Oh yes, so heated in fact that I decided to forgo replying to the juvenile outbursts in your post, and instead quote only the significant parts. Phew.ruisleipa wrote:
but for the record my panties aren't in a twist but are perfectly flat against my smooth buttocks.. but you seem to be getting rather heated over this issue.
No one here wants whales to be unnecessarily killed, ruisleipa. However, the behavior of the protestors makes one wish that they do not succeed in reaching their goal, and you want quite the opposite to happen as a result.
ruisleipa wrote:
oh man that deserves a LOL.JohnG@lt wrote:
text
So...lol?
Thanks for the personal insult. way to go. I'm so proud.
so what are you saying here? only you can do the name-calling?ruisleipa wrote:
how can you throw a tantrum on the internet? It doesn't make sense. I'm not going mad either. I refer you to my previous post, and you're still a prick.lowing wrote:
text
*yawn*steelie34 wrote:
ruisleipa wrote:
No, why?steelie34 wrote:
answer me one question ruisleipa.... are you a vegan?you think that burger you're eating was from a suicidal cow who just walked into the butcher's store? no it was SLAUGHTERED just like the whales.ruisleipa wrote:
If anything I'm against the Japanese whalers, since whaling is a cruel and inhumane activity.
hypocrite = you
your opinion on this matter = worthless
Actually I'm a vegetarian. Not a vegan.
your grasp of English = worthless.
I agree that their behaviour might not win many fans but you can't say just cos the sea sheperds are behaiving stupidly the other side must be de facto 'right', which is the stance most people here seem to be taking, including the lovely people saying they should all be shot.DesertFox- wrote:
No one here wants whales to be unnecessarily killed, ruisleipa. However, the behavior of the protestors makes one wish that they do not succeed in reaching their goal, and you want quite the opposite to happen as a result.
Killing vegetables.ruisleipa wrote:
*yawn*steelie34 wrote:
ruisleipa wrote:
No, why?you think that burger you're eating was from a suicidal cow who just walked into the butcher's store? no it was SLAUGHTERED just like the whales.ruisleipa wrote:
If anything I'm against the Japanese whalers, since whaling is a cruel and inhumane activity.
hypocrite = you
your opinion on this matter = worthless
Actually I'm a vegetarian. Not a vegan.
your grasp of English = worthless.
No, I don't really care what anyone calls me on an internet forum tbh.steelie34 wrote:
ruisleipa wrote:
oh man that deserves a LOL.JohnG@lt wrote:
text
So...lol?
Thanks for the personal insult. way to go. I'm so proud.so what are you saying here? only you can do the name-calling?ruisleipa wrote:
how can you throw a tantrum on the internet? It doesn't make sense. I'm not going mad either. I refer you to my previous post, and you're still a prick.lowing wrote:
text
My opinion of lowing is just my opinion, and he gives as good as he gets so don't worry about it.
whatever... if you want to split hairs about vegan vs vegetarian that's fine, but don't gimme any shit about inhumane treatment of animals unless you completely eschew any animal food, products, testing, etc. im sure you don't, so the fact you are a hypocrite stands.
why not? I only eat and buy free-range animal products. I don't use toiletries that have been tested on animals to the best of my knowledge. I don't buy leather. etc etc. I do try and live according to cetain ethical standards believe it or not. The fact that it is virtually impossible to live in today's Western world WITHOUT using some kind of animal products is sad but true, but I can't do anything more about that beyond NOT using animal products which in my opinion have been created via exploitation or animal suffering. Not very hypocrtical really is it? How does YOUR hypocrisy manifest itself?steelie34 wrote:
but don't gimme any shit about inhumane treatment of animals unless you completely eschew any animal food, products, testing, etc.
It would've been amusing watching someone like you try to survive before humans settled down into towns. The entire way you live your life is only possible because of todays Western world.ruisleipa wrote:
why not? I only eat and buy free-range animal products. I don't use toiletries that have been tested on animals to the best of my knowledge. I don't buy leather. etc etc. I do try and live according to cetain ethical standards believe it or not. The fact that it is virtually impossible to live in today's Western world WITHOUT using some kind of animal products is sad but true, but I can't do anything more about that beyond NOT using animal products which in my opinion have been created via exploitation or animal suffering. Not very hypocrtical really is it? How does YOUR hypocrisy manifest itself?steelie34 wrote:
but don't gimme any shit about inhumane treatment of animals unless you completely eschew any animal food, products, testing, etc.
