Animal Cruelty Vs. Human Cruelty

Alright everyone.

First of all; I don't condone any form of cruelty, however, there is one thing I've noticed from many people. Something I find interesting.

What I find interesting is how people are outraged and are super upset over animal cruelty and they bring it up quite so often. However, there are many cases of human cruelty (murder, torture, etc) where people don't even flinch when they read about it or see it in a video.

My question is, people. Why do(es it seem like) people react more to animal cruelty than human cruelty?
And don't say it's because animals are innocent, because that means you don't think things through, because many people are innocent as well.

(Innocent as in haven't done anyone any harm)

 

Animals lack voice and opinion, they have little choice when it comes to the desire of humanity since humanity can ignore animal care.
Animals rarely lash out without any reason that can not be observed or reasoned, the human mind is wild & ferocious at times, making it unpredictable & dangerous
Animals are hunted and killed by humans for sport, we have sent species to extinction and still do today.
We are protected by laws, armies, police forces. What protects animals but a few laws that are easily broken?

I find animal death tragic because when I do hear of an animals death it has almost always been killed by our species.

 

Like the above said, animals have no way to bring their opinions.
And...I suppose animals, to most people, are just more likable to our own, and that someone would be horrible enough to kill something that is usually so innocent.

I once saw a clip where a girl (I believe, if I remember correctly) put like a plate of glass on some kittens, and proceeded to slowly sit on it, killing/crushing them ;-;

 

Two reasons, both equally responsible.
Humans see violence against other humans as less shocking because acts of violence between two members of the same species is meant to be normal in the wild. Take Deer for example; they fight each other over a great deal many things, and it's normal to them, and as a pack animal we too have the instinct.

The reason violence is more shocking when done to an animal is likely because humanity believes itself to be more advanced than any other species on the planet, and therefore has a duty to protect and care for creatures that are lower than itself. The behaviour isn't exclussive to humans either; since Wolves and other mammals are also known to follow it.

In short; violence between members of a species is expected, but violence towards an animal not seen as prey is not, and that's why cruelty to animals is usually seen as worse.

 

To quote this thread and my school paper

I agree with the above quote. People > animals. Hell, I love animals. I ran over a rabbit the other day accidentally and almost cried. Both of my cats are rescued strays. I tear up during the whole abused animal commercials, but I think that we need to focus on helping our own species before helping 'lower' ones. Don't get me wrong, animal cruelty should be punished, but when the punishment for human cruelty is less than the punishment for animal cruelty, something's wrong here.

To go with what everyone else is saying, I think that the reason is because animals can't voice their opinion (though they can fight back) and it's like someone taking advantage of something because it's below them.

 

It's what humans will always do. Take advantage of the weak in their own species, and others. And with our higher intelligence (Well...) and technology, all other species are "weak" to some of us. I agree with the above posts. Our species can be evil sometimes a lot.

 

I think it may be worth noting that humans ARE animals and most humans (possibly myself included, though I obviously don't think so) aren't much better.

That having been said, it's not really important to stop cruelty of people against animals until we stop cruelty between people. I believe the saying goes, "Do not try to remove the splinter in your brother's eye until you have removed the plank from your own." To think that it is more important to stop the suffering of animals at the hands of man than it is to stop the suffering of man at the hands of man is extremely hypocritical.

 

And Caesar said- APE SHALL NOT KILL APE.

 

When an animal attacks a human, that's Nature. If you kill an animal in the wild who is trying to kill you, that is nature. Hunting is nature. Burning dogs alive for lolz is a pervision of nature, and is the same f***ed up thinking that has literally destroyed this planet. Humans are a parasite; but that's okay. The more intelligent the species, the more you need to sustain yourself. BUT. We're now permantly linked to the Earth. Meaning? If we go, it goes. We're thinking we're the best species on the planet. But we can't be on top forever...

