Author Options:

Ban the posting of Instructables that use of dead animals or parts thereof Answered

As one who respects all life, and who is sickened and repulsed by the "Instructables" which attempt to use dead animals or parts of them as some kind of demented joke, I propose that Instructables.com should ban the posting of articles dealing with or including dead animals or parts thereof. (And before anyone asks... Yes, I've been a vegetarian for 30 years. No, I don't wear leather or fur or other animal parts. No, I'm not a "wuss" - I just feel that the use or exploitation of living things or formerly living things without their consent is immoral.) eBay seems to have survived just fine with their policy of restricting the sale of animal products to a very specific list; I think Instructables should take the moral high-road and institute an outright ban on the use of animals in posts.


There is nothing wrong with having a personal opinion, but asking for the "banning" of any information of use is how the Soviet Union was born. It is not how the free world operates however. I despise most novels, but I don't ask for them to be removed from the shelves of bookstores..."Fahrenheit 451" all over again only not just with books, but with all displeasing information of any kind? That is NOT the world I want ot live in. Sorry. Even if I agreed with you about the treatment of dead animals, I would not want to ban the information.

Culturedropout, So where do you draw the line on "animals or parts thereof" would an instrucable showing you how to clean fine china be wrong ?? after all some fine bone china is upto 50 % dead animal or animal parts, What if I was to do one on how to fix a coleman stove ? would it to need banning because the stove used a leather cup in the fuel tank ?? And are you going to ban all the ones on driving because the master cylinder in the braking system may also contains leather parts, yea it's not just used for the seats?? (( Ok only skunkbait drives trucks with no brakes and I'm sure he can warn you of the danger of driving with no brakes <>)) And I don't see instructables on how to club baby seals, or one on how to make hamburgers by tossing a live cow into a tree chipper.... And I'm not calling you a wuss, but your should look at some the wussy acts like the product labeling acts, before shooting down instructables, and even before you say or think your a vegetarian, some products like rolaids are made from shrimp shells, nice if you have an allergy to shrimps no where does it say on the package made from ground up animals, but it does say it's got calcium, but so do shrimp shells... Hundreds of products don't actually list off there full ingredient's... Soap is another interesting product some say Tallow other say rendered fat, other say Oil, most say nothing, but which is the one for a true vegetarian to use..... Maybe you could do an instrucatable on how to be a vegetarian, and this would allow people to have a little more insight into the world of a vegetarian.....

I would like to read or contribute to such instructable :)

To the original question I am too against any animal exploitation - for food / testing / clothes / instructables. I am a veggie teen myself But banning such things on instructables wont hit the target and will do damage - like any kind of censorship. I am against banning this explicitly The way to go is change the attitude of people. Show them in fact that animals are not for us to exploit and that we can be happy without exploiting them Now lets think together - Is the mouse mouse or the fur jacket products of animal exploitation ? Yes. Is it needed or moral ? The question is global - Its not just about the instructables website Please stick to the point of overall animal exploitation. The use of animals for food is another question (my answer to it is No as well) and has its extra issues which are not related to the topic here

im not asking that people berate me here, but i do not think it is right to attempt to restrict the information on this site for a reason such as this. if you think back, humans have been using "dead animals or parts of them as some kind of demented joke" for thousands of years. think of the native americans. they for how many years, had used the feathers of dead birds for decoration and inking, or the bones and skins of dead deer and bear? what about the native Alaskans? they were known to use the bones of whales washed on the beach as hunting tools. im not sure, but killing one animal with another animals parts seem a little "iffy" to me. i would be in complete agreement with you if the subject were still living animals, but it isnt. the subject is "dead animals or parts".

on another note, which i apologize if seems rude, this is just selfish on the groups part. if you were to take all the members of this group, nay, all the instructables users who feel this way, versus all instructables users, you would see this group is in a great minority. this site isnt here to promote moral beliefs and arguments, it is here to share knowledge with others. as ledzep567 said "you dont like it, dont click the link."

People have owned slaves "for thousands of years" too. That doesn't mean that it was ever right, nor that it's okay to keep doing it. This has been done to death, and I had left it alone. I'm not sure what got the posts on this topic started again. I'm not sure which "group" you're referring to as being selfish; I represent only myself. That being said, I'm sure I'm not alone, and in any event, I'm not the type of person who cares much about what the majority thinks. If I see something I think is wrong, I'll challenge it. I'm sure there's some clever analogy involving lemmings or sheep or something on this subject. With regard to "promoting moral beliefs" I'd have to argue that you can't separate actions in one place or context from the rest of your life. Either you believe something and follow it consistently, or you don't really believe it. The site is great, and I enjoy it quite a bit. My intent in starting this discussion was to at least raise the awareness of the subject, and I think that's been accomplished. What people choose to do with that awareness is up to them.

