Should zoos and circuses be banned?

Jackie laughlin

Take it to the Islam forum! You have to be joking. I think I'll just drop it. I was merely interested in hearing InFront clarify his/her views as that level of extremism was surprising.

Tar.Aldarion

It's not extremism on his part, it's a part of their religion. If you call anything extreme, it's religion in general.

InFront

Jackie laughlin wrote:

Are you merely arguing that stoning is legitimate under sharia law or are you saying that you favour the implementation of this law including stoning?

The former. I think stoning is supported in Islamic guidelines as a way of administering death, just as human electrocution is legally valid in the US.

Would I vote for the introduction of stoning? No. While I think it's there, I'm not actually so sure about it that I'd put my name to its introduction. After all, it's divine law, and human life, you cant just go messing about with these things with doubt attached. Especially when there seems to be legitimate difference of opinion about its legality amongst the ulema (scholars).
If there was a definite concensus on this issue, and if I was sure enough of my understanding of the legality and place of stoning in capital punishment accoding to Islamic principles, then yeah in theory I'd be in favour of such law being implemented.
None of that really belongs in this thread.

zoos

Why have you started a thread about banning me? alot of negative vibes man!

Tar.Aldarion

Just wait till circuses gets here, he will sort them out.

Saint Ruth

Of course they shouldn't be banned.

It's a slippery slope. If you ban circuses, then people will want to start wanting to ban fox-hunting, shooting, and angling.

Tar.Aldarion

And so they should.

nacho libre

Saint Ruth wrote:

Of course they shouldn't be banned.

It's a slippery slope. If you ban circuses, then people will want to start wanting to ban fox-hunting, shooting, and angling.

you say it as if it's a bad thing. I wonder would you enjoy being hunted?

InFront

zoos wrote:

Why have you started a thread about banning me?

Try not to take it personally dude:D

Jackie laughlin

Tar,
Can you reconcile the relativism of your 25th post with the certainty of your 27th post?

Is the argument about zoos and circuses part of a set including foxhunting, shooting, fishing?

MooseJam

Whats with all the negativity towards circuses, lots of circuses don't have any animals at all !

Tar.Aldarion

Jackie laughlin wrote:

Tar,
Can you reconcile the relativism of your 25th post with the certainty of your 27th post?

Is the argument about zoos and circuses part of a set including foxhunting, shooting, fishing?

My 25th and 27th post?

Anyway, yeah, I would put them all in the subset of the venn diagram called animal cruelty.

Saint Ruth

nacho libre wrote:

you say it as if it's a bad thing. I wonder would you enjoy being hunted?

I wouldn't like to be made into a pair of shoes but that doesn't stop me wearing leather shoes...

It's absurd to talk about about banning circuses.

This is a country where even hare coursing isn't banned...

Ireland isn't Britiain when it comes to animal rights...not by a long shot...

Tar.Aldarion

Saint Ruth wrote:

I wouldn't like to be made into a pair of shoes but that doesn't stop me wearing leather shoes...

Maybe it should then, it stops it for me.

It's absurd to talk about about banning circuses.

This is a country where even hare coursing isn't banned...

Ireland isn't Britiain when it comes to animal rights...not by a long shot...

So what is the point of your post?
We do not have as good a track record, so we should not try?

Saint Ruth

Tar.Aldarion wrote:

Maybe it should then, it stops it for me.

Does it stop you giving your dog a bone?

I wouldn't like chewing an old bone but that doesn't mean that my dog doesn't like it.

That type arguement is just bogus anthropomorphism...

Tar.Aldarion wrote:

So what is the point of your post?
We do not have as good a track record, so we should not try?

Just that perhaps you should pick a more realistic target...

Tar.Aldarion

Saint Ruth wrote:

Does it stop you giving your dog a bone?

It would, but why would I have a dog?

I wouldn't like chewing an old bone but that doesn't mean that my dog doesn't like it.

That type arguement is just bogus anthropomorphism...

I'm not anthropomorphising anything.
This makes no sense, what are you referring to?

Just that perhaps you should pick a more realistic target...

There is no petition or movement here. This is a thread in the Humanities forum asking whether or not you think circuses should be banned. Not if that aim is realistic at the present time.

Saint Ruth

Tar.Aldarion wrote:

It would, but why would I have a dog?

Why would you have a dog??

To guard your house...or as a pet...

Don't tell me you think no one should ever own an animal!?

Tar.Aldarion wrote:

I'm not anthropomorphising anything.
This makes no sense, what are you referring to?