Last edited by JohnG@lt (2010-01-07 11:47:55)
"Ah, you miserable creatures! You who think that you are so great! You who judge humanity to be so small! You who wish to reform everything! Why don't you reform yourselves? That task would be sufficient enough."
-Frederick Bastiat
-Frederick Bastiat
so? I don't live 'before humans settled into towns', I live now. Living in today's Western world doesn't mean we have to rape the hell out of animals to do it. what's your point?JohnG@lt wrote:
IIt would've been amusing watching someone like you try to survive before humans settled down into towns. The entire way you live your life is only possible because of todays Western world.
Last edited by ruisleipa (2010-01-07 11:50:29)
You act like being a vegetarian is a natural state for human beings. It's not. It's only possible because of modern society and easy access to soy beans and vitamins.ruisleipa wrote:
what's the point of that comment? lol @ 'someone like you' - what does that mean then?JohnG@lt wrote:
It would've been amusing watching someone like you try to survive before humans settled down into towns.
"Ah, you miserable creatures! You who think that you are so great! You who judge humanity to be so small! You who wish to reform everything! Why don't you reform yourselves? That task would be sufficient enough."
-Frederick Bastiat
-Frederick Bastiat
Just because whalers aren't good doesn't mean what the protesters do is in anyway "right" or even lawful. Sure whaling is bad, but putting human lives at risk? They can simple stand in the way of the Japanese ship, but nooooo its ok for them to ram into a fucking boat in a freezing sea. Sure they're trying to send a message, but haven't they heard of non-violent protesting? Sure the results wouldn't be as satisfactory to them, but it sure does get a lot more support with the ethos they make. They are the same as environmental terrorists, destroying labs to claim what is "right." Things such as whaling should be done through diplomatic means or through education in Japan, not putting people who have a family's life at risk. On the sea shepherd's part, they are just purely irresponsible and find nothing wrong with their actions. Two wrongs doesn't make a right.
No I know it's not 'natural' depending on how you look at it. Nor is factory farming 'natural'. Don't really care if it's 'natural' or not but imo it IS ethical. Just like killing each other is 'natural' in some way i.e. a natural instinct but it doesn't mean we should do it.
free-range makes animal slaughter humane? you never wear nice dress shoes? why is it impossible to live in the western world without some kind of animal product? in fact, it would be quite easy to do so! the fact that you choose not to, but can say it's inhumane to kill an animal, is hypocritical.
just because you dont use products that "in your opinion" have been created via exploitation or animal suffering doesn't mean anything! your opinion, as hard as this might be for you to believe, doesn't mean shit. just like mine doesn't, or anyone else's for that matter. but do NOT come here and say 'i do what i can blah-blah' because you DON'T. you DON'T do all that you can, and as soon as you use that animal product you have invalidated any ethical standards you claim to have.
just because you dont use products that "in your opinion" have been created via exploitation or animal suffering doesn't mean anything! your opinion, as hard as this might be for you to believe, doesn't mean shit. just like mine doesn't, or anyone else's for that matter. but do NOT come here and say 'i do what i can blah-blah' because you DON'T. you DON'T do all that you can, and as soon as you use that animal product you have invalidated any ethical standards you claim to have.
The human race would not exist today if it abided by your system of ethics. Eating meat and wearing the skins of animals is what allowed us to survive up until the present day. Thumb your nose at others all you want but your false sense of pride in being abnormal is kind of amusing. It's like being proud you were born with a genetic defect.ruisleipa wrote:
No I know it's not 'natural' depending on how you look at it. Nor is factory farming 'natural'. Don't really care if it's 'natural' or not but imo it IS ethical. Just like killing each other is 'natural' in some way i.e. a natural instinct but it doesn't mean we should do it.
"Ah, you miserable creatures! You who think that you are so great! You who judge humanity to be so small! You who wish to reform everything! Why don't you reform yourselves? That task would be sufficient enough."
