What are your views on animal testing?

[kurtsimonw]

I can't be arsed to quote the several posts in which people have indicated that this isn't what they have said and I doubt it would matter as you've obviously chosen to ignore them thus far.

Well, that's exactly what Chindie put in his latest post, something we disagree with each other on.

You seem intent on trying to besmirch me and what I say and that is your prerogative.

How so? I will admit my comment about whether you PMd Chindie was not necessary, but that's the only time I've really gone OT regarding this thread.

I must indicate to you that I don't like your approach and I find it pretty grim. Please do carry on if it gets you going but don't expect me to retort each time in the future.

I really don't know what you mean. Not being awkward or sarcastic, but I generally don't see the problem wth my approach, I'm basicall just replying to ones opinion with my own. Apologies if you've taken offense to anything, it certainly wasn't my intent whether you think that or not.

[Chindie]

We'll have to disagree on this one Chindie.

When you commit such an act that you (should) be imprisoned for your entire life, you're no longer truly living as a human, your life is very different from the norm. I just feel that this makes your life worth less than others. If you're putting a price tag on life, I'm sure that of a free man would be higher than one imprisoned for life.

I will add that I'm not literally putting a price value on each person, that was just an example, before anybody picks up on that.

Ah, I see. Then well done to snowy, he did the right thing. (It was no shot at you, I know and understand why you said it).

The phrase 'truly living as a human' suggests theres a definable way to live, a quantifiable ideal for humanity to live like. The sad fact of the matter is that isn't the case and that the only definition of 'truly living as a human' is that you be a) Alive and Human. Theres no such thing as a norm in the way we live, and thus an imprisoned man has no lesser worth as a human than Joe Bloggs or the most successful healthy 'good' man in the world.

I understand what your saying and my arguement wasn't really with the intent to be realistic. Quite clearly, as you say, it has to be done as countries need to defend themself. But it is humans who force war upon each other, so our actions really aren't always for the good of the species.

Indeed. We rarely act for the good of the species. If ever really. We endeavour to better ourselves. In the past (I mean, dawn of humanity past) groups of us would have learnt things that the species as a whole picked up on as ways of life, but now that rarely happens as we are so divided. One of the plus sides of globalisation, in my opinion, is that it might force us to act much more one species rather than as glorified tribes. Or it might just force some of these tribes to **** the others even more. Who knows.

[snowychap]

It is interesting that you have chosen to ignore a question posed to you (and the other experimentalists) about how far you would take your 'treat in any way we want' ideology and instead focussed on attempting to wind other people up by calling them such insulting things as being 'liberal' or 'gay'.

Your posts are those of a truly enlightened individual and I hope that when your cat returns home, you, too, are hoist by your own petard and burnt at the stake.

The part of your post in bold show's who the homophobe is on here..... why else would you refer to it as an "insulting thing"

Just to clarify (as it appeared to fly over your head - not difficult, it appears), that was how you conveyed those things.

To follow your own 'logic', it would also mean that you thought that I was of the opinion that being liberal was a problem rather than the problem being about those who called others (in an accusatory) 'liberal'.

Apologies if that required too much thought for you.

[Chindie]

Is that because he supports the BNP or saying he doesn't value some lives as equal? Quite harsh because one or two others have said testing on humans (horrible criminals committing evil crimes) should be an option like sailor has said.

This isn't want the topic is about, but I'll answer.

Predominately the BNP angle which lowers my opinion of someone to about the lowest eschelon it goes, then the lack of empathy or understanding of humanity rams that a little bit further through the floor into the category I used.

[starsailor9774]

Chindie; so....................................... just you don't agree with someone that makes them scum? You sound cool.

Far too simplimistic a take. I disagree with people all the time.

What made me use that term for the esteemed starsailor9774 is that his views are so vile, so unflinchingly disgusting to me, so indefensible, that I refuse to respect them nor waste pleasantries on them, and by implication the person that holds them. I stand by the use of the term.

That would not be the case for pretty much any other stadnpoint.

Is that because he supports the BNP or saying he doesn't value some lives as equal? Quite harsh because one or two others have said testing on humans (horrible criminals committing evil crimes) should be an option like sailor has said.

I did say i agreed with one or 2 of the BNP's policys.... but that doesn't mean i want repatriation of people or see coloured people as second class.

I am neither racist or homophobic,. Just opinionated.

