Anyone here for animal rights?

[minerva]

Reading through this whole thread I can’t help but wondering.
MattyC, I wholeheartedly agree with almost everything you say. When I read your first couple of posts, I was impressed by your opinions and it seemed very obvious you knew what you were talking about, your heart is in the right place as far as animals are concerned and you seemed to be a sensible and intelligent person.
That being said, I find it all the more disappointing and disturbing, that your recent posts were mostly offensive, insulting and condescending, specially since no one attacked you in the first place.

See, I totally agree with you, that any kind of cruelty towards animals is terribly wrong, no matter what animal we are talking about. Medical testing to save human lifes, if there is no other way it can be done and if it doesn’t inflict more pain to the animal than absolutely necessary – well has to be done. Killing animals for eating their meat and taking those animals fur or leather for wearing it – well thats kind of a natural process.
Rasing minks for example and stuffing them into tiny cages where they lead a miserable live just to be killed for their fur – that is horrrible and totally unnecessary cruelty in my book as are so many other things done to animals.

Now as far as rats are concerned – no doubt their population has to be controlled and they have to be killed for obvious reasons and I very strongly believe in doing it without putting them through any unnecessary suffering.
But know what, I do understand, that poor people living in a rat-infested appartment have other things on their mind then killing rats in the most humane way. Those people are not mean or cruel – as much as the rats are not – and I’m sure none of them would enjoy watching a rat die slowly or even slowly torturing them to death, all they want is protect themselves and get rid of the pest as quickly as possible and they have to get it done in the cheapest possible way and I do understand that with all the misery that is going on in their own lifes it's not their highest priority to specially care about how the rats die.
I dont say, this is right, but it is understandable and human.
And those are the people and circumstances I think brianspencer is talking about.

As much as we care for animals I do think we also have to show some empathy for people who are less fortunate then most of us are, don’t you think so? Otherwise I’d find the whole thing a tad hypocritical.

Oh, and btw, the ‘Today’ - article brianspencer posted – well I read the post, where he first mentioned rats climbing into cribs and you, Matty accused him of over exaggerating – so I guess that was his point in posting this article now. totally on topic in my opinion

I can get very emotional when it comes to animal rights as well and could argue about this topic for ages, but all I wanna say is that respect and understanding for other human beings is just as important.

 

[BigJim]

Any organisation that has "rights" in its title is usually run by a bunch of wankers out to promote their own sense of self-importance. PETA is one of the worst, not least because it has leaning towards people who use violence, which is, in my opinion, nothing but terrorism.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=l9ijLulwUTY

Interesting viewing.


Me personally? I would bludgeon anyone I caught being cruel to an animal. I don't count eating one as being cruel, nor do I count vermin killing as cruel. Releasing one outside it all very well if you live in the country, but if you live in London or even a suburban area, all you’re doing is sending it right to the next target, i.e. your next door neighbour. Completely unworkable. I eat meat, although these days I'm 90% vegetarian from a health perspective. I don’t see anything morally wrong with that, although I am vehemently opposed to people who needlessly exploit and maltreat animals being raised for livestock or battery hens. Everything deserves respect.

 

[MattyC]

That being said, I find it all the more disappointing and disturbing, that your recent posts were mostly offensive, insulting and condescending, especially since no one attacked you in the first place.

Ah, but apparently I'm just a blithering moron who's taking this on a personal level (even though all I'm doing is arguing the points at hand).

When people stray away from the actual point and the topics raised, begin to post irrelevant issues and actually ignore the intended points... then I will tend to be more aggressive. Especially if such persons don't understand the point, or are ignoring it intentionally when it is made crystal clear. It is incredibly annoying... as is the need to repeat yourself, but I guess that is futile when the person either doesn't have the capacity to understand or is willfully ignoring it.

Did you read some of the stuff he posted? I don't usually flame, but my god, some people deserve it. Even if I did give him a bit of a battering (which he deserved), at least I stuck to my guns and kept on reiterating my points in order for his head to finally get around them.

Besides, I don't see where I was insulting or offensive - I was simply hitting a few home truths and emphasising my point. After all, he's the one who accused me of being some kind of high school kid and ridiculed a humane viewpoint by comparing it to some sort of crusade. I don't believe I called him an idiot or anything of the matter, nor said anything that attacked him personally... rather I was attacking his arguments, and his lack of addressing the points. It's hard not to be condescending when somebody argues with you like that where they don't even understand or ignore what you are saying. You have to spoon feed them essentially.

