Penn & Teller: Bullsh*t

[Dog--]

Anyone watch this show? They talk about the stuff we here on HL2.net do, too.

I only saw 2 shows so far, but the first I watched they talked about swearing and how it shouldn't be censored (and made fun of the people who think it should) and the second show I watched they talked (and made fun) about people obsessed with "beauty" these days.

It's really entertaining, if anyone gets the chance, watch it. They basically have the same opinion on everything as the majority of HL2.net. Right now I'm watching an episode where they are talking about life after death (going to be interesting, some bible nut is going to get made fun of, for sure!). Well I'm off to watch!

NOTE: Has lots of swearing in it!

 

[Absinthe]

I really enjoy that show. I find myself agreeing with a lot of their points and disagreeing with some. But I think they put it best themselves.

"We're biased as all ****, but we try to be honest."

 

[Adabiviak]

I saw them do a live show once - probably the best live stage performance I've ever seen. (For the record, I don't see a lot of live stage shows, but this rocked).

 

[Qonfused]

Funny, I was thinking about making a thread about this series. Awesome show.

 

[Dog--]

Yea, well I never think about making threads, I just do eet!

Probably why 99% of my threads are retarded.


On-Topic: The one I just watched was really funny, it was about the cost of funerals pretty much the cost of dying in general, probably the second funniest episode I've seen! (I saw 3!)

 

[The Brick]

Shhhhhhh! :O

 

[AJ Rimmer]

They are biased as ****, just like they say, but they're funny, and they often make good points.

 

[Absinthe]

The episode about talking to the dead is brilliant. And I love how Penn gets all mighty and righteous near the end of it.

The one where they aimed their sights at famous religious figures was also excellent. To this day, I do not understand how people give so much glowing praise to Mother Theresa.

 

[brink's]

Im gonna DL...i mean rent some, should i watch them in order? or does it really matter?

 

[Absinthe]

Im gonna DL...i mean rent some, should i watch them in order? or does it really matter?

They're all self-contained because they all address different topics. Doesn't matter where you start.

 

[<RJMC>]

I have saw 3

about prostitution,sex stuff like size of penis and breast and surgeries,and something about a project on the remains of the world trade center

 

[PvtRyan]

Shame they removed all episodes from Google Video. But this thread motivated me to sprafa the series.

 

[Bad^Hat]

I like the part where Teller says

 

[The Brick]

I like the part where Teller says

woof woof woof.

 

[Direwolf]

Love the show, and I do usually agree with them. Even when I don't they give enough food for thought that I reconsider my position.

Above all I love their sense of perspective on stuff and their transparency when it comes to bias.

 

[Stigmata]

I like the part where Teller says

I've only seen two episodes. The first was on how bullshit religion is, and I agreed completely. The second was on recycling vs landfills, and it caused a near-complete reversal of my views on recycling. Good show.

 

[Absinthe]

You should check out the PETA one too. I don't think people quite understand how stupid, hypocritical, and dangerous they and other animal activist groups are.

They have guys responsible for firebombings giving university lectures. :| But I think the most poignant part was when it highlighted how one of the leading activists regularly uses medicine that was developed through animal testing, and how she justified it.

 

[_Z_Ryuken]

Someone gonna tell the rest of us what network /time this is on?

 

[Dog--]

It used to be on the movie network around 8:00 or 9:00 pm, but I haven't seen it on there for a long time. I watch it on Men-TV at 1:00AM.

 

[Qonfused]

Someone gonna tell the rest of us what network /time this is on?

Showtime.

 

[Bad^Hat]

Awesome show, anyway. I really need to catch it more. But it's on Prime, and I never watch that...

 

[CyberPitz]

I think episodes are everywhere on youtube/etc

 

[-Psy-]

I think episodes are everywhere on youtube/etc

Yep.

 

[CyberPitz]

Yep.

sadly I'm watching the prostetution episode at work, good thing youtube doesn't let nudity up, otherwise I'd be fired now

 

[-Psy-]

Can I ask what the hell your job is? All you seem to do is some foruming here.

 

[CptStern]

You should check out the PETA one too. I don't think people quite understand how stupid, hypocritical, and dangerous they and other animal activist groups are.