[kurtsimonw]

The phrase 'truly living as a human' suggests theres a definable way to live, a quantifiable ideal for humanity to live like. The sad fact of the matter is that isn't the case and that the only definition of 'truly living as a human' is that you be a) Alive and Human.

I don't think I worded it very well at all, sorry. I was more or less talking about the ideal way to live. Humans are meant to be free. Obviously some aren't and it's out of their own hands, they can't help it. But when you chose to act in an inhumane way to another and lose your freedome because of it, you aren't truly living as a human in my view, in more ways than one.

But yes, in a simplistic way, you are right. Being alive nd human is the basis of living as a human.

[snowychap]

he now thinks i'm homophobic scum

Oh, grow up.

I don't refer to anyone as 'scum'.

[Chindie]

Theres no reason to support the BNP if you don't agree with their race policy.

Back on topic, I'm actually somewhat surprised that the idea of testing on humans was as popular as it appears to be. It's baffles me, it seems empathy and compassion aren't things some people do anymore.

[Chindie]

he now thinks i'm homophobic scum

Oh, grow up.

I don't refer to anyone as 'scum'.

He's referring to me mate .

[starsailor9774]

It is interesting that you have chosen to ignore a question posed to you (and the other experimentalists) about how far you would take your 'treat in any way we want' ideology and instead focussed on attempting to wind other people up by calling them such insulting things as being 'liberal' or 'gay'.

Your posts are those of a truly enlightened individual and I hope that when your cat returns home, you, too, are hoist by your own petard and burnt at the stake.

The part of your post in bold show's who the homophobe is on here..... why else would you refer to it as an "insulting thing"

Just to clarify (as it appeared to fly over your head - not difficult, it appears), that was how you conveyed those things.

To follow your own 'logic', it would also mean that you thought that I was of the opinion that being liberal was a problem rather than the problem being about those who called others (in an accusatory) 'liberal'.

Apologies if that required too much thought for you.

So why when people accuse you of conveying things in a post do you jump up and down demanding they read your post correctly

I never used the term gay as an insult and i stand by what i said.

You my "friend" are an hypocrit of the highest order.

.

[snowychap]

Snowy; what do you make of the death penalty - an eye for an eye? Killing a human compared to testing a human - which is more fitting and moral?

You obviously are relatively new to these types of threads. :winkold:

I am absolutely against the death penalty (many of the reasons for which I, and others, have already (indirectly)detailed in this thread).

[Chindie]

I don't think I worded it very well at all, sorry. I was more or less talking about the ideal way to live. Humans are meant to be free. Obviously some aren't and it's out of their own hands, they can't help it. But when you chose to act in an inhumane way to another and lose your freedome because of it, you aren't truly living as a human in my view, in more ways than one.

But yes, in a simplistic way, you are right. Being alive nd human is the basis of living as a human.

Thats my point though - there isn't an ideal way to live. Some people may think the ideal way to live is keep your nose clean, don't break the law, be successful and be happy. Others might believe that it should just be about happiness, and the rest is secondary. Others may believe the ideal way to live is be a model citizen, help people, meet a person you love and live out your life quietly. Others may think it's about getting rich at all costs, and **** morality and everyone that gets in your way.

I don't think you can say that a person who has lost their right to freedom has a lesser life, as there isn't a definable standard for that. I daresay there are people in the world who, hearing that a prisoner has a roof over his head, lots of free time, and 3 meals a day, would say a prisoner lives a better life than they do.

It's subjective. Thus the only definable answer to the true way to live as a human is the simplist one - be alive and be human. All the rest is open to debate.

A similar problem comes in if you accept humans as test subjects for the vilest crimes. Wheres the line drawn? Who calls the shots with what's vile enough to make that persons life and rights void? You might say, I dunno, all murderers. But each case is very very different, some have mitigating circumstances, where do you call the line there? Just serial killers? And so on.

[starsailor9774]

Theres no reason to support the BNP if you don't agree with their race policy.

Back on topic, I'm actually somewhat surprised that the idea of testing on humans was as popular as it appears to be. It's baffles me, it seems empathy and compassion aren't things some people do anymore.

I said i agreed with a couple of policys hardly makes me Adolf Hitler does it.

[Vojskovoda]

Snowy; what do you make of the death penalty - an eye for an eye? Killing a human compared to testing a human - which is more fitting and moral?