But know what, I do understand, that poor people living in a rat-infested appartment have other things on their mind then killing rats in the most humane way.

Oh of course, but you don't need to prioritise or think too much at all to actually do the right thing. It's called common sense.

I'm sure people can squeeze it in their minds. That there are other important things is no excuse for unnecessary suffering, and I emphasise unnecessary as cruelty cannot be avoided 100% of the time. To have no regard or respect for another creature's pain that you cause... well, you know my stance there.

Those people are not mean or cruel

Those who intentionally prolong suffering, or know that they are doing it but do not care? Oh, that's the definition of being mean. It's a matter of choice really. As if there's a big difference between "I support killing animals slowly and painfully" and "I see nothing morally wrong with killing animals slowly and painfully" anyway.

And those are the people and circumstances I think brianspencer is talking about.

I don't agree. First he managed to say that I was leading some "crusade", then completely disregarded a humane stance on these animals ... going so far as to say that showing mercy to them wasn't helping with my view, as if he completely missed the entire point. This is after he said he's not one for animal cruelty, after he said that he has no problem with humanely killing animals.

This is what I attacked him on. He dug himself in a hole of hypocrisy and nonsensical waffle... while at the same time not even managing to address the initial point.

As much as we care for animals I do think we also have to show some empathy for people who are less fortunate then most of us are, don’t you think so? Otherwise I’d find the whole thing a tad hypocritical.

Oh I agree, but that isn't the topic of discussion now is it? Human vs Animal rights shouldn't even be discussed as it is fairly obvious that humans come first.

Oh, and btw, the ‘Today’ - article brianspencer posted – well I read the post, where he first mentioned rats climbing into cribs and you, Matty accused him of over exaggerating – so I guess that was his point in posting this article now. totally on topic in my opinion

Well fine, but I still don't see what that has anything to do with the point I was making.

I can get very emotional when it comes to animal rights as well and could argue about this topic for ages, but all I wanna say is that respect and understanding for other human beings is just as important.

It is more important.

Some people seem to think it is mutually exclusive... well, I support both in terms of welfare, humans moreso. Since this is an animal thread, I think that going on about poverty and the less fortunate is best left for another thread.

 

[GirlWhoLikes2Laugh]

I am for animal rights in that I would never abuse an animal. However, I do eat meat sometimes and I am not a vegetarian. I would never buy a fur coat made out of real fur, I'd rather buy a fake fur coat instead.

 

[susannah355]

I don't know about rights per se, but I do know I hate to see animals mistreated.

 

[brianspencer66]

Ah, but apparently I'm just a blithering moron who's taking this on a personal level (even though all I'm doing is arguing the points at hand).

When people stray away from the actual point and the topics raised, begin to post irrelevant issues and actually ignore the intended points... then I will tend to be more aggressive. Especially if such persons don't understand the point, or are ignoring it intentionally when it is made crystal clear. It is incredibly annoying... as is the need to repeat yourself, but I guess that is futile when the person either doesn't have the capacity to understand or is willfully ignoring it.

Did you read some of the stuff he posted? I don't usually flame, but my god, some people deserve it. Even if I did give him a bit of a battering (which he deserved), at least I stuck to my guns and kept on reiterating my points in order for his head to finally get around them.

Besides, I don't see where I was insulting or offensive - I was simply hitting a few home truths and emphasising my point. After all, he's the one who accused me of being some kind of high school kid and ridiculed a humane viewpoint by comparing it to some sort of crusade. I don't believe I called him an idiot or anything of the matter, nor said anything that attacked him personally... rather I was attacking his arguments, and his lack of addressing the points. It's hard not to be condescending when somebody argues with you like that where they don't even understand or ignore what you are saying. You have to spoon feed them essentially.



Oh of course, but you don't need to prioritise or think too much at all to actually do the right thing. It's called common sense.

I'm sure people can squeeze it in their minds. That there are other important things is no excuse for unnecessary suffering, and I emphasise unnecessary as cruelty cannot be avoided 100% of the time. To have no regard or respect for another creature's pain that you cause... well, you know my stance there.



Those who intentionally prolong suffering, or know that they are doing it but do not care? Oh, that's the definition of being mean. It's a matter of choice really. As if there's a big difference between "I support killing animals slowly and painfully" and "I see nothing morally wrong with killing animals slowly and painfully" anyway.



