I am Anti-Humanist.

[Bender]

I would sooner try to understand a serial killer or rapist. At least they have hearts and souls.

But a dog torturer? Who does it for a holiday??? No. Im not degrading myself by even trying to think about what goes on in their in-human minds. And it offends me that someone would even expect me to degrade and damage myself by trying to understand something even lower than an abomination.

Don't you mean their "human" minds, since it seems that according to you it is a very human thing to want to torture dogs?

 

Just wondering: are you ok with torturing humans? You seem to think killing and raping humans is fine.

[Argent]

Say what you want, but it doesn't make it true. Leave your paranoid accusations of being a China-sympathizer at the tin-foil-lounge please. Rest assured, I deeply hate china and it is consumed with my rage. My only wish is that the UN takes hostile action to the chinese villages that torture dogs, because the chinese government wont do anything. And nobody wants to do anything about it. So people need to do something about it, by any means neccessary. Any means, and I don't care. The mere fact that these people are allowed to exist is sickening and disturbs me deeply. It also disturbs me that you would even think I would be a sympathizer of the chinese government. I dont even like america but i would sooner join the ranks of america than serve china.

My apologies for being unclear. I said this: "It rather seems to me that you don't want people to agree with you, therefore you select the position that is most likely to discourage agreement. It's an old trick, but seasoned campaigners can usually see through it - often before the practitioner does."

 

I don't know how you converted this into me accusing you of being a Chinese sympathiser. Let me try again. In most and probably all of the positions you adopt you do not wish anyone to agree with you. You wish to be the isolated voice condemning the rest. To do this you present the extremity of each position. As I noted before it is an old debating trick, often favoured by the young who think they have invented it. I don't have an issue with you using this approach. It's very silly, but that your choice. Everyone has a right to be silly.

[Arete]

A. is flawed logic. I hate humanists because they are the heros of humanity, defender of the sick sad species. Thus i specically target my hatred to such flagships who defend the sick sad species.

 

The defining feature of humanist ideology is the belief that ethics and morality are a human construction rather than derived from a supernatural, divine source. Any additional ideology regarding animal rights is coincidental and irrelevant to humanist ideology. You're using the term incorrectly.

[hypervalent_iodine]

Nah....Just a whiny little malcontent who is....To Nick a line from the movie Good Morning Vietnam...In more need of a blowjob than any man in history.

 

LOL

 

!

Moderator Note

Just because this one seems to have been missed.

 

This is not the first time you have made posts that aim to do nothing more than insult other members and add zero intelligent discourse into the discussion. This is against forum rules, and since you are a repeat offender of this, I feel that I should note that continued infractions will lead to further action.

[quickquestion]

 

 

!

Moderator Note

You might have noticed I said "Thus far I'm not seeing much discussion of ethics." rather than saying "I see no ethics discussion at all", and even where you mention this, it's not really in the context of ethics.

I don't get how much more about ethics it can get. I'm saying China is evil because it does not stop-dog torture.

 

 

I saw you say in an earlier post, that you always eat meat so that others will hopefully accept you.

You're adding to that body count. Also, that makes you a hypocrite.

 

 

Which dog can talk? Show me. Evidence. Sources. Now.

My dog can talk. Also some dogs on youtube can talk. You will probably think the video staged and fake, so the main point you should take is that dogs can communicate. Can dogs communicate with their owners without talking? Yes.

 

Im not a hypocrit because my avatar is a villian and I never said I was holy. I merely point out that human society is hypocrits and unholy. When I eat meat I admit that I am evil when I eat meat. But humans cannot even do that. And that is what I can't stand about it. I cant stand a society that goes around saying it is good when it is evil.

 

 

"How am I supposed to know what they define as ethical? "

If you don't know what they think then you shouldn't decide that you hate them for thinking it, should you?

Did you think that through?

I'm also willing to bet that you were banned for failing to comply with the vegan forum's rules.

Most sites tell you those rules when you join up, and they explain that use of the forum indicates that you agree to abide by those rules.