-Frederick Bastiat
-Frederick Bastiat
good point.Cybargs wrote:
Just because whalers aren't good doesn't mean what the protesters do is in anyway "right" or even lawful. Sure whaling is bad, but putting human lives at risk? They can simple stand in the way of the Japanese ship, but nooooo its ok for them to ram into a fucking boat in a freezing sea. Sure they're trying to send a message, but haven't they heard of non-violent protesting? Sure the results wouldn't be as satisfactory to them, but it sure does get a lot more support with the ethos they make. They are the same as environmental terrorists, destroying labs to claim what is "right." Things such as whaling should be done through diplomatic means or through education in Japan, not putting people who have a family's life at risk. On the sea shepherd's part, they are just purely irresponsible and find nothing wrong with their actions. Two wrongs doesn't make a right.
On the other hand, if someone believes strongly enough about something, and 'non-violent' action doesn't work, at what point do they snap and decide more direct action is needed? I'm just saying, although I'd shy away from doing it myself for the reasons you describe, that I can understand WHY they do it, even if I don't agree with the methods.
Yeah I never understood the free-range animal welfare thing. It's still going to have its head lopped off at the end of the day.steelie34 wrote:
free-range makes animal slaughter humane? you never wear nice dress shoes? why is it impossible to live in the western world without some kind of animal product? in fact, it would be quite easy to do so! the fact that you choose not to, but can say it's inhumane to kill an animal, is hypocritical.
just because you dont use products that "in your opinion" have been created via exploitation or animal suffering doesn't mean anything! your opinion, as hard as this might be for you to believe, doesn't mean shit. just like mine doesn't, or anyone else's for that matter. but do NOT come here and say 'i do what i can blah-blah' because you DON'T. you DON'T do all that you can, and as soon as you use that animal product you have invalidated any ethical standards you claim to have.
If the animal is not free range and has experienced nothing more than a cage, do people honestly think it would long for the freedom to run around? It wouldn't know anything about it. Stupidest shit ever.M.O.A.B wrote:
Yeah I never understood the free-range animal welfare thing. It's still going to have its head lopped off at the end of the day.steelie34 wrote:
free-range makes animal slaughter humane? you never wear nice dress shoes? why is it impossible to live in the western world without some kind of animal product? in fact, it would be quite easy to do so! the fact that you choose not to, but can say it's inhumane to kill an animal, is hypocritical.
just because you dont use products that "in your opinion" have been created via exploitation or animal suffering doesn't mean anything! your opinion, as hard as this might be for you to believe, doesn't mean shit. just like mine doesn't, or anyone else's for that matter. but do NOT come here and say 'i do what i can blah-blah' because you DON'T. you DON'T do all that you can, and as soon as you use that animal product you have invalidated any ethical standards you claim to have.
Last edited by JohnG@lt (2010-01-07 11:58:36)
"Ah, you miserable creatures! You who think that you are so great! You who judge humanity to be so small! You who wish to reform everything! Why don't you reform yourselves? That task would be sufficient enough."
-Frederick Bastiat
-Frederick Bastiat
i <3 vegetarians. more delicious cow, pig, fish, whale, chicken, buffalo and deer for me
I think it's just more of a quality thing, but it's like, it's not about Animals suffering in cages, they may not know any better, but they're still in pretty awful conditions regardless. Compared to those that are living free range.JohnG@lt wrote:
If the animal is not free range and has experienced nothing more than a cage, do people honestly think it would long for the freedom to run around? It wouldn't know anything about it. Stupidest shit ever.M.O.A.B wrote:
Yeah I never understood the free-range animal welfare thing. It's still going to have its head lopped off at the end of the day.steelie34 wrote:
free-range makes animal slaughter humane? you never wear nice dress shoes? why is it impossible to live in the western world without some kind of animal product? in fact, it would be quite easy to do so! the fact that you choose not to, but can say it's inhumane to kill an animal, is hypocritical.
just because you dont use products that "in your opinion" have been created via exploitation or animal suffering doesn't mean anything! your opinion, as hard as this might be for you to believe, doesn't mean shit. just like mine doesn't, or anyone else's for that matter. but do NOT come here and say 'i do what i can blah-blah' because you DON'T. you DON'T do all that you can, and as soon as you use that animal product you have invalidated any ethical standards you claim to have.