I don't agree. First he managed to say that I was leading some "crusade", then completely disregarded a humane stance on these animals ... going so far as to say that showing mercy to them wasn't helping with my view, as if he completely missed the entire point. This is after he said he's not one for animal cruelty, after he said that he has no problem with humanely killing animals.

This is what I attacked him on. He dug himself in a hole of hypocrisy and nonsensical waffle... while at the same time not even managing to address the initial point.



Oh I agree, but that isn't the topic of discussion now is it? Human vs Animal rights shouldn't even be discussed as it is fairly obvious that humans come first.



Well fine, but I still don't see what that has anything to do with the point I was making.



It is more important.

Some people seem to think it is mutually exclusive... well, I support both in terms of welfare, humans moreso. Since this is an animal thread, I think that going on about poverty and the less fortunate is best left for another thread.

First of all I did not stray from the topic of animal cruelty. If was simply amplifying a point that Game Girl made in her very first post about getting rid of mouse traps. She set the tone of this topic by mentioning the disposal of her parents mouse traps.

The only thing your basically harping is the means in which vermin are killed, as you mention the cruelty of glue trapps more than I care to mention. And I as well as everyone here gets your point.

I think the point your missing is how you put yourself across on here and well Im not always the kindest of people either. But it clearly annoys me when Im told Im "full of shit" when Im trying to make a point. And its clearly annoying when Im told "Im making things up" when Im talking of a true account and present some sort of documentation to prove it. If you dont want to believe it well thats fine. You also mentioned that I most likely did not know what antibodies were (protein in the blood used in the immune system to identify and newtralize bacteria or virus). And I think you also mentioned somthing about my spelling in the process too!! Is this the way to hold a conversation?
A battering? I hardly think so and Im capable of understanding quite well thank you.

I dont know if you ever lived in a depressed area. I know I have and Im not sensing your empathy for people who may live with vermin infestation day in and day out or the alarming asthma rate in some parts of the city partly due to the sheer size of the rodent population. These are people who are concerned with getting by on a day to day basis and they simply dont have time to deal with these very things we are talking about here. Do I want to see ANY animals killed slowly and cruely no? But I do think part of the discussion has to be the human factor to. Animals can effect humans in a positive and a negative factor. And just harping on one side of the equasion to me makes little or no sense. And that to me is the true hypocisy.

 

[MattyC]

First of all I did not stray from the topic of animal cruelty.

Well, we can read your posts and see.

But it clearly annoys me when Im told Im "full of shit" when Im trying to make a point.

I believe the story you posted was full of shit, that just simply does not happen.

And its clearly annoying when Im told "Im making things up" when Im talking of a true account and present some sort of documentation to prove it.

What documentation? A wikipedia article based on some kind of urban myth? I deal with facts, not rumours.

You also mentioned that I most likely did not know what antibodies were (protein in the blood used in the immune system to identify and newtralize bacteria or virus).

You called a few diseases as antibodies.

I know I have and Im not sensing your empathy for people who may live with vermin infestation day in and day out or the alarming asthma rate in some parts of the city partly due to the sheer size of the rodent population.

I emphasise with them well thank you, being that I have friends who live in those conditions (as I had already mentioned). But that's totally irrelevant to the thread and the actual topic.

The issue of rodent control was never in question. Poverty has little to do with using common sense and doing the right thing.

These are people who are concerned with getting by on a day to day basis and they simply dont have time to deal with these very things we are talking about here.

Right.

If people have the time to trap and kill animals, then they certainly have the time to show some kindness once in a while. As I said, it is a matter of choice to being humane or inhumane - both lead to the same conclusion and take as much effort regardless. Hence, why this "no time" argument is a load of crock.

And just harping on one side of the equasion to me makes little or no sense. And that to me is the true hypocisy.

That's because this is an "animal rights" thread. If you want to talk about the plight of ourselves as a species, go right ahead and start a new thread. If you want to discuss more important, much worse things... then go to the multitude of other threads present, or create one.

Do I want to see ANY animals killed slowly and cruely no?

Good. Glad you emphasised the "any", because you can't be selective on such things otherwise what is the point of being against such things? Using a double standard breaks it...

So then, what's exactly humorous and ridiculous about humane treatment of rats where possible? They don't deserve a quick putdown, because they're not animals in your eyes? Or is it because they're not as cute as baby seals?

