"Mans interference in nature is what truely defines man. From wearing clothes to adapt to diffrent enviorment, making cars to go faster, all the way to breeding new animals."

If thats your viewpoint, I cant really argue with you over it- its your perspective, and I cant even begin to guess how you came to such a conclusion.

Simply put: Just because man chooses to do something to make his life better, dosnt mean that its the right thing to do on a larger scale.

Narcissistic as we are, humans think that because we have the capacity to do something means that we are 'meant' to do it, or that we SHOULD. In our history as a species, we've only just recently started looking at the large scale consequences of our actions, and have started taking steps to prevent bad consequences from occuring. Many though, seem content to just say 'well, im a human, I have thumbs, im better than everything else; so why not do what I want?' And that basically comes down to "should I do it? Considering theres really NOTHING to gain in said circumstance, no, you should not. Could I do it? Yes, you probably could.... Ok, im gonna do it."...And if thats your outlook, well, no offense; but youre the problem with humanity as things are- theyd prefer to bury themselves in this blanket of ego; as opposed to accepting that the way theyve treated other living things since, well, the beginning of time, has been pretty primitive; and attempting to alter them accordingly. (im not saying you personally see things that way, but people that do ARE the problem)

And anyway, if you can logically compare wearing a shirt in order to survive in a colder environment; with confining mixed species in hopes of creating a hybrid.... well, im sorry, but that just dosnt sound logical to me. One is a requirement for survival; while another is simply something one does out of preference.

Many of mans actions are of this sort, and we simply prefer to group them all together. You cannot compare making a car go faster (still a luxury; but one that has at least a somewhat logical purpose) with keeping 2 species of animals confined together in hopes that the hormones of the males will get them reved up enough to essentially rape another animal( a luxury that has a far greater chance of injuring one/both of the animals, causing at least one of the animals mental distress, resulting in mutated/deformed babies or diluting the gene pool even; than it does of producing healthy, living offspring that will survive their lives successfully).

At least, not the way I see things.

[ Reply To This Message ] [ Subscribe to this Thread ] [ Show Entire Thread ]