When Is a Life Primative Enough To Kill Without Reprecussions? (From Man or God)

originally posted by: BuzzyWigs
a reply to: carewemust

The other day, one of my kid's 5 dwarf hamsters had 7 babies. To keep things manageable going forward, I put 5 of the babies down the garbage disposal. My sister-in-law said that was cruel.

That is sickening. I wish I had not read it. Now I can never, ever unknow it.

Shame on you. It was not only cruel, it was sadistic, unnecessary, and savage.

It is only sadistic if he garnered some sort of pleasure from the act. I don't believe that was the case from reading his OP. It seems to me this was a pragmatic solution to a problem of overpopulation.

Sometimes you need to separate your emotions from the situation and do what is necessary. Emotions are inconvenient and create a dissonance that keeps us from using logic.

originally posted by: savagediver
I dont have an answer , but the garbage disposal method seems so gory and weird to me. I know what goes down the drain is nasty , but killing baby anything mammal in a garbage disposal seems so sickening.

The garbage disposal was the swiftest method. Baby hamsters are no larger than the eraser heads on a pencil. I felt more remorse when hunting rabbits and raccoons as a young lad. But that passed at dinner time!

To get back to my original question, it seems that the animal's self-awareness is the key...but the ultimate judge of whether what we kill is right or wrong lies with GOD. He created all life, and determines if we killed something out of malice, for food, for fun, by accident, or to preserve a way of life...as in killing other humans during wartime, or to protect one's self or family, or to protect other humans. Thanks to everyone for any constructive feedback thus far!
-CareWeMust

a reply to: carewemust

I think the rule is that it is only okay if not killing them is a threat to your safety.

e.g. We need to eat animals to survive.
e.g. Pests threaten humans directly (physical harm or illness) or indirectly (through damage to crops and livestock).


I don't think it is okay to have pets that serve no purpose other than emotional toys. If an animal serves a purpose, then it is okay to keep them.

e.g. Horse for farming or transportation.
e.g. Cat and dogs for pest control.

I think it is definitely not good to keep pets and then kill them just so you don't have to care for them. I think in your case, the moral thing would have been for you to free them so they had a chance at life, or you could have, at least, given them to someone who wanted them.

Edit: That's about intent only. If you do not intend to, then the rules are different. (If you can be found negligent or not, etc..)

You should not mix intent with no intent.

a reply to: Puppylove

Ya..we kept hamsters a while ago..suffice to say it put me off keeping hamsters ever again.I saw some sights that will haunt my nightmares forever

a reply to: carewemust

I have come up with a solution to that, when my friends have an over abundance of pet rats, hamsters or other similar rodent and the significant other has had about enough of it. I get free snake food! Simple, I didn't hurt em or kill em, I returned them to the food chain.

originally posted by: Bleeeeep
a reply to: carewemust

I think the rule is that it is only okay if not killing them is a threat to your safety.

e.g. We need to eat animals to survive.
e.g. Pests threaten humans directly (physical harm or illness) or indirectly (through damage to crops and livestock).

You should not mix intent with no intent.

Wow... everyone really has strong feelings about these "It's OK/Not OK to kill" questions don't you! I just mentioned the hamster/garbage disposal incident because it's what made me think of the question: When is it OK to kill one of God's creations...and when is it NOT OK to kill one of God's creations... be it a spider, mouse, cat, horse, or.. a human?

Some of you made a lot of sense, and helped me think through your answers. I appreciate that!

BTW, I don't think we have to have animals to eat for survival do we, Bleeeeep? Some people don't eat animals and they live long lives.

-cwm

a reply to: carewemust

The garbage disposal?? Seriously? I think your sister-in-law is being generous when she said you were cruel. What a horrific way to kill something. All you had to do was put them in a baggie and stick them in the freezer. They would have basically slowed down, heart stopped and died.

I was so flustered over the inhumane way you killed them, I almost forgot the actual question. To me, killing is killing. We only justify it in our own brains for our own reasons. If presented with killing a spider, a mouse, a rat, a duck, a cat, a dog, ect.. doesn't matter, I couldn't do it. I had 10 chickens, named them all and joked that when they stopped laying eggs that we would have chicken for dinner. Well, the time came and they stopped laying eggs. I couldn't bring myself to kill them. I could have even justified that it was food and that I was feeding my family, but I just couldn't do it.