You're either for humane killing of animals, against needless cruelty towards them or you are not. Based on what this thread shows, I think you know the answer already.

 

[minerva]

Ah, but apparently I'm just a blithering moron who's taking this on a personal level (even though all I'm doing is arguing the points at hand).

yep, unfortunately after a while you turned into one
Picking on someones spelling,

By the way, it is humane. Learn to spell please.

or asking for newspaper articles

Give me a genuine newspaper article, you know, a credible source.

and when they are provided turn it around and say it's off topic is hardly arguing the points at hand.

When people stray away from the actual point and the topics raised, begin to post irrelevant issues and actually ignore the intended points... then I will tend to be more aggressive. Especially if such persons don't understand the point, or are ignoring it intentionally when it is made crystal clear. It is incredibly annoying... as is the need to repeat yourself, but I guess that is futile when the person either doesn't have the capacity to understand or is willfully ignoring it.

Well reading your reply to my post makes wonder if you understood my points either. This isn't about human vs animal rights at all! Does that mean, you dont have the capacity to understand? Hmm? I wouldn't dare say that, since I dont know you - obviously you just don't agree and therefore you decided to stick with your arguments instead of really thinking about what I said.

Besides, I don't see where I was insulting or offensive -

hmm - lets see:

I am insulting because you make stupid remarks,...

I think you are full of shit, no offense.

now dont try turn it around to

I believe the story you posted was full of shit,...

you wanna stick to facts, right?

dont forget - we all can read your posts as well and see...

 

[BigJim]

Didn't impress an ex of mine, who was quite into animal rights once. We went to a resteraunt and I said I thought I'd try the "freshly clubbed seal".

 

[MattyC]

yep, unfortunately after a while you turned into one
Picking on someones spelling,

Wrong on both accounts.

If someone can't spell a simple a word as "humane", when it has been repeated several times, I will point it out.

or asking for newspaper articles

Of course I did. I wanted evidence.

and when they are provided turn it around and say it's off topic is hardly arguing the points at hand.

Uh huh. See, I addressed each and every point... he ignored most of mine, and the actual point I was making. That said though, I asked for a credible source of that woman being attacked "by a pack" of rats - still not given.

Well reading your reply to my post makes wonder if you understood my points either. This isn't about human vs animal rights at all! Does that mean, you dont have the capacity to understand? Hmm? I wouldn't dare say that, since I dont know you - obviously you just don't agree and therefore you decided to stick with your arguments instead of really thinking about what I said.

I really don't need to repeat myself over and over again. The posts are there, the arguments are there... go read over them again.

now dont try turn it around to

Not at all, as both statements were intended.

you wanna stick to facts, right?

dont forget - we all can read your posts as well and see...

That is offensive? That I said his statements were stupid and that I said he was full of shit? I even wrote no offense after that, being that the intention was to imply that he wasn't being perfectly honest with me. Those statements you quoted were nothing personal at all.

If you think that is even insulting on a personal level, then you need to grow a thicker skin it seems. Or is that too insulting for you?

Look, seriously, I don't mean to argue or offend you - but some of the stuff I had to contend with was just plain ridiculous. It seems to me you are more concerned about some minor things you regard as insulting and offensive, rather than the actual argument we were having and the points raised. He talks about how rats can be pests, yes, but that's not relevant because he is preaching to the converted in that case. However:

look Im against clubbing seals to death as much as the next guy. But filthy vermin is simply filthy vermin and Id frankly care less how they are rid of.

tell them about your humain crusade and watch them laugh in your face

I have no problem what so ever with the humaine treatment of animals. What Im talking about here is your sort of cavalier resistance to simple common sense when it comes to dealing with vermin.

And of course I have a prejudice, THEY ARE FILTHY RATS!

And you telling me about humaine treatment for slum dwelling rats does not help your point either.

So, essentially what he is saying is:

It's ok to be brutal towards an animal you don't necessarily like, because you don't care.
The notion of being humane and minimising suffering where possible towards these animals is so ridiculous, it is hilarious.
Thinking in a compassionate way is akin to some kind of crusade.
Common sense is 'resisted' somehow when actually thinking about the ethics of dispatching "vermin".
Freely admitting prejudice, simply because animal A is animal A.
Humane treatment for these animals doesn't help with the point, even though that is the point.

Shall I go on?

 

[minerva]

If someone can't spell a simple a word as "humane", when it has been repeated several times, I will point it out.

