Response to Rifkin

Just as I had written in the essay we did in class, I responded to Rifkin's article by agreeing that animals are a lot alike us humans whether we like it or not. There is scientific evidence and just general ideas such as they give birth like we do, they react to pain like we do, and they eat and drink to survive like we do. And for some reason I began to think about turning the tables. Are WE a lot like them? But I think we try to be like them through our advancing technology. Maybe we got the idea of airplanes from flying birds, fast sports cars from jaguars, and the idea of being able to breathe underwater from fishes. Without the living functions of animals, we wouldn't be able to do those kinds of things. We unconsciously built our technology based upon animals. We somehow are like them as well.

Senior year

We are finally here, and we find ourselves wanting to be rid of high school. The first couple years were great, fun, easy, fast now this year all we want  is it to be out on our own. We want to have fun in our own ways, and not think once about school anymore. To put it straight guys we have a semester left; we can't slack off or get sick of school. This is the year you have been working toward, but this year will set the tone of your life. We hear this all to often now it`s either college, join the army, or just work. We all know that last option will get you minimum wage at a dead end job, military works for some people, but college if you have patience and work hard to get a masters or doctorate you can live comfortable. Life is hard, harder then it use to be. We need to make the right choices

Animal Rights

My feelings directly to the article "A Change of Heart about Animals" is half and half in my head... I haven't really picked a side, but I think after hearing what I say and what people have blogged about, I believe I may side the side that it is taking it could be taking it a bit too far. Personally, I think it would be difficult to draw a line somewhere. We do abuse animals a lot when we don't think about it, I think it's fair that they should have better animal rights, but isn't human rights a little too far? Animals were put on the Earth for us to use, to eat. Some animals can eat us too, dangerous creatures, though we don't know if they can be friendly. In my opinion, we should just treat animals with more care so they don't abuse us. Hitting them, cursing at them, caging them. I mean, I don't own any pets so I don't know what it's like to have own a domestic animal. We tame them, some people abuse them, some people experiment on animals, but most of us care for domestic animals. Some experiments are harmless, but can be used for data on the animal (to know more about the animal and to know what to do and what not to do with that creature). In conclusion, giving animals human rights is just taking it a bit too far, we don't know what they are really capable of... Some animals are very intelligent, but they aren't like us. Human and animal rights should be separate in my opinion.

Somewhere between the extremes.

All the animal rights arguments irritate me because it is very polarizing and there is no real answer. I hate questions like this because people try as hard as they can defend argument with no real facts. The vegetarians drown you with their argument. The animal experimenters drown you with their argument. Now scientist are even trying to judge if they should take an animals life based on whether it's smart or not. I know I have to pick a side, but I'm actually stuck in the middle. This is because I feel that killing animals for food and protection is justified, but killing animals in a cruel and unusual way is not. In the bible, it reads that some animals are meant to be killed and eaten. Also, killing predators that attack your sheep, or threaten our survival, is not a sin. This basic rule makes so much sense to me. Eating animals is a part of life; it is a way to sustain ourselves. Just because our society has evolved hunters to office workers, does not mean we have to change our diet. Also, we should  always have the right to protect ourselves from predators. But where I am against the killing of animals is when they are hurt and experimented on for no good reason. I've read stories of rabbits who have had their eyes melted away because a scientist is supposedly testing cosmetics. This is an example of cruelty that should be stopped. Especially because there are so many alternate ways to test the product, like skin cultures and virtual simulations. However, worrying about the animals intelligence or emotions is a little too far for me. The main reason we shouldn't be treating animals cruelly it because it is morally incorrect. Some people feel the reason should be because they are similar to us.  Does this mean that a gorilla should be pampered because it is similar and a turtle tortured because it is different? This argument makes no sense to me. In my opinion, a human is a human and  an animal is an animal. The sole reason should be because it is the right thing to do. So basically, I feel animals being killed for sustenance and protection is extremely reasonable, and I feel some pro-animal rights groups are being unreasonable. Converting the whole population to vegetarians is impossible, and treating animals like humans is ridiculous.

Animals and Humans

Reading the article "A Change of Heart about Animals" was very interesting to me. I found it interesting that a 300-pound gorilla was taught sign language, and honestly, that's pretty impressive. What I don't understand is why? Why does a 300-pound gorilla need to know sign language? Is it because it's cool to look at? Is it because people wanted to test the animal on it's learning ability? Who really knows? A gorilla needs to be in the wild roaming free, not in a session learning a new language. That is my opinion on that matter. Another topic in the article I found interesting was the research with the two birds. I was interested about how the female bird, Betty, was able to use her beak to wedge a wire through a crack and bend it with her beak to make a hook, grabbing a piece of food from the tube 9 out of 10 times. One questioned raised up in my head: How did she think to do that? And that is probably what the researchers were studying. I have no problem with animals having researched done on them, but there should be some type of limit to the research. What makes sense to test the animal on, and what doesn't. The article also started, " It's commonly believed that other animals have no sense of their mortality and are unable to comprehend the concept of their own death. " Sometimes I believe that researchers know this and they take advantage of it. Sometimes the animals are treated in such a cruel way when they are being used for research and it shouldn't be like that. If an animal is going to be used for the project, they should be treated in a where it doesn't seem like a cruel and unusual punishment. Like I said before, I don't mind animals being used for research, but  do believe there should be a limit. 

I dont think we should be trying to give animals human rights because if you start with one species of animals on human rights then where will we draw the line? Although do you think we should be treating animals anyway we want and disregaurding them afterwards I dont really think thats right either. Would you want your pet (if you have one) to be kicked around during some stand-up act and then thrown out into the street afterwards. I believe we should be give the animals we use some sort of curtisy and not just use abuse and leave them to die.

Blogging

"We get some rules to follow, that and this, these and those." Those are lyrics from the song No One Knows by Queens of the Stone Age. Why are us students restricted from what we can blog about? I feel that if students got to blog about whatever we wanted to, we would be more motivated to blog or we would like it more than we do currently. I get that we have restrictions, but why do is it only things that happen in class? Why couldn’t students blog about current events? A perfect example would be the death of Paul Walker, or even the death of Brian Griffin from Family Guy! These would be perfect topics that students are interested in and would like to talk about for a while. Ms. Fletcher said that she just wants us to have conversations on the blogs and that would certainly let us students have conversations with each other. Another thing Ms. Fletcher wanted was to challenge ideas and to show what we like or dislike. Using the example from earlier, I totally disagree with Brian Griffins death in family guy and I could go on and on just on that topic alone. People always tell students in school to never be plain and to use our imagination, so why are students being limited?