FMB Discussion Board > Fur makes an acceptable comeback.

bsvila

Jul 27 2009, 07:32 PM

QUOTE (RF @ Jul 27 2009, 07:17 PM)

QUOTE (bsvila @ Jul 27 2009, 05:07 PM)

QUOTE (RF @ Jul 27 2009, 06:54 PM)

Well releasing lab animals and domestic mink and such into the wild doesn't seem terribly compassionate when it comes to those animals...

Domestic mink - that must be a new term. Do they pick them up and pet them and talk sweet nothings to them? Funny how 'domesticated' dogs and cats can survive in the wild isn't it. Please explain to me how these so-called domesticated mink cannot.

Of course, I didn't say that a domesticated mink cannot survive in the wild.

Let alone "funny", it isn't even remarkable that some dogs and cats can survive in the wild. But many won't. I have no doubt some released mink survive after their release. But neither do I doubt that many don't.

But since releasing them is more political statement than compassion speaking... who gives a shit eh?

Political - you really think so. Have you ever been involved in a mink realease and been privy to the beforehand workup? I always remember the Starfish Poem - the ending goes like this:

why are you throwing starfish in the ocean?"

"The sun is up and the tide is going out.

And if I don't throw them in they'll die."

"But, young man, don't you realize that

there are miles and miles of beach

and starfish all along it.

You can't possibly make a difference!"

The young man listened politely.

Then bent down, picked up another starfish

and threw it into the sea,

past the breaking waves and said-

"It made a difference for that one."

One of the Chatham 3 - Open the Cages

RF

Jul 27 2009, 07:35 PM

QUOTE (bsvila @ Jul 27 2009, 05:32 PM)

QUOTE (RF @ Jul 27 2009, 07:17 PM)

QUOTE (bsvila @ Jul 27 2009, 05:07 PM)

QUOTE (RF @ Jul 27 2009, 06:54 PM)

Well releasing lab animals and domestic mink and such into the wild doesn't seem terribly compassionate when it comes to those animals...

Domestic mink - that must be a new term. Do they pick them up and pet them and talk sweet nothings to them? Funny how 'domesticated' dogs and cats can survive in the wild isn't it. Please explain to me how these so-called domesticated mink cannot.

Of course, I didn't say that a domesticated mink cannot survive in the wild.

Let alone "funny", it isn't even remarkable that some dogs and cats can survive in the wild. But many won't. I have no doubt some released mink survive after their release. But neither do I doubt that many don't.

But since releasing them is more political statement than compassion speaking... who gives a shit eh?

Political - you really think so. Have you ever been involved in a mink realease and been privy to the beforehand workup? I always remember the Starfish Poem - the ending goes like this:

why are you throwing starfish in the ocean?"

"The sun is up and the tide is going out.

And if I don't throw them in they'll die."

"But, young man, don't you realize that

there are miles and miles of beach

and starfish all along it.

You can't possibly make a difference!"

The young man listened politely.

Then bent down, picked up another starfish

and threw it into the sea,

past the breaking waves and said-

"It made a difference for that one."

One of the Chatham 3 - Open the Cages

*shrug*

Nothing says political statements can't be composed of or accompanied by unrealistic rhetoric.

bsvila

Jul 27 2009, 07:36 PM

QUOTE (RF @ Jul 27 2009, 07:28 PM)

QUOTE (bsvila @ Jul 27 2009, 06:19 PM)

QUOTE (bsvila @ Jul 27 2009, 07:07 PM)

QUOTE (RF @ Jul 27 2009, 06:54 PM)

Well releasing lab animals and domestic mink and such into the wild doesn't seem terribly compassionate when it comes to those animals...

Domestic mink - that must be a new term. Do they pick them up and pet them and talk sweet nothings to them? Funny how 'domesticated' dogs and cats can survive in the wild isn't it. Please explain to me how these so-called domesticated mink cannot.

One more thing, lab animals are not released into the wild. They are removed, evaluated, taken care of.

Then it isn't terribly accurate to claim they were liberated.

Depends on how much destruction the mad scientists have done to the removed animals. Since they go underground to appropriate facilities, we will never know.

bsvila

Jul 27 2009, 07:38 PM

QUOTE (RF @ Jul 27 2009, 07:35 PM)

QUOTE (bsvila @ Jul 27 2009, 05:32 PM)

QUOTE (RF @ Jul 27 2009, 07:17 PM)

QUOTE (bsvila @ Jul 27 2009, 05:07 PM)

QUOTE (RF @ Jul 27 2009, 06:54 PM)

Well releasing lab animals and domestic mink and such into the wild doesn't seem terribly compassionate when it comes to those animals...

Domestic mink - that must be a new term. Do they pick them up and pet them and talk sweet nothings to them? Funny how 'domesticated' dogs and cats can survive in the wild isn't it. Please explain to me how these so-called domesticated mink cannot.

Of course, I didn't say that a domesticated mink cannot survive in the wild.

Let alone "funny", it isn't even remarkable that some dogs and cats can survive in the wild. But many won't. I have no doubt some released mink survive after their release. But neither do I doubt that many don't.

But since releasing them is more political statement than compassion speaking... who gives a shit eh?

Political - you really think so. Have you ever been involved in a mink realease and been privy to the beforehand workup? I always remember the Starfish Poem - the ending goes like this:

why are you throwing starfish in the ocean?"

"The sun is up and the tide is going out.

And if I don't throw them in they'll die."

"But, young man, don't you realize that

there are miles and miles of beach

and starfish all along it.

You can't possibly make a difference!"

The young man listened politely.

Then bent down, picked up another starfish

and threw it into the sea,

past the breaking waves and said-

"It made a difference for that one."

One of the Chatham 3 - Open the Cages

*shrug*

Nothing says political statements can't be composed of or accompanied by unrealistic rhetoric.

LMAO it is only unreal to those that don't understand. To me it is very real - Freedom versus sure death.

RF

Jul 27 2009, 07:41 PM

QUOTE

The young man listened politely.

Then bent down, picked up another starfish

and threw it into the sea,

past the breaking waves and said-

"It made a difference for that one."