Because it makes you feel so much smarter? Congrats!
I'm still impressed with your opinions concerning animal treatment but not impressed at all with your lack of respect for other human beings.

Of course I did. I wanted evidence.

Uh huh. See, I addressed each and every point... he ignored most of mine, and the actual point I was making. That said though, I asked for a credible source of that woman being attacked "by a pack" of rats - still not given.

ok, that got me curious myself now :

http://www.theage.com.au/articles/2004/04/30/1083224581542.html?from=storyrhs

http://www.nysun.com/article/49861

I searched the internet about 2 minutes to find those two, so I'm sure there is a lot more. And while looking for those I found lots of other stories - from newpapers, you like newpapers, right - talking about rats attacking people in broad daylight, attacking children in there homes, running around in restaurants,...
You said rats are timid creatures and only attack if people are stupid enough to touch them - hmmm

Listen, reading your reply, I realized, that it doesn't make much sense to argue back and forth with you here, but I'll try once again to make my point clear.

Torturing animals - NO MATTER what animal - is horrible and wrong and should be prevented WHENEVER possible.

Now we all know, that animals do suffer at medical testings and most of us agree that while its a terrible thing it probably is sometimes necessary to protect human beings.

As much as I understand that, I do understand, that people who live in rat infested buildings will do anything to protect themselves and their children and while - again - I'm sure they wont make rats suffer just for fun, I can understand if it's not their top priority to care about how they get rid of the pest.

Let me ask you this:
Lets say someone called you to their home to take care of their sick animal. You have some injections in your bag to put an animal to sleep. And lets say for whatever reason you also carry a gun.
Now while you're on your way all of a sudden a dog attacks you. You're scared and you panic.
In this very moment, would you think about killing the dog in the most humane way? Would you search your bag and try to give the dog an injection to put it to sleep, or do you think you would just use your gun - without caring much if you kill with the first shot - just shoot to get the animal off you and protect yourself? hmm? Honestly?

All I'm saying is, I can understand, there are circumstances, where killing an animal the most humane way is simply not possible and this has nothing to do with how cute or not the animal is and it does not necessarily mean people who do what they have to do are heartless pricks.

 

[brianspencer66]

Wrong on both accounts.

If someone can't spell a simple a word as "humane", when it has been repeated several times, I will point it out.



Of course I did. I wanted evidence.



Uh huh. See, I addressed each and every point... he ignored most of mine, and the actual point I was making. That said though, I asked for a credible source of that woman being attacked "by a pack" of rats - still not given.



I really don't need to repeat myself over and over again. The posts are there, the arguments are there... go read over them again.



Not at all, as both statements were intended.



That is offensive? That I said his statements were stupid and that I said he was full of shit? I even wrote no offense after that, being that the intention was to imply that he wasn't being perfectly honest with me. Those statements you quoted were nothing personal at all.

If you think that is even insulting on a personal level, then you need to grow a thicker skin it seems. Or is that too insulting for you?

Look, seriously, I don't mean to argue or offend you - but some of the stuff I had to contend with was just plain ridiculous. It seems to me you are more concerned about some minor things you regard as insulting and offensive, rather than the actual argument we were having and the points raised. He talks about how rats can be pests, yes, but that's not relevant because he is preaching to the converted in that case. However:







So, essentially what he is saying is:

It's ok to be brutal towards an animal you don't necessarily like, because you don't care.
The notion of being humane and minimising suffering where possible towards these animals is so ridiculous, it is hilarious.
Thinking in a compassionate way is akin to some kind of crusade.
Common sense is 'resisted' somehow when actually thinking about the ethics of dispatching "vermin".
Freely admitting prejudice, simply because animal A is animal A.
Humane treatment for these animals doesn't help with the point, even though that is the point.

Shall I go on?

You know Minerva this guy is not really worth it. He claims to be a vet but I have a hard time believing it. He strikes me as highly intelligent but seriously lacking in social graces and plain ole common sense. Many here said they agreed with his basic premise about animal cruelty. But see that is simply not enough for him. he seems to want to beat everyone into having his point of view. sort of a kid having a tantrum. But he needs to come to terms with the fact that it is simply not acceptable to tell people on this thread that they are "full of shit" or "making things up". He seems to have some crude idea that verbal bullying is going to win him points here like some scared high school kid. Some sort of post adolecent inflated ego, as if he needs to do this to make himself feel better. And well he is a registerd member, I looked him up so lets have empathy on him and hope he learns better.

