Chicago Business Daily - How should we treat other human beings, animals, all life on earth, and the environment?

How should we treat other human beings, animals, all life on earth, and the environment?

How should we treat other human beings, animals, all life on earth, and the total environment? How should we treatment other human beings, animals, all life on earth, as well as the total environment of the earth? What is responsible treatment of other human beings, animals, all creatures of the earth, all life including plants, and the general environment of the earth? *How should we treat other human beings? *How should we treat animals? *How should we treat all life? *How should we treat the total environment of the earth? (Copy and Paste the above listing to help in answering this challenging question.) <<<<<<.....>>>>>> Especially with the advent of the machine age this question is more pressing. Is it ok to torture and/or kill other humans or animals? Is it ok to pollute the earth? Please explain for the benefit of all peoples and nations. This has been an issue throughout the history of mankind. What is responsible human behavior? MOTHER EARTH: Understanding the earth is just like our mother. Addressing all environmental concerns worldwide. http://groups.yahoo.com/group/motherearth I asked this question after contemplating man's irresponsible behavior at time throughout history. Are we as humans ready to act more responsibly?

Public Comments

my philosophy is to treat all living creatures as i would want to be treated...even though an animal may not be able to reciprocate.(although some can such as dogs, cats etc) you should still be considerate of their feelings...not to inflict pain or suffering on them...feed them when you can...the environment will evolve to take care of itself however it deems necessary to survive mans destruction...we are destroying ourselves
Treat all people and all life as you would like to be treated in other words do as you would be done by.
it think there is no concrete answer to your question, because every individual lives a different life, a different situation such as the ones established by the society or by nature itself. due to these facts and since every individual cannot do away with their influences brought about by these factors lead hi/her to treat others or everything around him/her differently.
Geez,what a question...It's very hard to reach a single conclusion on this matter because you can view it through different perspectives. For instance,you can say that torturing animals is against the animals' rights but,philosophically,animals have no rights whatsoever because they have no duties. But in simple terms of right and wrong,it's wrong - which means that we would have to all become vegetarians (and maybe vegans) to end the torture animals suffer so meat can be produced. On the other hand,you can consider that animals have always been part of our nutrition so it would be pointless to give it up now - argument that could be fought back by saying that back in the past,there was no conscience of animals' suffering and so people didn't care (or didn't have a choice) but,now, people are aware of what animals go through so that we can eat meat,so there's no excuse. My point is you can adopt different perspectives depending on what your interest may be - and there's always a valid argument. The same about environment and other human beings: you'll treat them according to your own interest because,in the end,personal interest is what prevails. If you adopt Kant perspective,though,you'll treat everything and everybody with respect because he said: find a rule for yourself that all others could guide themselves by.
They deserve to be treated with utmost care and respect. All creatures here on earth deserves to live as what the Mother Nature requires them to be. Absence from the requisites Mother Nature calls for is against the Law. Law of Nature must be followed for it is the highest form of Law. Thanks for asking. Have a great day!
Humanly!
With Love and Acceptance.
*How should we treat other human beings? It is not enough to treat them how we wish to be treated we should treat them how we think they wish to be treated. Then there is that whole roll-playing bit too. Like if you’re a dad you have to act the dad, if you’re the boss you have to act the boss, if you’re the employee you have to act the employee. I guess you can say that we treat people based on their wellbeing, the collative wellbeing, and any other group or individuals with invested interests wellbeing, as skewed by various responsibilities, in relation to our goal. *How should we treat animals?    Animals deserve moral consideration. Just less so then us. If only because we have more potential to do good then them. *How should we treat all life?    with empathy *How should we treat the total environment of the earth? like a glass garden
---with deep compassion--treating them all alike and feeling the Lord's presence seated in theit heart.
Very simple. Just treat every thing around as a part of ourselves, the way we treat our hands, legs, eyes, etc. Then we would need no ethics at all to tell us what is right & wrong. The best religious teachers try to get people to experience this from within, and then such people would become loving beings, with love as a quality of their very being ! Actions would simply flow out of such people according to the need of the situation (note, that our left hand promptly reaches to scratch the itch due to some mosquito bite on the right hand, without even waiting for our mind's permission, signal, command or what ever! We might be talking, busy working or even sleeping!)
Wow! What a deep concept! I am afraid that my answer will fall short in solving so many poigniant questions. Much of my answer will be based soley on my interpritation of the natural order of things, which will most likely vary from other answers you receive, cause as they say, everybody's got "one." I do feel that every cognizant creature hasa duty, a responsibility to provide care and humane treatment and protection of noncognizant eliments. Other people should first be treated aswe ourselves would want to be treated. Infact,ultuistically, we should try to give more than we get. There will be times when we can be the giver of kindness and understanding and other times we will need to be the recipiant. In the human species there are individuals that lack the ability to give or perceive the gifts of kindness, tolereance, understanding or the consequences of denying these gifts to others. Most likely to chemical imbalnce in their brain or due to a deep seeded lack of nurturing during the earliest moments in a childs deveolpment of these concepts. In the overwhelming majority of antisocial human characteristics, there is a traceable cause or root. These people can not be treated or trusted in the same fashion that most of the human community can be. While their condition must be dealt with to protect society, their treatment should be as kind as the condition will allow. The few that can not respond positively to humane treatment, should at the very least be treated with the closest thing to it that they do respond to. Attempts should be made to bring them to place within themselves that trains or retrains them to respond to what it is that makes the rest of us more human-like. Facilities and prisons are full of people that made concious decisions to act