Pro Hunt / Anti Hunt Debate (split from Toffbusters)

Discussion in 'UK Parties and Protests' started by dibblydowcus, Dec 18, 2004.

  1. matthew

    matthew Almost sexy

    Messages:
    9,302
    Likes Received:
    0
     
  2. matthew

    matthew Almost sexy

    Messages:
    9,302
    Likes Received:
    0
    double post
     
  3. DoktorAtomik

    DoktorAtomik Closed For Business

    Messages:
    4,356
    Likes Received:
    0
    I've not given you my opinions. I've given you facts. Animals that are re-homed are re-homed with caring people.

    Links to internet sites do not constitute proof. You appear to be fixated on websites. Anything can be written on a website - that doesn't make it fact. And let's face it - if I provided you with links to information with which you disagreed, you wouldn't accept it anyway.

    Which perfectly illustrates how poor a medium the internet can be for conveying reliable information. Which is why I advise you to get out into the real world and to stop depending on the internet to teach you about life.

    Uhh..... given that ALF activities are generally illegal, wouldn't you consider a law enforcement website to be kinda biased? Not to mention the fact that it's an American site?

    See, this is where you completely fail to understand me, and largely the reason that I've lost a lot of respect for you. You assume that I (and anyone you disagree with) starts out with an opinion that I/they then seek to manipulate the facts in order to maintain. That's not how it works. Maybe for some, but not for me. I'm not interested in holding opinions unless they're well-founded. I believe that animal liberation is a 'good thing' because of my understanding of the facts. If you were correct, and animals were not being re-homed with caring people, then I'd change my opinion. It's that simple. If animals were suffering as a result of animla lib. activities, then I wouldn't support them.

    Unfortunately though, you don't seem to understand this rational process of opinion-forming. You assume that if your opinion were correct, I'd be inclined to attempt to disprove it in order to maintain my own entrenched beliefs, regardless of the facts. Not only is this utter rubbish, but it's highly insulting. If animals were suffering as a result of animal libber activities, then I wouldn't support them. Period. I wouldn't be burying my head in the sand. My interest is in the welfare of the animals, not in winning an argument or defending a political ideology.

    So the question would be, do you consider it justifiable to liberate animals that are being experimented upon in this fashion?

    I don't trouble myself over whether we're superior to animals or not. The way I look at it is this: the highest of human qualities are our capacity for compassion and empathy. By inflicting suffering on other creatures for our own benefit, we're actually sacrificing the very things that make us human, and supposedly better.

    What if an alien species arrived on earth that had a mental capacity far in excess of our own? Would they be justified in experimenting upon us because we were inferior? What about people with brain damage? Is their life worth less than a normal human? Why not experiment on them?

    The question isn't whether one life is more valuable than another, but rather how we should best behave with compassion.

    To which sides do you refer?

    It hasn't changed. There are plenty of sabs who oppose hunting in other ways, but the practice of hunt-sabbing is self-evidently dedicated to saving the lives of animals - not some political goal. Apart from anything else, the coverage of sabbing in the media is virtually non-existent.

    Nothing can be 'proved' on an internet message board. You can only trade opinions. What it comes down to is respect. I'm offering you facts that, if you respect me, you can choose to accept as such. You might not like the way I present my arguments at times, but I would certainly hope I've never given you cause to think I'd lie about something just for the sake of scoring a few points.

    If I have opinions, then they will be offered as opinions, and not facts. For example, I don't say to you "animal experimentation doesn't work - that's a fact", beacause I have no proof of that. I have evidence and opinion, but I'm in no position to verify what I believe, so I can't vouch for it as a fact.

    When I have facts though, they'll be offered as such. I wouldn't accuse you of being a liar if you spoke about facts that were known to you, so I'd hope you'd show me the same respect.
     
  4. matthew

    matthew Almost sexy

    Messages:
    9,302
    Likes Received:
    0
     
  5. Claire

    Claire Senior Member

    Messages:
    4,855
    Likes Received:
    22
    No but you arguably started the debate... so when the thread was split from Toffbusters you were the first name to come up...

    DON'T F**KING SHOUT AT ME!!!:p

    Gawd you people are starting to piss me off! If you think you can do better at running this forum then go ahead, I really don't give a f**k:rolleyes: ...

    nothing personal, Mr Kev's brother, cos you're actually quite cute, which is as good a reason as any to let you off:p
     
  6. DoktorAtomik

    DoktorAtomik Closed For Business

    Messages:
    4,356
    Likes Received:
    0
    Matthew, I don't depend on the internet for information. Not do I keep records of every web site I've ever visited. You demand links to information on the web, but think that through.... what you're actually asking me to do is spend my time searching for that information. You can do that just as well as me, so why not just go and do it?

    Firstly, it has nothing to do with "having anything to gain from not giving facts". Opinions and interpretations vary according to the source, and your source is prejudiced according to its legal bias. Secondly, it's American. The ALF in America are not the same thing as the ALF in the UK.

    No, I don't. Everyone I've ever met with any involvement in animal rights has been obsessive about the welfare of animals. I remember one animal rescue centre that was run by 'extremists' that used to operate six-monthly and surprise visits to people who received animals from them. Quite aside from which, I don't think a battery hen could really be much worse off, could it?

    That's an opinion that you've formulated based entirely on second-hand information from prejudiced sources though.

    Like I said, animal experimentation really needs to be another topic if you want to discuss it.

    Well in my experience, those involved in sabbing were generally interested in saving foxes. However, the hunt would regularly resort to casual violence against the sabs.