Oh, it was actually nacho libre...his arguement:
"you say it as if it's a bad thing. I wonder would you enjoy being hunted?" is anthropomorphic...

Tar.Aldarion

Saint Ruth wrote:

Why would you have a dog??

To guard your house...or as a pet...

Don't tell me you think no one should ever own an animal!?

The only reason I can see for somebody to own an animal is to save it. Dogs and cats have been domesticated and would die on their own, it is the domesticators responsibility to look after what they have created.
It is wrong to breed such animals for profit and a life of captivity.

Oh, it was actually nacho libre...his arguement:
"you say it as if it's a bad thing. I wonder would you enjoy being hunted?" is anthropomorphic...

Fear is not a unique human characteristic, anthropomorphism is a pointless word to use if both animals(Human and another animal.) share the same emotion.

Orion

Saint Ruth wrote:

I wouldn't like to be made into a pair of shoes but that doesn't stop me wearing leather shoes...

Hunting is for trophies. Leather shoes are made from the animals that I eat for subsistence. Why waste what's left over?

It's absurd to talk about about banning circuses.

Yes it is. Banning the use and poor treatment of animals in circusses I could get behind. But there's no need to use an elephant gun (;)) approach and ban all circuses.
As for zoos. The primary focus of Dublin Zoo, to use it as an example, is the welfare and existence of the animals. The entry charge (or entertainment factor) is merely a way of funding that. Dublin zoo is one of the foremost in Europe in breeding of nearly extinct animals. There is a huge European wide and worldwide breeding program with the long-term goal of repopulation or reintroduction of animals into their natural habitats.

There is also the added bonus, if you have kids, of introducing them to these animals and educating them of the reasons why zoos are necessary to protect the existence of them. As well as giving them a sense of the environment. The educational benefits are huge. So don't just write it off as an evil place. Some of the enclosures are small I'll grant you but have you been to the African Plains there? And they are improving it all the time. It's not the place it was 20 years ago.

I was in Fota wildlife park two weeks ago with the kids. It was fantastic. Some of the animals were wandering around freely among the visitors and the more dangerous animals are in huge ranges. One of my girls got scratched by a kangaroo and learned not to startle wild animals - education in motion . (she was fine btw - just got a fright and a couple of scratches on her arm and stomach)

Jackie laughlin

Tar,
There's a good mate of mine beside me as I write this. He's a dog and I don't attribute human traits to him; to treat him as human would be cruel. However, I do like him a lot. No, dammit, I love him. I also like it that two cats who belong to neighbours regularly visit.

I don't either shoot or go angling. However, acquaintances who do impress me with their real commitment - expressed in work and money - to fauna and flora.

There are very few wildernesses left and certainly none in Ireland. We live in a man made environment and we must make the best of it. We also live with creatures: some wild, some tame, some domesticated, some line bred, all with different natures and abilities.

On my last visit to the zoo after an absence of many years, I was impressed. You see, I had stayed away because of the animals who were clearly driven mad by their conditions but that has changed. As I said above, I've never seen a badly treated circus animal. I tried to find evidence of cruelty over the years because I like animals but I couldn't. The animals were content and well cared for. Distress in a mammal is very obvious.

By the way, when I asked, "Can you reconcile the relativism of your 25th post with the certainty of your 27th post?", I was referring to dates.

Tar.Aldarion

Jackie laughlin wrote:

Tar,
There's a good mate of mine beside me as I write this. He's a dog and I don't attribute human traits to him; to treat him as human would be cruel. However, I do like him a lot. No, dammit, I love him. I also like it that two cats who belong to neighbours regularly visit.

I don't either shoot or go angling. However, acquaintances who do impress me with their real commitment - expressed in work and money - to fauna and flora.

There are very few wildernesses left and certainly none in Ireland. We live in a man made environment and we must make the best of it. We also live with creatures: some wild, some tame, some domesticated, some line bred, all with different natures and abilities.

I was not saying that you should treat your dog as a human(although in some countries apes have had the backing of government parties to get human rights).
I am saying that Saint Ruth's argument of anthropomorphism was faulty. Other animals clearly feel the same types of emotions as us, even though they are not near as intelligent. To say that an animal being hunted does not feel fear and pain is ridiculous and definitely not a case of anthropomorphism. I do not hold that because we are much more intelligent than them, that we should have such a right over whether they live or die, especially these days, where hunting is just for pleasure. With our intelligence should come responsibility and humility, not arrogance and a feeling of such self-importance. Even though I wouild be smarter than 99.9% of humans(IQwise anyway.) for instance, I don't feel that I or anybody else should feel better than another human or another animal, and have the right of arbitrarily killing it, no matter how dim they appear to you.

