View Poll Results: How important are animal rights issues to you?

Voters
150. You may not vote on this poll
  • Very important

    96 64.00%
  • Important

    7 4.67%
  • Animals rights are one of several reasons I'm a vegan

    44 29.33%
  • Not so important

    1 0.67%
  • Unsure

    1 0.67%
  • Not important at all

    1 0.67%
Results 1 to 43 of 43

Thread: How important are animal rights issues to you?

  1. #1
    Free_Tibet
    Guest

    Thumbs up How important are animal rights issues to you?

    Korn,

    Is it possible to make a poll
    asking members,

    "How important to Vegan Forum members are animal rights issues" ?

    1. Very important
    2. Important
    3. Not so important
    4. Unsure
    5. Not important at all.

    I don't know if its possible to make my own poll for this forum so if you wouldn't mind making a poll with this question, that would be good. Thanks

  2. #2
    Ex-admin Korn's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Location
    Europe
    Posts
    4,830

    Default Re: Poll - How important to Vegan Forum members are animal rights issues?

    Done. I changed your question, since it only makes sense to reply on your own behalf, and not on the behalf of 2600 members...

  3. #3

    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Location
    UK
    Posts
    189

    Default Re: How important are animal rights issues to you?

    Animal rights issues are very important to me. It's the reason I became vegan in the first place. I soon learned how important veganism is to people's health and the planet too, but concern for animals is still the main reason.

  4. #4
    tabitha
    Guest

    Default Re: How important are animal rights issues to you?

    Me too. Factory farming was the main reason I became vegan, the rest just followed. There is no end to the abuse. In the beginning I would find out new horrors every day and just couldnt believe it.

  5. #5
    Ex-admin Korn's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Location
    Europe
    Posts
    4,830

    Default Re: How important are animal rights issues to you?

    I just added a reply option. The question is a little difficult, because Animal Rights, as opposed to animals' rights, often focus on factory farming, test labs etc, while veganism isn't limited to avoid ie. meat from animals that have had a horrible life... Some people say that they would be OK with eating animals killed in hunting, but are against factory farming, but for me, the factory farming aspect of it isn't important at all; it's horrible, and makes things worse, but I wouldn't eat meat from a squirrel who was killed after a happy life in the wilderness either. So to me, the rather kind of rights that some AR people sometimes focus on (the right not to be tortured or kept in factory farms or used in test labs) is not important for my decision to avoid animal products. All animals' (and humans') right to live a happy life and not to be exploited or harmed/killed by others is more important. IMO there are so many good arguments pro being vegan that it's hard to separate them, or classify/rank their importance seen in relationship to each other.

  6. #6
    Maisiepaisie's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Location
    Manchester UK
    Posts
    914

    Default Re: How important are animal rights issues to you?

    Animal rights is very important to me. I am part of an animal rights group and regularly demonstrate against various kinds of animal exploitation. Animal rights was the reason I became vegan, it wasn't until later that I learned of the health benefits. I would still be vegan even if it was not healthy but I would never eat animal products even if they could be produced cruelty free.

  7. #7
    told me to Mr Flibble's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Location
    Warwickshire, UK
    Posts
    2,639

    Default Re: How important are animal rights issues to you?

    Animals rights are one of several reasons I'm a vegan, and they are very important to me also. Why can't I choose both options? I wouldn't want people to think that animal rights is the only reason that I am vegan, as this is not the case.
    "Mr Flibble - forum corruptor of innocents!!" - Hemlock

  8. #8
    vuycha's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    Zagreb, Croatia
    Posts
    63

    Default Re: How important are animal rights issues to you?

    Quote Mr Flibble
    Animals rights are one of several reasons I'm a vegan, and they are very important to me also. Why can't I choose both options? I wouldn't want people to think that animal rights is the only reason that I am vegan, as this is not the case.
    exactly, so i voted ''one of several reasons''. animal rights are important to me, but veganism is important part of bigger picture for me
    http://www.prijatelji-zivotinja.hr/index.en.php

  9. #9
    perfect RedWellies's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    Herefordshire, England
    Posts
    1,564

    Default Re: How important are animal rights issues to you?

    Can Free Tibet maybe clarify whether he /she did mean Animal Rights or animal's rights?
    "Do what you can with what you have where you are."
    - Theodore Roosevelt

  10. #10
    gertvegan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Location
    Bristol, SW England
    Posts
    1,912

    Default Re: How important are animal rights issues to you?

    Quote Mr Flibble
    I wouldn't want people to think that animal rights is the only reason that I am vegan, as this is not the case.
    See the Why are you vegan? thread.

  11. #11
    told me to Mr Flibble's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Location
    Warwickshire, UK
    Posts
    2,639

    Default Re: How important are animal rights issues to you?

    that doesn't explain why i can't choose multiple options in this thread
    "Mr Flibble - forum corruptor of innocents!!" - Hemlock

  12. #12
    Ex-admin Korn's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Location
    Europe
    Posts
    4,830

    Default Re: How important are animal rights issues to you?

    Shall I change the poll into a Multiple Choice-poll?

  13. #13
    Pilaf
    Guest

    Default Re: How important are animal rights issues to you?

    Very important, although with my budget, income and location, my options for helping with animal rights issues are truely limited.

  14. #14
    Nadine's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Location
    Kent, UK
    Posts
    99

    Default Re: How important are animal rights issues to you?

    Quote Maisiepaisie
    Animal rights is very important to me. I am part of an animal rights group and regularly demonstrate against various kinds of animal exploitation. Animal rights was the reason I became vegan, it wasn't until later that I learned of the health benefits. I would still be vegan even if it was not healthy but I would never eat animal products even if they could be produced cruelty free.
    Exactly what I would say!

  15. #15
    Free_Tibet
    Guest

    Default Re: Poll - How important to Vegan Forum members are animal rights issues?

    Quote Korn
    Done. I changed your question, since it only makes sense to reply on your own behalf, and not on the behalf of 2600 members...
    I'm not replying on behalf of 2600 members.
    I wasnt sure if you were going to post the poll Korn

    Thank you for allowing this issue to be discussed.

