11-23-2018, 09:25 AM
Quote:
23 hours ago, caikgoch said:
And "consent" is 100%, beyond a shadow of a doubt, absolutely a red herring. If an animal is property, consent doesn't exist (and it doesn't for any other aspect of the animal's life). If consent is required for any aspect of the animal's life, it is required for all (where will that lead?).
Quote:
3 hours ago, heavyhorse said:
Clearly this is absolutely so. Consent for sex is an issue? And no consent is needed to kill 150 millions of animals every day, dehorned and de-nutted without anesthesia, forced bred, anal electroshock, tails docked and ears cut, surgical practice and cosmetic testing, assassinated (er, "euthanized") by rescues and "humane" groups, and so on ad infinitum? Clearly "consent" is nothing but an artificial claim to create an ethics argument.
The old saying in 'forum circles' Quoted For Truth very much rings with both of these posts.
Past a legal standpoint (property) I do see consent (from the animal's perspective, more a simple 'yes' or 'no' in sexual situations...) is important. I don't place animals as Moral Agents, but their comfort and happiness are simply priorities of mine.
Though legally they are property I personally refuse to make that generalization and delete all other information that makes that generalization possible. In my own frame of reference (and I think a lot of this forum's members will agree) they are living, loving, caring, cognizant creatures who display sentience.
Now it's important to know the difference between Sapient and Sentient here. Sapient is what we are: what most would call 'high level', a being that questions it's past and asks the questions of it's existence and origins. While animals don't do that I can guarantee that most mammalian species are Sentient. Sentience is self-awareness, the ability to recognize danger, pleasure, pain, etc.: especially in survival situations. Sentience is pretty much crucial for higher mammals like us, Equines, Canines, so on and so forth. Sentience also requires the ability to identify self and others: this is able to be seen with a lot of mammals, the problem is most humans look for sight identifications (the aptly named 'Mirror Test') and not all species' primary sense is sight. Dogs for example are scent-based and while not terrible their vision is Monochromatic (I believe, don't quote 100% on that one..).
As someone who's grown up on a farm, and who's researched his 'partners of choice' (canines) extensively, and who still has a lot to learn, I can't agree with you enough HH on the amount of purely heinous shit we do to animals and call it 'acceptable'. Some of the procedures I've seen done first hand. Hell I've seen a two year old Stallion *gelded* with no anesthesia, hobble-tied in a trailer...
Dogs getting their bodies mutilated because it's 'healthier for them' and 'it lowers pet population'... I won't go in to that here as it's off topic and I've ranted about it elsewhere.
Caikgoch is right in the legal sense, HeavyHorse is very much right on a personal level, for me 100% as well.
Also, can't stand ear crops and tail docks with dogs. There's no reason to dock these days.. Just none.. Especially for a litter of canines who're going to be family pets, companions or possibly lovers.