inhumanely and because they have full awareness of the reprocusions of their acts, then they must be held accountable to the norms of a decent society. ( I almost hate saying decent society and norms because there are so many places on earth that the norms of the society are not what I consider to be humane) I think animals, all animals, even the pesky insect or critter type, where put here for a reason. I have no concept of what that reason is in some cases, but I believe there was one. The reason for the animals existance largely determines its fate while here. I do beleive that the human race has dominion over the other creatures and,yes, I believe that the purpose of many were put here to sustain us as food and nutriants. In the days of old a club to the head may have been the most humane manor in which to obtain the sustanence needed. We do have more humane ways now, but while it means the last moments of my flounders life or my steaks, may have been fearfull or unpleasent than I would like to think as I sit down to dinner, I do believe that to be my dinner was the reason that the animals that are a source of food, were put here. Again, with plants and trees, they should be treated with respect to the purpose of the existance! I think that lumber is agood reason to cut a tree. I prefer to think that trees farmed for this reason are preferable to thousand year old oaks but generations before us may have seen the width and tallness of the oak was a Godsend for their purpose. All life has a purpose whether or not our simple minds can understand or comprehend it. Life of anyone or anything should not be taken lightly or in vein. The earth was created with the ability to adapt to change. New land forms once lava cools, new growth of healthier foilage imerges from vast wild fires, a cleansing of the air occurs when an overgrowth of plant life overtakes a flat surface, and with each changing of the tide, the shore is met with water from afar. The effects of the marvals invented by man's search for progress as his future demanded more, faster, taller, and often artificial sollutions to the problems he met in his day, have not always been forseen until some damage to the natural mechanisms put into place at the time of creation is obivious. As populations grew, needs changed, and man developed new ways to meet the needs. Few would argue that if their child was dying a thousand miles away, it would be justifiable to get on a plane instead of hitching up the wagon to go and be by their side. But emmisions from cars, planes, space exploration vehicles etc... were not widely known to be dangerous until through technology, the damaging effects could be studied and the knowledge shared at lightening speed to others that were also tracking the same data. I could not even submit this humble attempt at answering such a vast and important philisophical pondering if it were not for the deveopment of some power source that,(while using some otherwise valuable resource,) that allows us to commincate with the world at the touch of a finger. So, now that we know we are doing damage to the built in earthly repair kit, we have to put our developing minds to work to acheive progress with out destruction to the degree that is possible. And to fix what we can of the damage that we have done. It becomes a matter of priorities. Should we cut down this tree or use recycled sources. Should we continue to run most things from oil or nuclear power or should we devise more things that run on solor, wind or water power. Should we build new buildings or repair the ones that are sitting vacant and unsightly down the road. Should we waste anything that someone else could use? Your last comment sums up the bulk of your question, but I find it most difficult to answer. I hate the thought of torture of anyone or anything. As a nurse, I have tried to be gentle in my delivery of care as to not cause unnecessary pain though there are treatments that I call tortuous. I know that many of these treatments are a direct result of animals giving their lives for scientist and chemists to ensure within a reasonable doubt that are safe for me to use in my care of humans. All drugs,used on humans, at the beginning of their use stand a greater chance of hastening death or causing long lasting, life altering side effects. The first people that try new drugsor experimental treatments are pioneers as in they may only be paving the way for future generations and not receiving the benifit they sought. I do believe the death penalty is justified in 1/100th of the times it is used. There are too many starving people in this world to continue to waste food on a person that knowingly, purposefully took the lives of others in the company of wittnesses without regret or remorse. Even then, I think the most humane method should be used and that the families of the victoms should have a right to participate if they so chose. In the grand scheme of things the fewer people, animals, plants, trees, air, water and earth that can be destroyed the better off the planet becomes, but in each instance there is an asterisk and unfortunately not one correct answer. But for all peoples, nations and mankind, the balance, the scale should be weighted by the consiquences of what the answer will mean down the forseable road more so than what the action or answer is today. To be a responsible human, we must take what has been intrusted to us and use it wisely,with kindness and forsight as a good steward for those that follow.
We need to treat them all as part and parcel of the Supreme Lord. Animals are no different than humans accept for their body and intelligence differs. The earth is the mother of mankind and the servant of God. We should respect her and not exploit her energies. All vegetation should be offered to God when prepared. What every we do we should take much consideration as to how to treat each living entity. If i accidentally squish a bug i should immediately chant Gods names to the soul of that bug and it will benefit (Such as Krishna, Allah, Jehovah, Vishnu, Rama, Etc.) We should treat all nations as equals (Friends) and as Gods children. We should never kill unnecessarily. Only to protect oneself or others and by the law. Never exploiting anyone. Then we can be happy. World Peace.
our treatment to all other beings including vegetation should be based on conservation and sustainability. compassion has no room since it happens only with human beings.
When we are children we should be destructive, this is the nature of mankind, we shouldn't care about people or the Earth, but as you live and go through life's painful lessons, you should be growing spiritually, for only a spiritual persons can >truly< care for one another and the envirornment. Spiritual enlightenment is the beginning of all things good.
I quit eating meat after watching a peta video, called Meet Your Meat. I was horrified to learn what kind of torture the meat I was eating had to go thru befor it was called meat. Animals laying there screaming and crying in pain as it had blood squirting from it's neck. The golden rule is old, tried and true. Unfortunatly it is not taught and modeled often enough. We as a society have become so barbaric and unfeeling, so unkind that we call it "normal". I can only hope that with the next evolution, our species wont de-evolve as quickly as this one did. KINDNESS IS KING !!!
as equals to us. utopic, huh ?
Unconditional love to all.