  16. #16
    Free_Tibet
    Guest

    Thumbs up Re: How important are animal rights issues to you?

    Quote Spiral
    Animal rights issues are very important to me. It's the reason I became vegan in the first place. I soon learned how important veganism is to people's health and the planet too, but concern for animals is still the main reason.
    Thank you for participating in this poll.

    I have been privately discussing with Korn about how I have been feeling about the positioning of animal rights issues and how it has been relegated to a small subsection. My impression is that Korn says members in Vegan forum do not want to be disturbed by animal rights issues. I found this disturbing to hear this and also wondered if this was just a disgruntled outspoken few who find it disturbing. Hence I requested this poll.

    I said to Korn that if Vegan Forum has relegated animal rights issues to a tiny subsection of an already small subsection of Vegan Forum, then this positioning speaks volumes about the importance of animal rights issues to the moderator and to the Forum as a whole. I asked Korn if he had already asked Vegan Forum members via a poll before now to vote on how important animal rights issues are to them and if so, how members voted. I don't know yet if this has already been asked before now. I said if animal rights issues are not important to this forum, I would probably leave, because I am wasting my time and others.

    I would find it sad and odd if animal exploitation and how to help end it were not important to a Vegan forum. I also asked Korn if he has asked the Vegan Forum how much space should be given to it? Or has he just taken the word of a disgruntle few who have been very outspoken about their unhappiness with disturbing animal rights issues being a big presence on the forum.

    I also asked Korn how important are animal rights issues to him personally?
    If he wishes to share this, thats fine.

    For me, animal rights issues not being important to a Vegan forum is similiar to an Abolitionist forum relegating the topic of slaves to a subsection within a subsection and talking about some subject like the economy in the rest of the forum.

    If people are only interested in vegan food, then really they are more foodists than anything. Vegan is a word that means a way of living which seeks to exclude, as far as possible and practical, all forms of exploitation of, and cruelty to, animals for food, clothing or any other purpose.

    Abhorrence of the cruel practices inherent in dairy, livestock and poultry farming is probably the single most common reason for the adoption of veganism.

    If a vegan is not interested in the above AR issues, then as I mentioned, they are more a foodist than anything.

    If the moderators want a forum where members who participate mainly due to health and ecological reasons, then that should be stated upon joining in the beginning and maybe the forum should be called another name because it does not do justice to the word vegan.

    I have to be honest, I feel this kind of attitude of "please don't upset members with disturbing posts" is worse than those people in the world who are ignorant of animal exploitation, because vegans hiopefully know better. This attitude of "please don't upset members with disturbing posts" is what keeps animal exploitation and speciesism going. Most of the public outside this forum do not realise how animals are "farmed" or how many animals are tortured for their medicines etc. 45 billion non human sentient beings each year suffer tremendous cruelty and this doesn't include animal research and testing, or hunting etc, zoos, circuses etc. There are many guests who pass on through here and this Vegan Forum could be helping spread the word on how to help end speciesism. Yes animal rights issues are disturbing, but there are many ways to help. I personally feel its irresponsible to have such a wide audience and diminish, through lack of presence, the main reason why veganism began or why the word was invented.

    Although Vegan Forum moderators have allowed animal rights issues in this forum, as I mentioned, it speaks volumes with how it is positioned and this can only imply a lack of importance Forum owners personally place on it through that positioning. I may be wrong but thats my impression.

    If this poll states that the majority of Vegan Forum members think that animal rights issues are important, I asked Korn will he allow a larger section for it, and call it Animal Rights News not animal news? I find even the title "Animal News" very odd. Even the title animal news is watered down.

    Thanks once again for participating in the poll.

  17. #17
    Ex-admin Korn's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Location
    Europe
    Posts
    4,830

    Default Re: How important are animal rights issues to you?

    Quote Free_Tibet
    Thank you for participating in this poll.

    I have been privately discussing with Korn about how I have been feeling about the positioning of animal rights issues and how it has been relegated to a small subsection. My impression is that Korn says members in Vegan forum do not want to be disturbed by animal rights issues.
    Wrong. I'm saying that animal rights issues should be posted in the relevant forums, just like posts about health or food...


    I said to Korn that if Vegan Forum has relegated animal rights issues to a tiny subsection of an already small subsection of Vegan Forum, then this positioning speaks volumes about the importance of animal rights issues to the moderator and to the Forum as a whole.
    If a forum is having separate forums for various topics, which all forums have, this would be true for the other topics too, but none of these topics have been 'relegated to tiny subsections'.

    I also asked Korn if he has asked the Vegan Forum how much space should be given to it?
    You may misunderstand the nature of a dynamic aite like this: the amount of space give to certain topics is only limited by the number of messages posted about them...


    I also asked Korn how important are animal rights issues to him personally?
    If he wishes to share this, thats fine.
    You may also have misunderstood my role here. I have gotten many PM's from people who ask me about my opinions on companion animals, horseback riding, abortion and so on, but I decided before I started this site to be as neutral as possible (I admit that I could have been more neutral): my opinions or priority is not important here. This is not a site for people who agree in certain things, except being vegan and in following some basic rules about being nice and not posting anything in conflict with the law.

    When vegans are against using fur, it's not for health reasons: as we know, veganism is not only about food or personal health, it's about respect for animals and their rights, which IMO go a lot further than the AR movement in some cases give the impression of.

    As I have mentioned several times, my respect for animals' rights is not limited to extreme cases where they are hurt are tortured or killed. We've had some people (in the early days of 'Veganforum1') who insisted that one could be a vegan and use leather, could be a vegan but still be OK with killing wild animals, and so on... some of these people were very busy trying to change the definition of 'vegan' into whatever they personally were comfortable with.

