Larry: "The only rights animals have is to become food and clothing for people. Why dont we worry about human rights and let the animals fend for themselves?
I see human rights are not popular with some. Ok ill change my answer. Save the whales.....**** the poor!"
How many millions of stupid Larrys are here on this planet? This is the typical cliché stupid discourse, Larry has: "Why dont u worry about human rights?" and also "Let the animals fend for themselves?"
Soooooooooo déjà vu, Larry, go get a rope, i'll pay for it with pleasure...
Cause, people who have such idiotic comments like Larry's, who speak out of agressivity because he feels agressed by the veg*ns, they usually DONT DO ANYTHING NEITHER FOR ANIMALS (OF COURSE) BUT ALSO NEITHER FOR HUMANS, that's the deal.
It's really nice to attack animal activists, but when you dont do anything for anyone, it's so hypocritical, dear Larry.
And you must be stupid, Larry, cause you still havent understand that defending animal rights can go hand in hand with defending human rights, shortly, DEFENDING THE RIGHTS OF THE WEAK, THE OPPRESSED AND THE SPEECHLESS. There's no exception, humans suffer as well (at least, there is some balance, huh!)
You must be the kind of guy who occasionnally says something about the Shoah, and say that, oh, yeah, it's terrible what happened to the Jews during the war (you know, some war called WWII!), and yet, you cannot even realize that what humans do to animals is pure nazism. It's a constant genocide, with torture, slaughtering, and cruelty.
It's even more shocking, because more than 95% of the people on this planet pay for it, take a part in this horrible massacre, and dont even feel bad for it, they dont even think that there might be something wrong with exploiting the animals....It's nazism, to me. The thing is that exterminating the Jews didnt make much money, unfortunately. Animals exploitation business does. What a great world!
The thing is, human beings are stupid. If something like concentration camps, and the murdering of so many people, during wars, terrorist attacks and bla bla bla could take place, it's because men are ******* idiots. They have no ethics. They fight for power, for money, for religion, three perfectly stupid things. But again, it's the human nature.
But what a man does to his fellow human, that's just a human business. Human stupidity should concern only humans. It's their burden.
Animals, on the other hand, didn't ask for anything, didn't do anything wrong, and they get ****** for everything, for food, for research, for entrertainment, for comsetics, for....the list is too long....That's the point where it is not acceptable. Animals should be able to lead their proper life, they have their own purpose and goals on this panet, like (or rather unlike) humans do. What we do to them is completely amoral, and, oh well, so "human"...
An animal suffers AS MUCH AS A HUMAN if you hurt him or cut his throat, you can be convinced of that, my friend. And dont ramble on the plant issue, "do they suffer as well"?
So lets stop the boring specism, and think out of the box, Larry. You're just another (human)-sheep.
To answer the proper question, finally, yeah, i think it's absolutely required to be a veg*n to have some coherence, cause no one could take you seriously, the whole speech about animal rights would be twisted, really. I cannot imagine myself doing this. You have to gain people's respect by showing how implied you are, otherwise, if you eat animals, you can be laughed at. Thats what i think anyway.
Sorry for the long post, if there were less Larries on this planet, i wouldnt mind so much, but...too many....what's the solution to that...........................?
Anyway, here is some food for thoughts:
"When a chimpanzee mother comforts her frightened child, we say she behaves like a human.
When a human resorts to insane violence, we say he behaves like an animal.
Maybe it's the other way around" (Wayne Grady)
"Auschwitz begins whenever someone looks at a slaughterhouse and thinks: they're only animals."
(Theodor Adorno, Jewish philosopher)
2006-10-01 12:56:14
·
answer #1
·
answered by PuMpKiNpiE 2
·
0⤊
0⤋
If the world reduced it;s meat consumption by a minuscule 10% we could eliminate world hunger. There ARE plenty of people to worry about human suffering. It's just very difficult to make change in this arena because there are many reasons that the wealthy never want to see the poor rise up. A more even distribution of wealth would be disastrous to the worlds super rich. It doesn't take much thought to figure this situation out, and realize how difficult and complex the battle to eliminate poverty really is.
To speak to the question more directly though, No of course you don't have to. Although personally, I find it strange to stand up for something on one hand, and then put it's flesh in your mouth with the other. I guess it also depends on the level of animal rights you believe should exist. If you only take it as far as farm animals should be treated properly, not abused, or mutilated as part of "common farming practices" and you believe they should be slaughtered as humanely and painlessly as possible then I guess you could still eat meat and campaign for that effectively.
2006-09-30 23:42:23
·
answer #2
·
answered by Anonymous
·
1⤊
0⤋