I'm sure I'm not alone

Have you actually read the rest of this thread?

I meant in terms of the human race. As far as I know, not all of them read/post to this site...

allow me to clarify, when i said group, i was referring to the group who believes strongly the subject of this thread. but, you are right in bringing it up. your are the only one here arguing it. people have indeed owned slaves for thousands of years, and guess what; they still do! why dont you say anything about work-horses if you are so intent on bringing slavery into it? why not pack-mules? why not seeing-eye dogs? im not saying there is anything wrong with you standing up for what you believe, when i see something i think is wrong, i too challenge it. in regards to your quoting my statement of "moral beliefs", i believe in this matter, separating morals from the action is justifiable. knowledge, in order to truly exist, must be unbiased. it cannot have anything to do with moral beliefs. as an example, if something were done with the intent to maim or kill, then it was not done in the name of science. if someone were to brutally murder an animal ,and somehow it had miraculously cured cancer, the fact would be that it cured cancer. but if the murder was necessary, would the knowledge be that the death cured cancer or the murder did? as for most of this, i respect you for it. there is really nothing more admirable than a person standing up for what they believe in.

people really do that?


9 years ago

canida wont agree...see her mouse mouse and taxidermy ibles

Yeah, and the pastor just keeps piling it on.


hmmm i think we should ban all instructables that take part in the actions of soldering, breaking things, moving of electrical currents, knitting, growing plants, and that include wood or metal in their projects. seeing as we are modifying them without their consent, heck they may even be able to think! i think you have no right to restrict the information on this site. you dont like it, dont click the link.

Ignoring the snide tone of your post, "I think" that this is an important issue that deserves discussion. Aside from the fact that some of these fairly disturbing "projects" are often featured on the front page of an otherwise thoroughly enjoyable and useful site, turning a blind eye to cruelty and indifference that tears your heart out isn't a healthy way to live.

Lol! Is funny because Culture has only contributed to the community thus far with this forum topic.

That's not true!

He has made a total of eight comments that aren't moaning about the poor wee dead beasties.

I wonder, sometimes; do people who refuse to use animal products because it "disrespects" the animals actually fear deep-down that the animals will come back and haunt them?

Oh, I know, he's a fan of Sapphire and Steel!

I wonder, sometimes; do people who refuse to usehttp://instructables.com/community/Ban-the-posting-of-Instructables-that-use-of-dead-/?comments=all#
post comment animal products because it "disrespects" the animals actually fear deep-down that the animals will come back and haunt them?

*holds back laughter*

I must be going soft in my old age, but... come on guys, CD isn't trying to convert us all to some zany religion, or persuade us that he/she has made a machine that defies the laws of thermodynamics, just make a point about a perceived moral issue with certain Instructables.

Also I almost just misspelled "perceived".. it's been a long week

I was told the golden rule of trying not to offend people was "you can't argue taste, and you can't argue humour, but anything else is fair game". I'm just trying to point out that a lot of people have no moral problem with this content and in keeping with the site's spirit it shouldn't be outright banned, without being unnecessarily derisive.

so you can argue religion right? teehee

Well, that's a problem because religion has been given an untouchable status. Any time that happens, the sh!t will hit the fan... or has it already... hmm...

i believe the fan is clouded in sh!t

Hey, if somebody just says they don't like a certain kind of 'ible, and contributes the kind he thinks should be here, that's fine.

But if they come on here doing nothing but moaning about the site content and calling people I like and respect "sickening", "repulsive", "deranged" and "immoral", then he's fair game.

I thought I was being quite restrained, compared to what I actually think.

I suppose what you actually think completely goes over the whole Be Nice policy.

Oh, I know, he's a fan of Sapphire and Steel!