    As our long term members know, these people got banned, because they didn't respect the most basic elements of what being vegan is all about - they actively tried to make 'vegan' into something else than it always has been. So the rights of a mouse or a bird or a deer or a 'factory cow' are important to all vegans - not only the right not to be tortued or the right to live, but the right to have a good life and not to be harmed or exploited or be used as slaves for humans.


    Abhorrence of the cruel practices inherent in dairy, livestock and poultry farming is probably the single most common reason for the adoption of veganism.
    I would be no less vegan even if these cruel practices would disappear overnight. This cruelty is not at all important for my views on veganism, on animals' rights, on food or health. IMO the focus on these practices alone may be a mistake, and represent an 'animal welfare'-kind of viewpoint, which in the end could lead to a way of thinking we have seen here sometimes: 'my main reason to go vegan is what happens in factory farms, but what's wrong with eating and killing a wild animal? It has had a happy life...'

    In my opinion, this viewpoints shows lack of respect for animals' rights. Just like with humans, animals deserve a good life, not to be hurt physically or emotionally, not have their freedom taken away from them..: they deserve to not become food, whether they've had a happy life or not.
    Just like humans.


    Limiting the focus of lack of respect for animals to the extreme cases seen in factory farming is in my opinion a big mistake - but works well as an eye-opener.


    If the moderators want a forum where members who participate mainly due to health and ecological reasons, then that should be stated upon joining in the beginning and maybe the forum should be called another name because it does not do justice to the word vegan.
    First if all, this is not the case, and secondly, it is not relevant what I or other moderators are most interested in. Respect for animals is a part of being vegan pr. defintion, and again: how much focus this will get on this site, is only dependent on what our members choose to write about.

    I have to be honest, I feel this kind of attitude of "please don't upset members with disturbing posts" is worse than those people in the world who are ignorant of animal exploitation, because vegans hiopefully know better. This attitude of "please don't upset members with disturbing posts" is what keeps animal exploitation and speciesism going.
    Nobody has told anyone not to disturb members with disturbing posts here. We just want recipes in the recipe section, and news about animals in another section. If someone wants to log in and find out how he can make his hummus taste better, he probably doesn't want to read about mass killing of animals in the same section. I know some people need an unexpected shock-like experience to see and feel what humans do against animals, but these people are basically not registered users at a vegan message board.

    [quote] Although Vegan Forum moderators have allowed animal rights issues in this forum, as I mentioned, it speaks volumes with how it is positioned and this can only imply a lack of importance Forum owners personally place on it through that positioning. [quote]

    No, it doesn't 'speak volumes'. From time to time I'm in touch with admins at othe rvegan sites, and here is an excerpt from a PM from one of them:

    "I also organised a couple of forums for animal related topics, as a solution to the tendency of some members to continuously start threads of a horrific nature (Chickens with their necks ripped off types of subjects) that upset sensitive members (me being one of them ). Some people need to vent their anger at these types of abuse, but others are frustrated over having to see stuff like this posted..."

    I replied that this was the reason we has separate sections for these kinds of topics here as well.

    Some people (me!) look in another direction if cruel treatment of humans or animals suddenly pops up on TV. Many vegans feel it this way. I have been to sites where all these topics get mixed up, and this solution makes a number of potential visitors not want to go there. I don't want to see reminder of animal cruelty all over the place every time I go in here either.

    Some people may want it the other way round; they may even feel that they need these reminders in order to remain vegans, and for those people, our soultion here is not the best one. That's why it is good that there are several forums to choose between.

    The Vegan Forum happens to be a site for people who basically want to have different kinds of topics in separate areas, and who have no problems with the fact that news about cruelty against animals are separated from other topics.


    If this poll states that the majority of Vegan Forum members think that animal rights issues are important, I asked Korn will he allow a larger section for it
    Again: the size of the Animals and Animal News forums are not defined by me or other moderators.

    ...call it Animal Rights News not animal news? I find even the title "Animal News" very odd.
    What is, in your opinion, the difference between animals' rights and Animal Rights with A and R instead of a and r?

  18. #18
    Free_Tibet
    Guest

    Arrow Re: How important are animal rights issues to you?



    Edit: Hi, I've changed the settings for max. post length and inserted your response in this post - see below. Korn




    Hi Korn, Thanks for your reply. Its appreciated.
    For your convenience and mine, I've temporarily put my response on to an unlinked part of our site as I wished to
    address all issues and it would not fit into one post.


    Below is my response.

    ==========================
    <<<You wrote: I'm saying that animal rights issues
    should be posted in the relevant forums, just like posts
    about health or food...>>>


    I'm happy to post animal rights articles in its own
    section "Animal News". I have no problem with that rule.
    I'm not happy with the title "Animal News" for the
    subsection because as I have mentioned, if this were
    an abolitionist forum, one wouldn't expect news
    about slaves to be in a subsection, and call it "Human
    News" I'm unsure why you are unable to see the comparison.

    However, you state there is no limit to the
    number of animal rights articles one can post in the
    "Animal News" section but without my knowledge
    you assigned all my AR article posts to one post
    and titled the post "January Animal News" without
    any discussion.

    This appeared to happen after you saw that I
    was posting many articles to Animal News.
    So if there is no limit to posts in "Animal News",
    why did you do this? Since there are limits on the size of
    any article, putting them together is a way of limiting them.
    Of course, I could always write another ...but that is
    what I had done.

    The articles I post are quality posts from dozens of
    excellent AR sources. When you suddenly gathered
    and assigned all my posts to that one post "January
    Animal News", that in turn reduced the amount of
    information I could place in the post. It also lessened
    other members and guests access to subject headings
    and complete articles that one can obtain from individual
    posts. I saw this as deliberate reigning in and reducing the
    so called "disturbing" posts for those scanning for new
    posts on the forum.

    I may be misinterpreting your post here, but my
    impression overall is that you do not see the benefit
    of animal rights articles or actions ("horrific" articles
    as you have referred to them) being posted in Vegan
    Forum.