 

How ethical would it be to sign up, then break the rules?

Is that the sort of hypocrisy that you accuse humanity of?

Well, perhaps you have a point, but you need a mirror.

They didnt cite any rule violations. They just, more or less, they arbitrarily judged my posts and didn't like the aesthetics.

 

Also, rule-breaking is not always unethical. If the world is comprised of private organizations, the majority of which have ridiculous rules, eventually you have to bite the bullet and submit to one of these organizations and follow the fascist rules. I didn't make the rules, so it's not like I'm breaking anything I would normally consent to.

 

 

Don't you mean their "human" minds, since it seems that according to you it is a very human thing to want to torture dogs?

 

Just wondering: are you ok with torturing humans? You seem to think killing and raping humans is fine.

If someone tortures dogs they deserve to be tortured.

 

 

My apologies for being unclear. I said this: "It rather seems to me that you don't want people to agree with you, therefore you select the position that is most likely to discourage agreement. It's an old trick, but seasoned campaigners can usually see through it - often before the practitioner does."

 

I don't know how you converted this into me accusing you of being a Chinese sympathiser. Let me try again. In most and probably all of the positions you adopt you do not wish anyone to agree with you. You wish to be the isolated voice condemning the rest. To do this you present the extremity of each position. As I noted before it is an old debating trick, often favoured by the young who think they have invented it. I don't have an issue with you using this approach. It's very silly, but that your choice. Everyone has a right to be silly.

I dont wish to be the isolated voice. I wish more would see it my way.

 

 

 

The defining feature of humanist ideology is the belief that ethics and morality are a human construction rather than derived from a supernatural, divine source. Any additional ideology regarding animal rights is coincidental and irrelevant to humanist ideology. You're using the term incorrectly.

And this is why I hate humanists. Because animal rights are irrelevant to humanist ideology. That was actually, one of the points I was trying to make.

[John Cuthber]

I don't get how much more about ethics it can get. I'm saying China is evil because it does not stop-dog torture.

 

 

My dog can talk.

Also, rule-breaking is not always unethical. If the world is comprised of private organizations, the majority of which have ridiculous rules, eventually you have to bite the bullet and submit to one of these organizations and follow the fascist rules. I didn't make the rules, so it's not like I'm breaking anything I would normally consent to.

 

 

If someone tortures dogs they deserve to be tortured.

 

"I don't get how much more about ethics it can get. I'm saying China is evil because it does not stop-dog torture."

Give it a rest: Nobody said otherwise.

 

"My dog can talk."

Cool, can you ask it what it thinks of Trump's haircut?

"Also, rule-breaking is not always unethical. "

True- if the rules are bad then breaking them is ethical. But, in that case, signing up to them was unethical.

​So the question is, which sort of hypocrite are you?

 

"If someone tortures dogs they deserve to be tortured."

When did two wrongs start making a right?

[Bender]

Im not a hypocrit because my avatar is a villian and I never said I was holy. I merely point out that human society is hypocrits and unholy. When I eat meat I admit that I am evil when I eat meat. But humans cannot even do that. And that is what I can't stand about it. I cant stand a society that goes around saying it is good when it is evil.

I everyone is evil, the concept has no meaning. Good and evil are relative and subjective.

 

If someone tortures dogs they deserve to be tortured.

 

What about the humans that don't torture dogs, which is nearly all of them? What about humans that torture humans?

What about dogs torturing dogs?

I dont wish to be the isolated voice. I wish more would see it my way.

 

You are not helping in achieving that goal. Edited April 22, 2017 by Bender

[quickquestion]

"I don't get how much more about ethics it can get. I'm saying China is evil because it does not stop-dog torture."

Give it a rest: Nobody said otherwise.

 

"My dog can talk."

Cool, can you ask it what it thinks of Trump's haircut?

"Also, rule-breaking is not always unethical. "

True- if the rules are bad then breaking them is ethical. But, in that case, signing up to them was unethical.

​So the question is, which sort of hypocrite are you?

