The Easter period for me has been split equally between rural recreation and consideration of curtailed crucifixions. Frankly, I’m sick of people re-enacting the crucifixion of Christ, in the name of deep spiritual heightening, in a totally diminished and undemanding fashion. I saw one particular man hyperbolise greatly about lying down on a cross and being securely and comfortable tied to it with cloth and then having the tiniest drawing-pin-like nails tapped into his hand. There was no blood or pain and barely a mark to be shown for this apparently significant act. So if you want to really impress me you know what to do now.
My experience of local rural splendour, shared with my nephew and niece, has been the epitome of springtime, but also overlaid with the philosophy of animal consciousness. This first arose when we went for a joyous gallop in some fields, as we followed a river in a beautiful valley nearby. On the way back from our sunny frolics my nephew suggested we stop at the trout farm to catch a couple of fish. As much as anglers believe fish are impervious to pain, I believe I am impervious to the joys of fishing. My nephew had caught fish here before with his dad and I didn’t have any reason to oppose his choice of how to end the day. When I have been here before with them we only usually feed the fish. My nephew is somewhat torn about the ethics of fishing and has yet concluded his ideas on animal welfare. His dad is rather antithetical to me when it comes to such matters. Whereas I am carefully pragmatic and ambivalent on many issues, he is downright certain and sadistic. We did catch a fish each but both distance ourselves slightly from the man when he had to bash it on the head. My nephew likes retelling how his dad always wants to do this himself and how one time he knocked an eye right out of the fishes head. But I think we both shared the sense of impossibility of constructing a perfect opinion on farming, animals and death. We had some interesting discussions about it and agreed that to be callously detached from any non-human existence doesn’t feel right, but also realised that reality itself exists due to forces of callousness and selective emotion. Incidentally, neither of us ate the fish.
The next day was even more thought provoking on the subject of animals for my nephew. For the second day in a row we enjoyed passing the fields full of llamas near where we live. But this time we instead went to a farm to observe the lambing season. My niece was rather taken by the donkey, but she wasn’t sure if he looked sad, bored or just donkeyish. We settled on comfortably apathetic.....well I did. There were also newborn kittens and calves too. We weren’t there at the right time to see the cows milked, but we all agreed the cow shed must have exceeded the EU limit on shitiness. There were about ten new mothers and their newborns in compartments that they stay in for a day following birth, before they’re taken to the field. The most aggressive mothers were chained up and stamped if you looked at the in the wrong way. In the lambing area were all the mothers-to-be and one ewe’s restlessness was a sure sign of an imminent birth. We had to wait quite a while, during which time my nephew was telling a random woman how his dad smacked a fish so hard his eye flew out. “I’m not his dad!”, I shouted forthrightly, but my nephew knew how I meant it....thankfully. When the lambs were eventually born my niece found it all a bit too fleshy and preferred to shove some hay in the direction of the donkeyish-looking donkey. The day we visited the farm there were several children with mental impairments taken there for a day out. Some of them seemed to have quite serious conditions. Later, following further discussion about animal consciousness with my nephew, I expanded my train of thought to include people's perceived order of value for differing beings. There is uneasy similarity between the grades of value for different species and distinctions made between human beings. Though to evaluate the value of an existence purely on cognitive ability is surely a morally difficult when applied to certain impaired minorities. By adulthood most people have learnt a bias of some kind about such issues. From triumphant pride in killing to futile over-emotion. As for fishing, even the nervous systems of earthworms are used to debate hardened stances. Apparently their nervous systems are too simple to feel pain. The ability of lobsters and crabs to feel pain is commonly brought up. On the one hand, lobsters are able to perceive and respond to noxious stimuli, but they lack the emotional component to be able to call it pain. The argument goes that because such creatures don’t have the ability to process emotional information they resultantly do not experience suffering. Then there are primates, used as the opposite extreme of animal awareness. Such as cases like one in Austria where a group of primatologists are attempting to have human status granted for a chimpanzee named Hiasal. A British teacher living in Vienna hopes to become his legal guardian and secure his future when the sanctuary that now looks after him closes. As far as my nephew’s trout, apparently scientists found sites in the heads of rainbow trout that responded to damaging stimuli, but much like the lobster, that doesn’t necessarily equate to pain.
