de gustibus non disputandum est Some people's witty reparte are pathetic and childish, others are the tippsy ramblings of the judgemental.
Nobody advocates wanton cruelty, but exactly what is that? Who defines what's cruelty for an animal we raise to kill? Who defines that? Who says the Frutarians are any more offbase than Peta folks. It's easy to be judgemental when your food comes from the supermarket. Regards, Bob S. On Wed, Dec 16, 2009 at 7:04 PM, Bob W <p...@web-options.com> wrote: >> >> I'm a very sensitive person and 1st noticed plant auras some time ago. >> Recently, plants have begun to talk to me. >> They are very sad about the murder of their fellow plants. >> So I'm gonna start a new group to stop the wanton destruction >> and consumption of plants. >> Come on folks, we've got to stop abusing the plants! >> Regards, Bob S. >> (I can't stand to drive thru the corn fields of Iowa as >> harvest time nears. >> The despair from the plants is overwhelming. Very sad indeed.) > > That's really pathetic, Bob. It's the sort of response one would expect from > a child. > > I'm really surprised at the way some people have reacted to the picture that > Frank posted. A couple of well-meaning people demonstrating against the fur > trade. No evidence that they were wearing leather, or members of PETA, or > even vegetarians, yet the picture seems to have stimulated a lot of vitriol > in some people. > > I wear leather and I eat meat, I'm not a member of any animal rights > organisation, I've never dumped a dead dog in a skip, and I've never wanted > a pet, but I'm opposed to cruelty to animals and (with some exceptions) to > the fur trade. There's nothing hypocritical about that - meat is a natural > part of the human diet. > > Now that we have domesticated ourselves and developed a sophisticated > awareness of other animals and their needs, it's perfectly possible to raise > animals for meat in ways where they can express their natural behaviour and > live fulfilling lives up to the point where we kill them, humanely. This > includes hunting game for food (game may well be the most ethical form of > meat). It also makes sense economically and ethically to make use of all the > by-products, such as leather. > > The differences between that and most of the fur trade are that fur is not > usually a by-product, wearing it is mostly about vanity rather than > essentials such as food, and much of it involves cruelty on a truly > spectacular scale. > > This is not a difficult distinction to understand and I'm sure most of the > people who've made juvenile comments and worn-out old jokes understand it, > so I don't understand why they feel threatened whenever they see someone > protesting against cruelty. It's not as if an admission that cruelty exists > is somehow going to turn you into soya-eating liberals all of a sudden - > you'll still be allowed to wear your cowboy boots and eat meat. As long it's > organically reared. > > Bob > > > > -- > PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List > PDML@pdml.net > http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net > to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow > the directions. > -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