They have guys responsible for firebombings giving university lectures. :| But I think the most poignant part was when it highlighted how one of the leading activists regularly uses medicine that was developed through animal testing, and how she justified it.

to be fair anyone can be a member of peta ..all you need is a pulse and pay a membership fee ...Peta was not responsible for the firebombing ..and I know of a few animal rights groups and they've never resorted to anything even remotely resembling criminality. Without animal rights groups this sort of thing would continually happen:

that deer had a strain of tubercolosis; it's an airbourne virus ..the infected deer were part of an outdoor petting zoo ..children are especially susceptible to virus and tuberculosis in general, guess who goes to petting zoos?

without an animal rights group exposing their indifference to risks posed to humans they would have continued to allow infected animals to be in close proximity to humans


without animal rights groups this would continue to happen:

black bears hunted exclusively for their organs regardless of any laws against seasonal hunting, age weight or whether the animals were caring for young

without animal rights grousp this would continue to happen:

animals seized from a animal/puppy mill

warning, disturbing photo of dog rescued from puppy mill
http://www.lcanimal.org/cmpgn/images/PMill16.jpg

besides a few extremists animal rights groups do a world of good, I dont see government or private individuals doing anyting worthwhile

 

[Absinthe]

I wasn't speaking about all animal activist groups. Mainly PETA and the ALF, as well the common man who doesn't understand the necessity of animal testing for medicinal research or parades around outside of animal shelters. The extremists.

Ingrid Newkirk - the president of PETA - has been implicated and accused of having foreknowledge of criminal acts carried out by prominent members of the ALF. She also has a nasty habit of donating money to those who commit crimes in the name of animal activism.

Penn and Teller's point isn't to provide an alternative. It's to demonstrate how the leading, most popular animal rights group in the world accepts and condones violent measures, devalues human life, and spends a good chunk of cash killing animals themselves. How the ideal world they want to live in is unrealistic, unmanageable, and flat-out stupid. These aren't acts of the fringe. The acts of its leading members and founders speak worlds about how corrupt and sneaky it is.

I don't know what you're trying to state with those last two pictures. All I see is dead animals.

 

[CptStern]

I wasn't speaking about all animal activist groups. Mainly PETA and the ALF, as well the common man who doesn't understand the necessity of animal testing for medicinal research or parades around outside of animal shelters. The extremists.

again it's individuals not the organization itself, anyone can be a member of peta

Ingrid Newkirk - the president of PETA - has been implicated and accused of having foreknowledge of criminal acts carried out by prominent members of the ALF. She also has a nasty habit of donating money to those who commit crimes in the name of animal activism.

the money was for a legal defense fund but again she's one person. Personally I think Peta should disband only because they become a target and all other animal rights groups are lumped in together

Penn and Teller's point isn't to provide an alternative. It's to demonstrate how the leading, most popular animal rights group in the world accepts and condones violent measures, devalues human life, and spends a good chunk of cash killing animals themselves.

most of those articles are written by the hunting/meat industry, they have a personal stake in making animal rights group look bad because they attack their livlihood ..besides penn and teller are using ad hominen attacks to discredit them ..oh and the money for killing animals is actually used to euthanize animals they find who are too far gone

How the ideal world they want to live in is unrealistic, unmanageable, and flat-out stupid. These aren't acts of the fringe. The acts of its leading members and founders speak worlds about how corrupt and sneaky it is.

oh come on, the problem is that 99% of population doesnt understand the issues, they dont want to understand the issues because if they did they'd have to examine their own conscious ..no one wants to be told that what we do on a daily basis is extremely cruel and inhumane ..if they say "dont drink cow's milk" ..all people see is .."dont drink cow's milk" they dont see the reasoning behind it: the deplorable and cruel conditions that the cows live in ..typically cows on dairy farms you see as you drive by the country farm live 25 years and produce milk for about 10 of those years ..in corporate farms dairy cows produce milk for about 4-5 years and then are sent to the slaughterhouse. their entre lives are spent standing up chained ..it defecates where it stands ..the milk they produce is for human consumption. Petas motives are pretty clear; it's in their name People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals ..I may not agree with their methodology but their motives are sound

I don't know what you're trying to state with those last two pictures. All I see is dead animals.

they're dead animals found in a puppy mill that died due to deplorable conditions ..many were amonst the living simply rotting in their cages ..I've also added a photo of one of the living

 

[Gray Fox]

The show is just that, bullshit. If you are serious about building up a proper base for a point of view then go read a book.

Edit:
And their show about PETA is especially bullshit. Why didn't the focus on the fact how most people think it is normal to torture and kill animals for fun, on how it is legal for MCdonalds and and meat products to advertise their products to kids and in the morning ,but it's inappropriate somehow to show how the animals are treated and killed, it's inappropriate to show this perfectly normal behavior somehow.