Ingrid Newkirk, the founder of PETA (People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals), the largest animal rights organization in the world, says things like “When it comes to pain, love, joy, loneliness, and fear, a rat is a pig is a dog is a boy.” The claim that “every creature with a will to live has a right to live free from pain and suffering”, surely validates the opinion that a creatures “right to live” can be seen to be proportionate to their scientific ability to suffer. There is a widely held opinion that animals deserve moral consideration if and only if they are sentient (especially possessing the capacity to feel pain). To philosophers interested in animal welfare or animal rights the issue of animal sentience is of utmost importance. Because of their focus on ontological rather than epistemological issues, there is often quite a disconnect between philosophers and scientists on these issues. A leading Professor of Philosophy, once argued that that “given their lack of sentience, it would be immoral not to use animals for research and other experimentation if doing so would improve the lot of sentient creatures such as ourselves”. He later argued that sentience is not the sole basis for moral consideration, and that animals qualify for consideration on the basis of frustration of their unconscious desires. It may be easier to define consciousness by saying what it is not. It is not a reflex, it is not simple conditioning, and it is not a hard wired instinct which works like a computer program.
It is difficult for some people to imagine a consciousness that is different from themselves. There can be said to be four basic levels of consciousness: consciousness within one sense, consciousness where all the sensory systems are integrated, consciousness where all the sensory systems are integrated with emotions and consciousness where sensory systems and emotions are integrated and thoughts are in symbolic language. Having read an article written by someone with autism, he states “The second level of consciousness is where I am at. My thoughts are not linked with emotions. I think a hierarchy of consciousness is reasonable because damage to the nervous system will damage consciousness.” I return to the thought that moral stances on behalf of non-humans with a lesser sense of consciousness aren't necessarily disassociated from those on behalf of humans. There was a case yesterday of a dead newborn baby being found in London. Cases such as those cement the opinion that the consciousness to be taken into account is that of the perceiver rather than the potential sufferer. There is certainly a differentiating of feeling according to age when there are deaths broadcast in the media. Of course the emotion in these cases seems stronger when the victim is less aware; children, elderly and disabled. The order of value of existence is based on your ability to emote for their cause rather than the result of philosophical or scientific analysis. In many ways these factors also migrate to those on abortion, especially in cases where the baby would be born with abnormalities.
But animals. Animals kill and die. Humans seem to want to eat meat, find cures and occasionally decide when there is need for a cull for the sake of the greater population of various species. But when arguing against such impulses becomes too arduous, you can always argue against things such as the “needless suffering” in slaughterhouses, like Pamela Anderson. Though I think to scrutinise the practical details of slaughterhouses and not the issues surrounding their very existence is a bit like criticising the sexual performance of a rapist....if you get what I mean.
But I think animal welfare is a great issue for rumination, to grow a sense of compassion and consideration along with a sense of realism and the inevitable. For me, it’s a difficult subject, made harder by the fact I make an amazing doggy when playing with my niece.
Christian Chat Person’s Profile Extract OF THE DAY - Nigel from Ireland: “I want to be a cowboy. Although I am allergic to horses so.. ”
Telenovela OF THE DAY - “Rebelde Way”: “Rebel's Way” is an Argentine telenovela that ended in 2004. Set in a prestigious boarding school near Buenos Aires, the show’s main characters are the children of some of Argentina's wealthiest citizens. The main plot revolves around a group of students forming a band. The actors of the fictitious band are also in a real band, Erreway which has been one of the highest-grossing acts in Argentina. The show has been sold to Germany, Austria and Greece and there have been versions made in India and Mexico. One star from the show, Luisana Lopilato, is particularly popular, though it’s not certain why her talent has stood out more than the other actors. As you can properly guess, this show is just sooooo coooooool. It’s Rebeltastic!
