rolls about in the dirt(and may be "special") there for the eldist cat is superior.

red herring

we are comparing animals to humans

not humans and humans

stop trying to alter the argument

Cassie

Jul 2, 2009, 06:31 PM

So, you people are saying...because of our intelligence...that makes us "better" than animals? :confused:

TuffLuffJimmy

Jul 2, 2009, 06:32 PM

The bible is a 2000 year old book written by some men perhaps smoking weed or aiming to write down some folk tales, it is nothing more. Just because our brain is better does not mean we are better.
Lions have bigger teeth that us so they are better at biting.
Snakes can eat extremely large animals compared to there head size so they are better at swallowing.
Or we can take it into humans, my professor has a PHD so he is more intelligent than me as i am only working on a honors degree so he must be better than me.
My mother is a high school drop out so there for i am better than her and she is a lower animal.
My eldest cat has different yelps depending on food, move, go out, or leave me alone, yet the youngest cat rolls about in the dirt(and may be "special") there for the eldist cat is superior.

Yeah, well I can press a button and kill hundreds of lions, thousands of snakes and dozens of elephants. I am better than all those animals. I deserve to be laid to rest and not to be food, so does every other person.

Jen, you're just playing devil's advocate. You're obviously just a little too faux apathetic and need to take a day off and enjoy some reality.

So, you people are saying...because of our intelligence...that makes us "better" than animals? :confused:

No. I'm saying a person has the right to be laid to rest and not a meal.

spaceboots06

Jul 2, 2009, 06:32 PM

The bible is a 2000 year old book written by some men perhaps smoking weed or aiming to write down some folk tales, it is nothing more. Just because our brain is better does not mean we are better.
Lions have bigger teeth that us so they are better at biting.
Snakes can eat extremely large animals compared to there head size so they are better at swallowing.
Or we can take it into humans, my professor has a PHD so he is more intelligent than me as i am only working on a honors degree so he must be better than me.
My mother is a high school drop out so there for i am better than her and she is a lower animal.
My eldest cat has different yelps depending on food, move, go out, or leave me alone, yet the youngest cat rolls about in the dirt(and may be "special") there for the eldist cat is superior.

1.) We are better at making weapons. I think only certain kinds of monkeys can make weapons. Lions can not make weapons.

2.) I think there are some humans that are good at swallowing. Do a quick google search.

3.) If you're more successful then, yes. If you give back to the community more, then yes. (I know people would probably disagree with me.)

4.) Of course it is. If they were both in survival mode, which one do you think would win?

i have since quoted the bbc link that that blog referenced

red herring

we are comparing animals to humans

not humans and humans

stop trying to alter the argument

You missed my white writing!!!

dukebound85

Jul 2, 2009, 06:33 PM

So, you people are saying...because of our intelligence...that makes us "better" than animals? :confused:

if you have a baby and a dog drowing, let me see you choose to save your dogs life over your childs

i mean they are equal to you right so it shouldnt matter which one you save...

Cabbit

Jul 2, 2009, 06:34 PM

Yes. But when did a baby become more dangerous than another snake? I don't know the meat to bone ratio of a baby or adult but I'm guessing it chose the baby because it was easy to digest. I'm also not sure if a 12' snake can gulp down a full sized person.

I don't believe that species has the capacity i have seen a larger 20 foot struggle to swallow a pig.
But these things full grown are happy with a deer.
The only reason to choose the child would be a completely open path or no way out of the house as snakes do like to find a defensive location to eat in peace.
Since it managed to get out of the cage and room fine i do not see why it did not go all the way to look for something more suitable such as a dog or rat.
The baby was the easy kill set right up for it.

Peterkro

Jul 2, 2009, 06:35 PM

you really think a human is the same as a water bear (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Water_bear)? After all we're both animals. People have a sense of kinship with other people. Hell I lay my dead dogs to rest, why shouldn't I just let them rot outside for the crows to eat?

Once very popular Sky Burials in Tibet did indeed leave there dead out for birds of prey to eat. I'm assuming the people thought it as normal as some western people think the sentimentalised rituals of death are.

spaceboots06

Jul 2, 2009, 06:36 PM

if you have a baby and a dog drowing, let me see you choose to save your dogs life over your childs

i mean they are equal to you right so it shouldnt matter which one you save...

The baby can't do anything besides whine and complain. (Like some members on this website :p) The dog can pull sleds and do tricks. The baby would probably suffer some damage and be incapacitated for the rest of it's life anyway.

Cassie

Jul 2, 2009, 06:36 PM

if you have a baby and a dog drowing, let me see you choose to save your dogs life over your childs

i mean they are equal to you right so it shouldnt matter which one you save...

It's human instinct to save the child, not really something we can control. It doesn't make the child any more important then the dog.

Cabbit

Jul 2, 2009, 06:37 PM

if you have a baby and a dog drowing, let me see you choose to save your dogs life over your childs

i mean they are equal to you right so it shouldnt matter which one you save...

Instinct would make you got for the child. It is also why we would feel more apathetic watching a snake eat a chick than a snake eating a spider. We associate with things that are like us more.

TuffLuffJimmy

Jul 2, 2009, 06:37 PM

Once very popular Sky Burials in Tibet did indeed leave there dead out for birds of prey to eat. I'm assuming the people thought it as normal as some western people think the sentimentalised rituals of death are.

**** that. We don't live in Tibet. That child has the right to be either cremated or embalmed and buried.

I can't believe this tragedy has evolved into a thread like this.

Peterkro

Jul 2, 2009, 06:37 PM

So when we know of animals that are more intelligent / more creative / better problem solvers then I'll withdraw that statement. But those "key words" aren't really key words.

What I was trying to point out is we don't need to know about it for other animals to be better at some things than humans are.

spaceboots06

Jul 2, 2009, 06:38 PM

Or you train the dog to rescue the baby and it's a win win situation for everyone.

dukebound85

Jul 2, 2009, 06:38 PM

It's human instinct to save the child, not really something we can control. It doesn't make the child any more important then the dog.

If you can't say you value the life of your child over your dog, I am afraid nothing will ever convince you

Instinct would make you got for the child. It is also why we would feel more apathetic watching a snake eat a chick than a snake eating a spider. We associate with things that are like us more.

Your point? A snake or any other animal's life is not as important as a humans

Or you train the dog to rescue the baby and it's a win win situation for everyone.

what if this dog had only 1 leg? lol

**** that. We don't live in Tibet. That child has the right to be either cremated or embalmed and buried.

I can't believe this tragedy has evolved into a thread like this.

I agree. The parents of the child would be absolutely disgusted by the view of some of the members here saying their childs life was no more important than the snake and should have been left as snake food

TuffLuffJimmy

Jul 2, 2009, 06:38 PM

Instinct would make you got for the child. It is also why we would feel more apathetic watching a snake eat a chick than a snake eating a spider. We associate with things that are like us more.

But logic would make you go for the child too.

Peterkro

Jul 2, 2009, 06:40 PM

**** that. We don't live in Tibet. That child has the right to be either cremated or embalmed and buried.

I can't believe this tragedy has evolved into a thread like this.

What I was trying to say is societies structure is largely responsible for attitudes' because you might have certain views on the treatment of bodies after death that doesn't make it universal or even correct.

Cabbit

Jul 2, 2009, 06:40 PM

But logic would make you go for the child too.

Logic would not apply, if logic got involved you would spend your time thinking of the pros and cons of which life to save that both would die. Common sense would tell you the dog has more chance of swimming to freedom than the child so there is greater chance of both lives being saved.