 

[ViperGTS]

I shoot metal BBs at Canadia Geese when they honk outside my bedroom window.

Because they're Canadian, not because they're animals.

 

[aun_existe_amor]

there is no point arguing. you cant change their opinion. there willalways be idiots

 

[MattyC]

Because it makes you feel so much smarter? Congrats!

Errm, no.

I'm still impressed with your opinions concerning animal treatment but not impressed at all with your lack of respect for other human beings.

Lack of respect of a fellow human being... you deduced all this from an internet messageboard, against one poster who I didn't even personally insult? Please.

http://www.theage.com.au/articles/2004/04/30/1083224581542.html?from=storyrhs

http://www.nysun.com/article/49861

THANK YOU! That's what I wanted. Since you have given me proof, I will detract my statements and admit I was wrong on the matter. Regardless, such things aren't normal due to the nature of these animals - such cases are incredibly rare. However though, the author of that book seems incredibly biased - rats killed 10 million people? No - disease kills millions of people, accidents kill people, people kill people - not the rats themselves. It isn't really the rats fault especially if people can't clean up after themselves or take preventive measures. After all, it is humanity who gave them such a large ecological niche.

And considering his bias, he'd really have to hate man - after all our species has killed millions upon millions of our own, and also transmit vile diseases too.

attacking children in there homes, running around in restaurants,...

They don't directly attack the children, they went directly for the milk/baby formula as I have already debunked. You even put any other small domesticated animal in that position, and it will most likely do the same thing. I've seen cases like this before.

You said rats are timid creatures and only attack if people are stupid enough to touch them - hmmm

Yes, they are timid creatures. Perhaps if you study these animals a bit, you would know that.

Let me ask you this:
Lets say someone called you to their home to take care of their sick animal. You have some injections in your bag to put an animal to sleep. And lets say for whatever reason you also carry a gun.
Now while you're on your way all of a sudden a dog attacks you. You're scared and you panic.
In this very moment, would you think about killing the dog in the most humane way?

I would shoot it where the dog dies instantly, so yes.

Would you search your bag and try to give the dog an injection to put it to sleep, or do you think you would just use your gun - without caring much if you kill with the first shot - just shoot to get the animal off you and protect yourself? hmm? Honestly?

Well of course I'd protect myself first by shooting the animal, but often a shot to the head is a insta-kill. Your analogy is incredibly extreme - you're comparing an aggressive dog that wants to attack you to a house rat, or house rats that are more likely to scatter and run away from a giant than act like an aggressive dog and attack you in such a fashion. Dog attacks happen all the time - but rat attacks in the same manner? There might be rare cases, those are isolated incidents. They don't happen often, if ever.

I don't hear many stories of a rat going up to a person and attacking them in board daylight because usually in urban areas they tend to avoid humans whenever possible. I'm sure most pest control operators or zoologists would attest to that.

there are circumstances, where killing an animal the most humane way is simply not possible and this has nothing to do with how cute or not the animal is and it does not necessarily mean people who do what they have to do are heartless pricks.

Of course there are, I agree with you and an not arguing with that. That is why I stated that sometimes cruelty cannot be avoided, but where possible needless cruelty should be. Those people who are presented with a choice - to kill the animal quickly or to let it suffer, if they take the latter option then, yes, they are heartless pricks. This is assuming that a humane kill is entirely possible. We're not talking about rabid, growling beasts wanting human blood... we're talking about beasts that are opportunistic and are only trying to survive.

 

[MattyC]

You know Minerva this guy is not really worth it. He claims to be a vet but I have a hard time believing it. He strikes me as highly intelligent but seriously lacking in social graces and plain ole common sense. Many here said they agreed with his basic premise about animal cruelty. But see that is simply not enough for him. he seems to want to beat everyone into having his point of view. sort of a kid having a tantrum. But he needs to come to terms with the fact that it is simply not acceptable to tell people on this thread that they are "full of shit" or "making things up". He seems to have some crude idea that verbal bullying is going to win him points here like some scared high school kid. Some sort of post adolecent inflated ego, as if he needs to do this to make himself feel better. And well he is a registerd member, I looked him up so lets have empathy on him and hope he learns better.

Whatever. I've highlighted some of the ridiculous things you have said, and at the same time made my point clear. It's got nothing to do with "beating people up with my POV", it's got everything to do with what arguments you presented. Heck, you didn't even answer what was so ridiculous and funny about being humane. You blatantly ignored it. You even at one point totally dismissed it, saying that it doesn't help with my point.

