Chinas Cruel Act Called Bear Bile Farming

[Guest]

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?

1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever

Login with username, password and session length

[PonySlaystation]

yes and,I guess you didnt see someone raping,committing genocide in village,torturing etc.

I have both heard and seen those things, your point is invalid.

[aeroblade56]

I am quite certain that wolf is not a dog 

Smurf went full Retard. we lost him. Either that or he had to much twilight to watch.

[Tymathee]

is smurf bipolar or something?

[Killer344]

By that logic, dog = wolf.... I guess we = Neanderthal.










Oh wait a second... we aren't, just in the same way dogs simply descend from wolves.

[Demon767]

That being said any man who can kill/rape or maim an animal deserves to be killed.

The funny thing is, that is your opinion
There is no universal law that says you cant or proves it to be wrong
The Chinese can tear the fur off alive dogs and throw the fur-less dogs in back of a truck
To you they 'deserved' to be killed
To the Chinese it is common practice

So you can never justify an opinion of someone deserving to be killed based on your own perception of reality.

[aeroblade56]

The funny thing is, that is your opinion
There is no universal law that says you cant or proves it to be wrong
The Chinese can tear the fur off alive dogs and throw the fur-less dogs in back of a truck
To you they 'deserved' to be killed
To the Chinese it is common practice

So you can never justify an opinion of someone deserving to be killed based on your own perception of reality.

is this how you feel about Asian women.

[Unkn0wn]

Even if there was a universal 'law' against it, the Chinese still wouldn't give a fuck.

[Masacree]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DoQCc15l-FA&feature=related

Rly sad 
fucking degraded Chinese...

d00d, people in every country do fucked up things.

Does that make them representative of their entire country?

That's a fucking blatant double standard.

Shit's fucked up and shit.

[DarkSoldierX]

d00d, people in every country do fucked up things.

Does that make them representative of their entire country?

That's a fucking blatant double standard.

Shit's fucked up and shit.

Actually from what ive seen the Chinese actually living in china seem to have less regard for animals then other people.

To say judging people as a stereotype is ignorant is a ignorance in its self.

[Vermillion_Hawk]

Stereotypes have a basis, but to judge an entire people based on them is in fact ignorant. The few people you encountered may have been simply misrepresenting the (massive) population of China.

[DarkSoldierX]

Stereotypes have a basis, but to judge an entire people based on them is in fact ignorant. The few people you encountered may have been simply misrepresenting the (massive) population of China.

Noone said the entire population has that, but I have no doubt the majority of China has a lesser regard for animals.

If the religion of islam can make a population regard dogs as lower than other animals, why couldn't the culture of a people regard some animals as lower?

[Masacree]

Actually from what ive seen the Chinese actually living in china seem to have less regard for animals then other people.

Real?

I guarantee you can't objectively weigh the evidence in your head because in America animal cruelty is done "under the hood". My roommate is Chinese, and he tells me that he hardly ever eats meat in China, people typically eat vegetables. So I'd guess animal cruelty, although maybe more visible, is probably less common.

To say judging people as a stereotype is ignorant is a ignorance in its self.

Are you fucking retarded?

Let's say you know exactly how 500 (!!!) different Chinese citizens have treated animals in every action
in their entire life.

That is 3.7x10^-5 % of the Chinese population. Clearly an adequate sample size to make sweeping generalizations about an entire civilization.

[DarkSoldierX]

I never said anything about america not cruelty to animals, but since you want to pick at that (because you wish to pick at me instead of my argument) I will answer.

For one, if american cruelty is "under the hood", why is there such a widespread whine about what happens to animals in america?

http://www.aspca.org/

And if america is just as cruel, why the fuck did begin to pass our animal cruelty preventions laws all the way back in the 60s? Which has been improved countless times.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cruelty_to_animals#United_States

When the Chinese passed there first attempt for a change in 2009 a mere 3 years ago.

http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/peterwedderburn/100010449/china-unveils-first-ever-animal-cruelty-legislation/

And only begins to step up those laws in 2010. If the chinese government has just finaly begun to pass laws in the last few years, then clearly there must have been lack of support for such laws by the population.

In the few years that have passed since then, do you really think the culture has had massive changes? Do you think the peoples opinion on animals have changed THAT much that they are equal to the level of cruelty in the United States? Don't get me wrong we are still cruel though.

And now, lets move on to what you said about bias and your friend.