 

"If someone tortures dogs they deserve to be tortured."

When did two wrongs start making a right?

I said my dog could talk, didn't say to what level of complexity. It understands a couple of words and ideas.

 

I explained in my private-corp analogy that if the entire world is filled with unethical rules, in order to participate into some kind of community you have to bite the bullet and pretend to accept those rules. it's a kind of forced-consent that you never really consented to.

 

If you don't believe two wrongs make a right then you don't believe in justice. Justice is punishing someone because they did something wrong. The whole point of justice is to make them suffer. That is why I don't agree with the justice system. Throwing someone in a cage for their whole life just for counterfeiting money is cruel and a form of torture.

 

 

I everyone is evil, the concept has no meaning. Good and evil are relative and subjective.

 

What about the humans that don't torture dogs, which is nearly all of them? What about humans that torture humans?

What about dogs torturing dogs?

You are not helping in achieving that goal.

No it doesn't have no meaning. Everyone can be evil, but they could also have a good side, and various degrees of evil. That is like how if a meat-eater gives you 50 bucks, they are good for giving you money, but evil for eating meat.

 

Also, I never heard of dogs torturing dogs.

[Bender]

If you don't believe two wrongs make a right then you don't believe in justice. Justice is punishing someone because they did something wrong. The whole point of justice is to make them suffer. That is why I don't agree with the justice system. Throwing someone in a cage for their whole life just for counterfeiting money is cruel and a form of torture.

I actually agree with you that putting people in jail is rarely a good idea. Indeed, I do not belief in justice on its own.

 

I am surprised that you don't think it is a good idea, because it certainly increases hate, which you like, and it is torture of humans, which you also like.

 

No it doesn't have no meaning. Everyone can be evil, but they could also have a good side, and various degrees of evil. That is like how if a meat-eater gives you 50 bucks, they are good for giving you money, but evil for eating meat.

What about eating worms or insects? Is that evil?

 

Also, I never heard of dogs torturing dogs.

Of course dogs torture and kill other dogs. Is it ok to torture these dogs?

[quickquestion]

I actually agree with you that putting people in jail is rarely a good idea. Indeed, I do not belief in justice on its own.

 

I am surprised that you don't think it is a good idea, because it certainly increases hate, which you like, and it is torture of humans, which you also like.

 

What about eating worms or insects? Is that evil?

 

Of course dogs torture and kill other dogs. Is it ok to torture these dogs?

I only believe in torturing the deserving. I also believe in minor torture but not major torture.

 

If that video is about domesticated dogs, it is irrelevant, because it is obvious the humans brainwashed those dogs, therefore the humans should be punished and not the dogs.

 

I dont think it is evil because i dont think worms or insects have any deep sentience. i think the reptile brain, bird brain, fish brain or mammal brain is needed for sentience.

[John Cuthber]

I said my dog could talk, didn't say to what level of complexity. It understands a couple of words and ideas.

 

I explained in my private-corp analogy that if the entire world is filled with unethical rules, in order to participate into some kind of community you have to bite the bullet and pretend to accept those rules. it's a kind of forced-consent that you never really consented to.

 

If you don't believe two wrongs make a right then you don't believe in justice. Justice is punishing someone because they did something wrong. The whole point of justice is to make them suffer. That is why I don't agree with the justice system. Throwing someone in a cage for their whole life just for counterfeiting money is cruel and a form of torture.

 

 

Do you understand that understanding a few words is not the same as talking?

 

"I explained in my private-corp analogy that if the entire world is filled with unethical rules, in order to participate into some kind of community you have to bite the bullet and pretend to accept those rules. it's a kind of forced-consent that you never really consented to."

Nonsense- you could start your own forum, or, at least, not join those whose rules you don't agree with.

 

You seem to agree with torture sometimes, but not others.

Do you plan to make up your mind some time?

[quickquestion]

Do you understand that understanding a few words is not the same as talking?

 

"I explained in my private-corp analogy that if the entire world is filled with unethical rules, in order to participate into some kind of community you have to bite the bullet and pretend to accept those rules. it's a kind of forced-consent that you never really consented to."

