"meat is murder" & "animal rights"
- Thread starter Quagmire
- Start date
It is my opinion that to try and defeat James R and his ilk in the "Eating meat is morally wrong" thread, you lumped together vegetarians, animal rights groups and extremists such as these, and are so implying "James R doesn't like to eat animals, therefore he must be an evil person who digs up graves". I may of course, be wrong, or you may be doing this subconsciouslyQuagmire said:"yet I suspect this thread is a straw man"
please, do explain wont you
it is strange that we have a thread with "aniaml rights" in the title yet we are not talking about animal rights.Theoryofrelativity said:
so.... what you want me to do about it?
i dont understand why you want to draw me into your feelings for these events as though i am about to defend some animal rights activists, who has jsut dug up your granma.
ellion said:
This is not personal to you at all ellion, I am just replying to the comments made (not just by you) that these acts make people pay attention to the rights of animals, when it does not, it is very defeatest.
The response that their actions draw attention to animal rights implies that their actions have had value, by having value their actions are justified. Hence I asked you to place yourself in the relatives position to see if you still consider their actions have value and thus can be justified?
Communist Hamster said:
As with all groups there will be extremists, I consider these latest grave desecrating antics to be acts of extremists. If quagmire thinks ALL vegetarians are extremists he is EXTREMIST in his view. But hey we know that already. Quagmires answer to all these extremists is extreme measures. Quite funny really.
i really woud challenge that view. the only time the media shows any interest in animal rights is when there has been some sort of "evil" commited in its name.Theoryofrelativity said:
yes, okay, people may only be talking about "how terrible the activists are" and "what if it was your family" but the issues of animal cruelty are brought to the surface of public conscience, however briefly that conscience is pricked it is pricked none the less. i do take your point of being counter productive also. it is counter productive in endearing the public to the activists cause. as it is thea ctivists that become the evil and not those in the laboritories or in the case of the old lady, the innocent breaders of guinea pigs.
another point though. do you think after having their mothers body dug up these people will continue to bread guinea pigs. i think maybe they will also be questioning their business enterprises.
yes and form their perspective their actions did have value. i geuss, i cannot know obviously.
as i said a confusion of perspectives this creates.
how can you justify actions such as this in an objective sense as you ask? for some they had positive value. for some they had negative value. for the whole ie society who is to say? will this change the treatment of animals in laboritories would that really be a positive. if so, would it then teach people that they can get what they want by emotional torment? would that really be negative? how can we say? how can we objectify such things?
ellion said:
It is really not hard to objectify these things.
As I keep saying inhumanity does not resolve inhumanity.
If animal rights groups had an intelligent creative management team they would riase funds through sponsored fun events and seek to 'educate' as oppose to desecrate. There are many much more rpoductive things that can be done to raise awareness. They could raise funds and then use those funds to sponsor a stunt such as the one David Blaine is engaging in or something less extreme. Lots of things grab the publics attention and far better to do so with positive actions than negative ones. They could provide fun leaflets aimed at young teens (before the makeup goes on!) about where to buy animal friendly products and why we should avoid those tested on animals etc. No doubt things like this do go on, but they are just NOT focusing their energies correctly. In my mind this group has now become a group of 'nutters' and not a group of animal rights supporters, and I am sure many people will feel the same.
Did we all become IRA supporters as a result of them bombing us?
Is islam top banana after their suicide bombings?
Does terrorism ever work? No
You want to be objective, consider the results. Has the group they lost support or gained more support?
Will the family continue to breed guinea pigs, I am pretty sure they will.
Last edited:
i concur, i'll go with that myself but is that the reasoning of this group responsible here. it a similar view as extremists of any order, as Quagmire views even.Theoryofrelativity said:
no of course not, but it does raise awareness though, people pay attention to the issues and it makes people say WTF? lets get something done about this! that is what i mean really.
i dont think they care about that. they really have no care for what people think of them or how their actions are judged. they want action to be taken and they want people to think, pay attention. i dont think they care too much about how and probably the more outrageous the better for their purpose.
who am i to judge, to each his own, eh.
These individuals have no 'reasonning' abilities this is the problem. I think they just get caught up in the drama. Maybe they are teenagers and their hormones are raging and their morality isn't adequately developed yet, they haven't had a loved one buried yet? Who knows what is resulting in their lack of ethics and morality. Either way if this group wants to be productive, they need some intelligent adult minds backing their team, but intelligent adult minds wouldn't touch a group with a reputation for stunts like that with a barge pole, rather start their own!
ToR these threads are pointless as it all depends on peoples opinions, i eat meat and will continue to. funnily enough whenever i tuck into a juicy steak the last thing i think about is the animal. may i also point out that you are in the minoritory
this is the same problem with all such ways of solving problems. violence begets violence.
whether that be terrorsit action against percieved oppresors or the oppressors form justice to the precievd terrorism.
it probably does have a lot to do with the emotional response being the more powerful motivation than the reasoned rational response.
whether that be terrorsit action against percieved oppresors or the oppressors form justice to the precievd terrorism.
it probably does have a lot to do with the emotional response being the more powerful motivation than the reasoned rational response.
thedevilsreject said:
what minority? I also eat meat?
ellion said:
agreed.