    I also get the impression you have a limited
    view of animal rights activism, believing it
    does not include promoting veganism and that
    animal rights activism is a less effective way
    to promote change than leading a vegan lifestyle.
    My impression is also that you feel being vegan
    is all one really needs to be to bring about change.

    I personally don't know any animal rights group
    who only promotes animal rights activism and
    do not promote veganism. There would be no point
    in explaining the cruelties & exploitation
    of animals involved in food production etc without
    rejecting such practices and promoting an alternative.
    Animal rights activists oppose the "use" of animals:
    for food, for leather or fur, for "test subjects. I think
    that animal rights activism should always include
    promotion of veganism. Veganism includes rejection
    of products of all sort that involve "use" (abuse) of
    animals.

    Regarding this poll question - "How important are animal
    rights to you"? Why did you change the 2nd choice?
    I felt it was quite clear with choices like - Important, not so important, unsure, not important at all etc. I would have prefered you left the second choice for this poll simply how
    I had requested it. I feel the poll has been manipulated
    a little with the second choice as I also am vegan
    for health reasons, but my primary reason is animal
    rights. So I could also put number 2, but to make
    a point I have put No. 1. I think most people are interestedin their health. It would have been clearer to leave the 5 choices as I had requested.

    <<<<You wrote: If a forum is having separate forums
    for various topics, which all forums have, this would
    be true for the other topics too, but none of these topics
    have been 'relegated to tiny subsections'. >>>>


    Do you think that subsections like " sweet" or "chit chat"
    are equivalent to "animal news", when "animal news" is
    the section for all mention of issues about the use/abuse
    of animals? If you do, then I find that concerning.

    <<<<I wrote: I also asked Korn if he has asked the Vegan
    Forum how much space should be given to it?>>>>
    <<<<You wrote: You may misunderstand the nature of a dynamic site like this: the amount of space give to certain topics is only limited by the number of messages posted about them...>>>>

    As I said earlier, if this is so, then why were my animal rights articles all assigned to a post you called "January Animal News"? It was not another subsection as far as I can tell, so it limits the quantity of information I can post.

    <<<<You wrote: You may also have misunderstood my
    role here. I have gotten many PM's from people who ask
    me about my opinions on companion animals, horseback riding, abortion and so on, but I decided before I started this site to be as neutral as possible (I admit that I could have been more neutral): my opinions or priority is not important here. This is not a site for people who agree in certain things, except being vegan and in following some basic rules about being nice and not posting anything in conflict with the law. >>>>

    Korn, I appreciate that you take the time to moderate this site and it is great that this site exists. I know it takes a great deal
    of time to effectively moderate a site so that it does not turn
    to chaff. However, you do have opinions as you say and not
    all of them have to be stated for them to be expressed and known.

    I'm aware you definitely have opinions about groups like ALF
    and I am more aware of your opinions about the importance
    the role animal rights play in veganism and in turn this forum
    and since you moderate this forum, your opinions do count
    and are not neutral.

    You also indicate that you and others Vegan Forum members
    find animal rights posts disturbing. I find them disturbing as
    well. I also understand why they have a section. Members
    who do not take an interest in animal rights, don't want to
    see these posts when they are searching for recipes.

    I rarely posted outside animal news until you gathered
    all my posts without discussion and placed them inside
    one post within Animal News which reduced information.
    So I started posting outside if the article was country specific
    in that country's section so to highlight this animal rights
    article which needed immediate attention. You have limited
    information by limiting my posting access as subject titles
    relating to date do not indicate much about content.

    <<<<You wrote: When vegans are against using fur,
    it's not for health reasons: as we know, veganism is
    not only about food or personal health, it's about respect
    for animals and their rights, which IMO go a lot further
    than the AR movement in some cases give the impression of. >>>>

    You views about the Animal Rights movement are mistaken.
    I do not know any animal rights group which does not
    promote veganism. It would be somewhat foolish to wish
    people stop eating animal products or using products which
    involve animal exploitation without giving them information
    on an alternative lifestyle. I don't know how you arrived
    at this conclusion.

    Perhaps you are confusing animal rights,
    which recognise the inherent rights of animals as sentient
    beings, with animal welfare, which may only involve a more
    "humane" treatment of animals. The two are very different.

    <<<<<You wrote: I have mentioned several times, my respect for animals' rights is not limited to extreme cases where they
    are hurt or tortured or killed. We've had some people (in the
    early days of 'Veganforum1') who insisted that one could be
    a vegan and use leather, could be a vegan but still be OK with
    killing wild animals, and so on... some of these people were
    very busy trying to change the definition of 'vegan' into whateverthey personally were comfortable with.>>>>>


    You obviously haven't visited our groups site. No one I know
    including myself wishes to juice up the definition of vegan or
    altar it in any way. Its fine how it is and we should honour
    the word's meaning in its entirity.

    My interest in animal rights extends to any non human animal
    which is exploited, tortured and or and killed for any purpose.
    It doesnt matter to what degree the exploitation is, its all
    relevant and important. I usually start posting about the most
    extreme cases which need immediate attention and go from there. My interest lies in the end of speciesism and there are many ways to that end and that includes being vegan and promoting veganism.

    <<< You wrote: I would be no less vegan even if these
    cruel practices would disappear overnight. This cruelty
    is not at all important for my views on veganism, on animals'
    rights, on food or health. IMO the focus on these practices
    alone may be a mistake,>>>


    I think you need to correct your mistaken view of
    true animal rights activism. It is you who is insisting
    that animal rights activists ONLY focus on animal
    rights as a means to end exploitation. Where did you
    arrive at this limited view ? Who said that there is
    only one focus of animal rights issues.? All animal rights
    groups I know focus on *all* areas, veganism
    being high on the list. What groups are you thinking of?
    Have you visited my site
    http://www.qgar.oceandrop.org ?
    QGAR has hundreds of references and links to vegan
    groups and promotion of veganism. Even many of the gifs
    I made on the site mention it as well. When we visit schools, promoting veganism is a focus, but one has to present people with reasons to change and animal exploitation with all its cruelty is a great motivator. We remind them that non human animals are not here for us to exploit. They are sentient beings who deserve the same respect as we human animals do.