What a tool. The young man doesn't know if it made a difference or not. He knows it made him feel noble and compassionate.

iowanic

Jul 27 2009, 07:41 PM

QUOTE (bsvila @ Jul 27 2009, 08:38 PM)

QUOTE (RF @ Jul 27 2009, 07:35 PM)

QUOTE (bsvila @ Jul 27 2009, 05:32 PM)

QUOTE (RF @ Jul 27 2009, 07:17 PM)

QUOTE (bsvila @ Jul 27 2009, 05:07 PM)

QUOTE (RF @ Jul 27 2009, 06:54 PM)

Well releasing lab animals and domestic mink and such into the wild doesn't seem terribly compassionate when it comes to those animals...

Domestic mink - that must be a new term. Do they pick them up and pet them and talk sweet nothings to them? Funny how 'domesticated' dogs and cats can survive in the wild isn't it. Please explain to me how these so-called domesticated mink cannot.

Of course, I didn't say that a domesticated mink cannot survive in the wild.

Let alone "funny", it isn't even remarkable that some dogs and cats can survive in the wild. But many won't. I have no doubt some released mink survive after their release. But neither do I doubt that many don't.

But since releasing them is more political statement than compassion speaking... who gives a shit eh?

Political - you really think so. Have you ever been involved in a mink realease and been privy to the beforehand workup? I always remember the Starfish Poem - the ending goes like this:

why are you throwing starfish in the ocean?"

"The sun is up and the tide is going out.

And if I don't throw them in they'll die."

"But, young man, don't you realize that

there are miles and miles of beach

and starfish all along it.

You can't possibly make a difference!"

The young man listened politely.

Then bent down, picked up another starfish

and threw it into the sea,

past the breaking waves and said-

"It made a difference for that one."

One of the Chatham 3 - Open the Cages

*shrug*

Nothing says political statements can't be composed of or accompanied by unrealistic rhetoric.

LMAO it is only unreal to those that don't understand. To me it is very real - Freedom versus sure death.

RF

Jul 27 2009, 07:42 PM

QUOTE (bsvila @ Jul 27 2009, 06:38 PM)

QUOTE (RF @ Jul 27 2009, 07:35 PM)

QUOTE (bsvila @ Jul 27 2009, 05:32 PM)

QUOTE (RF @ Jul 27 2009, 07:17 PM)

QUOTE (bsvila @ Jul 27 2009, 05:07 PM)

QUOTE (RF @ Jul 27 2009, 06:54 PM)

Well releasing lab animals and domestic mink and such into the wild doesn't seem terribly compassionate when it comes to those animals...

Domestic mink - that must be a new term. Do they pick them up and pet them and talk sweet nothings to them? Funny how 'domesticated' dogs and cats can survive in the wild isn't it. Please explain to me how these so-called domesticated mink cannot.

Of course, I didn't say that a domesticated mink cannot survive in the wild.

Let alone "funny", it isn't even remarkable that some dogs and cats can survive in the wild. But many won't. I have no doubt some released mink survive after their release. But neither do I doubt that many don't.

But since releasing them is more political statement than compassion speaking... who gives a shit eh?

Political - you really think so. Have you ever been involved in a mink realease and been privy to the beforehand workup? I always remember the Starfish Poem - the ending goes like this:

why are you throwing starfish in the ocean?"

"The sun is up and the tide is going out.

And if I don't throw them in they'll die."

"But, young man, don't you realize that

there are miles and miles of beach

and starfish all along it.

You can't possibly make a difference!"

The young man listened politely.

Then bent down, picked up another starfish

and threw it into the sea,

past the breaking waves and said-

"It made a difference for that one."

One of the Chatham 3 - Open the Cages

*shrug*

Nothing says political statements can't be composed of or accompanied by unrealistic rhetoric.

LMAO it is only unreal to those that don't understand. To me it is very real - Freedom versus sure death.

Uh...their death is sure regardless. Grow the fuck up.

Grizzly Bear

Jul 27 2009, 07:43 PM

QUOTE (bsvila @ Jul 27 2009, 07:07 PM)

QUOTE (RF @ Jul 27 2009, 06:54 PM)

Well releasing lab animals and domestic mink and such into the wild doesn't seem terribly compassionate when it comes to those animals...

Domestic mink - that must be a new term. Do they pick them up and pet them and talk sweet nothings to them? Funny how 'domesticated' dogs and cats can survive in the wild isn't it. Please explain to me how these so-called domesticated mink cannot.

QUOTE

Domestic mink - that must be a new term

There is a difference between domestic mink and wild mink. From the Nebraska Game and Parks Commission:

"The mink's coloration varies from brown to almost black, its belly is slightly lighter than its back and flanks, and it may have a white chin and throat. A domestic mink raised on a ranch for the fur industry is normally much larger than a wild mink and the color of its fur ranges from white to black with several unique colors that have been developed by mink ranchers."

http://www.ngpc.state.ne.us/wildlife/mink.asp

Also, here is a scientific paper that examines the adverse effects on wild mink caused by hybridization with escaped domestic mink, something that ignorant criminal mink-releasers should take note of.

http://www.ingentaconnect.com/content/bsc/...000006/art00014

QUOTE

Do they pick them up and pet them and talk sweet nothings to them?

Just because something is domesticated doesn't mean it's a pet or companion. Shouldn't that be fairly obvious?

QUOTE

Funny how 'domesticated' dogs and cats can survive in the wild isn't it.

Guess it depends on what your definition of "wild" is doesn't it? Here in the Colorado foothills, mountain lions and black bears abound and and people make sure their pets are inside at night, and for good reason. Some will not even let them out unsupervised in daylight hours. An escaped pet is lucky to survive the night in this part of the world.

QUOTE

Please explain to me how these so-called domesticated mink cannot.

Uh, he never made the claim they couldn't.

iowanic

Jul 27 2009, 07:44 PM

opps, sorry there. I musta pushed the wrong button.

Question:

Why didn't the young man take the starfish and give it a nice, safe home? Why throw it back into the sea where it might be eatten by other sealife or risk being washed up on shore another day?