Yet for some reason killing a fish or seafood doesn't quite bother me, I know that makes me a hypocrite.

a reply to: carewemust

No, we don't have to eat animals to survive. I fully admit I am a hypocrite. I have killed spiders before, but beyond that I couldn't bring myself to actually kill something myself. Yet I eat pork, beef, fish, seafood, ect... Really, morally speaking, given the fact that I can't bring myself to kill anything, I sure as hell shouldn't be eating it.

I think it is easy to detach from the actual animal and the end product we eat or in some cases wear. If I were to make that connection each and every time, I'd be vegetarian. I've actually given it a lot of thought lately.

originally posted by: carewemust
April 16, 2016

The other day, one of my kid's 5 dwarf hamsters had 7 babies. To keep things manageable going forward, I put 5 of the babies down the garbage disposal. My sister-in-law said that was cruel.

-CareWeMust

Actually what you have done could be considered criminal.

A man who killed his hamster by cooking it in a microwave has been jailed for nine weeks.

www.bbc.com...

a reply to: carewemust

Things that are unnecessary feel a little evil to me. So basically, because your situation could have easily been avoided had you not just bred the hamsters (it sounds like you knew that you didn't want any more hamsters), what you did was unnecessary and thus deemed wrong in mine eye, lol. But it's ok because you can evolve and learn from your experiences... right? So you can begin to make the right precautionary actions to prevent this from happening again, right? lol.

And I guess some animals do kill without any real apparent need (cats with mice, they don't eat them- but does the hunt and kill in fact satisfy some basic deep feline instincts which induce growth and bonding hormones that make the feline healthy?).

But in general to answer your question, two things come to mind:

1. if you're killing in self defense, then it is ok (I kill spiders in self defense, lol).
2. if you're hunting for food, and warmth(furs)... then yes, it's ok.

I think in regards to road kill, the expression "f-ck like rabbits" has earned its popularity due to the rapid speed in which rabbits multiply. They don't seem to be in any danger of going extinct. Same goes for squirrels, too. But, goose and ducks don't "f-ck like rabbits" so I guess people are just trying to be more mindful of the delicate threads in which certain species hang on... but then. Wow, then does the value of an individuals life decrease as the number of the species as a whole increases? As seen here with the rabbits vs the ducks?

Like, "oh, it's ok if a few rabbits die because there is so many of them?" Can the same be said of humans? Can one human life be likened to the rabbits life? Wow idk. Like if we're talking about the bigger picture, the survival of the human species at large, then a couple "roadside" killings isn't going to threaten extinction (as long as we're "f-cking like rabbits"). But that doesn't say anything about the personal worth and value of each individual and that doesn't make it OK. The being fined vs. not fined over the death of a species tricks us into thinking one has more value than the other, when that's just not the case. If we focus on any individual life... even the rabbits life, then dying on the side of the road needlessly is never ok. It falls into the unnecessary category because it happens at no ones expense. It's not for self defense and it's not for food.

Hamsters are an animal that if properly raised can be an excellent pet for a child. The risk of these really cute animals of carrying diseases like Rats or mice, makes then poor choices in relation to scientific research into disease like rats, mice, dogs, cats or monkeys.

originally posted by: savagediver
I dont have an answer , but the garbage disposal method seems so gory and weird to me. I know what goes down the drain is nasty , but killing baby anything mammal in a garbage disposal seems so sickening.

I have to kind of agree here. I was going to make myself something to eat, but I can't get the mental image out of my head.

There's got to have been a more...mundane way? Put em' in a box and spray some kind of gas or something? Electrocute them? Freeze them to death (they'd just fall asleep and not wake up). Car exhaust? I dunno.

Seriously? That was the first idea that came to mind? "Well, I guess I'll chuck em' down the sink..."?

Maybe someone with a pet snake? At least that's kind of nature vs. nature...

But seriously, the first idea that came to mind was "garbage disposal!"



I'm probably biased, living in Alaska. We don't have to deal with mice, rats, roaches or any other pests. We don't have any poisonous bugs really to speak of or snakes. No ticks. About the only thing we have are killer swarms of insanely large mosquitoes. We do have hornets and yellowjackets though. And those are dealt with extreme prejudice...because, ya know -- hornets aren't bros.