And make no mistake about it, these animals are tortured and killed for your pleasure, not for your food or survival, you do not eat meat to survive, in the west there are more then enough means and knowledge to easily and comfortably survive without meat.

And, any excuse to allow this torture to continue is based on social darwinism, in a society that is supposed to be based on humanist justice, society that was created to escape the cruel reality of social darwinism.

And any hypocritical bullshit that characterizes PETA doesn't even come close to the hypocracy and bullshit that characterizes it's adversary's.

 

[Absinthe]

again it's individuals not the organization itself, anyone can be a member of peta

This is like saying the Ku Klux Klan isn't responsible as an organization, just the individuals.

The President of PETA accepts violence. She condones violence. As the head of the group, her influence trickles all the way down the bottom.

the money was for a legal defense fund but again she's one person. Personally I think Peta should disband only because they become a target and all other animal rights groups are lumped in together

Defense funds for arsonists? You're not helping your case.

most of those articles are written by the hunting/meat industry, they have a personal stake in making animal rights group look bad because they attack their livlihood ..besides penn and teller are using ad hominen attacks to discredit them ..oh and the money for killing animals is actually used to euthanize animals they find who are too far gone

...Most of what articles? I don't know what you're referencing. Penn and Teller always use ad hominem attacks, but generally nothing beyond "****er". PETA wants total animal liberation. By stepping in and deciding which animals live or die, they are infringing upon the animals' rights. They can't square their beliefs with reality. As much as humans may be the purveyors of animal cruelty, we are also the ones to bestow kindness and ethical treatment to animals. Both entail and require a limitation in animal rights that deems our supervision necessary.

That PETA utilizes euthanasia just like the same animal shelters they're attacking is indicative of the massive hypocrisy that's inherent in its philosophy.

oh come on, the problem is that 99% of population doesnt understand the issues, they dont want to understand the issues because if they did they'd have to examine their own conscious ..no one wants to be told that what we do on a daily basis is extremely cruel and inhumane ..if they say "dont drink cow's milk" ..all people see is .."dont drink cow's milk" they dont see the reasoning behind it: the deplorable and cruel conditions that the cows live in ..typically cows on dairy farms you see as you drive by the country farm live 25 years and produce milk for about 10 of those years ..in corporate farms dairy cows produce milk for about 4-5 years and then are sent to the slaughterhouse. their entre lives are spent standing up chained ..it defecates where it stands ..the milk they produce is for human consumption. Petas motives are pretty clear; it's in their name People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals ..I may not agree with their methodology but their motives are sound

Are you saying that PETA pumping out biased, exaggerated, generalized misinformation is a good way to combat the ignorance of the public?

We are all for the ethical treatment of animals. Penn and Teller make it a point early on that the abuse on display is evil. But that is why we have laws and regulations put in place to combat it. It still happens, but PETA wants you to believe it's far more widespread and systematic than it is in reality.

PETA does not attempt to educate people. It attempts to brainwash them. There's a bold line differentiating the two. Its mission is total animal liberation. Most people attracted to it don't realize that means no medical research and even no pets. They show only what they want you to see, because the crazier side of its philosophy isn't so attractive. They'd sooner roll footage of a piglet having its back broken than go into a serious discussion about how vaccinations are supposed to work when we don't have shit to test it on.

 

[Absinthe]

The show is just that, bullshit. If you are serious about building up a proper base for a point of view then go read a book.

Why do people assume that Penn and Teller are trying to be the end-all in factual comprehensiveness? There's only so much you can do in a 30 minute time slot.

The show is good as a springboard for getting people interested in subjects they're unfamiliar with. That said, there are times when they require no further research. The episode on psychics reading minds and talking to the dead did a sufficient job of exposing them as frauds and hoaxes.

 

[Gray Fox]

You, penn, and teller are not for the ethical treatment of animals, if you were you would be for the complete abolshmant of the meat industry, and the fur industry.

Why do people assume that Penn and Teller are trying to be the end-all in factual comprehensiveness? There's only so much you can do in a 30 minute time slot.

The show is good as a springboard for getting people interested in subjects they're unfamiliar with. That said, there are times when they require no further research. The episode on psychics reading minds and talking to the dead did a sufficient job of exposing them as frauds and hoaxes.

Because just like with fox news, most people are not going to take the time to do proper research.
And when tackling such important subject matters as Penn and teller do, such biased and unfair argument and editing tricks are a failure and disgrace on a moral level.