Reply To ‘Fictitious Email Written From One ‘Candidate That Will Not Become The Next President Of The United States Of America OF THE DAY’ To Another OF THE DAY’....OF THE DAY:
[The fictitious email:]
“Dear John,
I’m also a Presidential candidate for 2008, but with the Libertarian Party. I have built up some friendly and useful relationships with other candidates, including many of the passionate independents already confirmed to be running. Having looked at the list of candidates, my first reaction was not to contact you, even though I wanted to reach out across the parties and political spectrum. But I thought why not? I thought maybe if I forged at least some kind of understanding with you and vice versa then anything is possible.
As you can imagine, I don’t share many of your views, if any, but I still hope you’ll respond positively and maybe we can both learn something. I read your site and in many ways it’s the least complicated of all the campaign sites I’ve read. It’s just all about being white. I think it’s sad that you haven’t developed a broader and more loving opinion through the years. There are so many different problems in the world and you seem to be stuck at first base on the one that means the least. Furthermore, it seems so negative and based on hate, why is that? Man, why do you feel so threatened and insecure? It’s a small world and the free market, so loved by the “white man” doesn’t see people as regards to color, so I find it so archaic that anyone can nowadays. Obviously the National Socialist Movement brings together similarly insecure men and in turn that makes them worse. But if you do really think those things on your site at least bring the views into the real world and up-to-date instead of it just seeming like a little club of hateful and insecure sensationalists.
I think the first port of call for any views should be Love. Love for ourselves and everyone around us, regardless of their color, ancestry or social standing. Then it’s important to have a realistic view of the world as it really is and try and move it forward as best we can. Not only is it negative to attempt to drag our great country, and the world as a whole, backwards, I think it’s an idea that will always fail. The world always wants to move forward, even if you don't want it to.
Having to live with cancer and illness most of my life I realise life is too short to be sad or to be hateful and I intend to make the most of it and be happy and help the world move forward the best I can, leaving that as my legacy. I fear your “staff” are a little too preoccupied with swastikas, dress-up and childish attention seeking to realise any of that.
Nonetheless I wish you luck in your campaign and your life.
Peace and Love
Your friend
Steve Kubby”
[The actually real reply (mysteriously CC to nicholaschappell@hotmail.com:]
“Dear Steve:
Thank you very much for writing. It is always a pleasure to hear from other candidates in the 2008 Presidential election. Even though our two political organizations may not agree on everything, the most important point is being able to run and to hopefully obtain printed ballot access.
Best of luck to you and your campaign.
Best regards,
John Taylor Bowles,
2008 NSM Presidential Candidate.”
Proof There Is Nothing People Won’t Vehemently Argue About On Youtube OF THE DAY - Ballet:
“amazing....and that is a fouette....because her leg is into passe...her posture is amazing tho... excellent.. inspiring...x”
“ok... lets get this right... they are not fouettes, they are ATTITUDE TURNS AND THEN SHE PULLS HER LEGS INTO PASSE IN THE END, call THAT a fouette if you wish. this girl is amazing.”
“i didnt really like the yellow tutus i liked the other one.....lol kool vid”
“EW have you ever heard of creativity LOOOSERRRR”
“u r such a bitch”
“balletis4gr8people um yes i have heard of creativity DUHH!..ballet wannabe”
“so balletis4gr8tpeople, if ballet is for great people, why do YOU do it?”
“i'll show you that i'm GREAT by not lowering myself so far into DIRT by not dissing you back.”
“ok i wasnt trying to be a bitch or anything i was just saying u could be a little more open minded... but whatever who cares what i said i dont even know you…”
“omg this is soooo gaaayy. please kill urself”
“im way better than that!”
“Well since you have a YouTube account why don't you post something up and prove it?”