I'd say once a living thing has the capacity to feel pain, that's where the cutoff is? I don't know about judgement though.

Intentional acts of cruelty can lead to multiple years behind bars.[26][27] These acts (of intentional animal cruelty or non-accidental injury) may be indicators of serious psychological problems.[28][29] According to the American Humane Association, 13% of intentional animal abuse cases involve domestic violence.[30] As many as 71% of pet-owning women seeking shelter at safe houses have reported that their partner had threatened and/or actually hurt or killed one or more of their pets; 32% of these women reported that one or more of their children had also hurt or killed pets. Battered women report that they are prevented from leaving their abusers because they fear what will happen to the animals in their absence. Animal abuse is sometimes used as a form of intimidation in domestic disputes.[31]

One of the known warning signs of certain psychopathologies, including antisocial personality disorder, also known as psychopathic personality disorder, is a history of torturing pets and small animals, a behavior known as zoosadism. According to The New York Times, "[t]he FBI has found that a history of cruelty to animals is one of the traits that regularly appears in its computer records of serial rapists and murderers, and the standard diagnostic and treatment manual for psychiatric and emotional disorders lists cruelty to animals a diagnostic criterion for conduct disorders.[32] "A survey of psychiatric patients who had repeatedly tortured dogs and cats found all of them had high levels of aggression toward people as well, including one patient who had murdered a young boy."[32] Robert K. Ressler, an agent with the Federal Bureau of Investigation's behavioral sciences unit, studied serial killers and noted,"Murderers like this (Jeffrey Dahmer) very often start out by killing and torturing animals as kids."[33]

Cruelty to animals is one of the three components of the Macdonald triad, indicators of violent antisocial behavior in children and adolescents. According to the studies used to form this model, cruelty to animals is a common (but not universal) behavior in children and adolescents who grow up to become serial killers and other violent criminals.

It has also been found that children who are cruel to animals have often witnessed or been victims of abuse themselves.[34] In two separate studies cited by the Humane Society of the United States, roughly one-third of families suffering from domestic abuse indicated that at least one child had hurt or killed a pet.[35]

Source

You know you could have sold them.

www.petsmart.com...

Or donated them......

Where can I donate my Hamster?

answers.yahoo.com...

8.Arrange homes for the babies. You only need to do this if you aren't planning on keeping the babies after they are born. If you are having a hard time finding friends who want to take a baby or two, try posting an ad on Craigslist. You can also check with teachers at local schools, as hamsters make excellent classroom pets.

Never breed Hamsters unless you can find them a homes or provide for them in your own home.

www.wikihow.com...

a reply to: MystikMushroom

Just the aural image has tainted my thoughts ...

Ahhh! Nothin' like the sound of hamsters in a sink disposal unit ... in the morning !

Do you string your racquets with cat gut ? Lol.

Crunch crunch ... 😲😬

a reply to: carewemust

Me? Strong feelings? No. Feelings? Yes. I mean, I do feel bad for the hamsters, and I do feel bad that you were so insensitive to their life, but I'm not deeply saddened or mad or disgusted or anything - I was mostly just answering your question: what I thought the moral rules were [for keeping and killing animals].

Can we live without eating animals? Yes and no. We need vitamin b12, and b12 is naturally produced by bacteria which are, themselves, living. Sufficient amounts of vitamin b12 only comes from eating of animals or synthesized b12 which hasn't been around very long. Beyond eating from animals, I guess manna or bread from God could do the trick, but then I don't think you were asking about miracles, were you? The short answer, though: vegans need to supplement, otherwise, their diet is unhealthy.

originally posted by: Sublimecraft
a reply to: carewemust
IMO, octopus, dolphins, squid, cuttlefish, mantis shrimp among others, are equally if not more sophisticated than humans.

The sophistication of unicellular yeast cells is underestimated as well. They certainly fit the usual definitions for "life" (used in biology, see the last video). And not as 'simple' or "primitive" as people thought 100 years ago:





For those videos in context:
Real science, knowledge about realities compared to philosophies and stories

Question 2: Is Any Form of Life Really Simple? Or "primitive"?