TuffLuffJimmy

Jul 2, 2009, 06:41 PM

Cabbit

Jul 2, 2009, 06:42 PM

Your point? A snake or any other animal's life is not as important as a humansd

All life is equally important, no life is more important than another.

dukebound85

Jul 2, 2009, 06:43 PM

Logic would not apply, if logic got involved you would spend your time thinking of the pros and cons of which life to save that both would die. Common sense would tell you the dog has more chance of swimming to freedom than the child so there is greater chance of both lives being saved.

Anyone who has to think twice over which life to save doesnt have logic nor common sense imo

All life is equally important, no life is more important than another.

are you willing to offer your life for a cow in the slaughterhouse? didnt think so

are you willing to offer your child's life to save the cow? i doubt it

are you willing to offer your neighbors child to save that cow? i would hope not

if you say no to each of those, then how can you then say that a humans life is not any more important? by one's answers, it is evident that the human's life IS more important

TuffLuffJimmy

Jul 2, 2009, 06:43 PM

All life is equally important, no life is more important than another.

So answer my post. Do you really believe a human being's life is as important as an onion's or a water bear's (Tardigrade)?

Cabbit

Jul 2, 2009, 06:43 PM

It's a hypothetical situation therefore we have time to think about it. LOGIC dictates you save a person over some dumb mutt.

No logic would not dictate that, logic would dictate you leave both to drown as its a very unsafe place that has already trapped two animals.

So answer my post. Do you really believe a human being's life is as important as an onion's or a water bear's (Tardigrade)?

As i said all life is equal be it a inset or a whale there is nothing more or less important.

TuffLuffJimmy

Jul 2, 2009, 06:45 PM

No logic would not dictate that, logic would dictate you leave both to drown as its a very unsafe place that has already trapped two animals.

No. If you can swim it's not dangerous. Obviously a baby can't swim, and for some reason the dog is retarded (yeah, I said it).

Cabbit

Jul 2, 2009, 06:48 PM

No. If you can swim it's not dangerous. Obviously a baby can't swim, and for some reason the dog is retarded (yeah, I said it).

Well i can't swim so i would leave both to drown rather than join them. There is something inside me that stops me from being a "sheep" i will not walk across the road when the person next to me is chancing it and the "Sheep" behind him follows so nor would i try to save these lives as i would be unable to do so and drown with them.

Also there would be more chance the dog would still be alive and worth saving, the baby would drown very quickly.

dukebound85

Jul 2, 2009, 06:49 PM

are you willing to offer your life for a cow in the slaughterhouse? didnt think so

are you willing to offer your child's life to save the cow? i doubt it

are you willing to offer your neighbors child to save that cow? i would hope not

if you say no to each of those, then how can you then say that a humans life is not any more important? by one's answers, it is evident that the human's life IS more important

Well i can't swim so i would leave both to drown rather than join them. There is something inside me that stops me from being a "sheep" i will not walk across the road when the person next to me is chancing it and the "Sheep" behind him follows so nor would i try to save these lives as i would be unable to do so and drown with them.

Also there would be more chance the dog would still be alive and worth saving, the baby would drown very quickly.

please answer my scenario

spaceboots06

Jul 2, 2009, 06:49 PM

No. If you can swim it's not dangerous. Obviously a baby can't swim, and for some reason the dog is retarded (yeah, I said it).

Actually babies can swim... Don't know how relevant that is though...

TuffLuffJimmy

Jul 2, 2009, 06:52 PM

As i said all life is equal be it a inset or a whale there is nothing more or less important.

That is ********! then go walk out in front of a semitruck. insects do it every day. Go chop your arm off to feed a family of opossums. If you're not willing to live up to what you preach then don't preach.

Cassie

Jul 2, 2009, 06:53 PM

are you willing to offer your life for a cow in the slaughterhouse? didnt think so

are you willing to offer your child's life to save the cow? i doubt it

are you willing to offer your neighbors child to save that cow? i would hope not
Would you be willing to die in place of someone you've never met? For all you know they could have done horrible things in their past. Most people would say no. Why is that?

Because in the end, humans don't care about other humans, they care only about the things that mean something to them.

Cabbit

Jul 2, 2009, 06:53 PM

please answer my scenario

We are humans were are predators, i have would not save a cow at a slaughter house. Though i think it is a dreadfully horrid way to kill your food and so much is wasted.
Slithers wastes nothing of his food and i make sure that the animals i kill to eat are used as much as possible.
Though i will admit i do not eat the head of an animal i have inherited some weakness from my mother that a animals head is sacred though i am sure i will remove such weakness as soon as i can.

dukebound85

Jul 2, 2009, 06:54 PM

Would you be willing to die in place of someone you've never met? For all you knowmthey could have done horrible things in their past. Most people would say no.

Humans don't care about other humans, they care only about the things that mean something to them.

i am comparing an animals life to that of a humans

NOT a humans to a humans

also, i am not the one cliaming an animal's life is equivalent to a persons

We are humans were are predators, i have would not save a cow at a slaughter house. Though i think it is a dreadfully horrid way to kill your food and so much is wasted.
Slithers wastes nothing of his food and i make sure that the animals i kill to eat are used as much as possible.
Though i will admit i do not eat the head of an animal i have inherited some weakness from my mother that a animals head is sacred though i am sure i will remove such weakness as soon as i can.

but you keep saying all lives are equal....what does being a predator have anything to do with it?

subsitute a tiger for the cow....whatever it takes before you would say you would offer up a human to save the animal

spaceboots06

Jul 2, 2009, 06:55 PM

Would you be willing to die in place of someone you've never met? For all you knowmthey could have done horrible things in their past. Most people would say no.

Humans don't care about other humans, they care only about the things that mean something to them.

http://health.usnews.com/sections/health/best-hospitals

http://www.redcross.org/

http://www.salvationarmyusa.org/usn/www_usn_2.nsf

http://www.charitynavigator.org/

Oh.

TuffLuffJimmy

Jul 2, 2009, 06:55 PM

We are humans were are predators, i have would not save a cow at a slaughter house. Though i think it is a dreadfully horrid way to kill your food and so much is wasted.
Slithers wastes nothing of his food and i make sure that the animals i kill to eat are used as much as possible.
Though i will admit i do not eat the head of an animal i have inherited some weakness from my mother that a animals head is sacred though i am sure i will remove such weakness as soon as i can.

you're side stepping the question. You're answer is "NO you would not trade your life for an animal, even if it saved two animals" therefore you do not believe that a human life is more important than an animals. Therefore every bit of everything you have said in this thread is complete bollocks.

You're playing devil's advocate, and you're not good at it. If you can't debate get out of the thread.

spaceboots06

Jul 2, 2009, 06:56 PM

Peterkro

Jul 2, 2009, 06:57 PM

Would you be willing to die in place of someone you've never met? For all you know they could have done horrible things in their past. Most people would say no. Why is that?

Because in the end, humans don't care about other humans, they care only about the things that mean something to them.

This is very true,westerners could easily forgo some of their trinkets and use the money to save the thousands of Africans that die of easily preventable diseases everyday, but no the vast majority don't give a *****.

Cabbit

Jul 2, 2009, 06:57 PM

That is ********! then go walk out in front of a semitruck. insects do it every day. Go chop your arm off to feed a family of opossums. If you're not willing to live up to what you preach then don't preach.

You miss the message, just because i consider all life equal you believe all should act the same. Because a bird flys into a car does not mean every bird will follow.
Because my ancestors tried to wipe out most of humanity does not mean i will follow this trend. Equality does not mean we all act as the lower common denominator and forget our survival instincts.