“she's quite good but in most of her spins her legs are turned in... but very nice anyways”
“You know what guys. She is fucking awesome. It doens't matter if her leg is turned in or stupid crap like. All that matters is the audience enjoys this. And listen to the audience at the end of those pirouttes. Case closed.”
“Ballet Dancer dont spin, they turn" Blah Blah Blah Who cares why do people like u have to be such bigheads for gods sake she was good. Ur so picky”
“she is soooo good, please you are just jealous, she is so good and her leg is not turned in”
“my friend does ballet and she taught me how to do a piroette and i did a double within 5 minutes”
“well dont you get a gold star!”
“My girlfriend can do better than that!”
“I would come on her face”
Famous Riot Given A Disney Ending OF THE DAY - Hong Kong Riots of 1967/Honey, I Shrunk the Kids:
In May 1967, inspired by the cultural revolution in China, pro-communists in Hong Kong escalated labour disputes into large scale demonstrations against British colonial rule. Clashes with police and subsequent arrest of active leaders exacerbated the violence, with some leftists using terrorist attacks. Both real and fake bombs were planted around the city and journalists opposed to the demonstrations were murdered. By the end of the year 51 people had been killed and over 800 had been wounded. What made it so bad was that they were all shrunk and it wasn’t really Hong Kong after all, but someone’s garden. Only after a demonstrator drowned in a bowl of cheerios did Rick Moranis finally find a way to restore them to their normal size. Being so happy to be back to normal they all apologised and were able to laugh about it all afterwards. THE END.
Sexual Position OF THE DAY: Dr Rashad Khalil (expert on Islamic law) et al:
“Being completely naked during intercourse invalidates a marriage”
[Fatwa on oral sex] “A disgusting western practice, resulting from westerners' habit of stripping naked during sexual intercourse”
“Muslim jurists are of the opinion that it is lawful for the husband to perform cunnilingus on his wife, or a wife to perform the similar act for her husband and there is no wrong in doing so. But if sucking leads to releasing semen, then it is makruh (blameworthy), but there is no decisive evidence especially if the wife agrees with it or achieves orgasm by practising it.”
[Oral sex] “This hideous practice will draw the anger of Allah”
[Masturbation] “Abominable and wicked act”
“Forbidden in Islam”
[The late Grand Mufti of Saudi Arabia on masturbation] “It’s harms are great and it has disastrous consequences as established by doctors including damage to eyesight, disruption of the digestive system, inflammation of the testicles, damage to the spine (“the place from which sperm originates”), trembling and instability in some parts of the body like the feet, weakening of the 'cerebral glands' leading to decreased intellect and even mental disorders and insanity. Due to constant ejaculation, the sperm no longer remains thick and dense as it normally occurs in males resulting in sperm which is not “mighty enough” to make a woman pregnant or produces children who are more prone to disease and illness.”
“Anal sex is a grave sin and is completely forbidden, regardless of whether the wife agrees to it or not”
“Temporary marriage” [A Shia tradition which in effect legalises prostitution]
[An Islamic website] “Islam strictly forbids the waste of seminal fluid”
My niece was recently taken on a trip to a PetLandWorldRUs by my sister to choose a new pet to impulsively purchase, neglect and allow to die prematurely. My sister and her husband are, of course, to blame for the shallow and immature attitude to having pets. But along with other more responsible members of my family, I try and aid any of their pet’s existence. My nephew was certain he wanted a dumbo rat, but my niece had one of her incomprehensible mispronunciations. She was adamant she wanted a terrorist. Whatever else was suggested, she simply repeated her desire to own a pet terrorist. Usually they give in to her, but this time they felt it wasn’t really suitable, even when they discovered she actually wanted a terrapin. Terrapins grow to be very large, but not half as big as the average terrorist. Anyway, hearing all of this made me think of my own sporadic aspiration to own a tortoise. [Question You Must Answer In The Form Of A Comment:] Do you think I should finally give in to my desire and get a tortoise?
Facebook del.icio.us 
Stumbleupon Reddit