    Animal RIGHTS activism to me encompasses the promotion
    of veganism and also involves many creative ways to end
    exploitation. It focuses on more than just food and a few

    products.

    <<<<You continued: ... and represent an 'animal welfare'-kind of viewpoint, which in the end could lead to a way of thinking we have seen here sometimes: 'my main reason to go vegan is what happens in factory farms, but what's wrong with eating and killing a wild animal? It has had a happy life...'

    Again, I don't know any animal rights activist who has a
    narrow or misguided view such as this. Animal rights and
    animal welfare are two different things, however they are not exclusive. My activism extends to trying educate the public, personal action and vegan lifestyle to try and reduce any non human animal exploitation and suffering along the way to an ultimate end. I believe it is very important to expose extreme cruelty along the way, because until that magical day when speciesism ends, I believe we must do everything possible to help reduce the exploitation and suffering of non human animals.

    As far as ideology goes RE animal rights, animal welfare, vegan etc, as a friend most recently said "It doesn't make any difference to an animal whether he or she is being tortured to "benefit" "mankind" or being used by a drug smuggler. It doesnt matter what country it lives in. Our philosophy doesn't matter to them either. Animals can't keep waiting for us to convince the world to go vegan....Billions of people put religion before any logic and put lofty ideals before reality. People are fickle; cultures are devoid of compassion. We have to use every tool we can to get animals out of this mindless grasp. While we're educating youth and people who will listen; it is still up to us to make sweeping changes for animals despite the apathy and opposition of most people."

    <<<<You continued from your above quote: In my opinion, this viewpoints shows lack of respect for animals' rights. Just like with humans, animals deserve a good life, not to be hurt physically or emotionally, not have their freedom taken away from them..: they deserve to not become food, /whether they've had a happy life or not. /Just like humans.>>>>>>>>

    I absolutely agree, yes and they deserve
    not to be tested on and fed toxins and cosmetics
    till they die a torturous death or hunted till they
    are ripped apart, or skinned while they are still
    alive or chained and imprisoned, or have their
    habitat impinged upon until they are extinct,
    or bred with genetic mutations just for "research"
    and on and on. There is so much more to being
    vegan than the food, ecology & health element.

    <<<You wrote: Limiting the focus of lack of respect for animals to the extreme cases seen in factory farming is in my opinion abig mistake - but works well as an eye-opener.>>>>>

    Once again, I don't know what animal
    rights group or activists have given
    you this mistaken impression. You also
    underestimate my activism. There is no limit
    and no one focus. Activism for it to be effective,
    takes creativity and needs to have a multipronged
    approached:
    *Promoting veganism
    *leading a vegan lifestyle
    *Through law change,
    *through boycotts,
    *direct action,
    *protests,
    *shock tactics,
    *education
    *multi media coverage,
    *through forums like this, etc etc
    through as many creative ways as possible to get the word
    out and make change, but it is pointless if we are only
    preaching to the converted. If I post animal rights articles
    that are about "extreme" exploitation, it is because these
    instances need to be bought to peoples attention now.
    They are usually not isolated cases and usually exist
    with the knowledge of most governments.
    If your family were being put in cages and given
    taser shocks to test tasers efficacy (like the pig taser experiments at UMW), or electrodes strapped to their brains or if your mother was being fed toxins to see how long
    it takes for her to die, would you not do your utmost
    to try and stop it? Would you not be posting this
    information and speaking out to anyone who will listen?
    This should be the same toward our non human animal
    friends. Would you just continue eating and using
    non animal products and feel better that you are
    not participating in the cruelty. Is that enough?

    Will that help an animal right now being tortured
    in a cage at a university somewhere? We all take
    medications at some point in our life and hopefully
    all vegans know that most of these medications have
    been tested on non human animals and then most
    of them are then killed and dissected. If these were
    your relatives, would you not want others to help you
    end this ?

    To me every case of exploitation is extreme.
    Every one!. Because it is unacceptable.
    Just as one cant be a little bit pregnant, a
    little exploitation or a great deal of
    exploitation is not acceptable, particularly when
    those beings have no way of speaking out.

    <<<<< You wrote: it is not relevant what I or other
    moderators are most interested in. Respect for
    animals is a part of being vegan pr. defintion,
    and again: how much focus this will get on this
    site, is only dependent on what our members
    choose to write about.>>>>


    As I mentioned earlier, when I started posting
    a lot of animal rights articles in "Animal News",
    you suddenly put all my posts in one post called
    "Jan Animal News" within the subsection of
    Animal News. lol

    How do you know what members are interested in.
    Do you take the number of views of an article as
    member's interest? or how many animal rights posts
    are made by various members? I still think that
    "animal news" deserves a bigger section than
    "sweet" or "chit chat".

    <<<<You wrote: Nobody has told anyone not to
    disturb members with disturbing posts here. We just
    want recipes in the recipe section, and news about
    animals in another section. If someone wants to
    log in and find out how he can make his hummus
    taste better, he probably doesn't want to read about
    mass killing of animals in the same section. I know
    some people need an unexpected shock-like experience
    to see and feel what humans do against animals,
    but these people are basically not registered users
    at a vegan message board. >>>>>


    Don't let the mass killings of sentient beings get
    in the way of a good hummus recipe (just kidding)
    I agree that sections are good. I've explained
    my problems within the aloted sections earlier to you.

    The fact that they are not regulars of the board
    is probably more reason that they may need to
    see shock like experiences. Its actually people who
    are unaware these exploitations are happening, that are
    the ones who would benefit from knowing. Most
    often though, the subjects lines are not so shocking.
    The content may be shocking.

    I remember posting something about chicken
    slaughter here one day in the Animal News section
    and had a vegan forum member complain about it. Everytime
    I would post something in the Animal News section
    they would complain about it. Then others joined in
    and said that it is good that guests outside the forum
    get to see it because they may not be aware of the
    terrible cruelty involved in "humane" chicken slaughter.
    Most people who eat chicken are not aware.