TuffLuffJimmy

Jul 2, 2009, 06:59 PM

You miss the message, just because i consider all life equal you believe all should act the same. Because a bird flys into a car does not mean every bird will follow.
Because my ancestors tried to wipe out most of humanity does not mean i will follow this trend. Equality does not mean we all act as the lower common denominator and forget our survival instincts.

I'm sure you have absolutely no response to this:
you're side stepping the question. You're answer is "NO you would not trade your life for an animal, even if it saved two animals" therefore you do not believe that a human life is more important than an animals. Therefore every bit of everything you have said in this thread is complete bollocks.

You're playing devil's advocate, and you're not good at it. If you can't debate get out of the thread.

So please retract everything you've said in this thread.

Also your signature link leads to a 404. :rolleyes:

Cabbit

Jul 2, 2009, 07:00 PM

You make it sounds like you're a Native American. You know what happened to them, right?

I have not spent any time studying american culture nor would i care to i have no interest in that side of the world when in the eastern world there are cultures 1000's of years old i am far more fascinated with.

dukebound85

Jul 2, 2009, 07:00 PM

I'm sure you have absolutely no response to this:

So please retract everything you've said in this thread.

lol it is easy to ignore scenarios that if one would answer, it would compromise their position

why does it feel i am talking to kubanuru for some reason lol

Cabbit

Jul 2, 2009, 07:01 PM

I'm sure you have absolutely no response to this:

So please retract everything you've said in this thread.

Survival instincts would not allow one animal to place its self in harms way for two of another species it is not built into the genes to do so. Everything in your body tells you to live and to reproduce.

Cassie

Jul 2, 2009, 07:02 PM

http://health.usnews.com/sections/health/best-hospitals

http://www.redcross.org/

http://www.salvationarmyusa.org/usn/www_usn_2.nsf

http://www.charitynavigator.org/

Oh.

There's always an exception to a rule. Not too many people are a part of those organizations, especially when you consider the amount that could be a part of them.

TuffLuffJimmy

Jul 2, 2009, 07:02 PM

Survival instincts would not allow one animal to place its self in harms way for two of another species it is not built into the genes to do so. Everything in your body tells you to live and to reproduce.

but logically, sans instincts, make an answer. Quit side stepping and answer our questions.

dukebound85

Jul 2, 2009, 07:03 PM

are you willing to offer your life for a cow in the slaughterhouse? didnt think so

are you willing to offer your child's life to save the cow? i doubt it

are you willing to offer your neighbors child to save that cow? i would hope not

if you say no to each of those, then how can you then say that a humans life is not any more important? by one's answers, it is evident that the human's life IS more important

Survival instincts would not allow one animal to place its self in harms way for two of another species it is not built into the genes to do so. Everything in your body tells you to live and to reproduce.
You conveniently neglected most of the scenario

and just to stay a step ahead of any response, what if it was 2 animals you would be saving with a humans life in any one of the steps

should be a no brainer if all lives are equal right? 2 for 1? sounds like good odds lol

Cabbit

Jul 2, 2009, 07:04 PM

I would not ignore any scenario regardless of it compromising my position of not, and to use such terms as "So please retract everything you've said in this thread." is rather petty, you put your points across and i and others will also put our points across and with luck this will get back to being civil and respectful.

spaceboots06

Jul 2, 2009, 07:04 PM

There's always an exception to a rule. Not too many people are a part of those organizations, especially when you consider the amount that could be a part of them.

Yes, there is. But there must be some logical explanation for hospitals, police departments, parks, landmarks, schools, infrastructure, etc etc... All of these things were built by people for other people to use.

Cabbit

Jul 2, 2009, 07:06 PM

You conveniently neglected most of the scenario

Well he tried to answer it for me and i do not care to get full swept into this silly scenario. But here we go for some direct answers.

are you willing to offer your life for a cow in the slaughterhouse? nope i would eat it

are you willing to offer your child's life to save the cow? again cow is human food

are you willing to offer your neighbors child to save that cow? depends how annoying said child is.

dukebound85

Jul 2, 2009, 07:06 PM

Well he tried to answer it for me and i do not care to get full swept into this silly scenario. But here we go for some direct answers.

are you willing to offer your life for a cow in the slaughterhouse? nope i would eat it

are you willing to offer your child's life to save the cow? again cow is human food

are you willing to offer your neighbors child to save that cow? depends how annoying said child is.

this is NOT your argument

to you, all life is equal

being a predator should have nothing to do with it

make it two tigers in the slaughterhouse

stop hiding behind this "human food thing"

Cabbit

Jul 2, 2009, 07:08 PM

You conveniently neglected most of the scenario

and just to stay a step ahead of any response, what if it was 2 animals you would be saving with a humans life in any one of the steps

should be a no brainer if all lives are equal right? 2 for 1? sounds like good odds lol

How would you propose the human would replace the cows, you would eat the human we taste like pig but it is not in our nature to eat each other. And as i said he answered for me and it is set up as a no win scenario.

spaceboots06

Jul 2, 2009, 07:08 PM

Well he tried to answer it for me and i do not care to get full swept into this silly scenario. But here we go for some direct answers.

are you willing to offer your life for a cow in the slaughterhouse? nope i would eat it

are you willing to offer your child's life to save the cow? again cow is human food

are you willing to offer your neighbors child to save that cow? depends how annoying said child is.

So if the child was not annoying, you wouldn't offer the child to save the cow? Sounds like you value children more than cows.

dukebound85

Jul 2, 2009, 07:10 PM

How would you propose the human would replace the cows, you would eat the human we taste like pig but it is not in our nature to eat each other. And as i said he answered for me and it is set up as a no win scenario.

You are missing the point:rolleyes:

Ok its not a slaugterhouse but a cliff and lets say its 2 tigers lives or one humans

i shouldnt have to be this explicit to make you realize the point i am making

Cabbit

Jul 2, 2009, 07:11 PM

this is NOT your argument

to you, all life is equal

being a predator should have nothing to do with it

make it two tigers in the slaughterhouse

stop hiding behind this "human food thing"

All life is equal. We just happen to also have things we need to eat to survive how can you not understand this. Life is not devalued when you are the predator or the prey your still of equal importance.

You are missing the point:rolleyes:

Ok its not a slaugterhouse but a cliff and lets say its 2 tigers lives or one humans

i shouldnt have to be this explicit to make you realize the point i am making

Well the 2 tigers are going to eat the human and so be it they have the greater chance of survival.

TuffLuffJimmy

Jul 2, 2009, 07:12 PM

How would you propose the human would replace the cows, you would eat the human we taste like pig but it is not in our nature to eat each other. And as i said he answered for me and it is set up as a no win scenario.

Does someone have a gif, or an emoticon that communicates something going way over someone's head?

dukebound85

Jul 2, 2009, 07:13 PM

All life is equal. We just happen to also have things we need to eat to survive how can you not understand this. Life is not devalued when you are the predator or the prey your still of equal importance.

You are intentionally sidestepping my argument

Make it whatever animal youd like in whatever setting youd like but either the animal dies or a human

Well the 2 tigers are going to eat the human and so be it they have the greater chance of survival.

I will take you continually sidestepping the point completely I am making over and over and over as you can not honestly answer this question without compromising your position

Cabbit

Jul 2, 2009, 07:13 PM

So if the child was not annoying, you wouldn't offer the child to save the cow? Sounds like you value children more than cows.