You criticize me for using too small of a portion of people, and even laugh at the thought of a sample size of 500 people to get a idea of the Chinese population, then you tell us about your one roomate who tells you he hardly ever eats meat in china?

Do I need to tell you whats wrong with that argument? I mean really, cmon, at least tell me about your 10 Chinese friends who are telling you otherwise. At least get a 50th of the sample size you say is too small.

Oh and by the way, just because you don't eat a lot of meat doesn't mean you arn't cruel to animals.

[Demon767]

Even if there was a universal 'law' against it, the Chinese still wouldn't give a fuck.

no evidence is able to support that claim.

[Masacree]

I never said anything about america not cruelty to animals,

d00d you specifically started with the statement:

I have no doubt the majority of China has a lesser regard for animals.

"Lesser" implies a comparison to, so the way that America treats animals is absolutely 100% relevant.

And if america is just as cruel, why the fuck did begin to pass our animal cruelty preventions laws all the way back in the 60s? Which has been improved countless times.

1. The existence of "animal cruelty" laws does not imply their effectiveness, nor does it say much of anything about the general culture.
2. This is ridiculous comparison. China isn't a fully modernized country and their legal system is still going through growing pains.
3. Regardless of when the laws were implemented, you yourself admitted that both countries currently have animal cruelty laws implemented, so regardless of the past, IN THE STATUS QUO (by your logic (which is clearly faulty...)) the animal abuse in both countries should be equivalent.

You criticize me for using too small of a portion of people, and even laugh at the thought of a sample size of 500 people to get a idea of the Chinese population, then you tell us about your one roomate who tells you he hardly ever eats meat in china?

Do I need to tell you whats wrong with that argument? I mean really, cmon, at least tell me about your 10 Chinese friends who are telling you otherwise. At least get a 50th of the sample size you say is too small.

It may not be obvious to you, but this argument clearly cuts in my favor. You run into trouble because either 1. your sample size is laughably small to be sweeping generalizations concerning an entire civilization and so your initial statement is clearly false or 2. my own evidence (of comparable validity) rejects your statement, and so your statement is unwarranted at best.

[DarkSoldierX]

1. The existence of "animal cruelty" laws does not imply their effectiveness, nor does it say much of anything about the general culture.
2. This is ridiculous comparison. China isn't a fully modernized country and their legal system is still going through growing pains.
3. Regardless of when the laws were implemented, you yourself admitted that both countries currently have animal cruelty laws implemented, so regardless of the past, IN THE STATUS QUO (by your logic (which is clearly faulty...)) the animal abuse in both countries should be equivalent.

1. The existence of them shows undeniable evidence at a attempt for at least trying to help animals. And how do these laws not show a reflection of the culture? America was not under control by a animal loving totalitarian government, and even then if it was why weren't the laws abolished by the people after they were overthrown? Why were they improved? Because in the last 50 years the American people have been electing countless animal loving politicians? Or did they wish for it themselves?
2. You actually have a somewhat justifiable argument there. Still doesn't explain why the Chinese can openly have cruelty without such a large outcry the american's have, even with the far larger population they have.
3. I don't understand you. Or rather you don't understand me. I indeed said both countries have animal cruelty laws implemented. That is correct. But when did I say the animal cruelty in both countries should be equivelent regardless of the past? Clearly I argue against that. Maybe I should make myself more clear.

China just FINALY enacts animal cruelty laws.

US has eneacted animal cruelty laws in 1960's.

The chinese people must not have been supporting such laws so much if they are finally enacted after all this time. Not to mention at a time where much of the support for such a law was due to forgien powers pressuring for such change.

The americans have first enacted laws a long time ago, and have continued to strengthen these laws. When america first enacted these laws there was not as much foreign support for such a law.

It may not be obvious to you, but this argument clearly cuts in my favor. You run into trouble because either 1. your sample size is laughably small to be sweeping generalizations concerning an entire civilization and so your initial statement is clearly false or 2. my own evidence (of comparable validity) rejects your statement, and so your statement is unwarranted at best.

Huh?

1. your sample size is laughably small to be sweeping generalizations concerning an entire civilization and so your initial statement is clearly false

Uhh if mine is laughably small then yours must be not even worth a chuckle for being 1 person? I don't see how my arguement is false from this.

2. my own evidence (of comparable validity) rejects your statement, and so your statement is unwarranted at best.

