And we are told animals are not sentient

[2322]

Re: Genesis: How forgetful of those Christians to deny the existence of a non human creature which fell from grace - i.e. the serpent punished for tempting Eve. God killed animals to create skin coats as parting gifts for Adam and Eve. God loved the smell of burning flesh as did many of the ancients who ate of it.

I don't think it should be a crime akin to murder to harm any creature.
Have you and Hung joined PETA or the JeepersJane fan club jason?

http://www.lpsg.org/56553-molestation-assault-battery-murder-ritual.html

No. When I wrote that I was referring to the animals I listed. I do think higher primates, cetaceans, elephants, crows, and dogs should have special protections due to their intelligence and, yes, self-awareness. I truly believe that. Squash all the mosquitoes and trap all the mice you like.

 

[B_Mister Buildington]

Animals taste good and are also good for testing medicine, foods, and surgical techniques on to make sure that they're safe for humans.

Yay animals!

 

[Calboner]

Animals taste good and are also good for testing medicine, foods, and surgical techniques on to make sure that they're safe for humans.

Yay animals!

You provocateur, you.

 

[HUNGHUGE11X7]

Told so by whom?

We are taught this at an early age . I remember in Biology class when instructed to disect an Earth worm and trying to say no cause I in no way wanted to inflict pain onto the creature. My biology teacher tried to tell me that it was NOT a reaction to pain but a reaction caused by the nervous system. I DIDNT believe it then and I still don't !


I know of exactly one scientist who has propounded such a view: René Descartes. He died more than 350 years ago, and even in his own day very few people accepted his views. They have not grown more popular since then.

You are boxing with ghosts.

Not exactly true about Descartes, he thought that animals didn't feel pain but also thought they had a collective consciousness and the ability to perceive yet he thought they felt no pain... love Descartes but what an odd notion.

This is from NewScientist.com and it is akin to the belief of most Scientists today unless they are enlightened ! It is speaking of a reaction a primate has while holding her dead baby .

According to all the news stories I've read, this photo demonstrates that she is grieving - feeling the same emotions as we would in these circumstances. Really? Or is this just rampant anthropomorphism?
There are many reports of animal behaviour that is said to constitute mourning. For example, biologist Marc Bekoff argues that magpies, elephants, and even llamas experience grief, with some animals even holding wakes to bid farewell to their dead.
But others have argued that foisting human emotions onto animals is unscientific. Just because animals sometimes behave like us does not mean that the same complex cognitive reasoning underlies these behaviours.

This above is what the Scientific community usually but NOT excusively believes !




HH

 

[HUNGHUGE11X7]

I think that he means that Christianity dictates that animals are not sentient.

Plus sentience has been traditionally known as being human.

Sentience is also usually used in parallel with self awareness and consciousness. Additionally, it is often confused with the term sapience which is another word for wisdom.

Give the OP a break, he is trying to make a point, not argue about the actual meaning of the word sentient... it means different things to different people and as a word is generally poorly understood by current human thought.

In Buddhism, I was taught to honor all sentient beings which in that application meant any "living" creature.

I saw the pic yesterday with my family and we were trippin' on how some of them had expressions that are similar to humans. Cool as hell.

Very well said . It does mean different things to different people but on the whole Scientists do not recognize animals as having what we have come to know as human consciousness and are therefore not sentient beings .
I too was blown away by that image

HH

 

[HUNGHUGE11X7]

The only other animals which recognize themselves in a mirror are the higher primates, porpoises, and elephants. It is possible that there are others.

About the Genesis thing... Humans are the only creatures which fell from grace. All other animals are in a state of grace at least as far as Christians are concerned.

I think it a crime akin to murder to harm any of these creatures. We're getting better at it but we have a long way to go.

Absolutely ... what gets me is that Christians read THOU SHALT NOT KILL . It does not say THOU SHALT NOT KILL except.... Yet they excuse away murder especially of animals for a myriad of reasons and STILL call themselves Christian .

HH

 

[HUNGHUGE11X7]

I don't think it should be a crime akin to murder to harm any creature.
Have you and Hung joined PETA or the JeepersJane fan club jason?

I am indeed a proud member of PETA and Ingrid Newkirk is a personal hero of mine :biggrin1::tongue::biggrin1:


HH

 

[HUNGHUGE11X7]

Animals taste good and are also good for testing medicine, foods, and surgical techniques on to make sure that they're safe for humans.

Yay animals!

What a repugnant ideology I find this to be, unless of course it was said sardonically .

HH

 

[vince]

I bet that snake in your pants has a mind of it's own. :wink:

 

[dreamer20]

Absolutely ... what gets me is that Christians read THOU SHALT NOT KILL . It does not say THOU SHALT NOT KILL except.... Yet they excuse away murder especially of animals for a myriad of reasons and STILL call themselves Christian .

HH

Yes, Christians read " Thou shall not kill" of Exodus 20:13 ,all of Genesis , Exodus , Leviticus and Numbers and concluded killing humans was wrong but killing animals for food, their skins and ritual sacrifices was acceptable.

God killed animals to create skin coats as parting gifts for Adam and Eve. God loved the smell of burning flesh as did many of the ancients who ate of it.

Leviticus:Chapter 1:1,5,9

^^At God's behest, burnt offerings of cattle were to be presented to him. Henceforth a bull was slain and burnt making an odor that was pleasing to God.

 

[Calboner]

Not exactly true about Descartes, he thought that animals didn't feel pain but also thought they had a collective consciousness and the ability to perceive yet he thought they felt no pain... love Descartes but what an odd notion.

I don't know what you mean by "collective consciousness," or what you may have read in Descartes that led you to impute such a notion to him, but Descartes maintains that there is nothing in the behavior of animals that cannot be attributed to the mechanical functioning of their bodies. See, e.g., part V of his Discourse on the Method:

And we ought not to confound speech with the natural movements which indicate the passions, and can be imitated by machines as well as manifested by animals; nor must it be thought with certain of the ancients, that the brutes speak, although we do not understand their language. For if such were the case, since they are endowed with many organs analogous to ours, they could as easily communicate their thoughts to us as to their fellows. It is also very worthy of remark, that, though there are many animals which manifest more industry than we in certain of their actions, the same animals are yet observed to show none at all in many others: so that the circumstance that they do better than we does not prove that they are endowed with mind, for it would thence follow that they possessed greater reason than any of us, and could surpass us in all things; on the contrary, it rather proves that they are destitute of reason, and that it is nature which acts in them according to the disposition of their organs: thus it is seen, that a clock composed only of wheels and weights can number the hours and measure time more exactly than we with all our skin. [Source]

 

[MercyfulFate]

I am indeed a proud member of PETA and Ingrid Newkirk is a personal hero of mine :biggrin1::tongue::biggrin1:


HH

Really? Ick...

PETA is horrible.