when they say and 'harm none'....what do they think happens to capitve animals that can not fend for themselves does? or animals that are not made for the cilmate they are released into...or the affect on native wild life? i am againist animal abuse..and all that sounds abusive to me....worse then the fate of being a fur coat.(which i don't wear..like i could afford one or want one) and yes i eat meat... yummmm cow is good! could i eat one i rasied..most likely not.
so what do u guys think was it the crazy ones out there or some other sick people?
ohhh and the poor dogs.
http://www.post-gazette.com/pg/07160/792840-54.stm
2007-06-10 17:12:34 · 10 answers · asked by dragonwolf 5 in Pets ➔ Dogs
Extremist like this do more harm than good.
I understand people's indignation on matters such as mink farms, but there are better ways of stopping them than acts of violence. I wish the people who release minks into the wild would stop for just a minute and think of the effect it has on the wild otter population and the prey population. Is freeing the minks really worth the extinction of other animals?
The freed minks will be replaced by other minks in the farms, the otters will not be replaced. Why not try to get to the root of the problem instead? Mink farms will exsist as long as there is a demand for mink coats, it's as simple as that. Stop the demand and you stop the farms. This is, in my opinion, best done by educating the public and not through aggression, hysterics and tantrums. I've found that people are more willing to listen and are more likely to take me serious if I'm well mannered, eloquent and informed than if I'm screaming my head off at them, killing their pets and throwing paint on their clothes.
2007-06-10 21:22:52 · answer #1 · answered by Voelven 7 · 2⤊ 0⤋
I think they have good intentions, but they go overboard. If animal testing was the only way to find a cure for a major disease, I would not be opposed to it, as long as the scientists did not inflict any more pain than absolutely necessary.
Not all of them know exactly what they're doing, either--one group released a lobster into the wild in the Pacific Ocean--it was a Maine lobster!
2007-06-11 02:41:56 · answer #2 · answered by cross-stitch kelly 7 · 1⤊ 0⤋
when I see lots of the ill and twisted issues businesses do to animals to make their product "sell-in a position", it does erupt a sort of anger interior me. the occasion you're offering, drugs, is an comprehensible one (simply by fact we want drugs). What you pass away out is the multitude of goods that we don't need, trend products. Is it incorrect to ask that animals be taken care of humanely? Is it incredibly mandatory to kill a pig with blunt stress trauma? Or to boil chickens whilst they're nevertheless alive? Or have a cow choke by making use of itself blood whilst dangling from a team? just to save some money? some animal rights activists are extremists, yet no longer all. No, i do no longer propose we habit assessments on human beings, yet i might prefer to no longer habit pointless assessments on animals the two. some compassion, empathy, and FSM forbid... a splash perspective would make you notice issues slightly distinctive whilst it consists of animal slaughter.
2016-10-07 06:48:09 · answer #3 · answered by ? 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
you guys are not going to like this but a lot of animal activists are more harmful then not. I have raised and ate my own steer, most poeple do not eat cows, cows are for breeding. animal by-products are in a lot of stuff that you may not know about. I am against animal abuse but that does not mean that hitting a dog for trying to bite you is wrong, or putting a shock collar on a dog that tries to run away is wrong, those things are done for the animals health, the shock is better then being hit by a car, and a smack is better then being put down, or beaten more severly for biting. and when i see animal activists going against children, 12-18 years old it makes you dislike them, not that all are bad, but maybe you need to work on animals activists human relations to get your story out.
2007-06-10 17:25:03 · answer #4 · answered by oes 2 · 4⤊ 2⤋
I am not an aminal activist, but consider myself a defender of animals. When I defend them, it is against the cruelty of humans. Caring more about humans than animals will do nothing for our world-evil people will always be evil people. And then animals would have no one helping them. Rememer, the big difference between us is we always have a choice what kind of persons we want to be. Dogs don't always have that option. I feel it is our responsibility to care for the more helpless. If you can't care about living beings besides yourselves, you have no souls.
2007-06-12 03:27:24 · answer #5 · answered by anne b 7 · 1⤊ 1⤋
That's just plain abuse to me! I'm not an activist. I do eat meat h@ll I live in the country...and have no desire for a fur coat...but I'm totally against animal abuse.
poor animals!!!!!!!!!!!!
2007-06-10 18:00:45 · answer #6 · answered by Buster 5 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Eco-Terrorists.
2007-06-11 00:32:33 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
I'm an animal activist and i don't care what other people think because i know in my heart that i'm doing the right thing and people would have to be cruel heartless jerks to think i am nuts
2007-06-10 17:17:49 · answer #8 · answered by Julia 2 · 2⤊ 4⤋
If those people cared half as much about other humans as they do animals the world would be SUCH a better place!
2007-06-10 17:16:27 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 3⤊ 3⤋
YES!!!
ALL of em are TOTALLY out-of-touch w/REALITY!!!
WACKOS!
They've been DISNEY-FIED!!!
*&* dare to butt-in to other folks(SANE people!) business!
2007-06-11 01:17:43 · answer #10 · answered by yrdelusional 2 · 3⤊ 2⤋