I would still offer the child or better yet since i don't like no win scenarios i would buy the cows and set them free so some other animal can eat them.

You are intentionally sidestepping my argument

Make it whatever animal youd like in whatever setting youd like but either the animal dies or a human

If there is a choice between 2 animals and 1 human i would choose logically the 2 animals yet my instinct would tell me to save my own.

TuffLuffJimmy

Jul 2, 2009, 07:15 PM

I would still offer the child or better yet since i don't like no win scenarios i would buy the cows and set them free so some other animal can eat them.

Then write to your local political leader asking for a mass genocide as long as it saves twice as many animals. We'll see how that goes over. :rolleyes:

You just can't talk to a brick wall.

Actually... a brick wall may echo something that resembles intelligence, so I'd rather talk to a brick wall.

Cabbit

Jul 2, 2009, 07:17 PM

Then write to your local political leader asking for a mass genocide as long as it saves twice as many animals. We'll see how that goes over. :rolleyes:

Nahh i am pretty sure he is a conservative i have no time for money grabbers, besides if i want to get into genocide all i have to do is start going to church there really into there ethnic cleansing over the last 2000 years.

You just can't talk to a brick wall.

Actually... a brick wall may echo something that resembles intelligence, so I'd rather talk to a brick wall.

You know the feeling works both way, yet i still treat you with respect though i can disagree with your opinion.

instaxgirl

Jul 2, 2009, 07:35 PM

I think the owner didn't properly care for the animal

2. By stabbing multiple times it afterwards

I call that animal abuse.

Hmm, in the circumstances I can ignore the stabbing. I mean if the thing's wrapped around a 2 year old and won't let go you probably wouldn't be thinking about the snake.

Overall it sounds like this Darnell guy has a lot to answer for, poor kid :(

LizKat

Jul 2, 2009, 07:35 PM

**** that. We don't live in Tibet. That child has the right to be either cremated or embalmed and buried.

I can't believe this tragedy has evolved into a thread like this.

+10 zillion. So right. I feel like I must have fallen down the proverbial rabbithole. I could not have imagined I would ever see arguments like I've seen in this thread.

The wrangling started with a suggested premise that it was not right for the boyfriend to remove his girlfriend's dead infant from the mouth of a half-starved python that had escaped from its cage in the family's house and had instinctively hunted, killed and started to eat the child.

WTF. Who among us in that guy's circumstance would actually let a snake finish eating our dead little sister, or our grown sister's dead little son or daughter?

If some people on this forum do believe that they would actually do that, they've been playing too many headgames or cybergames for too long. To them I say this: Cut it out. Time to regroup, grow up, acquire or regain some empathy for other human beings before you blow up the planet with your experimental and (I claim) quite artificial apathy towards other people's humanity.

OK (climbing off soapbox). Time to feed the fisher-cat another miniature Yorkshire terrier.... ta ta :eek:

Cassie

Jul 2, 2009, 07:37 PM

i am comparing an animals life to that of a humans

NOT a humans to a humans

also, i am not the one cliaming an animal's life is equivalent to a persons

Correct. The point of my post was to try to get you to see my side of the argument.

Would I give my own life to save an animals? It depends on whether or not I could get a guarantee that said animal wouldn't be in the same situation that it had to be saved from. Same thing goes for a human.

spaceboots06

Jul 2, 2009, 07:37 PM

WTF. Who among us in that guy's circumstance would actually let a snake finish eating our dead little sister, or our grown sister's dead little son or daughter?

Jennifer.

dukebound85

Jul 2, 2009, 07:38 PM

TuffLuffJimmy

Jul 2, 2009, 07:39 PM

Correct. The point of my post was to try to get you to see my side of the argument.

Would I give my own life to save an animals? It depends on whether or not I could get a guarantee that said animal wouldn't be in the same situation that it had to be saved from. Same thing goes for a human.

That's a lie and you know it. There is no way you would willingly give your life for a dog, or even a cow.

Diane2boys

Jul 2, 2009, 07:39 PM

[

Cassie

Jul 2, 2009, 07:41 PM

That's a lie and you know it. There is no way you would willingly give your life for a dog, or even a cow.

What makes you so sure of that?

TuffLuffJimmy

Jul 2, 2009, 07:41 PM

being presented just for the sake of arguing....... :rolleyes:

exactly. I know I do that sometime, argue just to argue. But this is just too much. Cassie and Jen are full of it.

jessica.

Jul 2, 2009, 07:41 PM

exactly. I know I do that sometime, argue just to argue. But this is just too much. Cassie and Jen are full of it.

You? Argue?
Weird.

Cabbit

Jul 2, 2009, 07:42 PM

+10 zillion. So right. I feel like I must have fallen down the proverbial rabbithole. I could not have imagined I would ever see arguments like I've seen in this thread.

The wrangling started with a suggested premise that it was not right for the boyfriend to remove his girlfriend's dead infant from the mouth of a half-starved python that had escaped from its cage in the family's house and had instinctively hunted, killed and started to eat the child.

WTF. Who among us in that guy's circumstance would actually let a snake finish eating our dead little sister, or our grown sister's dead little son or daughter?

If some people on this forum do believe that they would actually do that, they've been playing too many headgames or cybergames for too long. To them I say this: Cut it out. Time to regroup, grow up, acquire or regain some empathy for other human beings before you blow up the planet with your experimental and (I claim) quite artificial apathy towards other people's humanity.

OK (climbing off soapbox). Time to feed the fisher-cat another miniature Yorkshire terrier.... ta ta :eek:

Remember those are your and your cultures morals, not every culture shares your way and it is arrogant to believe all should believe as you do or they are wrong.
We are not talking about a life here we are talking about a snake caught eating a lifeless corpse nothing more what it once was does not apply. Though terrible that a infant would suffer such a fate we can only blame 2 very irresponsible adults for bringing in 2 very good predators into a there house hold then not adequately feeding the snake in question nor providing a adequate enclosure and not coming to the aid of the infant at the first cry because there is no way even a 12 foot snake is going to stop that child crying when it takes the first bite.

dukebound85

Jul 2, 2009, 07:42 PM

What makes you so sure of that?

The fact you are still around now

There's a million animals dying everyday

Remember those are your and your cultures morals, not every culture shares your way and it is arrogant to believe all should believe as you do or they are wrong.
We are not talking about a life here we are talking about a snake caught eating a lifeless corpse nothing more what it once was does not apply. Though terrible that a infant would suffer such a fate we can only blame 2 very irresponsible adults for bringing in 2 very good predators into a there house hold then not adequately feeding the snake in question nor providing a adequate enclosure and not coming to the aid of the infant at the first cry because there is no way even a 12 foot snake is going to stop that child crying when it takes the first bite.

You have made it VERY clear than a snake has every right to eat a child and that its life is just as important as a humans

TuffLuffJimmy

Jul 2, 2009, 07:43 PM

You? Argue?
Weird.

LOL

I know, I know. I'm trying to work on that... Maybe I just need to steer clear of these forums for a while.

Cassie, I know that you are not a vegetarian, so obviously you're full of it. Jen, I'm just guessing that you aren't, but it's a pretty safe bet.

dukebound85

Jul 2, 2009, 07:45 PM

LOL

I know, I know. I'm trying to work on that... Maybe I just need to steer clear of these forums for a while.

this is a monumental thread

me and Jimmy agree on something? the planets and stars must be aligned lol

Cassie

Jul 2, 2009, 07:45 PM

The fact you are still around now

There's a million animals dying everyday

What can I do about? If I gave my life for a cow about to be slaughtered, how can I know it won't end up in the same situation two months later? Then my sacrifice would have been in vain, a lose-lose situation.