RF

Jul 27 2009, 07:45 PM

QUOTE (bsvila @ Jul 27 2009, 05:36 PM)

QUOTE (RF @ Jul 27 2009, 07:28 PM)

QUOTE (bsvila @ Jul 27 2009, 06:19 PM)

QUOTE (bsvila @ Jul 27 2009, 07:07 PM)

QUOTE (RF @ Jul 27 2009, 06:54 PM)

Well releasing lab animals and domestic mink and such into the wild doesn't seem terribly compassionate when it comes to those animals...

Domestic mink - that must be a new term. Do they pick them up and pet them and talk sweet nothings to them? Funny how 'domesticated' dogs and cats can survive in the wild isn't it. Please explain to me how these so-called domesticated mink cannot.

One more thing, lab animals are not released into the wild. They are removed, evaluated, taken care of.

Then it isn't terribly accurate to claim they were liberated.

Depends on how much destruction the mad scientists have done to the removed animals. Since they go underground to appropriate facilities, we will never know.

Being kept captive in even an "appropriate facility" is hardly the same as being liberated, the way I see it.

RF

Jul 27 2009, 07:47 PM

Maybe fur trappers are appreciative of domestic mink releases...

Grizzly Bear

Jul 27 2009, 08:05 PM

QUOTE (bsvila @ Jul 27 2009, 07:38 PM)

QUOTE (RF @ Jul 27 2009, 07:35 PM)

QUOTE (bsvila @ Jul 27 2009, 05:32 PM)

QUOTE (RF @ Jul 27 2009, 07:17 PM)

QUOTE (bsvila @ Jul 27 2009, 05:07 PM)

QUOTE (RF @ Jul 27 2009, 06:54 PM)

Well releasing lab animals and domestic mink and such into the wild doesn't seem terribly compassionate when it comes to those animals...

Domestic mink - that must be a new term. Do they pick them up and pet them and talk sweet nothings to them? Funny how 'domesticated' dogs and cats can survive in the wild isn't it. Please explain to me how these so-called domesticated mink cannot.

Of course, I didn't say that a domesticated mink cannot survive in the wild.

Let alone "funny", it isn't even remarkable that some dogs and cats can survive in the wild. But many won't. I have no doubt some released mink survive after their release. But neither do I doubt that many don't.

But since releasing them is more political statement than compassion speaking... who gives a shit eh?

Political - you really think so. Have you ever been involved in a mink realease and been privy to the beforehand workup? I always remember the Starfish Poem - the ending goes like this:

why are you throwing starfish in the ocean?"

"The sun is up and the tide is going out.

And if I don't throw them in they'll die."

"But, young man, don't you realize that

there are miles and miles of beach

and starfish all along it.

You can't possibly make a difference!"

The young man listened politely.

Then bent down, picked up another starfish

and threw it into the sea,

past the breaking waves and said-

"It made a difference for that one."

One of the Chatham 3 - Open the Cages

*shrug*

Nothing says political statements can't be composed of or accompanied by unrealistic rhetoric.

LMAO it is only unreal to those that don't understand. To me it is very real - Freedom versus sure death.

QUOTE

To me it is very real - Freedom versus sure death.

Um, perhaps a quick biological fact is in order here. I hate to break this to you, but all living things face a sure death.

RF

Jul 27 2009, 08:17 PM

QUOTE (bsvila @ Jul 27 2009, 01:17 PM)

QUOTE (rpedog @ Jul 1 2009, 08:34 AM)

QUOTE (Grace @ Jul 1 2009, 04:58 AM)

As is typical, you never get it. I wasn't equating throwing a baby out the window to wearing a fur coat goddamnit. Let's take the 1950's or 60's for example. Were kids having a shootout in our schools? Were kids taking guns to school and shooting/killing each other? Did mothers drown their babies in tubs, lakes, cut off their arms, or cook them in microwaves? Was there road rage? Morals today aren't what they were in yesteryear. Divorce statistics, abortion, murder, robberies, animal abuse, you name it. People just don't give a shit.

We didn't have people whose agenda was to ban owning animals either and who put animals ahead of people. They don't give a $hit either and are part of the problem.

Are you not compassionate enough to care for animals and people? Who doesn't give a shit? it's very easy to equate a group of people as "they". I'm coming late into this debate and it's been a few years since I've been on this forum, however, I see it's the same ole shit - animal vs people. LOL If you care about animals, you have to not care about people. I never could understand that way of thinking. Maybe you'd like to explain it to me.

One of the Chatham 3 - OPEN THE CAGES

Well obviously, when it comes to compassion for fur farmer vs compassion for fur bearer.....the fur bearer wins out.

So is this holding the interests of an animal as superior to the interests of a human?

Or is it just another case of one human holding his interests as superior to the interests of another human?

RF

Jul 27 2009, 08:22 PM

QUOTE (Grizzly Bear @ Jul 27 2009, 06:05 PM)

Um, perhaps a quick biological fact is in order here. I hate to break this to you, but all living things face a sure death.

Yes, the implied dichotomy is false.

However, invisible deaths don't trouble ARFs so much. It's like the ARF vegans and their, "So what if animals die? So long as visible parts of their corpses don't end up on my plate I'm doin' GOOD!" routine.

Grace

Jul 28 2009, 06:18 AM

QUOTE (RF @ Jul 27 2009, 07:42 PM)

Grace wrote:

QUOTE

As far who's more accurate, me valuing my cat as a pet vs. someone who values a cat as a meal? My valuation is more accurate for the cat.

Yet, you value a chicken as a meal more than as a pet. And I bet you claim that is the more accurate value also.

Actually, you'd lose that bet. See I do have my faults.

Grace

Jul 28 2009, 06:21 AM

I love that starfish story. Every time I read it, it's like the first time.

OHIOSTEVE

Jul 28 2009, 06:29 AM

QUOTE (RF @ Jul 27 2009, 08:22 PM)

QUOTE (Grizzly Bear @ Jul 27 2009, 06:05 PM)

Um, perhaps a quick biological fact is in order here. I hate to break this to you, but all living things face a sure death.

Yes, the implied dichotomy is false.

