• Hi Guest: Welcome to TRIBE, Toronto's largest and longest running online community. If you'd like to post here, or reply to existing posts on TRIBE, you first have to register on the forum. You can register with your facebook ID or with an email address. Join us!

Casuistry: The Art of Killing a Cat

PosTMOd

Well-Known TRIBEr
Just to add something, it wasn't too long ago that every single person in undergraduate biology was required to dissect a cat.

Furthermore, it was only in the late 1970s that they stopped doing an interesting experiment in physiology classes whereby they would remove the head from a cat, leaving the brain stem intact, sling it standing onto a treadmill, and turning on the treadmill. The headless cat would walk, showing that most of a cat's behaviour is automated.

To somehow magically make a connection between killing cats and killing humans is not only stupid as fuck, it is immoral. That someone can equate a cat with a human just shows how fucking stupid some people are.

What's next? Are you going to connect killing flies or mosquitoes with serial killers? Or is it only mammals that you feel somehow connected to? Fucking morons.
 

~atp~

TRIBE Member
Originally posted by PosTMOd

What's next? Are you going to connect killing flies or mosquitoes with serial killers? Or is it only mammals that you feel somehow connected to? Fucking morons.
I think the argument is more subtle (and by subtle, I mean using greater than 2 neurons):

a) what are the reasons for killing the animal and
b) humans are also animals. We are not cats, but not far from them either...as compared to, say, a rock. ;)
 

gsnuff

TRIBE Promoter
Originally posted by PosTMOd
What's next? Are you going to connect killing flies or mosquitoes with serial killers? Or is it only mammals that you feel somehow connected to? Fucking morons.
<passes baton to Timo>
 

PosTMOd

Well-Known TRIBEr
Originally posted by ~atp~
I think the argument is more subtle (and by subtle, I mean using greater than 2 neurons):

a) what are the reasons for killing the animal and
b) humans are also animals. We are not cats, but not far from them either...as compared to, say, a rock. ;)

a) Any animal? What about plants? Bacteria? What reasons are acceptable? Is it not arbitrary?

b) Indeed humans are animals; however, I've noticed that most humans mean "animals other than humans" when they write "animals". I suppose the comparison is made to us, and then the arbitrary decision is made by some morons that if it has hair and is cute, it is almost human, and therefore the animal must be afforded the same protection as humans.

What's so subtle about that? Sure, arbitrary can be seen as subtle, but I would just call it moronic.
 

Vote Quimby

TRIBE Member
Originally posted by Maui
What I meant was do some research and you will find that a large % of those who torture and kill animals for fun eventually torture and kill humans for fun. (ie. Jeffery Dahlmer)
I wasn't suggesting torture. Just having a cat for dinner. Kill em, clean'em, roast him on a spit.
 

rejenerate

TRIBE Member
Originally posted by Maui
^^^ Page is working fine for me

It was down all morning that day and then came online again.

I saw the film and think it could be a very powerful anti-cruelty tool...the activists were definitely too reactionary in dismissing it outright. It made me think about a lot of things. I'll be posting a review in the general forum.
 

docta seuss

TRIBE Member
Originally posted by PosTMOd
Though many serial killers/violent people, etc., have tortured animals in their past, it does not mean that animal torturers necessarily go any further.
wouldn't it make sense though, that those willing to torture smaller creatures would be more likely to torture the larger creatures? it seems like a very simple conclusion to come to, but a reasonable one.

Originally posted by PosTMOd
just to add something, it wasn't too long ago that every single person in undergraduate biology was required to dissect a cat.
disection and vivisection are two very different things.

Originally posted by PosTMOd
Any animal? What about plants? Bacteria? What reasons are acceptable? Is it not arbitrary?
don't pretend to be an idiot. let me make it simple for you. all creatures which have the ability to feel pain, should never intentionally be made to feel pain.

i think we can all agree that plants and bacteria do not have the ability to feel pain, thus they don't rank so high on the ethics activists' lists.
Originally posted by PosTMOd
Indeed humans are animals; however, I've noticed that most humans mean "animals other than humans" when they write "animals". I suppose the comparison is made to us, and then the arbitrary decision is made by some morons that if it has hair and is cute, it is almost human, and therefore the animal must be afforded the same protection as humans.

...I would just call it moronic.
yeah, that's about what i'd call it. thing is, you're probably the only person who's ever come to that conclusion, so responsibility for that moronic thought lies with you.
 

PosTMOd

Well-Known TRIBEr
Originally posted by docta seuss
wouldn't it make sense though, that those willing to torture smaller creatures would be more likely to torture the larger creatures? it seems like a very simple conclusion to come to, but a reasonable one.
Simple, and perhaps commonsensical, but incorrect.

Originally posted by docta seuss
disection and vivisection are two very different things.
There are thousands of mice, and a few hundred sheep and rabbits being used for medical experimentation in the basement of Mount Sinai hospital. Many of those animals undergo procedures that cause a lot of pain, such as being implanted with tumours.

Are the researchers psychos? The pain is most definitely NOT necessary.

