PETA is on crack... - by LancerChronics
jtr7 on 16/1/2009 at 08:10
Who said that?!?:confused:
Koki on 16/1/2009 at 08:43
It's because of people like you that zippocat was made.
van HellSing on 16/1/2009 at 11:22
Quote Posted by jtr7
Who said that?!?:confused:
Quote Posted by denisv
(...)the differences between fish and cats are only aesthetic(...)
:p
jtr7 on 16/1/2009 at 11:40
:ebil:
SD on 16/1/2009 at 15:42
Quote Posted by denisv
Everyone in this thread who says the differences between fish and cats are only aesthetic... you're dumb.
no u
What I actually wrote was:
"inconsistencies with which we treat different species purely because of their aesthetic appeal"
Which is basically true. A tuna fish is no less
worthy a creature than a kitten, but because it's wet and slimy, not furry and meowing, it's okay to chop it up and put it in little cans.
Imagine the outrage if Del Monte wanted to bring out StarKits, an exciting new range of tinned, processed catmeat. Anyone who thinks that shit would even make it past the planning stage is deluding themself.
PigLick on 16/1/2009 at 15:45
the question is, does cat taste any good?
SD on 16/1/2009 at 16:12
That's just a blatant setup for an eating pussy joke, right?
Vivian on 16/1/2009 at 16:12
I would imagine that in ecological terms, tuna are several thousand times more important and valuable than the domestic kitten. Which is surely the point, if everyone can stop being all meaty and protective about it.
DDL on 16/1/2009 at 16:25
That's a bit messy though, since you could argue the domestic kitten is utterly valueless in ecological terms. Thus several thousand times nothing is...nothing.
And even if you assign a non-zero value to the kitten, it could still be vanishingly small, such that the 'thousand times more important' tuna is merely 'not very important'.
/pedant
37637598 on 16/1/2009 at 16:29
My post only appears to those who care, with that said:
And that's my opinion.
