My thoughts on the ethical treatment of animals

I am a strong believer in the idea that all people are equal. I have never understood the arguments that skin color, sexual orientation, strength, or even genetics makes one person more important or "better" than another. To me it is fairly obvious that people all have different qualities, some good and some bad, but all come out about the same. There are some people (such as rapists) that I feel the world could certainly live without but that doesn't in my mind conflict with the idea of people being equal.

But what about animals? Are we better than them? No, because technically people are animals. We are just a different class of animal. But to make the wording simpler I am going to refer to people and animals instead of people being a type of animal.

I have met people who treat all animals badly, others that treat animals with indifference, and a few that view them as having equal rights as people. Each philosophy has its points but for myself if I had to choose between an animal dying or a person dying it would be a no brainer. I value people more than I value animals. People have a higher intelligence (at least in general).

But just because I value people more than animals doesn't mean I treat animals badly. I eat animals for food but I want the animal killed as painlessly as possible and raised as painlessly as possible. I do not go out of my way to cause pain in animals. I do not have a pet because I am away from home a lot and they would be very bored sitting inside all day.

I am having trouble with the wording of this post, but here are some of my thoughts so I don't lose them:

Wild animals should be left alone where possible. If they are a pest they should be killed as painlessly as possible but we should in no way try to improve their lives. Feeding or trying to help a wild animal always ends up causing more pain in the long run and not less.

Pets should be treated well. If you can't treat them well give them to somebody who can. If there isn't anybody then they should be killed as painlessly as possible. A painless death if better than a life of pain.

Food animals should be raised in decent, clean environments then killed as painlessly as possible. An animal should be given a decent lifespan, not killed when it is very young. A middle ground needs to be sought over giving an animal a decent lifespan and the quality of the meat.

There are good animals and bad animals, the same as there are good and bad people. A dog that attacks a person should be killed outright even if that causes it pain. We need to balance the pain we cause it with the pain it causes others.

Life

Lately the people I interact with online have been dealing with a lot of crisis and loss. A divorce, a fatal accident, etc. People try but there are really no words of comfort for these situations. Eventually time passes and you accept what has happened but when it is happening there isn't much anybody can do to help. The best thing you can do is simply be there to talk to. Profound words don't help, only time and having somebody to talk to do. The absolutely worst thing you can do is avoid them so that you don't have to deal with their pain.

The world is ending. Again.

So the world is ending tomorrow. Big deal. Every couple of years some wacko decides the world is coming to an end. Sometimes (like in this case) it is a repeat wacko. My only question is where do they keep finding gullible people who believe this nonsense? I would think people who have that level of gullibility would have died off from wandering in front of a bus long ago and yes we do keep making more but still....

I find it appalling that our society has so many gullible people in it. People who will time after time believe utter nonsense blathered by some idiot. Clearly our education system has failed us.

Acceptance

I read a lot of science fiction and as a result I have read a number of books that have touched on the subject of mutation, usually after an atomic war. Most authors seem to agree that while there will be an attempt by people to eliminate mutations we ultimately need to accept mutants into society, not ostracize them. Given how hard it is currently for people to accept people of different skin color or sexual orientation it seems we have a long way to go before we accept people with physical mutations.

We have a long way to go as a society if we are ever to accept such a profound change. What will it take for us to reach this point? I have no idea. Better education? Maybe.

Something readers should be aware of

Readers of this blog (all two of them) should be aware that I am not the worlds greatest communicator. There are many unsaid assumptions in my posts.

If you read any of my posts you should be aware that I believe the world can be and should be a better place than it is. We need to work to make it a better place. We need to plan and fight to make it a better place. When I point out something that I feel is wrong with the world it isn't just to complain, it part of my attempt to understand. The first part of fixing a problem is to recognize that there is a problem. My posts are both an attempt to make people realize there is a problem and to help myself understand the problem. We cannot fix the problems as individuals, but if we all do what we can we will make progress in the right direction. Even if all you can do is not to make things worse it is a move in the right direction.

Scientific studies

I just finished reading another news article based on a seriously flawed scientific study. The supposed scientists found that their study proved exactly what they were expecting. Well duh. When you start a study with expectations you skew the study to match what you expect. True scientists don't start a study with expectations of what the results might be.

Part of the reason for the flawed study is that the people who sponsor these things pretty much dictate the results. Shame on the supposed scientists for using their positions to promote a lie. Another part of the reason is that universities reward their faculty for getting into the news. Shame on the universities for rewarding bad science.

The companies that provide our news are of course at fault because they pounce on anything that they can print to get readership, flawed or not. Their motivation is money and at least they (more or less) honestly admit that. They are at fault for promoting bad science, but they are not the originators of the garbage they print.

I really with one of the scientific groups would start tracking and publishing scorecards for individuals that participate in the creation of this psuedo-science. Then we would have some way of knowing who the major producers of garbage are.

Ignoring problems

People have a habit of not solving problems until they have to. This is rarely a good idea because when the pressure is on the best possible solution is rarely chosen, and yet people continually put problems off to the future. I have never understood why.

Some problems can't be solved until they happen because some factors will be unknown or uncertain until the problem occurs. Some problems are best left without a final solution until they happen because there is a possibility some new fact or solution may occur before the problem happens. But in both cases at least some thought and decisions can be arrived at well before the problem occurs. By totally ignoring a problem until it happens you have given up your chance to do that forward thinking that may mean the difference between a bad solution and a good one.

Sometimes I think peoples desire to ignore problems is simple laziness, other times I think it is because they fear confrontation. I am sure they are many opinions including some that think that ignoring problems is the most efficient way to handle them. I myself disagree. I solve or at least try to solve problems before they happen. Forward thinking has saved me a lot of grief, I don't understand why others have not chosen the same route I have.