I tend to view that sense of superiority that humans have, stems pretty much directly from the Abrahimic faiths, amongst a few other things. Most other cultures seem to have developed a firmer grasp of their place, within, and as part of the natural world... rather than separate from and somehow superior to it.
I don't think any atheist/agnostic should believe humans "deserve a higher place in the world than animals, as if we are divine beings".
As for people who believe in a religion, they believe morality to be objective, and dictated by their god. It is rather clear what they believe and why.

People have broken away from religion for generations of a family but still have the feeling that they are superior to other animals instilled in them, as they grow up. People are more affected by things than they think, and knock on affects can travel through generations and carry through into a society that makes it feel right to kill a 'lesser' animal.

On my last visit to the zoo after an absence of many years, I was impressed. You see, I had stayed away because of the animals who were clearly driven mad by their conditions but that has changed.

I've only gone to a zoo as a child and have never gone back, I am heartened that the conditions are improving.

As I said above, I've never seen a badly treated circus animal. I tried to find evidence of cruelty over the years because I like animals but I couldn't. The animals were content and well cared for. Distress in a mammal is very obvious.

Even walking by circuses I have seen animals treated and locked up cruelly. Just google circuses and cruelty. All these people make a fuss for a reason.

By the way, when I asked, "Can you reconcile the relativism of your 25th post with the certainty of your 27th post?", I was referring to dates.

I employed certainty in both posts. It is fact that stoning is part of the islamic faith, it is not an extremist view. It is also a fact that believing in a religion is an extreme view to me.
Then, on the 27th, I then put forth another view of certainty.
Both posts don't appear to offer subjectivity, but objectivity, if you care to expand your point on what you think is subjective in my posts, go ahead.

It is funny that I do, of course, offer my opinions as if they were objective rather than subjective. Even though I believe them to be subjective and not objective.
I of course share the flaw of every human, that my moral compass is pointing true.

fairplay

We haven't banned hare coursing...yet. But it took Australia quite a few years to ban it....state by state. I think Victoria was the last Australian state last to outlaw this sickening excuse for a "sport"...Britain only banned it a few years ago at the same time it banned fox and stag hunting.

Circuses will go eventually. How much better to appreciate exotic animals in large wildlife parks in the open spaces, and not as bullied performers in circuses or innocent captives in zoos.

It's an evolving process, but we'll get there. Tossing virgins into Volcanos and locking single mothers with vicious SS-style nuns was tradititional once too, (as were cock fighting and bear baiting) but one moves one...doesn't one?

Orion

Do you just pop in now and again to drag up old threads? I've no problem with your ideal - I'm against hare coursing and hunting as a sport. But dragging up threads every now and again when you don't take part in the boards community just pisses me off.

fairplay

Macros42 wrote: »

Do you just pop in now and again to drag up old threads? I've no problem with your ideal - I'm against hare coursing and hunting as a sport. But dragging up threads every now and again when you don't take part in the boards community just pisses me off.

Afraid I don't understand you. I have expressed a point of view. That's what forums are about. Forgive me if I don't conform to some particular expectation as to how one should behave in these situations.

I didn't think of myself as "dragging up threads", whatever that means. If you don't want people commenting on particular issues or "threads" that you consider out of date or whatever, why not just have those ones deleted?

So long as they remain, you can't condemn people for adding their views etc.

What on earth do you mean by not taking part in the Boards Community? Does a person have to be on the damn thing day and night or what?

994

nacho libre wrote: »

I'll never forget the misearble looking Elephant i saw at Dublin Zoo as a child. So my answer is yes for Zoos that are not involved in conservation projects.

Animal facial expressions do not match human ones; a "sad" face on an elephant could mean anything.

Censorsh!t

Circuses involving animals, there's no question about it, they should be banned. The training methods are disgraceful in a lot of cases, and the animals should not have to spend their life cooped up in trucks, travelling. All they do is teach children that animals may be exploited, nothing else.

Zoos...it really depends. But for the majority, they should be closed. I would agree to a zoo/wildlife park who's animals are one's that were injured/orphaned animals that cannot survive in the wild themselves.

And yes, of course if circuses and zoos were banned, then other issues involving animal welfare would arise, and so they should. In my opinion hunting, horse and dog racing, factory farms, fur farming, etc should be banned, and that's just specifying with Ireland. Of course that debate is for another time.