However, invisible deaths don't trouble ARFs so much. It's like the ARF vegans and their, "So what if animals die? So long as visible parts of their corpses don't end up on my plate I'm doin' GOOD!" routine.

something else that gets me RF....why is interfering with nature OK when it is to save the starfish but not to kill the deer?

Grace

Jul 28 2009, 06:42 AM

I can't help but wonder if the starfish story went over all your heads. Seriously.

bsvila

Jul 28 2009, 07:39 AM

QUOTE (RF @ Jul 27 2009, 08:42 PM)

QUOTE (bsvila @ Jul 27 2009, 06:38 PM)

QUOTE (RF @ Jul 27 2009, 07:35 PM)

QUOTE (bsvila @ Jul 27 2009, 05:32 PM)

QUOTE (RF @ Jul 27 2009, 07:17 PM)

QUOTE (bsvila @ Jul 27 2009, 05:07 PM)

QUOTE (RF @ Jul 27 2009, 06:54 PM)

Well releasing lab animals and domestic mink and such into the wild doesn't seem terribly compassionate when it comes to those animals...

Domestic mink - that must be a new term. Do they pick them up and pet them and talk sweet nothings to them? Funny how 'domesticated' dogs and cats can survive in the wild isn't it. Please explain to me how these so-called domesticated mink cannot.

Of course, I didn't say that a domesticated mink cannot survive in the wild.

Let alone "funny", it isn't even remarkable that some dogs and cats can survive in the wild. But many won't. I have no doubt some released mink survive after their release. But neither do I doubt that many don't.

But since releasing them is more political statement than compassion speaking... who gives a shit eh?

Political - you really think so. Have you ever been involved in a mink realease and been privy to the beforehand workup? I always remember the Starfish Poem - the ending goes like this:

why are you throwing starfish in the ocean?"

"The sun is up and the tide is going out.

And if I don't throw them in they'll die."

"But, young man, don't you realize that

there are miles and miles of beach

and starfish all along it.

You can't possibly make a difference!"

The young man listened politely.

Then bent down, picked up another starfish

and threw it into the sea,

past the breaking waves and said-

"It made a difference for that one."

One of the Chatham 3 - Open the Cages

*shrug*

Nothing says political statements can't be composed of or accompanied by unrealistic rhetoric.

LMAO it is only unreal to those that don't understand. To me it is very real - Freedom versus sure death.

Uh...their death is sure regardless. Grow the fuck up.

Great comeback. Yes, death is sure. However, our society seems to think that quality and quantity is the important thing. Maybe you haven't figured that out yet.

Grace

Jul 28 2009, 07:55 AM

OHIOSTEVE

QUOTE

something else that gets me RF....why is interfering with nature OK when it is to save the starfish but not to kill the deer?

Err, with one you're trying to save its life and with the other you're taking it away? Just a guess.

rpedog

Jul 28 2009, 08:39 AM

QUOTE (bsvila @ Jul 27 2009, 05:20 PM)

I don't find it so easy because within that group there are individuals and each individual has a different belief in the topic of animal rights. You cannot equate them all into one group even if they are all AR. Each has a different level within the AR movement. Some will only write letters, some will protest, some will go further and do direct action - some will do all three or two or one of the three. So "they" does not equate. Unfortunately you have met the wrong people in the movement if you believe that none of them care about the animals. Please - There are very few 'innocent' people on either side.

Its the inane agenda of the AR movement that I don't support. If people were to just live their lives and not try to force others to bow to their emotional wants I wouldn't care. But the AR movement spends millions to push anti-animal legislation every year.

You can worship cockroaches for all I care. Just don't try and force others to do the same.

QUOTE

I see you support animal welfare - do they not push people aside to get what they want?

No they don't push people aside.

QUOTE

Who makes the decision that an animal can be adopted by a certain person?

What does that have to do with the subject? There are those that do a lousy job of it. The goal is to make sure the animal has a suitable home but people sometimes go overboard.

Grace

Jul 28 2009, 09:02 AM

The starfish story isn't just some AR rhetoric. It's a life lesson and can apply to anything. Like one starving child out of millions. Say the task seems overwhelming, to "heal the world", or "feed the world", but to sponsor or donate for the adoption of just one child, it makes all the difference between life and death, to that individual.

bsvila

Jul 28 2009, 09:42 AM

QUOTE (rpedog @ Jul 28 2009, 08:39 AM)

QUOTE (bsvila @ Jul 27 2009, 05:20 PM)

I don't find it so easy because within that group there are individuals and each individual has a different belief in the topic of animal rights. You cannot equate them all into one group even if they are all AR. Each has a different level within the AR movement. Some will only write letters, some will protest, some will go further and do direct action - some will do all three or two or one of the three. So "they" does not equate. Unfortunately you have met the wrong people in the movement if you believe that none of them care about the animals. Please - There are very few 'innocent' people on either side.

Its the inane agenda of the AR movement that I don't support. If people were to just live their lives and not try to force others to bow to their emotional wants I wouldn't care. But the AR movement spends millions to push anti-animal legislation every year.

You can worship cockroaches for all I care. Just don't try and force others to do the same.

QUOTE

I see you support animal welfare - do they not push people aside to get what they want?

No they don't push people aside.

QUOTE

Who makes the decision that an animal can be adopted by a certain person?

What does that have to do with the subject? There are those that do a lousy job of it. The goal is to make sure the animal has a suitable home but people sometimes go overboard.

Life would be wonderful if people wore blinders and were never informed about what is going on. The perfect world!
However, everyone has an opinion and they go about letting others know it in different ways. I have a problem with the inane agenda of those that wear those blinders and are afraid that someone may remove them and, heaven forbid, they have to open their eyes and see something that may take them from their comfortable lifestyle. The sad part is that in order to get our country to change laws, someone has to go above and beyond to get their point across and be heard. You may not like it and I may not like it, however, that is how we progress and have always progressed upward toward a better life for all.

Pops

Jul 28 2009, 10:03 AM

the Chatham 3

Patricia Dodson, Hilma Ruby, Gary Yourofsky

Dodson and Ruby pleaded guilty and received 90 days in jail and a $24,000 fine.
Yourofsky took his case to trial, where he was found guilty and sentenced to 6 months
in jail plus $34,000 in restitution for his part in the raid.