Money talks. Imagine the amount of viewership and publicity (hell were discussing it here) they got because of this ramming. You must look at OTHER reasons they might do this as well. If they truly wanted support, they should use non-violent tactics so they don't look like the Al Qaeda of the seas. I love how they have the "were such rebels, society wouldnt like our way of dealing with things" ethos.ruisleipa wrote:
good point.Cybargs wrote:
Just because whalers aren't good doesn't mean what the protesters do is in anyway "right" or even lawful. Sure whaling is bad, but putting human lives at risk? They can simple stand in the way of the Japanese ship, but nooooo its ok for them to ram into a fucking boat in a freezing sea. Sure they're trying to send a message, but haven't they heard of non-violent protesting? Sure the results wouldn't be as satisfactory to them, but it sure does get a lot more support with the ethos they make. They are the same as environmental terrorists, destroying labs to claim what is "right." Things such as whaling should be done through diplomatic means or through education in Japan, not putting people who have a family's life at risk. On the sea shepherd's part, they are just purely irresponsible and find nothing wrong with their actions. Two wrongs doesn't make a right.
On the other hand, if someone believes strongly enough about something, and 'non-violent' action doesn't work, at what point do they snap and decide more direct action is needed? I'm just saying, although I'd shy away from doing it myself for the reasons you describe, that I can understand WHY they do it, even if I don't agree with the methods.
They just love that bad boy look, hell in the beginning they said "were not protesters, were pirates." Hell if I was a prosecutor I can charge them a shit load of things.
And on vegetarianism: Less meat you eat, the more for me.
wow you're really getting stressed mate, take it easy. You don't know diddly about me so I could also say to you DON'T come here and talk about shit you don't know about. Do you have ethical standards? Do you live by any? Or is there no point to anything? My point was that you call me a hypocrite for disagreeing with certain human ways of exploiting animals. I say I'm not a hypocrite because I don't do the things mentioned above, and I DO do all I can. no, I don't have a pair of 'nice dress shoes'. When I say it's impossible to live in the Western world without using some kind of animal product that's the truth. but if you could give me a typical week where someone could get by WITHOUT using ANY products that have ANY animal products or been tested on animals short of living in a wooden hut and eating berries then I'd be very interested to hear it. Just as a random example using a seatbelt in a car could be thought of as abusing animals because they used to test seatbelts with pigs, but of course I'm gonna wear a seatbelt cos it'd be illegal not to, plus I don't wanna fly through the windscreen.steelie34 wrote:
free-range makes animal slaughter humane? you never wear nice dress shoes? why is it impossible to live in the western world without some kind of animal product? in fact, it would be quite easy to do so! the fact that you choose not to, but can say it's inhumane to kill an animal, is hypocritical.
just because you dont use products that "in your opinion" have been created via exploitation or animal suffering doesn't mean anything! your opinion, as hard as this might be for you to believe, doesn't mean shit. just like mine doesn't, or anyone else's for that matter. but do NOT come here and say 'i do what i can blah-blah' because you DON'T. you DON'T do all that you can, and as soon as you use that animal product you have invalidated any ethical standards you claim to have.
If none of our opinions mean shit then what's the point of this forum, or in fact you posting here? hmmm, actually now you've stated your opinions don't mean shit I think I'll ignore them. happy now?
And if the world ever entered the post apocalyptic state of the movies and fiction the rest of us could feast on the flesh of the vegetarians who die within the first month from starvationsteelie34 wrote:
i <3 vegetarians. more delicious cow, pig, fish, whale, chicken, buffalo and deer for me
"Ah, you miserable creatures! You who think that you are so great! You who judge humanity to be so small! You who wish to reform everything! Why don't you reform yourselves? That task would be sufficient enough."
-Frederick Bastiat
-Frederick Bastiat
Who cares? The thing was hatched in order to be eaten. Does it really matter how it lived it's six weeks on the planet?Mekstizzle wrote:
I think it's just more of a quality thing, but it's like, it's not about Animals suffering in cages, they may not know any better, but they're still in pretty awful conditions regardless. Compared to those that are living free range.JohnG@lt wrote:
If the animal is not free range and has experienced nothing more than a cage, do people honestly think it would long for the freedom to run around? It wouldn't know anything about it. Stupidest shit ever.M.O.A.B wrote:
Yeah I never understood the free-range animal welfare thing. It's still going to have its head lopped off at the end of the day.
"Ah, you miserable creatures! You who think that you are so great! You who judge humanity to be so small! You who wish to reform everything! Why don't you reform yourselves? That task would be sufficient enough."
-Frederick Bastiat
-Frederick Bastiat