 

When someone get's caught murdering someone, there's an arrest, inspection, court case, the whole shebang.
When thousands of dolphins get slaughtered in Japan every year, who punishes those responsible? NO ONE.
Don't think an animal rights activist is misguided when trying to bring something like that to light. Stopping human-on-human murders is already a priority, when stopping the killing of dolphins isn't. Should we just let this continue?

I believe if we want to live in a morally sound society we have to at least try to put an end to all types of cruelty, wherever it may be.

 

Well put, Crisp. I only believe human on human murder should be punished more so than that of animals. But yes; we need to punish those who hurt animals more than currently, as we're killing the planet and ourselves. And honestly, Animal cruelty is just wrong. Unlike a human, they can't fight back. But then, humans are sentient, making their deaths more important. Again, there's two sides to each coin, each with valid points.

 

Like others have said, it's because we, the humans, have minds and can think rationally.

However, animals can't; therefore, when we hear about how a human has severely mistreated an animal, we get outraged.

 

Personally, sentience doesn't make a death more important than another.
Everything here is and has been created, and we should value all life, regardless of whether they are capable of rational thinking or not.
Overall, I think that killing an animal should warrant as equal a punishment for killing another human; both were living creatures that felt, that were an important part of people's lives. And for someone to take that away, be it from human or animal, is wrong (with certain exceptions).

 

Yes, but in the long run humans hold more importance than animals. Honestly, humans, and earth for that matter, aren't important. Earth is just tiny spec in the entire universe, and humans hold technology on Earth. Maybe one day we can be remotely important. Earth, maybe. But in the end, Humans are more important for this worlds future. For better(Hopefully) or worse(likely) Also, we think and feel on a different level than animals. We think about our loved ones when we're about to die, how they're going to deal with it. The money, the bills, the lose etc. Animals are living things, and it isn't right to for them to be abused at all. But if it came between a human, and a dog... I'm a human being. Not a dog. We're competing with the other species, always remember that. It's nature. Though we're on the top, survival is a war. Now, that being said, we shouldn't use and abuse animals. Those who do need to be punished. I just think human life is simply more important. But that doesn't give people the right to torture these creatures. They're alive, like us. They feel. Just not on our level. And only a very sick person does the things that people here say people do to animals. There are ALOT of sick people; you guys are just showing a few tiny examples of it.

 

I agree that in the grand scheme of the whole universe, that we're basically an insignificant dot amongst the stars.

But even if we do think and feel on different levels, the ability to itself is still there. And I doubt that at this point we're hardly competing for survival now. Considering the mass quantity of deadly weapons we have, most, if not all animals, fare little to no chance at competing wth us in terms of survival anyore. Not to mention, of course, that we have very nearly overtaken most of their habitats and refined the more dangerous animals (lions, tigers, bears, etc.) into select, unpopulated areas within the world.

But I also agree with the fact that we humans have made ourselves a "necessity" to "evolving" the world too. Without us, none of the present day advancements would be around. All in all, I agree that we are important Earth-wise, but we can't really judge which species' lives are more important, because they're lives.

 

Dolphins are being hunted for food, so there's no difference between that and fishing.

 

Fishing for food is indeed cruel as well. Fish suffocating to death, or worse, gutted alive for caviar. Not to mention the lobsters in hot water.

But the dolphins are not being killed for food, it's for money. They let trainers get their pick of the dolphins and buy them for their amusement parks, and the rest get speared. The dolphin meat is purposely mislabeled as a different type of exotic whale and sold at high price overseas.

 

Regarding your comment about fishing for food; So we should just not eat fish, one of the healthiest things on the planet to eat? I don't quite see your logic, we need food to survive, we need to kill animals in order to survive. Vegetarians survive, but they are not as strong and healthy as they could potentially be if they ate meat. (Also, they often need to take some sort of pills to make up for the lack of meat)

 

We do need to hunt and kill to eat. That's our right as the top species. Other animals do it, and if they were this numerous, would kill at the level we are. But exploting them is wrong. Fishing more than you need is wrong. But fishing at normal levels is perfectly natural.