You obviously are relatively new to these types of threads. :winkold:

I am absolutely against the death penalty (many of the reasons for which I, and others, have already (indirectly)detailed in this thread).

Fair enough and I've understood what you've said about testing on humans etc... Not trying to shape things here, but would you feel any different to the death penalty if a dear member of your family was murdered by someone? What about war criminals committing genocide?

Do the circumstances matter to you or is it just a straight NO to the death penalty altogether?

[Chindie]

I said i agreed with a couple of policys hardly makes me Adolf Hitler does it.

And yet you still would agree with a party defined by it's racism. Thats the only reason to agree with that party, if you buy that rubbish. No other reason.

[snowychap]

I never used the term gay as an insult and i stand by what i said.

Would you care to explain the purpose of your 'comical' conjecture that the people who opposed you were gay, then?

Was it a celebration of homosexuality?

Or was it an attempt to 'get one over' those with whom you were in discussion?

Would you care to explain why you haven't spoken about my apparently 'hypocritical' comments about being 'liberal'?

Ah, that might dash your (already flimsy) argument.

You my "friend" are an hypocrit of the highest order.

At least I'm no hypocrite, eh?

[Chindie]

Fair enough and I've understood what you've said about testing on humans etc... Not trying to shape things here, but would you feel any different to the death penalty if a dear member of your family was murdered by someone? What about war criminals committing genocide?

Do the circumstances matter to you or is it just a straight NO to the death penalty altogether?

I know this is directed at Snowy (and worse, off topic ), but I'd answer these as well, not to steal Snowy's thunder mind.

The family member thing is a non entity - it isn't about what the victims feel, it's about what the third party, justice and the law, feels. The law is impartial, a victim is not.

For me, the circumstances never matter - the death sentence is wrong. I've always said that, even on a blood thirsty level, surely a life with your freedom taken from you, knowing that for much of your remaining life, it not all of it, is now to be ruled by bars and walls and lonelyness, is a worse punishment than knowing that quickly and painlessly your life will end.

[starsailor9774]

I said i agreed with a couple of policys hardly makes me Adolf Hitler does it.

And yet you still would agree with a party defined by it's racism. Thats the only reason to agree with that party, if you buy that rubbish. No other reason.

Agreeing with a policy or two in no way makes me a racist,

[Vojskovoda]

Fair enough and I've understood what you've said about testing on humans etc... Not trying to shape things here, but would you feel any different to the death penalty if a dear member of your family was murdered by someone? What about war criminals committing genocide?

Do the circumstances matter to you or is it just a straight NO to the death penalty altogether?

I know this is directed at Snowy (and worse, off topic ), but I'd answer these as well, not to steal Snowy's thunder mind.

The family member thing is a non entity - it isn't about what the victims feel, it's about what the third party, justice and the law, feels. The law is impartial, a victim is not.

For me, the circumstances never matter - the death sentence is wrong. I've always said that, even on a blood thirsty level, surely a life with your freedom taken from you, knowing that for much of your remaining life, it not all of it, is now to be ruled by bars and walls and lonelyness, is a worse punishment than knowing that quickly and painlessly your life will end.

Yeah, I can totally relate to your last paragraph.

I've always thought having to spend 20+ years inside prision would be a bit like being in hell - torture and you then see prisioners trying to commit suicide inside prision because of how bad being locked up inside prision is. It's a punishment that in reality is horrible and some people don't often realise how shit it must be so the death penalty may not always at tfirst seem the correct and fitting punishment.

As for war criminals commiting genocide I think I'm still a bit indifferent on that but I think I'll leave that for another thread for another time perhaps.

[starsailor9774]

I never used the term gay as an insult and i stand by what i said.

Would you care to explain the purpose of your 'comical' conjecture that the people who opposed you were gay, then?

Was it a celebration of homosexuality?

Or was it an attempt to 'get one over' those with whom you were in discussion?

Would you care to explain why you haven't spoken about my apparently 'hypocritical' comments about being 'liberal'?

Ah, that might dash your (already flimsy) argument.

You my "friend" are an hypocrit of the highest order.

At least I'm no hypocrite, eh?

Ooh a spelling mistake.... how very bad of me.

Read my post again...... I conveyed that if other people see something between the lines in your posts that they take it a certain way then you immediately go on the offensive with "where did i say that" .... but you did the same to me.

Anyway... i have 4 hours sleep before work so i am going to bed.