LMFAO... open the cages... do the time pay the fine..... Looosers!!!

rpedog

Jul 28 2009, 10:19 AM

QUOTE (bsvila @ Jul 28 2009, 09:42 AM)

Life would be wonderful if people wore blinders and were never informed about what is going on. The perfect world!
However, everyone has an opinion and they go about letting others know it in different ways. I have a problem with the inane agenda of those that wear those blinders and are afraid that someone may remove them and, heaven forbid, they have to open their eyes and see something that may take them from their comfortable lifestyle.

That is largely pretentious bull.

QUOTE

The sad part is that in order to get our country to change laws, someone has to go above and beyond to get their point across and be heard. You may not like it and I may not like it, however, that is how we progress and have always progressed upward toward a better life for all.

Putting animals ahead of humans does not lead toward a better life. Eliminating them from people's lives doesn't lead toward a better life. Forcing all to be vegan doesn't lead toward a better life. The animal rights industry is indicative of society's decay not of its progress.

XBlackX

Jul 28 2009, 10:23 AM

QUOTE (rpedog @ Jul 28 2009, 03:39 PM)

Its the inane agenda of the AR movement that I don't support. If people were to just live their lives and not try to force others to bow to their emotional wants I wouldn't care. But the AR movement spends millions to push anti-animal legislation every year.

How do you define 'force' in the context use by you here? It's confusing because you go on to say "the AR movement spends millions to push anti-animal legislation" it's this the way in a democracy? I find people such as yourself to be confused about the whole issue, wanting your cake and eating it so to speak.

QUOTE

You can worship cockroaches for all I care. Just don't try and force others to do the same.

That word 'force' again. Please give us an example of this 'force' you speak of.

QUOTE

No they don't push people aside.

Seen many hunter and hunt supporters commit serious acts of violence, is that ok?

OHIOSTEVE

Jul 28 2009, 10:30 AM

QUOTE (XBlackX @ Jul 28 2009, 11:23 AM)

QUOTE (rpedog @ Jul 28 2009, 03:39 PM)

Its the inane agenda of the AR movement that I don't support. If people were to just live their lives and not try to force others to bow to their emotional wants I wouldn't care. But the AR movement spends millions to push anti-animal legislation every year.

How do you define 'force' in the context use by you here? It's confusing because you go on to say "the AR movement spends millions to push anti-animal legislation" it's this the way in a democracy? I find people such as yourself to be confused about the whole issue, wanting your cake and eating it so to speak.

QUOTE

You can worship cockroaches for all I care. Just don't try and force others to do the same.

That word 'force' again. Please give us an example of this 'force' you speak of.

QUOTE

No they don't push people aside.

Seen many hunter and hunt supporters commit serious acts of violence, is that ok?

Sure it is....especially if it against people forcefully interfering in their lives.......such as say... AR activists

OHIOSTEVE

Jul 28 2009, 10:31 AM

QUOTE (Grace @ Jul 28 2009, 08:55 AM)

OHIOSTEVE

QUOTE

something else that gets me RF....why is interfering with nature OK when it is to save the starfish but not to kill the deer?

Err, with one you're trying to save its life and with the other you're taking it away? Just a guess.

I understand that grace, but BOTH scenarios involve man interfering with the animal kingdom.

XBlackX

Jul 28 2009, 11:03 AM

QUOTE (OHIOSTEVE @ Jul 28 2009, 05:30 PM)

QUOTE (XBlackX @ Jul 28 2009, 11:23 AM)

QUOTE (rpedog @ Jul 28 2009, 03:39 PM)

Its the inane agenda of the AR movement that I don't support. If people were to just live their lives and not try to force others to bow to their emotional wants I wouldn't care. But the AR movement spends millions to push anti-animal legislation every year.

How do you define 'force' in the context use by you here? It's confusing because you go on to say "the AR movement spends millions to push anti-animal legislation" it's this the way in a democracy? I find people such as yourself to be confused about the whole issue, wanting your cake and eating it so to speak.

QUOTE

You can worship cockroaches for all I care. Just don't try and force others to do the same.

That word 'force' again. Please give us an example of this 'force' you speak of.

QUOTE

No they don't push people aside.

Seen many hunter and hunt supporters commit serious acts of violence, is that ok?

Sure it is....especially if it against people forcefully interfering in their lives.......such as say... AR activists

Yes we have gone down this avenue before steve but you are unable to provide any sound facts on the matter. You are not even clued up on English law and so get all confused.

But I will go with the fact you think it is ok for violence to be inflicted on others because of trespass..... Says it all about what sort of person you are!

bsvila

Jul 28 2009, 11:12 AM

QUOTE (rpedog @ Jul 28 2009, 11:19 AM)

QUOTE (bsvila @ Jul 28 2009, 09:42 AM)

Life would be wonderful if people wore blinders and were never informed about what is going on. The perfect world!
However, everyone has an opinion and they go about letting others know it in different ways. I have a problem with the inane agenda of those that wear those blinders and are afraid that someone may remove them and, heaven forbid, they have to open their eyes and see something that may take them from their comfortable lifestyle.

That is largely pretentious bull.

QUOTE

The sad part is that in order to get our country to change laws, someone has to go above and beyond to get their point across and be heard. You may not like it and I may not like it, however, that is how we progress and have always progressed upward toward a better life for all.

Putting animals ahead of humans does not lead toward a better life. Eliminating them from people's lives doesn't lead toward a better life. Forcing all to be vegan doesn't lead toward a better life. The animal rights industry is indicative of society's decay not of its progress.

It usually is hell having to give up that comfortable life you are so accustomed to. Since you have never tried to live a different life, it is hard for you to understand. The majority of ARs started off in your world and changed so they have that experience. In my opinion, society's decay is war, however, that's for another topic.

Grace

Jul 28 2009, 11:20 AM

QUOTE (OHIOSTEVE @ Jul 28 2009, 12:31 PM)

QUOTE (Grace @ Jul 28 2009, 08:55 AM)

OHIOSTEVE

QUOTE

something else that gets me RF....why is interfering with nature OK when it is to save the starfish but not to kill the deer?