Nonsense- you could start your own forum, or, at least, not join those whose rules you don't agree with.

 

You seem to agree with torture sometimes, but not others.

Do you plan to make up your mind some time?

I already tried to make my own forums, noone joined.

And there is hardly any forums I can think of that have rules I totally agree with.

 

My morality is contextual. It depends on the context and situation. So naturally I agree with certain things sometimes, depending on the context.

[Bender]

I only believe in torturing the deserving. I also believe in minor torture but not major torture.

But if everyone is evil, isn't everyone deserving?

 

If that video is about domesticated dogs, it is irrelevant, because it is obvious the humans brainwashed those dogs, therefore the humans should be punished and not the dogs.

You do know that all dogs are domesticated, don't you? There were no dogs before humans domesticated them. None. (Don't bother pointing out that there are wild dogs because they were released somehow, that is irrelevant to the discussion)

 

Why do you excuse a dog for doing as it was taught, but not a poor Chinese man for inheriting his fathers "dog torturing business"?

 

I dont think it is evil because i dont think worms or insects have any deep sentience. i think the reptile brain, bird brain, fish brain or mammal brain is needed for sentience.

That's a pretty arbitrary line, isn't it? So torturing and eating octopuses is fine too? What if someone shows up and says you are evil and need to be tortured for all those horrible things you do to worms?

[quickquestion]

But if everyone is evil, isn't everyone deserving?

 

You do know that all dogs are domesticated, don't you? There were no dogs before humans domesticated them. None. (Don't bother pointing out that there are wild dogs because they were released somehow, that is irrelevant to the discussion)

 

Why do you excuse a dog for doing as it was taught, but not a poor Chinese man for inheriting his fathers "dog torturing business"?

 

That's a pretty arbitrary line, isn't it? So torturing and eating octopuses is fine too? What if someone shows up and says you are evil and need to be tortured for all those horrible things you do to worms?

Because humans have the ability to think and question. And its not a business, but a holiday. Anyone who goes along with a dog-torturing holiday is inhuman.

 

Everyone is deserving of punishment, this is the concept of christ, christ came to save the world (And no im not religious.)

 

Octopuses are probably sentient, so its not ok to torture them. And torturing dogs and humans is more evil than torturing worms.

[John Cuthber]

I already tried to make my own forums, noone joined.

 

OK, so, everyone else in the world is wrong.

[Bender]

So can we agree that good vs evil is a continuous spectrum?

Why is your arbitrary opinion about where each action is positioned on that spectrum more valid than my arbitrary opinion?

 

Because humans have the ability to think and question. And its not a business, but a holiday. Anyone who goes along with a dog-torturing holiday is inhuman.

I have never heard of dog-torturing holidays.

Everyone is deserving of punishment, this is the concept of christ, christ came to save the world (And no im not religious.)

 

If you are not religious, why bring it up? The statement is meaningless without religion.

Octopuses are probably sentient, so its not ok to torture them. And torturing dogs and humans is more evil than torturing worms.

What about crabs, lobsters or squids? Edited April 23, 2017 by Bender

[John Cuthber]

I have never heard of dog-torturing holidays.

 

I guess he means this

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lychee_and_Dog_Meat_Festival

[quickquestion]

I guess he means this

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lychee_and_Dog_Meat_Festival

The thing that the Wiki article does not mention, is that the dogs are burnt alive and tortured.

 

 

So can we agree that good vs evil is a continuous spectrum?

Why is your arbitrary opinion about where each action is positioned on that spectrum more valid than my arbitrary opinion?

 

I have never heard of dog-torturing holidays.

If you are not religious, why bring it up? The statement is meaningless without religion.

What about crabs, lobsters or squids?

Because burning someone alive is more evil that cutting off their finger. Pain and death index.

It is not an arbitrary system.

What is an arbitrary system is the American Legal System.

They demand severe punishment for minor crimes.