    <<<Your friend wrote to you "I also organised a couple
    of forums for animal related topics, as a solution to the
    tendency of some members to continuously start threads
    of a horrific nature (Chickens with their necks ripped
    off types of subjects) that upset sensitive members (me
    being one of them ) . Some people need to vent their anger
    at these types of abuse, but others are frustrated over having
    to see stuff like this posted..." >>>>>


    Its interesting you pick this quote "continuously start threads
    of a horrific nature". or "some people need to vent their anger". Do you think this is why people post animal rights arcticles?
    because they are angry? Anger is not productive. Anger
    can be a motivator, compassion is a better motivator
    and action is productive. I wish the fact werent as"horrific" as the articles decribe. I also wish it weren't so that human animals are exploited.

    I think you misunderstand the intention behind
    animal rights posts. it is not to vent anger, it is to
    motivate people to do something to end it and
    hopefully contained within the post is an action link.
    If you deter these posts by limiting space like has
    been done to my newsletter on this forum, or
    deter it because you find it horrific, or label
    people that post them as "angry" or limited
    or ineffective, this is unhelpful and in some ways
    complicit to the continuing exploitation.

    I cry often and my heart aches over the common
    incidences of great cruelty and exploitation. Its often
    quite unbearable to know its happening. I am very
    sensitive. I have trouble reading about it, but if I just
    turn off and keep on with my private vegan lifestyle
    and hope for the best, well thats not enough in my
    opinion. Any exploitation should be made
    known and if we do not, we are playing into the hands of
    industry because exploitative industries do not want these
    facts out there, because maybe someone might actually try
    to stop them by boycotting their product.

    Apartheid didn't end because racial problems were reduced in
    our own countries. Apartheid ended because of an international outcry. Indirect censorship by limiting posts or detering it indirectly or concern about upsetting people just plays into the hands of corporations. Nothing to me is more upsetting than vegans or animal rights or animal welfare people trying to limit
    dissemination of information because of its content or becauseit doesnt suit their particular ideology or trying to protect others
    sensitivities. Its unfortunate there isn't a filter on the forum for people who do not wish to view animal rights articles.


    >>>>You wrote: I replied that this was the reason we have
    separate sections for these kinds of topics here as well.

    Some people (me!) look in another direction if cruel treatment
    of humans or animals suddenly pops up on TV. Many vegans
    feel it this way. >>>>>

    I look the other way as well if some dreadful cruelty is on TV,
    but I dont ignore that it happened. I take action in various ways. I don't have to watch it or read all the dreadful details to know that it needs action. I don't need to pour over every last gory detail of an article to know its terrible and I don't ignore it either and not do nothing.

    <<<<<You wrote: I have been to sites where
    all these topics get mixed up, and this solution
    makes a number of potential visitors not want
    to go there. I don't want to see reminder of animal
    cruelty all over the place every time I go in here either. >>>>>


    We've established that sections are a good idea.
    I await the answer regarding my own posts. There are
    people who may want more than recipes. I am happy
    to have a section, maybe called "Animal Activism" where
    such posts as mine could be. I think a clear heading for the
    section, as clear as "chit-chat", would help. A description of
    the section with a warning that it includes graphic information
    about situations being protested would let people like you
    avoid unpleasant facts. I think no limits, rearrangements or
    editing of the content or headers would make it what you say
    actually exists.

    How would you prefer it be known to you or
    known to the public that it is happening? If it is not
    in print, or images, or on TV or radio or forums etc,
    what is the best way to make it known ? Do you think
    only leading a vegan lifestyle or promoting veganism
    without mentioning animal exploitation is effective?
    Is there a way that animal rights groups who are trying
    to end vivisection can end it without giving
    the public the facts of what is actually happening
    and why animal testing and animal experimentation
    is wrong ?

    What do you think would be the most common
    catalyst that makes most people decide to be vegan?
    Do you feel most decide to be vegan because
    its a healthy choice? I think we would find the most
    common catalyst was the revelation of great animal
    cruelty and suffering behind the product. How or
    where did they hear about this animal exploitation?

    Korn, you personally may be aware of animal exploitation
    now and not need or wish to know or take action against
    animal exploitation except through your own private
    vegan lifestyle and via this forum, but there are others who
    do not know why people are vegetarian or vegan or why they
    should be vegan. If they don't know the background
    information, why would many people who enjoy the taste
    of eggs, dairy or meat become vegan? Or why would consumers who buy Pantene because it keeps their hair shiny boycott
    Procter & Gamble ? They don't put 1 + 1 together,
    because they either don't know or don't care.

    <<<You wrote: Some people may want it the other way
    round; they may even feel that they need these reminders
    in order to remain vegans, and for those people, our
    solution here is not the best one. That's why it is
    good that there are several forums to choose between.>>>


    Is the solution at this forum to be vegan and
    thats the extent of it? Do you encourage people
    to promote veganism through action ? If so, how
    is it promoted? Is information about animal
    exploitation included?

    Have you read the leaflet promoted by Vegan
    Outreach which is all about animal exploitation
    as a means of promoting veganism? How can you
    separate the two really if you want to reach people
    effectively?

    <<<<<You wrote : The Vegan Forum happens to be
    a site for people who basically want to have different
    kinds of topics in separate areas, and who have no problems
    with the fact that news about cruelty against animals are
    separated from other topics. >>>>


    Once again I have no problem with
    separating animal rights news from
    other topics like "chit chat" and "sweets".
    However as I said I do have a problem with you
    limiting the amount of animal article posts by myself
    and the length of posts on animal topics within the
    Animal News section. That to me is unfair unless
    you have stated it up front there is a limit. Do you
    limit the number of posts from other members
    in other sections?