Cabbit

Jul 2, 2009, 07:45 PM

exactly. I know I do that sometime, argue just to argue. But this is just too much. Cassie and Jen are full of it.

Because you do not agree does not make your argument more right than mine or anyone else's. There is never a right side or a right answer there are points we agree and diss-agree with.

dukebound85

Jul 2, 2009, 07:46 PM

What can I do about? If I gave my life for a cow about to be slaughtered, how can I know it won't end up in the same situation two months later? Then my sacrifice would have been in vain, a lose-lose situation.

You right there just contradicted your position

spaceboots06

Jul 2, 2009, 07:47 PM

LOL

I know, I know. I'm trying to work on that... Maybe I just need to steer clear of these forums for a while.

Cassie, I know that you are not a vegetarian, so obviously you're full of it. Jen, I'm just guessing that you aren't, but it's a pretty safe bet.

From an earlier post it was stated that Jennifer eats animals but makes sure to eat every part of it except the head.

Cabbit

Jul 2, 2009, 07:47 PM

The fact you are still around now

There's a million animals dying everyday

You have made it VERY clear than a snake has every right to eat a child and that its life is just as important as a humans

The point the child died it became a carcass that means food to the snake. There is nothing left of the child.

Cassie

Jul 2, 2009, 07:48 PM

You right there just contradicted your position

How so? Maybe I should have used a human example. Same outcome. :rolleyes:

dukebound85

Jul 2, 2009, 07:48 PM

The point the child died it became a carcass that means food to the snake. There is nothing left of the child.

For one who portrays having immense respect of life as you equate it to a humans, you sure dont understand respect and dignity for loved ones of your family when they die

How so? Maybe I should have used a human example. Same outcome. :rolleyes:

how so? the animal still dies yet you do nothing to save it since you hide behind teh fact "it may be in the same posistion later"

that stance right there makes you value your life more than any animals

spaceboots06

Jul 2, 2009, 07:49 PM

Wow. I'm watching The Factor and they had three children and two large snakes...

TuffLuffJimmy

Jul 2, 2009, 07:50 PM

There is nothing left of the child.

ummm there's a 20 pound corpse. It's pretty obvious there's a lot of the child left.

And @duke, I was thinking the same thing. I'm glad we've got something in common, namely human compassion.

From an earlier post it was stated that Jennifer eats animals but makes sure to eat every part of it except the head.

WTF? Why? That doesn't sound very natural. I hope she raises and kills all those animals herself instead of living off animals that weren't treated like people.

Cabbit

Jul 2, 2009, 07:52 PM

From an earlier post it was stated that Jennifer eats animals but makes sure to eat every part of it except the head.

That would be because i require meat for survival and my animals kill and eat as well. It just means i do as many other animals do i kill another to feed myself the same as that animal will kill plant life in order to survive.
If this did not happen there would be no life would exist yet it does not change my value that the animals i eat are of less importance or value than myself, i dare say few of you have even killed and prepared your own meal.

dukebound85

Jul 2, 2009, 07:53 PM

That would be because i require meat for survival and my animals kill and eat as well. It just means i do as many other animals do i kill another to feed myself the same as that animal will kill plant life in order to survive.
If this did not happen there would be no life would exist yet it does not change my value that the animals i eat are of less importance or value than myself, i dare say few of you have even killed and prepared your own meal.

humans do not require meat for survival

oh, you really think many havent hunted game here? do you really believe that?

TuffLuffJimmy

Jul 2, 2009, 07:56 PM

That would be because i require meat for survival and my animals kill and eat as well.

That's not true.

It just means i do as many other animals do i kill another to feed myself the same as that animal will kill plant life in order to survive.
but you don't need it to survive.

If this did not happen there would be no life would exist yet it does not change my value that the animals i eat are of less importance or value than myself
But you said all animals are equally important...

i dare say few of you have even killed and prepared your own meal.
No. That's entirely irrelevant to the thread. Although it is not irrelevant to your stance. If you don't do that then you're a hypocrite and don't actually subscribe to the stance you've taken in this thread.

Cabbit

Jul 2, 2009, 07:57 PM

For one who portrays having immense respect of life as you equate it to a humans, you sure dont understand respect and dignity for loved ones of your family when they die

Dignity is something you can retain while you life when you die you are gone, dignity is of no value to a corpse. The snake killed for food not for vengeance or petty emotion. Yet instead of getting the meal it was harassed and severally injured for no reason.
There was no chance to save the child life and for only a 12 foot snake you can unwrap the thing with your bear hands if you really don't want it eating the corpse instead of stabbing it and perhaps causing 2 needless deaths.

Cassie

Jul 2, 2009, 07:59 PM

how so? the animal still dies yet you do nothing to save it since you hide behind teh fact "it may be in the same posistion later"

that stance right there makes you value your life more than any animals

Like you said, millions of animals die everyday. What can I do about it? Nothing at all. The cows life is just as important as mine, but that doesn't mean I could do something to save it. If I could, I would. But only if the animal could live a long life after that.

Again, same thing with a human. If I had the chance to push someone out of the way of a speeding car, but knew that they would just get hit by another car in the next lane, I wouldn't do it.

Everyone values their own life over everyone elses. I'm just saying animals have the same value as a human to me.

dukebound85

Jul 2, 2009, 08:00 PM

Dignity is something you can retain while you life when you die you are gone, dignity is of no value to a corpse. The snake killed for food not for vengeance or petty emotion. Yet instead of getting the meal it was harassed and severally injured for no reason.
There was no chance to save the child life and for only a 12 foot snake you can unwrap the thing with your bear hands if you really don't want it eating the corpse instead of stabbing it and perhaps causing 2 needless deaths.

The snake getting harrased and injured for no reason?

IT JUST KILLED A BABY

spaceboots06

Jul 2, 2009, 08:00 PM

Dignity is something you can retain while you life when you die you are gone, dignity is of no value to a corpse. The snake killed for food not for vengeance or petty emotion. Yet instead of getting the meal it was harassed and severally injured for no reason.
There was no chance to save the child life and for only a 12 foot snake you can unwrap the thing with your bear hands if you really don't want it eating the corpse instead of stabbing it and perhaps causing 2 needless deaths.

My Grandmother's face was eaten off by my Father's dog when she died. Everyone was horrified. Yes, as a normal family, we have respect for dead bodies.

No, I would not let the dog finish the face of my Grandmother, one being that I didn't want to see the body and two domesticated dogs aren't supposed to eat that.

rdowns

Jul 2, 2009, 08:02 PM

This thread has become so absurd.

TuffLuffJimmy

Jul 2, 2009, 08:02 PM

Like you said, millions of animals die everyday. What can I do about it? Nothing at all.
(To be grammatically correct it's "As you said" not "Like you said")
Not true. You can join peta, start stealing and releasing people's pets. Start stealing cows and pigs from farms and releasing them. You can do all sorts of stuff. If you saw people being farmed wouldn't you do something about it? It would go against your stance to not do the same for animals.

The cows life is just as important as mine, but that doesn't mean I could do something to save it. If I could, I would. But only if the animal could live a long life after that.
you could go to the farm and buy a cow to save it. They're not very expensive, maybe around $500 for one, based on its weight.

dukebound85

Jul 2, 2009, 08:03 PM

Would I give my own life to save an animals? It depends on whether or not I could get a guarantee that said animal wouldn't be in the same situation that it had to be saved from. Same thing goes for a human.

