Protest/Demo/installation for animals

[auroraglacialis]

Originally Posted by Raptor

The problem is, because they are of a different species, they aren't our equal. Perhaps they take an equal role in the ecosystem, but they simply can't be treated equally. Comparing racism and speciesism is just too far.

Well to set racism and speciesism equal would be taking it too far. Nothing can be said about comparing them (that comparison could also conclude that they are different). I think there are many differences, but there are also some parallels, namely that some people mistreat animals out of hate, greed or simply a feeling of superiority. The same can be said for racism (or misogyny for tha tmatter).
The way I see it there is a relationship between all animals. That relationship may well be one of predator and prey, of symbiotic living, or eating and being eaten. Actually all animals have such a relationship that involves death as well as living. This is why I do not say that humans should exclude themselves from that, because that would be a grave mistake to seperate humans from the rest of the world (and it is already done in many respects).
What we as a species need to find is our place in these relationships. Right now, at least a large part of our species is behaving very different from what our place in Nature used to be. Instead of hunting, fishing and gathering or even of guarding sheep or cows, tending for plants in gardens or taking a portion of the eggs of birds at least many members of our species act like abusive partners in that relationship. And this is what is a dire problem - our relationship to nonhumans is no longer a balanced one. We don't even feed the soil with our manure, the minimal service predators do to their environment. And not only do we take much more than we need, we dont even give what we do not need to those who could use it. And keeping cows in feedlots, fur animals or chicken in small cages and all the other stuff is IMO a sign of a relationship gone horribly wrong. How do we relate to each other and to the nonhuman world, that is the issue for me, not that there should be no death in the world.
And such a relationship may start with a simple "Thank you" when killing an animal, with a sense of gratitude and with the consideration if what one gets for the killing of an animal is really worth the death of another being. In many cases I would say if one really thinks about this and considers oneself to be in a relationship to all the other animals around, in many such cases I would think that the answer would be "no". In some it is of course "yes" - for example if I get attacked by an animal I do consider this appropriate. And I even (sorry Eltu ) consider it approriate to kill a mosquito that tries to drink my blood and may infect me with some disease.

Originally Posted by Clarke

nature intending anything is, IMO, your own anthropomorphization; an "entity" that is not self-aware cannot intend anything.

Does intention require self-awareness?
What about a bug crawling up a leaf - does it not have an intention?

Originally Posted by Raptor

I treat it as a system that has a very fine balance to keep its inhabitants thriving.

I would not even say that the balance is so fine - Earth is pretty robust and very good in recovery. But it definitely has its weak points and pushing it too far will break her as well - or at least provoke "corrective measures" that are so strong as to pose real troubles for us.

Originally Posted by Tsyal Makto

I'm sure there would be plenty of takers, either because 1) The price is right, 2) They are already sick and have nothing to lose but things to gain, or 3) They just want to play a part in the advancement of medical science.

Well #1 I would not agree on, as this means that poverty is an incentive to become a "guinea pig" for medicine, but the other two yes.
Actually, the people who are most fond about scientific and medical progress, who want to see all this stuff happening should rightfully also be the ones who bear the consequences, would that not be fair?

Now onto the subject of nature - IMT (in my theory) we have a mechanically "soft Gaia," where the sum of all organisms acts as part of one full, global, living biosphere....Could this somehow be a basis for a global consciousness, like each brain cell together makes a working brain?

Hehe, I definitely think this is a possibility. In any case, that whole thing about "Gaia theory" does not even say that Gaia has to be intelligent, self-aware or anything like that. At least not in the definition we generally accept. Lets take a hamster - you would maybe not call it very much intelligent, but the hamster will have a constant body temperature, grow fur to a certain length, be host for bacteria and mites and react to other beings. Even if you give Gaia only that much similarity to a living being, it means that climate, ecosystems and species, individual animals and plants, water flows and nutrient cycles are all part of her and that she can also react on them, just like a hamster can react to you pinching him in the belly even if he has not the level or form of intelligence a scientist would demand to call something a "higher being".