Originally posted by docta seuss
don't pretend to be an idiot. let me make it simple for you. all creatures which have the ability to feel pain, should never intentionally be made to feel pain.

i think we can all agree that plants and bacteria do not have the ability to feel pain, thus they don't rank so high on the ethics activists' lists.
How can you be so certain that plants and bacteria don't feel pain?

For that matter, how can you be so certain that cats DO feel pain?

Any way you slice it, it is arbitrary... the more something "looks like" you, the more likely you are to personify it.

Originally posted by docta seuss
yeah, that's about what i'd call it. thing is, you're probably the only person who's ever come to that conclusion, so responsibility for that moronic thought lies with you.
See above. Explain what is NOT arbitrary about it.
 

PosTMOd

Well-Known TRIBEr
This guy is obviously a complete moron...

(And just for the record, I don't condone the torturing and killing of animals [including human]; I do, however, have a problem with people not being able to admit their own hypocrisy, and the laying of arbitrary moral judgments on others)


http://www.thestar.com/NASApp/cs/ContentServer?pagename=thestar/Layout/Article_Type1&c=Article&cid=1095199811617&call_pageid=968332188492&col=968793972154

Sep. 15, 2004. 06:31 AM
CHARLA JONES/TORONTO STAR

Cat killer crashes protest

Appears outside film festival screening
Police take him in until film ends

MURRAY WHYTE
ENTERTAINMENT REPORTER

A placid protest outside the Cumberland Theatre last night erupted in a row when the subject of the protesters' ire, cat killer Jesse Powers, made an impromptu appearance outside the theatre.

Powers is the former Ontario College of Art and Design student who videotaped himself skinning a live cat for an apparent art project in 2001. The resulting animal cruelty case made international news, launching Powers to a sensational degree of infamy.

Powers and two others were sentenced last year to 90 days jail time, to be served largely on weekends.

The festival this year selected a documentary about the case, Casuistry: The Art of Killing a Cat, for its Real to Reel program. The film generated a large degree of controversy leading up to the festival, and a programmer received a death threat at his home.

Yesterday, a crowd of about 100 — armed with various placards and posters with the image of Kensington, the cat that became Powers' victim — were milling quietly about in the minutes leading up to the 6 p.m. world premiere screening when Powers suddenly emerged from behind the crowd and crossed the street.

A chorus of "cat killer," rose from the throng of suddenly restless protesters, who converged on Powers before he could reach the theatre.

A crowd of demonstrators and police surrounded him. One protester confronted him, demanding to know if he felt any remorse.

"I felt sort of bad about it after, but I haven't had a chance to (feel guilty), because everything sort of barraged on top of me," Powers said calmly.

"When was there time to feel guilty? In the end, I got to bring the wrath upon myself."

Powers and the protester continued talking when a police officer stepped in, and took him into the theatre.

Powers emerged from the theatre's foyer struggling with police, his hands cuffed behind his back.

A clutch of officers surrounded Powers, escorting him to a waiting police van that had suddenly appeared on Cumberland. Police confirmed that Powers had been arrested for breach of peace.

He was held in custody until "the situation was alleviated," said a staff sergeant at 53 Division. Police held him for about 2 1/2 hours until the film ended and the crowd dispersed. He was then released without charge.

It is not known whether Powers was a scheduled guest, or if he appeared of his own accord.

The festival administration could not be reached for comment last night.

The second and final screening of the documentary is scheduled for Friday.
 

docta seuss

TRIBE Member
i was disagreeing with this part of the post.

Originally posted by PosTMOd
the arbitrary decision is made by some morons that if it has hair and is cute, it is almost human, and therefore the animal must be afforded the same protection as humans.
the, 'fuzzy and cute' card has already been played to death. it's got nothing to do with fuzziness or cuteness...

it's to do with right and wrong. i'll protect what i deem to be an ugly animal (including humans) just as vigorously as i will a cute one.

There are thousands of mice, and a few hundred sheep and rabbits being used for medical experimentation in the basement of Mount Sinai hospital. Many of those animals undergo procedures that cause a lot of pain, such as being implanted with tumours.

Are the researchers psychos? The pain is most definitely NOT necessary.
no, the researchers are not psychos. they are desensitized as to the pain they cause.

i know it would be impossible to stop all animal research, but is at least semi-humane treatment too much to ask for? i mean, lab mice for example, are killed in CO2 chambers, an extremely painful death, despite there being plenty of methods available to induce a painless death. why is this necessary? it's that age-old problem of people just not thinking to care or caring to think.

Simple, and perhaps commonsensical, but incorrect.
it's easy to say it's incorrect, and i'm not saying you're wrong, but what makes you so sure you're right? more often than not, if something's commonsensical, there's a very simple reason as to why.
 

Maui

TRIBE Member
Good lord PosTMOd get a grip you meathead, or go back to your auditioning for the next disney cartoon in the general forum.

I simply don't have the time to waste hand feeding you the basic arguments of moral philosophy.