    <<<I wrote: this poll states that the majority of
    Vegan Forum members think that animal rights
    issues *are* important, I asked Korn will he allow
    a larger section for it>>>


    <<<You wrote: Again: the size of the Animals
    and Animal News forums are not defined by
    me or other moderators. >>>>>


    I still don't understand why "Animal News" is a subsection
    along with "sweets" and "chit chat". Don't you think that
    maybe news about animal exploitation is more important
    than posts about sweet food? I'm sorry but I really don't
    agree with your rationale that they all deserve to be subsections.

    <<<< You wrote: What is, in your opinion, the difference
    between animals' rights and Animal Rights with A and R
    instead of a and r? >>>>

    Non human animals deserve rights like human animals
    deserve rights, and humans have to act to help non human animals reclaim their rights since non human animals do not havethe ability to do so. Slavery did not end only by the efforts of slaves. It did not result only by "good feelings" and "personally virtuous attitudes" by some free people. It resulted from people whose understanding led them to act to try and end the actions of those who oppressed people and called them "slaves", used those slaves, or benefitted from their use. It involved boycott, political action, raising their voice. It involved action in a wider social sphere.

    I think a section "animal news" is ambiguous. As I mentioned, if this were an forum about living a life in which all humans were
    respected, we wouldn't call a section regarding slavery as human news". "Violation of human rights" would be a better heading. "Animal Rights Activism" would be a better heading for the issues I bring up.

    I think i am getting the picture here though about your feelingsand the intentions of this forum and your importance on animal rights issues. My feeling is that you feel news or action regarding animal exploitation is not very important to being vegan.

    I also get the impression that you feel being vegan is probably
    the most effective and active way one can be. Thats my impression of what you have expressed here. I may be wrong. I personally feel this is limited. Whatever the case, after reading this, I think I am barking up the wrong tree in this forum. Thanks for your explanation. Its appreciated.

    Trisha

  19. #19
    perfect RedWellies's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    Herefordshire, England
    Posts
    1,564

    Default Re: How important are animal rights issues to you?

    I am a vegan because I do not want any animal to be hurt or killed for me. But I would not eat an animal that had died of old age/been killed by a car, etc any more than I would eat a human.
    Health benefits are irrelevant to me personally.

    I joined this forum because I wanted to interact with like-minded people. I realise that awful things go on in this world but I did not come here to read about them. That doesn't mean I don't think they should be posted on this forum, just that I think they should be in a specific area. I would read them if they weren't too graphic because I think it's important to know who's doing what but to be honest, I can't face too much.

    I've not been involved in any kind of activism, I'm more passive (I'll write letters/emails, etc.). Calling the posts Animal Rights News may put some browsers off because to some it conjures up images of violence/digging up dead bodies,etc. Maybe a different heading, with brief posts that include a link to more detailed stories would be the way forward?
    "Do what you can with what you have where you are."
    - Theodore Roosevelt

  20. #20
    Ex-admin Korn's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Location
    Europe
    Posts
    4,830

    Default Re: How important are animal rights issues to you?

    Trisha, as you can see, I've put your response into your mail (after having increased the max size for post lengths). Thanks for your reply. I agree in a lot of your opinions, but unforunately your post contains so many assumptions, misunderstandings, misinterpretations and errors (and it's rather long) - so I'll have to comment them later. I'll also re-read your post before I reply, in case you have corrected some of the text. I hope you have, because in almost every section of what you write, there are either erratic assumptions or other wrong info.

    I'll try to find some time to reply your questions ASAP (there are 35 of them), but please elaborate a bit more on my question to you, above: 'What is, in your opinion, the difference between animals' rights and Animal Rights with A and R instead of a and r?'

  21. #21
    Kevster
    Guest

    Default Re: How important are animal rights issues to you?

    I'm not altogether concerned that issues of non human exploitation are to be found in animal news, it's probably going to contain a lot of stuff. People will look into it when they want, there's a lot of stuff on this forum i'm not into, and i wouldn't want it thrown about all over the place.

    I would be surprised if animal rights issues weren't important to almost all vegans, Charlotte Church possibly exempt. And don't think this will marginalise the subject.

    PS. The way i navigate this forum is through looking at new posts and they're not distinguished by thread, or section as such, but by being new. So i can't say i've ever really noticed where animal rights info has been specifically posted before, and i won't notice now.

  22. #22
    AR Activist Roxy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Location
    South Australia
    Posts
    4,977

    Default Re: How important are animal rights issues to you?

    Trisha - no offense, but I have to admit I don't really look at most of your posts. Not because I'm not concerned about animal rights though. It's because you post tons of links to different things, post letters etc written by other people and never really start a discussion about such things. When I see your posts I think "Oh there's another link from Free Tibet". Maybe people would be more interested in your links/posts if you were to discuss your feelings, thoughts and opinions about the matters you are wanting us to take an interest in.

    BTW I didn't think that the "Animal News" section was all that small. It's 5 pages long.

  23. #23
    Geoff
    Guest

    Default Re: How important are animal rights issues to you?

    'I personally don't know any animal rights group
    who only promotes animal rights activism and
    do not promote veganism.' - Free Tibet


    Well, there's RSPCA, WPAA, WPSQ, Free The Bears, Animals Asia, The Donkey Protection Society, Elefriends, The Great Ape Project and KAPS for a start!

  24. #24
    Free_Tibet
    Guest

    Default Re: How important are animal rights issues to you?

    Quote Geoff
    'I personally don't know any animal rights group
    who only promotes animal rights activism and
    do not promote veganism.' - Free Tibet

    Well, there's RSPCA, WPAA, WPSQ, Free The Bears, Animals Asia, The Donkey Protection Society, Elefriends, The Great Ape Project and KAPS for a start!
    The RSPCA is not an animal rights group. I don't know about
    the other groups, but I think I see welfare groups there. As
    I said, i do not know any animal rights group which only promotes
    animal rights activism, and does not promote veganism as well.

  25. #25
    Free_Tibet
    Guest

    Default Re: How important are animal rights issues to you?