    I'm afraid I can't respect this particular point, no. Firstly, it's not based on any evidence - just a prejudiced opinion. Secondly, how many 'bad homes' do you think are likely to want a scrawny chicken that can hardly stand up, or a rabbit with burn marks? Not exactly ideal pets y'know. The very fact that people want to take these animals is surely a very good sign that they're the kind of people with a strong affection for animals?

    That's absolutely fine. I think there are some good points lurking behind a lot of what you say, but you let your prejudices and assumptions get in the way of those points. For example, there are certainly some violent ass holes involved in the animal rights movement. There are also people who're more interested in the politics of confrontation that actaully helping save animals. These are points you kinda make, but you lose them behond sweeping generalisations about animals not being re-homed proplerly.
     
  7. matthew

    matthew Almost sexy

    Messages:
    9,302
    Likes Received:
    0




    Do you think that is wise :rolleyes:

    I can accept if yo say that the majority of people are not violent that are out to protect foxes .. their is violence on all sides , its realy the percentage on each side i would like to know..but i will accept what you say in the view of not going around in circles.


    Well, i did not just start reading about this .. when i saw the thread.. it is based on years of you could say prejudiced opinion. I would say its just what i have been exposed to and my own point of view. I have read lots of unbiased biased material .. spoken to a few (not many) people and just gained my own perspective. If you see this as biased/prejudiced even ill informed opinion (from what i have said) fair enough.

    All i am realy argueing is your point that no animals re homed are worse off .
    If you can honestly say as a fact that this is true.. argueing about it will become futile. I again will just have to accept this , but still hold onto what i have already gathered .. but take on board what you say...this is realy all i am asking you to think about.


    Yes some were in all my posts i could find a statement i have made , that would agree with all that you say.. but i am not making sweeping generalisations thats unfair.. your just ignoring when i agree with you , i could quote a few times when i have said that i agree that what you say is true. But their is a percentage i believe that this is not the case.. your almost saying that the re homing of animals is perfect with nothing bad involved. I don't mean because of the poor condition of the animal sometimes thay have to be put to sleep , or they just die. I mean people not taking due care and just wholly rightous about liberating animals and that finding the task of keeping them overwhelming.
     
  8. x1x1x1

    x1x1x1 Member

    Messages:
    32
    Likes Received:
    0
    I agree with hunting provided it is purely for the purposes of food - after all we are animals and other animals hunt. Hunting merely for sport, however, is seriously fucked up. Where did we get to this where we're hurting or stressing animals for sport, or fur coats or anything inane and frivolous for that matter.

    What a fucked up world we live in when humans are breeding dogs for hunting foxes all in the name of sport and tradition and the charm of the hunt. But equally fucked up is animal rights peeps who think violence is a good way to deal with people who are cruel to animals. Respect to all non violent animal rights activists.

    This world is a beautiful planet where everythng lives in harmony, delicate ecosystems and native species in native lands evolving for the purpose of survival within their land.

    Well. . . . . That was until humans came along. We introduced other species of animals into our lands(as have other "developed" countries) I mean foxes and rabbits and more-correct me if I'm wrong are an alien species to UK.

    IMO the wole infrastructure of this planet is fucked up cos of humans motivated by power and money and deceiving the gullable mainstream into thinking these earth spoiling invasive activities are in our best interests of civilisation. This is why we have mass over population of certain species like rats etc, the whole infrastructure is fucked up.

    Peace
    Impludo
     
  9. matthew

    matthew Almost sexy

    Messages:
    9,302
    Likes Received:
    0
    *stands back in amazement* I can't disagree at all.
     
  10. Claire

    Claire Senior Member

    Messages:
    4,855
    Likes Received:
    22
    I disagree somewhat... and I would think the animals he eats would too.

    But this thread's about hunting... and he's anti-hunt... so I agree with him on that.
     
  11. x1x1x1

    x1x1x1 Member

    Messages:
    32
    Likes Received:
    0
    ROFLMAO @ Blair dance project - cheered me right up.

    Was walkin the farmers fields early this morning and found some shrooms, nibbled a few and byeeeee gawd, a bull popped out from nowhere doing a highland fling - or was it Gordon Brown, or was it Tony Blairrrrrr - aaaaarrgghhh

    Then I woke up with the duvet round my neck-hahahaahhaa

    Soz for the bit of amusement there, Sar knows about my delusions with dancing PM's.

    Back to hunting, yeah the worlds fucked up but what we gonna do about it.

    Can't the folk who enjoy the sport, make sport some other way?

    Impludo
     
  12. Claire

    Claire Senior Member

    Messages:
    4,855
    Likes Received:
    22
    As regards to stopping hunting we could start here: http://www.hipforums.com/forums/showthread.php?t=46066

    Obviously they feel they can't... hence the whole debate we're having.

    Nice to meet you Impludo:)
     
  13. matthew

    matthew Almost sexy

    Messages:
    9,302
    Likes Received:
    0
    Thankyou, i apreciate it.. See i am not so bad am i ? (ok you don't have to answer that:p ).

    I just give back what i get . I can't say i am 100% illuminatory, but i am honest .

    Blair dance project ?? erm sounds 'intresting'

    http://www.miniclip.com/discocherie.htm

    http://www.miniclip.com/dancingblair.htm

    probably not what your talking about , but i laughed for 10 seconds ...

    anyway .......

    It is our attitude as a society that is fucked up..the world i think goes on regardless.
     

Share This Page

  1. This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
    By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.
    Dismiss Notice