Way to refute the evidence with your opinion though.
Most kids DO torture animals just like they also engage in criminal activity. It's a phase though. I'm talking about the ones who take it up as a weekend hobby.
As for vivisection and slaughter houses, it has to do with the psychological connotations. These people have been socialized to believe that what they are doing has a reason. Obviously there is none as neither are necessary but they don't understand that. Thus it not the same as someone who cuts rats ears off after school everyday.
I won't even touch the plant comment. Its too laughable.

Maui
 

PosTMOd

Well-Known TRIBEr
Originally posted by Maui
I won't even touch the plant comment. Its too laughable.
Laughable because you can't wrap your head around the idea that plants might be conscious and they might feel pain?

I'd actually like to see you define pain... probably not possible, but give it a shot.
 

derek

TRIBE Member
Originally posted by Maui

I won't even touch the plant comment. Its too laughable.

Maui
shamanistic cultures believe plants are sentient. several of the altered states they endure are designed to communicate with the plant world. they understand the plants in a way civlisation does not, and have an extensive pharmacopeia. they also show alot of respect for other animals within their tutelary beliefs.

whether they actually communicate or not is a matter for debate; however, i don't think they would find it laughable, or at least i don't laugh at them for believing it.

cheers,

derek
 

docta seuss

TRIBE Member
Originally posted by derek

whether they actually communicate or not is a matter for debate; however, i don't think they would find it laughable, or at least i don't laugh at them for believing it.
oh come on... he wasn't laughing at them.

he's saying it's laughable that PosTMOd, whom we assume is not of a shamanistic culture, is trying to defend the position that plants and bacteria, neither of which have nervous systems, can feel pain.
 

docta seuss

TRIBE Member
Originally posted by PosTMOd
Laughable because you can't wrap your head around the idea that plants might be conscious and they might feel pain?

I'd actually like to see you define pain... probably not possible, but give it a shot.
oh for the love of head...

can you please drop this nutty argument. obviously we can alter meanings of words by coming up with some zany definition found underneath all the others in a dictionary, but it's a poor way to try to prove a poor argument.
 

derek

TRIBE Member
Originally posted by docta seuss
oh come on... he wasn't laughing at them.

he's saying it's laughable that PosTMOd, whom we assume is not of a shamanistic culture, is trying to defend the position that plants and bacteria, neither of which have nervous systems, can feel pain.
he was laughing at the concept of plants being sentient. which is understandable in civilised society, and i just wanted to point out that other cultures don't share this view. i did not imply he was laughing at shamanistic cultures. again, a shamanistic culture would not see the concept of plants being able to feel as laughable, and I would not laugh at them for it.

why does postmod have to be from a shamanistic culture to postulate the possibitity of plants being able to feel?

are you sure a nervous system is needed to feel? certainly this seems the case in animals, but need it apply to all forms of life.

cheers,

derek
 

PosTMOd

Well-Known TRIBEr
Okay, so make an assumption that a nervous system is needed to feel... but feel what?

A jellyfish has a rudimentary neural net that could be seen as a nervous system. Do jellyfish feel? Is that why they sting you? Or do they sting you to torture you? If they were able to make a film, would they make a film showing a couple of them stinging a human in the name of art?

At what level do people start caring, feeling pseudo-empathy...

At the level of a clear cerebral cortex? Or hindbrain? Or ganglia?

Or is it really an arbitrary choice based on an arbitary phylogenetic distance from humans? I believe it is. In other words, chauvinistic, in that one can only feel empathy toward something that is close enough genetically to oneself as a human, the superior animal, nay the superior living being.
 

docta seuss

TRIBE Member
i have arbitrarily come to the conclusion that you say arbitrary way too much.

in any event, i will not try to sway your views, as i will not be successful, and i don't care to get into it over the definition of 'pain'.

anyone can argue any angle on anything once they start getting into definitions.
 

derek

TRIBE Member
ironically, our superior cognitive capabilities and intellect can also manifest as superior stupidity.

just look what's happening in the world right now: stupid.

other animals lack our intellect and stupidity. perhaps being superior is destructive in a system that requires balance.

cheers,

derek
 

zee

TRIBE Member
Originally posted by docta seuss
lab mice for example, are killed in CO2 chambers, an extremely painful death
just for curiosity's sake, how does this work? i'd think it'd just make them really sleepy until they pass out
 

Subsonic Chronic

TRIBE Member
Originally posted by PosTMOd
A jellyfish has a rudimentary neural net that could be seen as a nervous system. Do jellyfish feel? Is that why they sting you? Or do they sting you to torture you? If they were able to make a film, would they make a film showing a couple of them stinging a human in the name of art?
Gold.
 

docta seuss

TRIBE Member
Originally posted by zee
just for curiosity's sake, how does this work? i'd think it'd just make them really sleepy until they pass out
that could be done with a lower concentration of co2, and even that would be unpleasant, but not half as bad. no, they just fill the chamber with a high concentration, which is essentially the same as hanging the poor buggers. it's death through asphyxiation.

slow.
 
Top