Or Pet Sematary LOL

well, if you think that the "crueulty" suposedly displayed in these wonderfuly crafted instructables is more worthy of a whistle blowing topic post then lets say THE MASSACRE IN DARFUR then maybe YOU are the one "turning a blind eye to cruelty and indifference that tears your heart out"

No - I'm quite aware of all the evil things people are doing to each other in the world, and it's very sad. Your comment actually brings up a good point, though. Since we're a supposedly "superior" species, why is it then that _no_other_animal_ wages war against its own kind with the aim of wiping out entire groups, solely on the basis of disagreements about mythology, or out of lust for things like money or gold or oil, or maybe even just because they're the wrong color? No other species locks hundreds of thousands of its own kind in cages for years or decades. Other animals will fight over food, or territory, but they haven't invented (and used) weapons of mass destruction on each other, or ignorantly wallowed in their own filth until they've nearly wrecked the planet. So -yes- I'm aware people do awful things to each other for seemingly arbitrary reasons (or for no reason at all). As a "superior" species, shouldn't they be able to see that what they're doing is wrong, and stop? Or could it be that they're not really all that "superior" after all?

why is it then that _no_other_animal_ wages war against its own kind with the aim of wiping out entire groups, solely on the basis of disagreements about mythology, or out of lust for things like money or gold or oil, or maybe even just because they're the wrong color?

Ants, termites and bees all wage war on other colonies that are not in direct competition for resources.

So do troops of monkeys, lemurs and chimpanzees.

Dolphins have been observed bullying, kidnapping, murdering and even raping members of other schools, and of schools of other species.

In what way are humans "superior" to other species? It has been scientifically invalid to refer to later products of evolution as superior to earlier products for over a century.

"WMD" is just a matter of scale - compared to "no weapons", the clubs and rocks used by chimpanzees are WMD.

_no_other_animal_ wages war against its own kindwith the aim of wiping out entire groups

Not true, there is a species of hornet that will slaughter entire colonies of honeybees. The lust you say does not exist, is honey and larvae.

Just one of these hornets can kill 40 European honeybees a minute; a handful of the creatures can slaughter 30,000 European honeybees within hours, leaving a trail of severed insect heads and limbs.

Oh there are mammals that will do this too. Take Meerkats, or any territorial animal; they would rather not compete for food and area, so they would just as well have the "other" family wiped out.


. Yeah. I'm still trying to figure out this "humans are superior" business. He says we are superior and then provides examples of why we're not.
. As far as I can tell, humans are NOT superior to other species, but I suppose that depends on one's definition of superior. The only thing we have going for us is intelligence (and an opposable thumb), but high IQ does NOT equal smarter. Personally, I find my dogs to be vastly superior to most h. sapiens. (Cats are evil, but that's another story. heehee)

At least a couple of other people said that we were at the top of the food chain, superior animals, etc. so that somehow gave us the right to treat other (supposedly inferior) animals as we wished. That's what I was referring to, and that's why the word "superior" was in quotes.

. Sorry for the misunderstanding. See my comment dated Jun 8, 2008. 6:13 PM.

well, if they could im sure they would speak up in a humanly manner and disagree with us.

but, since no other animal has made an effort(that we know of) to become the "superior" being naturally we assumed the role.

Now, if you wish to be ruled by a family of chipmunks be my guest and live in a tree if you want...

Or could it be that they're not really all that "superior" after all?

Superior to what ???

And, by the way, do you feel superior to omnivores humans ?

This is a thought that I had about a year ago that is somewhat on topic: Is getting syrup from trees cruel? Think about it if we were trees and trees were humans. They would pricks us, collect our blood, boil down the blood into a thick mass of blood cells, and then pour it on there waffles and say yum

. That depends on whether or not you believe plants can feel pain and the procedure actually causes pain, if they can. . A lot depends on your definition of "feel." I've read that plants produce a measurable response to cutting and rough handling, but I have a hard time calling that "feeling pain." And the same ppl claim to get a response from yelling at the plants, which I have a hard time believing. . I don't believe plants can feel pain (or anything else), so I see no ethical issues with harvesting the sap.

Obviously you did not see the mythbusters episode where they made plants grow better by yelling at them in a controlled experiment! :D

I am not a nut, nor do I believe their results. I do not talk to plants, or believe it helps. I don't believe plants can feel pain. I am not a nut

I'm not saying whether or not they can feel pain, I just thought of it as a point of view

i disagree with your view. i love eating meat. its delicious, and a good source of nutrients. i hate tofu. i dont mind leather. i do, however, hate animal skins and think they are ugly. i am with you, however, against dissections. there are plenty of good videos out there on animals being dissected, the school doesnt need to buy 300 frogs so we can see whats inside.

Yeah, let all those future doctors "practice" on live, and actual patients rather then on practice instrument use before hand. Hi, I am Jack, I am your surgeon today. This is the first time I have ever held a knife in my hand......

Well, doctors do practice on live patients. Sort of. They do small things while supervised, like stiching up a wound or excising a bit of tissue, and graduate on to actual surgeries.

There are some video games about surgeries and stuff like that.

Hi. I am Jack, and I will be your surgeon for the day. Don't worry, I passed this level on medium before.