Err, with one you're trying to save its life and with the other you're taking it away? Just a guess.

I understand that grace, but BOTH scenarios involve man interfering with the animal kingdom.

The AR movement doesn't believe in interfering with the animal kingdom? I highly doubt that. What about animal rehabbers? Veterinarians? Animal sanctuaries and the like?

bsvila

Jul 28 2009, 11:25 AM

QUOTE (Pops @ Jul 28 2009, 11:03 AM)

the Chatham 3

Patricia Dodson, Hilma Ruby, Gary Yourofsky

Dodson and Ruby pleaded guilty and received 90 days in jail and a $24,000 fine.
Yourofsky took his case to trial, where he was found guilty and sentenced to 6 months
in jail plus $34,000 in restitution for his part in the raid.

LMFAO... open the cages... do the time pay the fine..... Looosers!!!

The loser is the person who is not willing to go to jail for something they strongly believe in. What have you done besides sit at a computer and criticize others?

bsvila

Jul 28 2009, 11:31 AM

QUOTE (OHIOSTEVE @ Jul 28 2009, 11:31 AM)

QUOTE (Grace @ Jul 28 2009, 08:55 AM)

OHIOSTEVE

QUOTE

something else that gets me RF....why is interfering with nature OK when it is to save the starfish but not to kill the deer?

Err, with one you're trying to save its life and with the other you're taking it away? Just a guess.

I understand that grace, but BOTH scenarios involve man interfering with the animal kingdom.

What if man caused the problem to begin with and it had nothing to do with the animal kingdom?

XBlackX

Jul 28 2009, 11:33 AM

He enjoys having a dig because one is an ex-con.. Little things.

rpedog

Jul 28 2009, 11:38 AM

QUOTE (bsvila @ Jul 28 2009, 11:12 AM)

It usually is hell having to give up that comfortable life you are so accustomed to. Since you have never tried to live a different life, it is hard for you to understand.

Thats just more pretentious bull$hit. I was an AR before most people had ever heard of it. I was a vegan, I sat in on strategy and "philosophy" sessions. I was young and stupid. Then I saw what it was really about as I met some of the intellectual idiots driving it. I went on a raid and saw what they really did. The animal rights industry is not being led by those who want to better people's lives. What they want is control and they're power mongers. The whole movement is based on a lie in the first place.

QUOTE

The majority of ARs started off in your world and changed so they have that experience. In my opinion, society's decay is war, however, that's for another topic.

The majority of ARs are a few cards short of a full deck and the vast majority are emotionally weak. The men are effete and thats no coincidence. Much like those who are drawn toward other cults there is something missing in their life and the animal rights industry con is something they get sucked right into.

bsvila

Jul 28 2009, 11:40 AM

QUOTE (Grace @ Jul 28 2009, 12:20 PM)

QUOTE (OHIOSTEVE @ Jul 28 2009, 12:31 PM)

QUOTE (Grace @ Jul 28 2009, 08:55 AM)

OHIOSTEVE

QUOTE

something else that gets me RF....why is interfering with nature OK when it is to save the starfish but not to kill the deer?

Err, with one you're trying to save its life and with the other you're taking it away? Just a guess.

I understand that grace, but BOTH scenarios involve man interfering with the animal kingdom.

The AR movement doesn't believe in interfering with the animal kingdom? I highly doubt that. What about animal rehabbers? Veterinarians? Animal sanctuaries and the like?

Grace, some find it easy to lay the blame on the AR movement. Man has been interfering with the animal kingdom since the beginning of time. Most don't think about it nor care until it affects them directly. Why can't I have that bigger house in that new subdivision? Why do I have to bother to recycle, it takes way too much time? Who cares if we eliminate that species of animal, they are just a nuisance to me.

bsvila

Jul 28 2009, 11:50 AM

QUOTE (XBlackX @ Jul 28 2009, 12:33 PM)

He enjoys having a dig because one is an ex-con.. Little things.

Maybe he should be more worred about the drunk drivers and child molesters that are running lose.

Grace

Jul 28 2009, 11:57 AM

It is the common fate of the indolent to see their rights become prey to the active.
~ John Philpot Currant

If you are neutral in situations of injustice, you have chosen the side of the oppressor. If an elephant has its foot on the tail of a mouse and you say that you are neutral, the mouse will not appreciate your neutrality.
~ Tufu

bsvila

Jul 28 2009, 12:02 PM

QUOTE (rpedog @ Jul 28 2009, 12:38 PM)

QUOTE (bsvila @ Jul 28 2009, 11:12 AM)

It usually is hell having to give up that comfortable life you are so accustomed to. Since you have never tried to live a different life, it is hard for you to understand.

Thats just more pretentious bull$hit. I was an AR before most people had ever heard of it. I was a vegan, I sat in on strategy and "philosophy" sessions. I was young and stupid. Then I saw what it was really about as I met some of the intellectual idiots driving it. I went on a raid and saw what they really did. The animal rights industry is not being led by those who want to better people's lives. What they want is control and they're power mongers. The whole movement is based on a lie in the first place.

QUOTE

The majority of ARs started off in your world and changed so they have that experience. In my opinion, society's decay is war, however, that's for another topic.

The majority of ARs are a few cards short of a full deck and the vast majority are emotionally weak. The men are effete and thats no coincidence. Much like those who are drawn toward other cults there is something missing in their life and the animal rights industry con is something they get sucked right into.

So you are down on the organized AR movement. I can see your points because I feel the same about all organized groups; be it religion, hunting organizations, animal welfare organization, etc etc Unfortunately money and power go hand in hand within them. So, since you have seen so much and AR is a "con", you must believe there is no animal abuse in this world. If you say there is abuse, how do you think it should be handled? Do you believe that animal welfare is the only way? How far should animal welfare go?