Everyone values their own life over everyone elses. I'm just saying animals have the same value as a human to me.

So you say you would give your life for an animals

then state you wont as you couldnt guarantee it would live long

then state you value your life more than an animals

glad you are coming around:)

Cabbit

Jul 2, 2009, 08:05 PM

That's not true.

but you don't need it to survive.

But you said all animals are equally important...

No. That's entirely irrelevant to the thread. Although it is not irrelevant to your stance. If you don't do that then you're a hypocrite and don't actually subscribe to the stance you've taken in this thread.

Humans have a requirement for meat, fish, fruit and vegetables or other plant life to survive and evolve it is how we developed and i will not go against that though i will make sure my food comes from a source i know and trust and i have killed my own chickens, sheep and such and gutted them and made sure every part is fully used be it for myself, or for cat food.

Yet i do not think i will ever understand the morning of a dead corpse, make a grave and keep the memory alive ether dump the corpse in the forest to decompose(which may have implications with the amount of murders in countries like america) or if the body was killed by a animal bloddy heck left it have its kill, not often they get one up on us these days.

It is nice to be reminded we are no invincible and are still food once laid bare.

spaceboots06

Jul 2, 2009, 08:05 PM

I guess half of the people in this thread think that the Donner Party's actions were 100% acceptable...

Cassie

Jul 2, 2009, 08:06 PM

So you say you would give your life for an animals

then state you wont as you couldnt guarantee it would live long

then state you value your life more than an animals

glad you are coming around:)

I think you're missing the point. A humans life is worth as much as an animals life. Would you sacrifice your life for an animal given the chance?

Cabbit

Jul 2, 2009, 08:08 PM

The snake getting harrased and injured for no reason?

IT JUST KILLED A BABY

No it had already killed the baby and was in the middle of eating the corpse the child was no longer present as the child was dead.

dukebound85

Jul 2, 2009, 08:09 PM

Yet i do not think i will ever understand the morning of a dead corpse, make a grave and keep the memory alive ether dump the corpse in the forest to decompose(which may have implications with the amount of murders in countries like america) or if the body was killed by a animal bloddy heck left it have its kill, not often they get one up on us these days.

Seriously, this is baffling

I respect those that have died. It is not just flesh to me. If you can't see past that then I am truely sorry

It is nice to be reminded we are no invincible and are still food once laid bare.
I do not enjoy thinking of myself as food, so it is NOT nice to be reminded of this....

seriously.:rolleyes:

No it had already killed the baby and was in the middle of eating the corpse the child was no longer present as the child was dead.

Let me say this again.

It killed the baby

how you would remain calm if this was your kid is redicoulous

I think you're missing the point. A humans life is worth as much as an animals life. Would you sacrifice your life for an animal given the chance?

No a humans life is noy worth anything NEAR that of an animals

There is no way in hell i would sacrifice my life or another humans for an animals. that is not my position, its yours and its downright silly

TuffLuffJimmy

Jul 2, 2009, 08:09 PM

Humans have a requirement for meat, fish, fruit and vegetables or other plant life to survive and evolve it is how we developed and i will not go against that though i will make sure my food comes from a source i know and trust and i have killed my own chickens, sheep and such and gutted them and made sure every part is fully used be it for myself, or for cat food.
Obviously you're an incredibly ignorant person. People do NOT need meat to survive. I know many vegans, and even a family who have gone their ENTIRE lives without any animal products.

Yet i do not think i will ever understand the mourning of a dead corpse, make a grave and keep the memory alive ether dump the corpse in the forest to decompose(which may have implications with the amount of murders in countries like america)

People die of natural causes in ridiculously higher numbers than the number of people who die from murder.

or if the body was killed by a animal bloddy heck left it have its kill, not often they get one up on us these days.
No.

It is nice to be reminded we are no invincible and are still food once laid bare.

jen, I understand you are very young, maybe one day when someone close to you dies you'll see what a complete fool you've been.

Cabbit

Jul 2, 2009, 08:13 PM

en, I understand you are very young, maybe one day when someone close to you dies you'll see what a complete fool you've been.

I have had the death of my best friend, my great grand mother and my grand mother died last week at 88. I will not spend my days sobbing over there deaths or corpses they had great lives and i would never dis honour there memory by crying over lumps of rotting flesh.

dukebound85

Jul 2, 2009, 08:15 PM

I have had the death of my best friend, my great grand mother and my grand mother died last week at 88. I will not spend my days sobbing over there deaths or corpses they had great lives and i would never dis honour there memory by crying over lumps of rotting flesh.

no one cries for their "lumps of rotting flesh" but rather their lives and impacts they had on others

TuffLuffJimmy

Jul 2, 2009, 08:15 PM

I have had the death of my best friend, my great grand mother and my grand mother died last week at 88. I will not spend my days sobbing over there deaths or corpses they had great lives and i would never dis honour there memory by crying over lumps of rotting flesh.

So you had the same emotions you have when a bug hits your windshield when they died?

Cabbit

Jul 2, 2009, 08:16 PM

no one cries for their "lumps of rotting flesh" but rather their lives and impacts they had on others

Yes so i respect the memory, i do not care what happens to the corpse.

So you had the same emotions you have when a bug hits your windshield when they died?

Don't drive and have no interest in it, i have a bike and easy access to the train and bus i would not waste money on a car.

TuffLuffJimmy

Jul 2, 2009, 08:20 PM

Don't drive and have no interest in it, i have a bike and easy access to the train and bus i would not waste money on a car.

Jen, I don't know if you know this but I couldn't care less about the details of your life. Quit avoiding questions with your inane responses.

spaceboots06

Jul 2, 2009, 08:21 PM

Don't drive and have no interest in it, i have a bike and easy access to the train and bus i would not waste money on a car.

No offense, but that's a hard headed response.

Jen, I don't know if you know this but I couldn't care less about the details of your life. Quit avoiding questions with your inane responses.

+1

Cabbit

Jul 2, 2009, 08:22 PM

Jen, I don't know if you know this but I couldn't care less about the details of your life. Quit avoiding questions with your inane responses.

You asked how i would feel and i told you i have no term of reference to give you a answer. I can not answer a question when i have no answer to give though i will be sure if i ever do drive and a bug hits the window i will answer your question then.

dukebound85

Jul 2, 2009, 08:23 PM

Don't drive and have no interest in it, i have a bike and easy access to the train and bus i would not waste money on a car.

fine, what about bugs you hit with your bike or train?

seriously, do you need to be told explicitly the point we try to convey? dont take it so literal. you know what he is trying to say and you always avoid it if the scenario doesnt fir you to a "T"

the scenario isnt important, its the point conveyed in the scenario...

you are a human and not a robot? meaning you should be able to deduce his point i hope

Cabbit

Jul 2, 2009, 08:24 PM

No offense, but that's a hard headed response.

Of course i would take no offence, i respect your point of view regardless of whether i agree with your view or not.

Cassie

Jul 2, 2009, 08:27 PM

It's human instinct to feel sadness at the loss of someone close to you. But you don't feel the same way every time a human dies, so why would you feel the same way every time a bug dies? :rolleyes:

spaceboots06

Jul 2, 2009, 08:28 PM

Of course i would take no offence, i respect your point of view regardless of whether i agree with your view or not.

No this isn't about views or anything. I respect your views but I can, at the same time, think or declare that they're wrong.

My above post wasn't attacking your views, it was attacking the fact that you can't maturely reply to something.