 

[<RJMC>]

people dont care about animals thats why this animal rights groups are portrayed so bad even if they are not like peta,like the "tree huggers",people will care about animals if the animals give them ipods and hummers

 

[Absinthe]

You, penn, and teller are not for the ethical treatment of animals, if you were you would be for the complete abolshmant of the meat industry, and the fur industry.

Oh, but I am for ethical treatment. To a reasonable extent. In fact, I'll go so far as to say that I'm far more ethical in my treatment of animals than PETA is.

If PETA had their way, with total animal liberation, you'd have countless animals running around unsupervised, getting killed, hurting people (and then getting subsequently killed), unable to feed themselves, unable to find shelter, and subjected to the harsh laws of nature (which includes animal-on-animal violence and environmental hazards).

My dog is in better care in my hands than it is on its own.

Because just like with fox news, most people are not going to take the time to do proper research.
And when tackling such important subject matters as Penn and teller do, such biased and unfair argument and editing tricks are a failure and disgrace on a moral level.

Penn and Teller don't force their views down your throat. They admit to being biased and that the content on display is a product of their personal views. Not once have I seen them lie, and yet I have seen them admit error. I cannot say the same for Fox News. That's because Fox intertwines its agenda so heavily in its presentation of "objective" facts. Your comparison holds no water.

 

[Gray Fox]

Well I would think abstinence, Gun laws, Animal treatment, beauty obsession would be considered important.

Edit: oh **** you meant, show me some of those editing tricks and biased arguments. Thats hard for me since I haven't watched the show in a long time and I do not feel like wading trouch shit for hours. But like even you said they admit and are proud to be biased.
As far as the editing tricks, you should look the gun debate video, IIRC they edited out all the arguments the anti-gun debate people made and just repeated over how they guy says gun are bad, or insane. Something like that, to make it look like there are no proper arguments against it.

Oh, but I am for ethical treatment. To a reasonable extent. In fact, I'll go so far as to say that I'm far more ethical in my treatment of animals than PETA is.

If PETA had their way, with total animal liberation, you'd have countless animals running around unsupervised, getting killed, hurting people (and then getting subsequently killed), unable to feed themselves, unable to find shelter, and subjected to the harsh laws of nature (which includes animal-on-animal violence and environmental hazards).

My dog is in better care in my hands than it is on its own.

If your still pro meat and fur industry then I disagree, yes if we let them just free it would be terrible, but much less so then the systematic torture and killing of millions upon million of animals over and over and over and over every ****ing year. Plus I do think they are insane and hypocritical, just much less then the average meat eating joe imo.

 

[Absinthe]

Do you eat meat? Ever worn a product that had animal products? Ever had a vaccine?

If you say yes to any of the above, then I'd lay off on calling meat eaters insane and hypocritical. I don't even know where you're drawing hypocrisy from. We're well aware that something had to die in order to get to our plate.

What millions upon millions? If you're including the mere deaths of animals in those figures, then I'm sorry to inform you that Mother Nature is a far greater offender than humanity ever has been. Systematic torture of animals does exist, but that's why we fight it. We don't just say "**** it" and shut down the meat industry.

Let's say we liberate all the animals from their cruel shackles of oppression in processing plants. Say goodbye to any animal that's been domesticated or bred in captivity. The farm chicken will go extinct, and the bovine shall dwindle in numbers. If we decide to go the full way and also release all the strays from animal shelters, you can expect most of them to starve, get hit by a car, or get killed by another animal.

By advocating total animal liberation, you are advocating the extinction and endangerment of numerous species. The ones we eat may not be having their beaks impacted and their legs broken by us, but they are left to be killed by a by a multitude of other beasts, and even die from malnutrition. Either way, they're still meeting grisly ends. Just because something dies a "natural" death in the animal kingdom doesn't mean it's any less painful or horrific for the critter having its throat ripped out and being devoured.

(This is assuming you support total animal liberation. I'm not quite sure where you think a line should be drawn, so feel free to explain your stance on this, as I'm not entirely clear what it is. Oh, and Penn and Teller admit to being biased. That's not the same as being proud, but then I don't see why they should be ashamed of it either.)

 

[PvtRyan]

Indeed, it's pretty weak to accuse meat eaters of hypocrisy when I can guarantee you that despite most likely being a vegetarian, you still support the "meat industry" daily. Now that's hypocrisy.