Pops

Jul 28 2009, 12:26 PM

QUOTE (bsvila @ Jul 28 2009, 11:25 AM)

QUOTE (Pops @ Jul 28 2009, 11:03 AM)

the Chatham 3

Patricia Dodson, Hilma Ruby, Gary Yourofsky

Dodson and Ruby pleaded guilty and received 90 days in jail and a $24,000 fine.
Yourofsky took his case to trial, where he was found guilty and sentenced to 6 months
in jail plus $34,000 in restitution for his part in the raid.

LMFAO... open the cages... do the time pay the fine..... Looosers!!!

The loser is the person who is not willing to go to jail for something they strongly believe in. What have you done besides sit at a computer and criticize others?

Well blackie even 'bsvila' thinks you're a looser... PALEEEEESE Judgy don' put me ina jail!!! I do good tings for my local dog pound!!! Sniff sniff snark ...

Well 'bsvila' I can tell you what I haven't done... Break the law!!! none of you were very willing to go to jail or you wouldn't have tried to keep from going

Grace

Jul 28 2009, 12:31 PM

QUOTE

How do you define 'force' in the context use by you here? It's confusing because you go on to say "the AR movement spends millions to push anti-animal legislation" it's this the way in a democracy? I find people such as yourself to be confused about the whole issue, wanting your cake and eating it so to speak.

rpedog

QUOTE

You can worship cockroaches for all I care. Just don't try and force others to do the same.

X

QUOTE

That word 'force' again. Please give us an example of this 'force' you speak of.

Usually when they use "force", they mean by law enactment. Pig farrowing crates, tethered dogs, S/N laws, dog fighting laws, breed specific laws...

Although ironically it's not just AR's responsible for many of these laws.

rpedog

Jul 28 2009, 12:41 PM

QUOTE (bsvila @ Jul 28 2009, 01:02 PM)

So, since you have seen so much and AR is a "con", you must believe there is no animal abuse in this world. If you say there is abuse, how do you think it should be handled? Do you believe that animal welfare is the only way? How far should animal welfare go?

No. Seeing the animal rights industry for the con it is does not mean one believes there is no animal abuse. The push for anti-animal laws by ARs is just to lay the groundwork for ever more restrictive legislation. They are not focused on abusers but anyone who owns an animal. Their idea of stopping abuse is stopping ownership.

QUOTE

Although ironically it's not just AR's responsible for many of these laws.

They are experts at conning the public.

XBlackX

Jul 28 2009, 12:50 PM

QUOTE (Pops @ Jul 28 2009, 07:26 PM)

QUOTE (bsvila @ Jul 28 2009, 11:25 AM)

QUOTE (Pops @ Jul 28 2009, 11:03 AM)

the Chatham 3

Patricia Dodson, Hilma Ruby, Gary Yourofsky

Dodson and Ruby pleaded guilty and received 90 days in jail and a $24,000 fine.
Yourofsky took his case to trial, where he was found guilty and sentenced to 6 months
in jail plus $34,000 in restitution for his part in the raid.

LMFAO... open the cages... do the time pay the fine..... Looosers!!!

The loser is the person who is not willing to go to jail for something they strongly believe in. What have you done besides sit at a computer and criticize others?

Well blackie even 'bsvila' thinks you're a looser... PALEEEEESE Judgy don' put me ina jail!!! I do good tings for my local dog pound!!! Sniff sniff snark ...

Well 'bsvila' I can tell you what I haven't done... Break the law!!! none of you were very willing to go to jail or you wouldn't have tried to keep from going

As usual you get things very wrong pops but thats all people expect from you. I for one accept that as part of my activism there was a point when I would spent time in prison. How far one was willing to go over that line is another story, I crossed it and spent a while in jail, again it was accepted and expected.

One thing that would be futile would be to expect not to go to jail because it was also accepted that my prosecution was politically motivated. I did request to clear a couple of things up publicly. One was that I would not be attending demonstrations again because I found that my rescue work played a bigger role with helping animals. Protest is futile so hands on is the best way to go.

My 'targets' were never the people who worked for the companies but the company themselves, it was pure economic since every place we attended didn't function while we were there and for some time after. So I apologised to two women who felt intimidated, most didn't feel this way and said it was more an annoyance than anything.

I knew what to expect from prison having served a long prison sentence once before, occupational hazard you might say. It's not that big a deal

But you miss the point as usual.

XBlackX

Jul 28 2009, 01:07 PM

QUOTE (rpedog @ Jul 28 2009, 06:38 PM)

Thats just more pretentious bull$hit. I was an AR before most people had ever heard of it. I was a vegan, I sat in on strategy and "philosophy" sessions. I was young and stupid. Then I saw what it was really about as I met some of the intellectual idiots driving it. I went on a raid and saw what they really did. The animal rights industry is not being led by those who want to better people's lives. What they want is control and they're power mongers. The whole movement is based on a lie in the first place.

Please do enlighten us. Your rhetoric doesn't fit.

QUOTE

The majority of ARs are a few cards short of a full deck and the vast majority are emotionally weak. The men are effete and thats no coincidence. Much like those who are drawn toward other cults there is something missing in their life and the animal rights industry con is something they get sucked right into.

Emotionally weak? I can see you had a bad experience all those years ago but, don't things change..?

Pops

Jul 28 2009, 03:48 PM

QUOTE (XBlackX @ Jul 28 2009, 12:50 PM)

As usual you get things very wrong pops but thats all people expect from you. I for one accept that as part of my activism there was a point when I would spent time in prison. How far one was willing to go over that line is another story, I crossed it and spent a while in jail, again it was accepted and expected.

One thing that would be futile would be to expect not to go to jail because it was also accepted that my prosecution was politically motivated. I did request to clear a couple of things up publicly. One was that I would not be attending demonstrations again because I found that my rescue work played a bigger role with helping animals. Protest is futile so hands on is the best way to go.

My 'targets' were never the people who worked for the companies but the company themselves, it was pure economic since every place we attended didn't function while we were there and for some time after. So I apologised to two women who felt intimidated, most didn't feel this way and said it was more an annoyance than anything.

I knew what to expect from prison having served a long prison sentence once before, occupational hazard you might say. It's not that big a deal

But you miss the point as usual.