TuffLuffJimmy

Jul 2, 2009, 08:29 PM

Of course i would take no offence, i respect your point of view regardless of whether i agree with your view or not.

http://i.eprci.net/picard-facepalm

There's just no talking to this kid, is there?

Cabbit

Jul 2, 2009, 08:31 PM

fine, what about bugs you hit with your bike or train?

seriously, do you need to be told explicitly the point we try to convey? dont take it so literal. you know what he is trying to say and you always avoid it if the scenario doesnt fir you to a "T"

the scenario isnt important, its the point conveyed in the scenario...

you are a human and not a robot? meaning you should be able to deduce his point i hope

Make your point clear i do not read between the lines i read and answer precisely the question you put forth. And to answer your question the bugs i hit with my bike and when i ride the train are in the same number as when i breath so it is a mute point. Just by being we kill millions of living organisms and that is something that gets to the point point that for there to be no dead there must be no life.

There's just no talking to this kid, is there?

Careful who you call a kid i am not making this personal you are, once again you are making this into personal attacks and not about your own arguments and view points.

Cassie

Jul 2, 2009, 08:33 PM

If you saw people being farmed wouldn't you do something about it? It would go against your stance to not do the same for animals.
Nope. People have farmed animals for thousands of years, why not do the same to them?
you could go to the farm and buy a cow to save it. They're not very expensive, maybe around $500 for one, based on its weight.
Right, because I have $500.

TuffLuffJimmy

Jul 2, 2009, 08:38 PM

Nope. People have farmed animals for thousands of years, why not do the same to them?
Because of human empathy

Right, because I have $500.

You do. You have a pretty computer you're typing on, you have the ability to go get a job, you can sell yourself to older men who will do things I don't want to talk about to you. But you do have $500.

kymac

Jul 2, 2009, 08:39 PM

Of course i would take no offence, i respect your point of view regardless of whether i agree with your view or not.

i hate to give you attention by replying to this.. because you appear to have a personality which thrives from it.. but we get it, you will disagree with everything someone says. if you respected peoples points of view, please finish the useless, repetitive nagging. stop while you're.. uh.. pretty far behind.

Cabbit

Jul 2, 2009, 08:39 PM

Because of human empathy

You do. You have a pretty computer you're typing on, you have the ability to go get a job, you can sell yourself to older men who will do things I don't want to talk about to you. But you do have $500.

My last cow was £40, they must charge you to much in the states for them.

TuffLuffJimmy

Jul 2, 2009, 08:40 PM

My last cow was £40, they must charge you to much in the states for them.

full grown?

dukebound85

Jul 2, 2009, 08:41 PM

My last cow was £40, they must charge you to much in the states for them.

Once again, you missed the point

Cabbit

Jul 2, 2009, 08:45 PM

i hate to give you attention by replying to this.. because you appear to have a personality which thrives from it.. but we get it, you will disagree with everything someone says. if you respected peoples points of view, please finish the useless, repetitive nagging. stop while you're.. uh.. pretty far behind.

Your point seems to not have any grounding in this conversation. This is about a snake killing a child and while in the process of eating the corpse being attacked by one of the parents and the argument i put forward was the snake should have been allowed to eat the corpse which under normal circumstances the snake would throw up or get the substance it requires to live.
I have no requirement for attention but i will not have my point dismissed because others believe it to be wrong. And i will not stoop to personal attacks.

Once again, you missed the point

I have no interest in the point i made a off topic note that $500 is a lot to pay for a cow when my last one was £40, i have no interest in the point you were making as i do not believe it to be relevant to your argument.

Cassie

Jul 2, 2009, 08:48 PM

Because of human empathy

I have the same amount of empathy for animals. Humans don't deserve it any more then they do.

You do. You have a pretty computer you're typing on, you have the ability to go get a job, you can sell yourself to older men who will do things I don't want to talk about to you. But you do have $500.

I don't see you doing the same to help humans.

dukebound85

Jul 2, 2009, 08:49 PM

I have no interest in the point i made a off topic note that $500 is a lot to pay for a cow when my last one was £40, i have no interest in the point you were making as i do not believe it to be relevant to your argument.

it wasnt i that was making a point with the 500 dollar cow

just saying you missed the point of what he was trying to convey

no one cares how much you buy a cow for

the point is why not save as many lives as you can if you can go buy animals and spare them from getting killed

I have the same amount of empathy for animals. Humans don't deserve it any more then they do.

I don't see you doing the same to help humans.

once again, the argument is an animals life vs a humans. stop trying to make it a human vs a human as your counter arguemnt

Cabbit

Jul 2, 2009, 08:50 PM

I have the same amount of empathy for animals. Humans don't deserve it any more then they do.

You'll find most humans can apply more empathy to other mammals and often birds more than to things such as fish and reptiles. I believe it is due to the "its furry its cute." mentality that humans have.

LizKat

Jul 2, 2009, 08:52 PM

Nope. People have farmed animals for thousands of years, why not do the same to them? /snip/

Some of the arguments in this thread border on suggesting that legal constraints on what can be done with or to dead humans do not exist.

That's bad enough but now you want to take it to another level and talk raising people for food?

Cabbit

Jul 2, 2009, 08:54 PM

it wasnt i that was making a point with the 500 dollar cow

just saying you missed the point of what he was trying to convey

no one cares how much you buy a cow for

the point is why not save as many lives as you can if you can go buy animals and spare them from getting killed

We eat cows, empathy and respect for life as equals does not involve living in some fairy land where you don't eat. Plants are living too, we respect them they provide life and are just as important as any other life the same as a cow or ourselves.
If anything all we do is destroy so there is less room for us but that would be generalising to much.

Cassie

Jul 2, 2009, 08:55 PM

once again, the argument is an animals life vs a humans. stop trying to make it a human vs a human as your counter arguemnt

You guys are accusing me of not doing everything I can to help animals, when you yourselves have the means to help what you consider to be more deserving of your time and energy. And yet you don't. Hypocritical much?

dukebound85

Jul 2, 2009, 08:57 PM

You guys are accusing me of not doing everything I can to help animals, when you yourselves have the means to help what you consider to be more deserving of your time and energy. And yet you don't. Hypocritical much?

I am not the one making the claim that an animal's life is worth the same as a human's. You are

My position is that it is not. You have then stated you would serve yourself up to save an animal and then state later you wouldn't as you value your life over other lives. You said it, not me.

Where have I been hypocritical? Stop throwing around words and not using them correctly.

I am just pointing out how flawed your argument is and how you yourself have contradicted yourself over this thread.

My only position is that I do not value an animal's life as equal to a human's. Please show me where I have been hypocritcal.

Cabbit

Jul 2, 2009, 08:59 PM

I am not the one making the claim that an animal's life is worth more than a humans.

No one has put this claim forward, we have put forward that animals are all equal regardless of species even humans.

Cassie

Jul 2, 2009, 09:01 PM

I am not the one making the claim that an animal's life is worth more than a human's. You are

My position is that it is not.

Where have I been hypocritical? Stop throwing around words and not using them correctly.

I'm 16, my grammar ain't gooder. ;)

What I'm trying to say: People in this thread are suggesting that I don't think an animal's life is equal to a human's, because I'm not doing everything in my power to help them. I don't see you guys moving to Africa to help the starving people over there. Does that mean you don't value a human's life over an animals?

Also, I never said I value an animals life more. I said they're equal to us.

themoonisdown09

Jul 2, 2009, 09:01 PM

I'm just curious... are we talking about a snake or is "python" a code word for pecker?

spaceboots06

Jul 2, 2009, 09:01 PM

No one has put this claim forward, we have put forward that animals are all equal regardless of species even humans.