Umm, the links to the laws I posted, thats pretty solid evidence. Unless your telling me those websites are false.

[Sachaztan]

China isn't a democracy though.

Doesn't really matter what the people want.

[Masacree]

1. The existence of them shows undeniable evidence at a attempt for at least trying to help animals. And how do these laws not show a reflection of the culture? America was not under control by a animal loving totalitarian government, and even then if it was why weren't the laws abolished by the people after they were overthrown? Why were they improved? Because in the last 50 years the American people have been electing countless animal loving politicians? Or did they wish for it themselves?

This is wrong. It's been proven that in a democracy most issues are decided by powerful and dedicated special interest groups rather than typical majority opinion. Check out  Mancur Olson and his book the Rise and Decline of Nations. This is relevant because it shows that animal rights legislation is not representative of typical public opinion.

2. You actually have a somewhat justifiable argument there. Still doesn't explain why the Chinese can openly have cruelty without such a large outcry the american's have, even with the far larger population they have.

Maybe they do and you just haven't heard of it because you don't follow local Chinese news? I don't think either of us are in a position to make this sort of a comparison.

3. I don't understand you. Or rather you don't understand me. I indeed said both countries have animal cruelty laws implemented. That is correct. But when did I say the animal cruelty in both countries should be equivelent regardless of the past? Clearly I argue against that. Maybe I should make myself more clear.

What I'm saying is that we're describing the status quo, so the past is irrelevant.

Uhh if mine is laughably small then yours must be not even worth a chuckle for being 1 person? I don't see how my arguement is false from this.Umm, the links to the laws I posted, thats pretty solid evidence. Unless your telling me those websites are false.

I don't think you understand. You backed up your original statement by saying that you've seen Chinese people be mean to animals. My argument functions as follows:

Either you agree that your sample size is laughably small to be making sweeping generalizations about an entire civilization (and that my sample size, talking to my roommate) is also too small to be making those sorts of generalization and so your original claim is rendered unwarranted (having no evidence)

Or, that sort of a sample size IS sufficient to make those sorts of generalizations in which case my evidence is atleast as good, if not superior to your own, which makes the claim inconclusive at best (because there is good evidence on both sides of it).

[PonySlaystation]

Saying that all democracies are the same is not at all a generalization.

[DarkSoldierX]

This is wrong. It's been proven that in a democracy most issues are decided by powerful and dedicated special interest groups rather than typical majority opinion. Check out  Mancur Olson and his book the Rise and Decline of Nations. This is relevant because it shows that animal rights legislation is not representative of typical public opinion.

If what you say is 100% true, then how could those dedicated special interest groups hold such power for roughly 40 years? The law has only been made more and more strict over the years, and never the other way around. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Animal_Welfare_Act_of_1966#Amendments

What does that group have to gain from this personal matter? I have trouble seeing a way to improve ones own status over this. And if this group exist, why don't the farmers lobby to gain support for the rejection of this law as described by Mr. Olson? Not to mention it would actually improve their status because the cops wouldn't be fining them for improper animal treatment.

What I'm saying is that we're describing the status quo, so the past is irrelevant.

We are describing the current, but inorder to gain proper understanding of the matter we discuss, we must use the past as evidence.

I don't think you understand. You backed up your original statement by saying that you've seen Chinese people be mean to animals. My argument functions as follows:

Either you agree that your sample size is laughably small to be making sweeping generalizations about an entire civilization (and that my sample size, talking to my roommate) is also too small to be making those sorts of generalization and so your original claim is rendered unwarranted (having no evidence)

Or, that sort of a sample size IS sufficient to make those sorts of generalizations in which case my evidence is atleast as good, if not superior to your own, which makes the claim inconclusive at best (because there is good evidence on both sides of it).

Actually I consider my evidence to be much more sufficient, especially when your roomate doesnt exactly talk about animal cruely, rather he talks about how much animals they eat.
(CONTAINTS GRAPHIC IMAGES)(smurf you need to learn to tag your stuff like I do )
http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=8c7_1179830339 (Semi graphic, Westerner news crew doing it)
http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=bb5_1265587808 (Very graphic at the end)
And I have alot more videos, but id so rather not show you guys them due to many people being stuborn fucks that would watch it anyway even though they know they can't handle it. But il let you know they are absoultely are crazy. Your going to have to take my word when I say that they are public displays of cruelty to animals.