Unemployed Taylor had pleaded with the judge not to jail him. He apologised for his actions, saying he had not understood the consequences of his actions on innocent people.

"I have no intention of going out and demonstrating again," he said.

..........
just how stupid are you break into peoples place of employment in masks shouting murders and crap and you didn't understand your actions ... Gezz... Mary, Peter and Joseph..
Now you disclose that you are a two time LOOSER…

XBlackX

Jul 28 2009, 03:59 PM

QUOTE (Pops @ Jul 28 2009, 10:48 PM)

QUOTE (XBlackX @ Jul 28 2009, 12:50 PM)

As usual you get things very wrong pops but thats all people expect from you. I for one accept that as part of my activism there was a point when I would spent time in prison. How far one was willing to go over that line is another story, I crossed it and spent a while in jail, again it was accepted and expected.

One thing that would be futile would be to expect not to go to jail because it was also accepted that my prosecution was politically motivated. I did request to clear a couple of things up publicly. One was that I would not be attending demonstrations again because I found that my rescue work played a bigger role with helping animals. Protest is futile so hands on is the best way to go.

My 'targets' were never the people who worked for the companies but the company themselves, it was pure economic since every place we attended didn't function while we were there and for some time after. So I apologised to two women who felt intimidated, most didn't feel this way and said it was more an annoyance than anything.

I knew what to expect from prison having served a long prison sentence once before, occupational hazard you might say. It's not that big a deal

But you miss the point as usual.

Unemployed Taylor had pleaded with the judge not to jail him. He apologised for his actions, saying he had not understood the consequences of his actions on innocent people.

"I have no intention of going out and demonstrating again," he said.

..........
just how stupid are you break into peoples place of employment in masks shouting murders and crap and you didn't understand your actions ... Gezz... Mary, Peter and Joseph..
Now you disclose that you are a two time LOOSER…

I fail to see what your point is, how many times do you have to say the same thing? It's called trolling.

It s a bore trying to explain the simplest thing to the simple minded. If you had the full facts in front of you you would have known that in my defence I was filmed without a mask and was never inside a building

I was always outside in the car park son LMFAO

I wonder how you can break into a public area during office hours?

You are not very good at trying to wind people up are you pops, in fact I think you wind yourself up more.

Pops

Jul 28 2009, 04:36 PM

QUOTE (XBlackX @ Jul 28 2009, 03:59 PM)

QUOTE (Pops @ Jul 28 2009, 10:48 PM)

QUOTE (XBlackX @ Jul 28 2009, 12:50 PM)

As usual you get things very wrong pops but thats all people expect from you. I for one accept that as part of my activism there was a point when I would spent time in prison. How far one was willing to go over that line is another story, I crossed it and spent a while in jail, again it was accepted and expected.

One thing that would be futile would be to expect not to go to jail because it was also accepted that my prosecution was politically motivated. I did request to clear a couple of things up publicly. One was that I would not be attending demonstrations again because I found that my rescue work played a bigger role with helping animals. Protest is futile so hands on is the best way to go.

My 'targets' were never the people who worked for the companies but the company themselves, it was pure economic since every place we attended didn't function while we were there and for some time after. So I apologised to two women who felt intimidated, most didn't feel this way and said it was more an annoyance than anything.

I knew what to expect from prison having served a long prison sentence once before, occupational hazard you might say. It's not that big a deal

But you miss the point as usual.

Unemployed Taylor had pleaded with the judge not to jail him. He apologised for his actions, saying he had not understood the consequences of his actions on innocent people.

"I have no intention of going out and demonstrating again," he said.

..........
just how stupid are you break into peoples place of employment in masks shouting murders and crap and you didn't understand your actions ... Gezz... Mary, Peter and Joseph..
Now you disclose that you are a two time LOOSER…

I fail to see what your point is, how many times do you have to say the same thing? It's called trolling.

It s a bore trying to explain the simplest thing to the simple minded. If you had the full facts in front of you you would have known that in my defence I was filmed without a mask and was never inside a building

I was always outside in the car park son LMFAO

I wonder how you can break into a public area during office hours?

You are not very good at trying to wind people up are you pops, in fact I think you wind yourself up more.

No it's called holding your feet to the fire... every time you lie you get in deeper And I don't care if you were once filmed without a mask or not you had no business in those places during or after hours that’s how you break in

RF

Jul 28 2009, 05:56 PM

QUOTE (bsvila @ Jul 28 2009, 06:39 AM)

Great comeback.

Of course it was. Your Free Willy take on the matter is juvenile.

QUOTE

Yes, death is sure. However, our society seems to think that quality and quantity is the important thing. Maybe you haven't figured that out yet.

From the juvenile to the nonsensical. I don't believe in the idea of society as a sapient entity. That's a fairy tale that collectivists and statists tell one another.

RF

Jul 28 2009, 05:59 PM

QUOTE (Grace @ Jul 28 2009, 05:18 AM)

QUOTE (RF @ Jul 27 2009, 07:42 PM)

Grace wrote:

QUOTE

As far who's more accurate, me valuing my cat as a pet vs. someone who values a cat as a meal? My valuation is more accurate for the cat.

Yet, you value a chicken as a meal more than as a pet. And I bet you claim that is the more accurate value also.

Actually, you'd lose that bet. See I do have my faults.

Do you mean you value a chicken as a pet more than you value it as a meal then? Does that hold for chickens in general, or just some specific chickens?

RF

Jul 28 2009, 06:01 PM

QUOTE (OHIOSTEVE @ Jul 28 2009, 05:29 AM)

QUOTE (RF @ Jul 27 2009, 08:22 PM)

QUOTE (Grizzly Bear @ Jul 27 2009, 06:05 PM)

Um, perhaps a quick biological fact is in order here. I hate to break this to you, but all living things face a sure death.

Yes, the implied dichotomy is false.

However, invisible deaths don't trouble ARFs so much. It's like the ARF vegans and their, "So what if animals die? So long as visible parts of their corpses don't end up on my plate I'm doin' GOOD!" routine.

something else that gets me RF....why is interfering with nature OK when it is to save the starfish but not to kill the deer?

The whole thing about not interfering with nature is just bullshit, that's why.