There's NOTHING ethically wrong about eating meat, there's just unethical treatment of the animal while it's alive. And while far from perfect, we're trying to limit mistreatment as much as possible and we're slowly getting there. To do away with an entire, important, industry is hasty at best.

 

[CptStern]

This is like saying the Ku Klux Klan isn't responsible as an organization, just the individuals.

not the same thing the KKK works as a group ..peta members can work as individuals. many of the radical members of peta also belong to the ALF as well

The President of PETA accepts violence. She condones violence. As the head of the group, her influence trickles all the way down the bottom. Your distinction is meaningless.

"Ingrid Newkirk: We are opposed to all cruelty, so as advocates of non-violence..."

http://www.indiatogether.org/reports/peta/newkirk.htm

I cant find any quotes that directly proves she's condoning violence ..and if she is, it's probably a left over from her days in state law enforcement :E ..but meh I really dont care either way as I dont support Peta ..I support the overall cause but am ambivilent when it comes to peta. Peta does not represent animal rights groups as a whole

Defense funds for arsonists? You're not helping your case.

they have legal defense funds for all their activists ..the defense fund does not discriminate based on alledged crime ..monies directly given to the arsonists were without the consent of it's donors ..in other words the higher up dictate where what goes

...Most of what articles? I don't know what you're referencing.

every single negative article on the internet brings up one of seven points against Peta ..you stated a few of them

http://www.canadafreepress.com/2007/consumer-freedom012807.htm

btw the article was written by ..

"The Center For Consumer Freedom is a nonprofit coalition supported by restaurants, food companies, and consumers"

and ...

"The group was created in 1995 as the Guest Choice Network by Richard Berman, executive director of the public affairs firm Berman and Company, with $600,000 from the Philip Morris tobacco company.[2] The concept of the group, according to a letter by Richard Berman to Barbara Trach, who at the time was Philip Morris's senior program manager for public affairs, was "to unite the restaurant and hospitality industries in a campaign to defend their consumers and marketing programs against attacks from anti-smoking, anti-drinking, anti-meat, etc. activists ..." Its purpose, according to a planning document by Berman, was to encourage operators of "restaurants, hotels, casinos, bowling alleys, taverns, stadiums, and university hospitality educators" to "support [the] mentality of 'smokers rights' by encouraging responsibility to protect 'guest choice'."[4] Internal documents from Philip Morris reveal that it donated $2,950,000 to the Guest Choice Network between 1995 and 1998"

Penn and Teller always use ad hominem attacks, but generally nothing beyond "****er". PETA wants total animal liberation.

no they want animals to be treated ethically

By stepping in and deciding which animals live or die, they are infringing upon the animals' rights.

pardon? where are you getting this idea they judge what animals can live or die? are you talking about the animals they euthanize?

They can't square their beliefs with reality.

since when does ideology have to be fully realistic? sure their goasl are not attainable overnight but they do push public awareness and do get results

The fact that as much as humans may be the purveyors of animal cruelty, we are also the ones to bestow kindness and ethical treatment to animals.

only on an individual level ..look the majority of animal rights groups dont bother with private farmers, why is that? because traditional farmers have to provide proper care for their animals because it's their livelihood ..not so with corporate farms that have a mass production mentality ..one or two dead animals in amonst the living is meaningless ..You will NEVER see this at a family farm:

Both entail and require a limitation in animal rights that deems our supervision necessary.

animals do not have rights, they are considered property ..there's anti cruelty laws but for all intents and purposes they're property

That PETA utilizes euthanasia just like the same animal shelters they're attacking is indicative of the massive hypocrisy that's inherent in its philosophy.

why would an animal rights group attack an animal shelter? ...peta works with animal shelters ..in fact one of the doctors who administers euthanisia is from a local shelter

Are you saying that PETA pumping out biased, exaggerated, generalized misinformation is a good way to combat the ignorance of the public?

peta is not the only animal rights group around ..and yes they are affective as they get results ..and again i dont approve of their tactics

We are all for the ethical treatment of animals.

no, we are not, it that were true we'd all be eating free range ..people dont care ..I can post a horrible video that shows the inside of slaughterhouses where animals are killed in extremely barbaric ways ..one scene shows a pig being literally rendered apart while still alive ..contrary to all state animal laws ..and I can bet a good percentage of people's responses would be something to the effect of "Peta ..people eating tasty animals" or "I sure do love pork chops hyuck"

Penn and Teller make it a point early on that the abuse on display is evil.

why not focus on that instead of peta? why didnt they make a Bullshit episode that dealt with the lies of the meat industry? why take on the smaller issue and ignore the bigger issue ..I'll tell you why <stern rubs forefinger and thumb together doing the universal sign for money>