Instead of doing my psychological file from a simple argument on an internet messageboard, why don't you begin to address my points rather than stay on the issue of "ohh, look, he is insulting me, he is insulting me" ? For crying out loud, I wasn't insulting you personally, I was insulting some of your statements.

If you honestly think that's somehow offensive and indicates a tantrum and an inflated ego from me, start growing a thicker skin. Really.

 

[MattyC]

On a side note, I found it very interesting reading our Animal Welfare Act. Apparently this act excludes mice, rats and birds from minimum requirements of care and humane treatment for laboratory animals - as if they were "non animals". This also extends to the treatment of farm animals. That's really absurd and not really fair, considering that 85% of animals used in research comprise of mice, rats and birds. Also what is interesting is that this bill doesn't apply to these animals in retail either. And I do think farm animals at least deserve some amount of care. No other country in the world (as far as I know) makes exceptions towards these animals in regards to humane care - certainly not in the figure of 85% of all lab animals used. With regards to animal welfare, we (the US) are far behind with the rest of the world... the welfare act in other countries cover all their lab animals.

What do you people think about these exemptions, and the Act in general?

 

[brianspencer66]

Whatever. I've highlighted some of the ridiculous things you have said, and at the same time made my point clear. It's got nothing to do with "beating people up with my POV", it's got everything to do with what arguments you presented. Heck, you didn't even answer what was so ridiculous and funny about being humane. You blatantly ignored it. You even at one point totally dismissed it, saying that it doesn't help with my point.

Instead of doing my psychological file from a simple argument on an internet messageboard, why don't you begin to address my points rather than stay on the issue of "ohh, look, he is insulting me, he is insulting me" ? For crying out loud, I wasn't insulting you personally, I was insulting some of your statements.

If you honestly think that's somehow offensive and indicates a tantrum and an inflated ego from me, start growing a thicker skin. Really.

I dont think its a matter of having a thicker skin its just a matter of common decency and treating people with respect. Do you say these types of things in real time with people you meet on a day to day basis? Do you see others here telling people they are "full of shit"? I fully understand the contex in which you said it dont get me wrong, and well I been told worse things belive me and my skin is alot thicker than yours will ever be. But its about how one comports on self in a public forum and your seriously lacking. You know if you would have said the story of the woman I sent you was the exception and not the rule well i could have lived with that. Lots of us say things on here that may have happened in the news. But no one comes right out and says its made up. Ive been talking to people here on years and disagree with them but there is a line of respect that you need to simply understand. With me its not about your issues anymore its about your attiude.

 

[MattyC]

I dont think its a matter of having a thicker skin its just a matter of common decency and treating people with respect.

So thrashing someone's argument on an internet message board is indicative of a lack of respect towards people? Right.

Do you say these types of things in real time with people you meet on a day to day basis?

No, because I don't have arguments like this with complete strangers who I've never met before. Though I've had the odd argument before of course, but at the end of the day it was all cool. They had nothing to do with a lack of respect because both parties were arguing their own line of reasoning, and not against the actual person.

And if you're going to ask me RL questions like that, then I'll ask you: Do you begin to go mental about respect and attitude when someone demolishes your points one by one?

Do you see others here telling people they are "full of shit"?

All the time. Subtle or not.

my skin is alot thicker than yours will ever be.

Haha, right. See, I'm not the one who's having a cry about a "lack of respect" because someone tore into my arguments.

With me its not about your issues anymore its about your attiude.

Be thankful you're not on boards that are actually focused on debating issues, because you would not survive there one second. Now, I never attacked you personally nor did I ever make this personal - you're the one who seems to be implying this on a personal level. As I said, thicker skin.

Expect people to sink their teeth into your arguments/points whatever if they stand out as ridiculous - it's got nothing to do with internet etiquette, as long as it doesn't turn personal. All I have said focused on your arguments, not you on a personal level.

I think I've made my point well clear for you, and I am really not going to repeat myself again.

 

[brianspencer66]

Matty this is getting old give it a rest dude, move on

 

[MattyC]

Matty this is getting old give it a rest dude, move on

I agree, let's.

Ok, back on the issue of the AWA. I feel that it is fundamentally flawed... if you can't give basic protection to all domesticated animals then there's no point for a law like that. Thoughts?