You counterfeit money? Life in prison, judge says. Says you damage the economy. But Judge doesn't care about corporations who have damaged the economy more than some counterfeiter ever could.

Rob 200 dollars from a pizza store? 20 years in prison.

Ok.

We can see what BS it is. Justice is an injustice.

And the UN will just slap the wrist of these Yulin tortureres. And they will go to the grave without the punishment they deserve. Sickening. The world sickens me.

[John Cuthber]

The thing that the Wiki article does not mention, is that the dogs are burnt alive and tortured.

 

 

Because burning someone alive is more evil that cutting off their finger. Pain and death index.

It is not an arbitrary system.

What is an arbitrary system is the American Legal System.

They demand severe punishment for minor crimes.

You counterfeit money? Life in prison, judge says. Says you damage the economy. But Judge doesn't care about corporations who have damaged the economy more than some counterfeiter ever could.

Rob 200 dollars from a pizza store? 20 years in prison.

Ok.

We can see what BS it is. Justice is an injustice.

And the UN will just slap the wrist of these Yulin tortureres. And they will go to the grave without the punishment they deserve. Sickening. The world sickens me.

You do know that it's common practice to boil lobsters alive, don't you?

 

[quickquestion]

You do know that it's common practice to boil lobsters alive, don't you?

 

Lobsters have less sentience than dogs. And boiling is less torture than the Yulin festivals. The yulin do all kinds of torture to the dogs.

 

But yes, I hate Red Lobster too. I made a thread about how I hate humanity. And I have to prioritize my targets. So if I only had the ability to stop one, I would choose stopping Yulin over Red Lobster. But if I had the ability to change the world as I saw fit, I would stop Red Lobster too. But humans dont make it easy for me. They always have to resist. Even when I try to stop torture of humans. If I was back in the Roman day I would be saying Crucifixition is wrong. But society would resist me and give me a hard time.

[dimreepr]

Lobsters have less sentience than dogs. And boiling is less torture than the Yulin festivals. The yulin do all kinds of torture to the dogs.

 

But yes, I hate Red Lobster too. I made a thread about how I hate humanity. And I have to prioritize my targets. So if I only had the ability to stop one, I would choose stopping Yulin over Red Lobster. But if I had the ability to change the world as I saw fit, I would stop Red Lobster too. But humans dont make it easy for me. They always have to resist. Even when I try to stop torture of humans. If I was back in the Roman day I would be saying Crucifixition is wrong. But society would resist me and give me a hard time.

 

For someone who hates so much, you do seem to have a soft spot for spot (the dog).

 

The thing that the Wiki article does not mention, is that the dogs are burnt alive and tortured.

 

Why would it since the only mention of cruelty are the only things that required citations, but you're welcome to provide your own.

 

Throughout the 10 days of festivities dogs are paraded in wooden crates and metal cages and are taken to be skinned and cooked for consumption of festival attendants and local residents.^{[citation needed]}

 

 

Animal rights activists and campaigners, however, claim that the animals are "treated abominably", based on photographs of the event.^{[citation needed]}

[quickquestion]

 

For someone who hates so much, you do seem to have a soft spot for spot (the dog).

 

 

Why would it since the only mention of cruelty are the only things that required citations, but you're welcome to provide your own.

 

 

 

I dont have enough money to visit china and prove it on my own. If the photographic evidence of activists isn't enough to believe it, then what is? Apparently photographs are not enough evidence for people.

[dimreepr]

I dont have enough money to visit china and prove it on my own. If the photographic evidence of activists isn't enough to believe it, then what is? Apparently photographs are not enough evidence for people.

 

Show us the photo's.

[Arete]

And this is why I hate humanists. Because animal rights are irrelevant to humanist ideology. That was actually, one of the points I was trying to make.

 

That makes as much sense as hating badminton players because the rules don't have any good recipes in them. Plus, just as many humanists are also animal rights activists, I'm sure many badminton players are good cooks.

[quickquestion]

 

Show us the photo's.

You can google it if you want, but it may disturb you for life. Thus I wish to not view them or post them.