Who believes violence against scientists and fur farmers is completley justifiable.?

Question

I do....what comes around goes around eventually

Answer 1

I agree an eye for a eye a tooth for a tooth

Answer 2

Violence is not an answer for anything however bad the reason.Violence is not justifieable for any means against anybody whether they are farmers ,scientist, more so children .

Answer 3

I don't. Karma works in a circle. If you hurt someone it will come back to you three times.

You can't justify violence against the violent unless it is for your (or another's) immediate protection. It works against you in the case of retaliation or trying to stop someone from doing something in the future as they may not do it.

Karma will come around to them without you incurring Karmic debt.

Answer 4

I'm totally against animal testing and fur farming - I'm a vegetarian and don't believe in killing anything, even garden pests. However, violence is not the answer. Using violence is inexcusable at any time.

Answer 5

Firstly fur farmers kill for profit wheres scientists experiment on animals for cures to help man.

So diseases will not live on dead tissue so scientists require animals to test new cures on animals. You cannot test new cures on humans because if the cure doesnt work then you would have alot of dead people.

I am a memeber of green peace and give to many animals charities but I am also a student studying sciences with the hope of working in a lab developing a cure for cancer with cancer research uk. I know my job will entail some animals testing but to save lives I will do what I have to. Sometimes the ends do justify the means.

Answer 6

Violence is only justifiable as a reaction to unwarranted violence, to defend against an attack or destruction. Nothing should be "won" or gained by violence, only maintained or defended. You can only do violent harm to someone if he is doing violent harm, and then only to the same extent.

In this case, the scientists who do not respect the life of other animals, or the people capable of caging mammals or immobilizing chickens or beating a baby seal to death for money are no doubt "evil" and inmoral whatever your definitions of those two terms. They should be stopped, and the non-human animals treated as well as possible in future.

But that should be done peacefully, by legislation and policing...and jail sentences for such beastly conduct.

But as so many miserable human beings think any price is too small if their lives can be extended more years or their disease cured, the scientists will never be stopped. (The market in human body parts is praised universally, though responsible for many murders and atrocities...and injustices...and we are wiping out all other species on land and in the sea in order to live "better".)

Try being active politically. Write letters. Get your friends involved. But violence would in this case be going too far.
Your anger only demonstrates that you are a fine person and living thing!

It is coming round...the society thanks to the sacrifice of animals and simple ethics in the name of our "well-being" has never been less healthy or more in danger of disease and epidemic...Aids, tuberculosis, hepatitis...are illnesses spread to millions as a result of medical treatment, research, and the very programs supposedly aimed to stop them. And that even atheists have decided that human life is "sacred" and worth any price, even at the expense of all other life on this planet have led to an earth so over-populated that we may soon envy the fur bearing mammals in captivity their luxurious living-space. Good question and good observation.

We all should be angry. But we should all stay within the limits of behavior that qualify a man or woman as good. There are presently millions of people on the earth disposed to destroy passenger planes in flight, enter foodstores with bombs, shoot children in playgrounds, or slaughter farm families in the name of their religion...that is where the correct reaction is violence, don't you think?

Answer 7

I don't think any type of violence is justifiable. I agree that these protesters have a point, but a government is not going to be on your side when you use violence.

Answer 8

What is the difference between someone who uses violence for their religious beliefs, and someone who uses violence for their so called "humanitarian" beliefs?
A terrorist by any other name.
ps. I am neither a farmer or a scientist.

Answer 9

By using Violence, how does this make you any better than they are?

Answer 10

Absolutely not. Animal testing saves lives. I agree that the animals' suffering should be kept to a minimum (no testing of cosmetics etc) but I also believe man is superior to beast.
I dislike fur farming.