You three are strange...

Animals are generally euthanized because there is no way for shelters to provide for them (and no one to adopt them), they are sick and injured, or simply dangerous. It's often the only humane thing to do, considering the alternatives.

With humans, it could be considered the same. The terminally ill might be better off choosing to be euthanized early rather than suffer later. And one could even consider the death penalty to be a form of euthanasia (putting down the dangerous humans, so to speak).

The more I read your posts, hubb, the more confused I get. What exactly are you referring to when you say "animal holocausts?"

Asia doing this is really sad. I hope the UN can end this quickly.

I think we should agree with FML that kids in Asia are not animals and it is not wrong for them to exsists.

Does russia count? I think Russian kids east of the Urals should but west shouldn't.

Kids in asia do not have the right to die.

I think it is wrong to call kids in asia animals and then to even question whether they are wrong to exist.

You somewhat fail to note that there is a school of thought, where Euthanasia is not cruel to human beings. Some people are proponents of it, even if it is being forced. Although the general population may think of this as inhumane, there are still those who are proponents of it.

Now, Animals are not equal to people. They are not even close to people, in my opinion. We don't rely on Animals (Note the key word animals. This is not to be confused on enviroment), as a primary device of human survive. It is theoretically possible we could survive without animals (Theoretically, not practically. I'm being careful with my words here.) We are also supreme over animals (This was assured by the atomic bomb. It was arugable that it would be impossible to wage an entire war against every animal on the planet, save humanity. With the invention of the atomic bomb, we now have the capability to wipe every being on this planet, save ourselves, and cockroaches out. So, huamnity is pretty secure in it's dominancy of the planet.) and therefore own rights over them. Since they're not part of our species, they don't fall under the same protection as those of different race, religion, and genders do.

Because of this, arguing that they deserve any amount of respect is purely based on one's opinion. Since they're not human, they don't get the same protection (Difference in species is far greater then difference in Gender, Skin Color, or Religion). So, then what are they? Well, they're at best property, and if we can't afford it, I'd say that everyone should have free rights to do with their property. But, since they are living beings, and resources are plentiful where we are, we can afford, and as some would argue, are morally obligated to, afford some protection to them. We have enough resources to go around (This is arguable under a capitalistic system and all that. But we do have the raw resources to do it.), so logically then, we should afford animals some rights. This can include good treatment, since we can then view it to be inhumane to mistreat animals, and not risk running out of food. If we have enough resources, this can even go to afford animals certain rights to life in situation like Euthanasia. But they are not the same as humans, as I've given above, so this can extend to more lenient situations, such as when it would be inhumane, to let an animal continue to exist in the state it does.

So, to purely eliminate animals, seems unneccesary to me, and inhumane at worst. I would then logically not agree with it occuring. We have enough resources to go around, and we have enough resources to continue research, and feed the nation. So needlessly killing animals, would then seem unneccesary, and as I said before, I wouldn't support it. But, if it's in the case of a mercy killing, then we're talking about a being radically different then a human being, and it would only seem humane then, to put it to a peaceful death. That, I can support.

I understand your argument, LoveTheRainbow. Animals are not equal to us. But as non-PETA as I am, I believe that animals, as living creatures, deserve a certain amount of respect. This respect entails life.

Animal holocausts, regardless of what euphematic motive the Humane Society's cooked up, is cruel. It's unneeded. Why are we destroying life, even animal life, so thoughtlessly?

I understand the purpose of scientific studies in medicine and research that entail the death of animals--and I support it. But that's different than the squandering of animal life. This is what animal euthanasia is.

Because people seem to have this silly idea that they are better than said animals.