But that is why we have laws and regulations put in place to combat it.

you think we shouldnt have laws forbidding cruelty? that's the only laws on the books ..again animals have NO rights, just laws against cruelty

It still happens, but PETA wants you to believe it's far more widespread and systematic than it is in reality.

but it is ..every single big slaughterhouse in the world uses cruel methods ..look anytime there's profit to made things like humane treatment goes by the way side as it's far too expensive when it's a factory farm ..mass production neccesitates cost cutting measures ..the real problem is factory farms ..if we went back to family farms this wouldnt be a problem ..we'd also be a lot more healthy as a result

PETA does not attempt to educate people. It attempts to brainwash them. There's a bold line differentiating the two.

i dont see how ..especially since they say things that are unpopular with the overwhelming majority of people ...brainwashing implies that the brainwashee has to be somewhat supceptible to the propaganda they're ingesting

Indeed, it's pretty weak to accuse meat eaters of hypocrisy when I can guarantee you that despite most likely being a vegetarian, you still support the "meat industry" daily. Now that's hypocrisy.

care to explain exactly how? leather shoes? combine chopped up groundhog at vegetarian farms?

There's NOTHING ethically wrong about eating meat, there's just unethical treatment of the animal while it's alive. And while far from perfect, we're trying to limit mistreatment as much as possible and we're slowly getting there.

that's not true ..factory farms are relatively new, if anything we're heading in the opposite direction

To do away with an entire, important, industry is hasty at best.

the point has never been to shut the industry entirely (that may true for some groups but not all) the mjority just want humane treatment ..is that really too mcuh to ask?


look I absolutely hate talking about this issue because people are FAR too defensive ..it's because you directly question their lifestyle ..I can guarentee if if I without a doubt prove that the meat on your table suffered before it reached it would be ignored and NOTHING would change ..people need to rationalize their choices reardless if it's right or not. BTW I'm done with this topic ..I have no stomach for it

 

[Gray Fox]

Yes I have eaten meat ,yes I have worn animal fur/leather, yes I have gotten vaccines that were tested on animals( something which I am not against). But majority of those were out of my control, I could not control what my mother fed me, which shoe's she bought me. And yes even now I support the meat industry to some extent, but that is because of the holistic nature of our world.

Non of this however diminishes any of my arguments, even if I was a flat out hypocrite it still wouldn't. It would just say something about me.

Now Killing animals to survive is not wrong, killing humans to survive is not wrong either. But killing humans for your pleasure is wrong, and so is killing animals, to a lesser extent obviously.
You do not need meat to survive, you do not need cow leather or anything else for your shoe's, jacket, pants etc. The act of killing sentient beings, with distinct personalities, reasonable intelligence, basically valuable life for your pleasure is very very wrong, and eating meat in our modern western society is indeed very wrong. It cannot be justified by any other means then social darwinism.
And since you own a dog absinthe you should be aware of how much his/her life is worth, and what I mean by reasonable intelligence. You should know that breeding him/her and his/her offspring, torturing them and killing them would be wrong. Many animals you eat are even more intelligent and deserving of life the he/she

The meat industry is not important, everything it offers has alternatives that are cheaper and superior(albeit more expensive in that case)

And for the record I am not for the liberation of all animals, I would simply let the far industry kill all but lets say 50.000 animals and let those live in a reserve. And if they all were to die, then that would be far less wrong then what is going on now.

I mean if someone said to you, would you rather have 7 billion human beings go extinct, or would you have them all captivated, bred for a few months in horrible conditions, then killed, and then the same for their children, and so on and on and on. I bet you would say that extinction is better.

BTW how come someone gets arrested for beating and killing a peacock, at a fracking fast-food restaurant. How come all those people there are disturbed by it, I mean their industry supports much crueler things.
Because they ****ing see for themselves, they experience for themselves how horrible it is to kill a living sentient being for nothing. They know it's not the same as a lion killing for survival or wild humans doing so too. When most of your interaction with farm animals is just picking up a lifeless peace of meat, then yeah your going to thinks it's normal to kill millions of animals for fun, that somehow animals do not deserve the very basic right of living a life without intentional torture and harm by humans.

And I like how we call their flesh, meat. While at the same time recognize them as similar when medical treatment is concerned. Somehow they are not meat then, they are made out flesh, like ours then.

 

[Qonfused]

Goddamn it Stern. Why?