XPost: alt.philosophy, alt.animals.ethics.vegetarian, alt.global-warming   
      
   On Mon, 29 Mar 2010 11:39:57 -0700, "Dutch"  wrote:   
      
   >   
   > wrote   
   >> On Thu, 25 Mar 2010 20:54:00 -0700, "Dutch"  wrote:   
   >>   
   >>>   
   >>> wrote>    Veg*ns and people who have faith in the gross mi$nomer   
   >>>> "animal rights"   
   >>>   
   >>>It's not a misnomer. It's often misguided, maybe, but there is no   
   >>>misnomer.   
   >>>To call it a misnomer is to suggest that their vision of a world without   
   >>>livestock somehow violates some animal rights or causes harm or loss to   
   >>>animals, and that is completely false.   
   >>   
   >>    No, what it suggests is that bringing about the elimination   
   >> of domestic animals is completely different than it would be to   
   >> provide them with rights, and we know it. Since the objective is   
   >> completely different than what the name suggests:   
   >   
   >It's not different at all, everyone knows what the AR movement wants. They   
   >want *no livestock to be born*, NOT livestock eliminated.   
      
       They certainly do want them eliminated. Stop lying. But then   
   again I guess if you were to stop lying, you couldn't respond at   
   all.   
      
   >Stop being so   
   >fucking stupid.   
   >   
   >You know you are such a fucking hypocrite. YOU want these animals   
   >eliminated. You want them prodded up ramps, bolted throught the head, hung   
   >by the legs, gutted and cut up into pieces so you can eat them. You have a   
   >lot of nerve criticizing someone who doesn't want to see animals born   
      
     · Because there are so many different situations   
   involved in the raising of meat animals, it is completely   
   unfair to the animals to think of them all in the same   
   way, as "ARAs" appear to do. To think that all of it is   
   cruel, and to think of all animals which are raised for   
   the production of food in the same way, oversimplifies   
   and distorts one's interpretation of the way things   
   really are. Just as it would to think that there is no   
   cruelty or abuse at all.   
      
       Beef cattle spend nearly their entire lives outside   
   grazing, which is not a bad way to live. Veal are   
   confined to such a degree that they appear to have   
   terrible lives, so there's no reason to think of both   
   groups of animals in the same way.   
       Chickens raised as fryers and broilers, and egg   
   producers who are in a cage free environment--as well as   
   the birds who parent all of them, and the birds who parent   
   battery hens--are raised in houses, but not in cages. The   
   lives of those birds are not bad. Battery hens are confined   
   to cages, and have what appear to be terrible lives, so   
   there is no reason to think of battery hens and the other   
   groups in the same way. ·   
      
   >to be   
   >treated that way. Just enjoy your fucking meat like I do and stop being such   
   >a complete moron.   
   >   
   >> "The vast majority of the financial support for PeTA comes   
   >> from people who do NOT subscribe to the complete elimination   
   >> of animal use." - Dutch   
   >   
   >SO FUCKING WHAT?   
      
       So obviously you're aware that they are tricking people into   
   donating money to something they don't agree with, meaning they   
   are dishonestly fooling people into believing they stand for   
   something different than what they actually do. Such dishonesty   
   is okay from your pov....in fact you think the dishonesty is okay   
   but that pointing out the truth is a bad thing:   
   _________________________________________________________   
   dh pointed out:   
      
   > AW means better lives for animals. "AR" means the elimination of   
   > farm animals, and as much as you obviously want to believe they're   
   > the same thing, they are completely different objectives.   
      
   "Dutch" desperately responded in apparent fear of the truth:   
      
   Shut the fuck up you stupid fucking moron. Do the world a favour   
   and go blow your stupid fucking head off with the biggest fucking   
   gun you can find.   
   ¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯   
   >> it's a good thing to refer to it as the misnomer that we know it   
   >> to be.   
   >   
   >It's not a misnomer any more than the movement to end slavery was a   
   >misnomer.   
      
       In contrast to domestic animals who would be killed or left   
   to die without reproducing until none would be left, there are   
   plenty of descendants of slaves. Again you were horribly   
   dishonest by trying to pretend that such different situations   
   should be thought of in the same way.   
      
       What do you think would be wrong with referring to the   
   objective to eliminate domestic animals as: The elimination   
   objective?   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)