Exactly. You've put the claim forward. It's an assertion. It's unproven.

dukebound85

Jul 2, 2009, 09:01 PM

No one has put this claim forward, we have put forward that animals are all equal regardless of species even humans.

and that is absurd

dukebound85

Jul 2, 2009, 09:02 PM

I'm just curious... are we talking about a snake or is "python" a code word for pecker?

peckers create babies, not eats them lol
I'm 16, my grammar ain't gooder. ;)

What I'm trying to say: People in this thread are suggesting that I don't think an animal's life is equal to a human's, because I'm not doing everything in my power to help them. I don't see you guys moving to Africa to help the starving people over there. Does that mean you don't value a human's life over an animals?

Also, I never said I value an animals life more. I said they're equal to us.
Once again, i did not say I would offer myself to save an animal and later retract it. you did

I am not the one making claims so what I do is irrelevant.

Cabbit

Jul 2, 2009, 09:06 PM

and that is absurd

That is absurd in your opinion which may or may not be the majority opinion of your country or of other countries in the world with different cultures. In my own country there are few that share your opinion such as Jehovah's witnesses and other cults.
You have the right to your opinion but i strongly disagree with it.

dukebound85

Jul 2, 2009, 09:08 PM

That is absurd in your opinion which may or may not be the majority opinion of your country or of other countries in the world with different cultures. In my own country there are few that share your opinion such as Jehovah's witnesses and other cults.
You have the right to your opinion but i strongly disagree with it.

So you compare my view to religious cults?

WTH are you implying?

If you hadn't noticed, everyone in this thread besides Cassie disagrees with you and thinks your view is downright disturbing. Sorry if people feel sympathy for a baby and not the snake.

i realize it's hard to understand... I am being sarcastic as I am worried you can't pick up on that

kymac

Jul 2, 2009, 09:12 PM

such as Jehovah's witnesses and other cults.

jehovahs witness is not a cult! how can treat a religion as if it wasn't equal!!!!! all religions have equal value in life! respect religion!! respect cults!!!! respect everything! :rolleyes:

Cassie

Jul 2, 2009, 09:14 PM

peckers create babies, not eats them lol

Once again, i did not say I would offer myself to save an animal and later retract it. you did

I am not the one making claims so what I do is irrelevant.

Alright, let me rephrase and restate my position on that.

In the event I was given a chance to save an animal in exchange for my own life, I probably would do it if the decision had to be made on the spot. But If I had time to think about, I would have to consider a lot of factors.
There is absolutely no point in sacrificing your own life, whether it be for an animal or a human, if the end result is going to be the same anyway.

But the thing is, you really don't have anyway of knowing whether or not that animal/person is going to die tomorrow anyway. Therefore you have to make a guess, and if I felt whatever I was sacrificing my life for had a fairly good chance of making it longer then a few months, I would do it.

spaceboots06

Jul 2, 2009, 09:44 PM

There is absolutely no point in sacrificing your own life, whether it be for an animal or a human, if the end result is going to be the same anyway.

Now that this thread has been unlocked I can continue to try to make my point.

The end result will never be the same in terms of sacrificing an animal or human. Humans have an infinitely more amount of potential than animals.

That's all.

LizKat

Jul 2, 2009, 09:56 PM

And here I was happy a little while ago to see that this thread had finally been padlocked in Current Events.

Putting the thread over here is not going to make it sane. Really it should be pole-axed and written over 7 times. MacRumors is a better place than this thread would lead almost anyone to believe.

The thing is off topic, irrational, becoming difficult to avoid piling on (because some of the posts --not the posters-- richly deserve it) and because there is nowhere to go with its seminal propositions, so it is becoming driftwood. Driftwood eventually only attracts the albatross at sea...

Y'all have a good Independence Day weekend even if you're not Yanks :)

Sun Baked

Jul 2, 2009, 10:08 PM

I'm 16, my grammar ain't gooder. ;)

It probably is all the UK English on MacRumors messing you up.

Cassie

Jul 2, 2009, 10:11 PM

Now that this thread has been unlocked I can continue to try to make my point.

The end result will never be the same in terms of sacrificing an animal or human. Humans have an infinitely more amount of potential than animals.

That's all.

And what is the end end result? As far as I can tell, it's a life saved, a life lost. No difference between the two,

spaceboots06

Jul 2, 2009, 10:15 PM

And what is the end end result? As far as I can tell, it's a life saved, a life lost. No difference between the two,

No but you're only exactly wrong. Physically, yes, it's a life saved either way. But there's more to it than that. We don't act like animals and animals don't think like us. There's ultimately a difference.

A human has potential. A human can create something besides more humans. A human can solve math questions, a human can contribute to society, a human can resolve issues using its brain. Animals can not solve math questions, animals cannot contribute to society as humans do, and animals can not resolve issues effectively using its brain as we do.

I would rather live amongst humans than animals.

Sun Baked

Jul 2, 2009, 10:16 PM

I think if we were the ones choosing the baby or the snake for a meal, we'd likely choose the snake.

The baby may taste better (hard to find someone to ask), but you'd feel better eating the snake.

spaceboots06

Jul 2, 2009, 10:17 PM

I think if we were the ones choosing the baby or the snake for a meal, we'd likely choose the snake.

The baby may taste better (hard to find someone to ask), but you'd feel better eating the snake.

Or, we wait for the snake to eat the baby, then we eat the snake. :o

eawmp1

Jul 2, 2009, 10:21 PM

Wow, I get back onto my computer 6 hours later and this post has entered an alternate universe. :eek:

May the young girl R.I.P. while we slug out absurdities.

Cassie

Jul 2, 2009, 10:22 PM

No but you're only exactly wrong. Physically, yes, it's a life saved either way. But there's more to it than that. We don't act like animals and animals don't think like us. There's ultimately a difference.

A human has potential. A human can create something besides more humans. A human can solve math questions, a human can contribute to society, a human can resolve issues using its brain. Animals can not solve math questions, animals cannot contribute to society as humans do, and animals can not resolve issues effectively using its brain as we do.

I would rather live amongst humans than animals.

But how does that make our lives any more valuable then theirs?

I don't see the reasoning behind "Well, we're smarter so we're better then them."

Rt&Dzine

Jul 2, 2009, 10:25 PM

I am not the one making the claim that an animal's life is worth the same as a human's. You are

My position is that it is not. You have then stated you would serve yourself up to save an animal and then state later you wouldn't as you value your life over other lives. You said it, not me.

Where have I been hypocritical? Stop throwing around words and not using them correctly.

I am just pointing out how flawed your argument is and how you yourself have contradicted yourself over this thread.

My only position is that I do not value an animal's life as equal to a human's. Please show me where I have been hypocritcal.

Your argument is flawed. Just because she thinks that humans are just another species of animal, doesn't mean that she needs to sacrifice her life for a cow. That doesn't make any sense. (FWIW, I don't agree with her about the child.)

spaceboots06

Jul 2, 2009, 10:27 PM

But how does that make our lives any more valuable then theirs?

I don't see the reasoning behind "Well, we're smarter so we're better then them."

I think you're measuring value in cuteness. I'm not.

And if you're not measuring value in cuteness, what are you measuring it in?

EDIT: How do you measure value if everything is equally valuable? Doesn't that just negate value in general? It's like saying a chinese knock off iPhone is just as valuable as the real thing because they look the same.