    Quote Roxy
    Trisha - no offense, but I have to admit I don't really look at most of your posts. Not because I'm not concerned about animal rights though. It's because you post tons of links to different things, post letters etc written by other people and never really start a discussion about such things. When I see your posts I think "Oh there's another link from Free Tibet". Maybe people would be more interested in your links/posts if you were to discuss your feelings, thoughts and opinions about the matters you are wanting us to take an interest in.

    BTW I didn't think that the "Animal News" section was all that small. It's 5 pages long.
    Hi. No offense taken. Thanks for yor imput. Unfortunately I don't have time to discuss issues. Thats good if you want people to discuss the
    articles, there are a few people in this forum whom Im sure would be happy to do so. I just do not have the time unfortunately.

    About Animal News being not that small, I didn't say Animal News is small, I said that my posts were gathered and placed in one post titled January Animal News by the moderator instead of being left as individual posts or left in the general section. It was done without any discussion and that was my problem.

    cheers

  26. #26
    Free_Tibet
    Guest

    Default Re: How important are animal rights issues to you?

    Quote Mr Flibble
    Animals rights are one of several reasons I'm a vegan, and they are very important to me also. Why can't I choose both options? I wouldn't want people to think that animal rights is the only reason that I am vegan, as this is not the case.
    I choose both options as well, but when I asked Korn to post the poll, I wanted to keep the answers very simple, that was my point.

  27. #27
    Geoff
    Guest

    Default Re: How important are animal rights issues to you?

    Quote Free_Tibet
    The RSPCA is not an animal rights group. I don't know about
    the other groups, but I think I see welfare groups there. As
    I said, i do not know any animal rights group which only promotes
    animal rights activism, and does not promote veganism as well.
    Well, the RSPCA Charter says: 'Animals have an intrinsic value of their own and, accordingly must be considered to possess the right to live in a way which enables them to have a positive life and to develop and enjoy their inherant qualities'
    The Great Ape Project's sole aim is to give the right to life for all great apes.
    I would define both the above organisations as encompassing animal rights, albeit to a limited extent.
    I'd like to meet someone from an animal rights organisation who thinks that termites have the right to eat their house!

  28. #28
    Free_Tibet
    Guest

    Talking Re: How important are animal rights issues to you?

    Quote Korn
    Trisha, as you can see, I've put your response into your mail (after having increased the max size for post lengths). Thanks for your reply. I agree in a lot of your opinions, but unforunately your post contains so many assumptions, misunderstandings, misinterpretations and errors (and it's rather long) - so I'll have to comment them later. I'll also re-read your post before I reply, in case you have corrected some of the text. I hope you have, because in almost every section of what you write, there are either erratic assumptions or other wrong info.

    I'll try to find some time to reply your questions ASAP (there are 35 of them), but please elaborate a bit more on my question to you, above: 'What is, in your opinion, the difference between animals' rights and Animal Rights with A and R instead of a and r?'
    Hi Korn. Thanks for your reply and thanks for taking the
    time to plow through a long post. Unfortunately I haven't
    had time to view your reply yet and may not for a few
    days, if at all. I've been very busy lately. I have a sick
    elderly mother who has cancer and very recently had a
    small stroke. So I really don't have time to debate the
    value of animal rights activism or whether it is effective,
    or valid, or misguided or disconnected from veganism
    or whatever else you feel it lacks or doesn't lack. I don't
    need to justify it as a movement. It speaks for itself.

    If I have, as you say, "misunderstood" or "misinterpreted"
    what appears to be your limited view of animal rights
    activism, then I apologise. However I cannot recall one
    positive comment you made regarding it as a movement.
    Also, I have felt less than welcome posting articles at this
    forum. I don't post them for the fun of it, or to clog up
    anything, I post them in the hopes that people will take
    some action and have information.

    If I am mistaken that you make negative assumptions
    about animal rights activism, then that would be good.
    I would like to be mistaken. However I don't feel I have
    "assumed" anything, nor do I think my comments are
    "erratic" or that I made "errors" copying and pasting
    your quotes. I feel you repeated yourself enough that
    there was no mistake. It just appears that you view
    animal rights activists as only interested in extreme
    examples of exploitation of animals, or "angry" or
    misguided, or limited or ineffective or disconnected
    from veganism. At this moment I'm not sure how you
    view them since you say I have totally misunderstood you.

    As I have said before, I do not know any animal RIGHTS
    group that does NOT promote veganism. Its a vital part
    of a multipronged approach toward the total abolition of
    speciesism. AR activists do not only focus on the extreme,
    they focus on *all* exploitation.

    I think I may leave the issue as it is, because I've said
    all I need to. Please don't spend too much time with the
    reply Korn. If you insist I have misunderstood you, I'll take
    it that I misunderstood you and leave it at that.

    Best wishes

  29. #29
    Ex-admin Korn's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Location
    Europe
    Posts
    4,830

    Default Re: How important are animal rights issues to you?

    Hi Trisha, I wrote this before you las post. I'll look at it later.

    Quote Free_Tibet


    I'm not happy with the title "Animal News" for the
    subsection because as I have mentioned, if this were
    an abolitionist forum, one wouldn't expect news
    about slaves to be in a subsection, and call it "Human
    News" I'm unsure why you are unable to see the comparison.


    The subforum is called Animal News, because it is meant for news animal related news. This is not a forum about animals, and one can talk about animal topics that ar enot news-related, so I think the title is quite good, but maybe it can be changed into something better... we change things all the time. And by the way, if I changed it 'News about cruelty about animals' or 'Animal Slavery News', the forum would be more specific than it is now, and I guess your posts would be read by less people than they are now.

    However, you state there is no limit to the
    number of animal rights articles one can post in the
    "Animal News" section but without my knowledge
    you assigned all my AR article posts to one post
    and titled the post "January Animal News" without
    any discussion.
    We have threads, and we have posts. Combining posts that are related to each other into threads is something we do in all subforums, we may do it too often sometimes, and not often enough in some cases, but this is not something specific for the Animal News-area. I have never touched any of your Animal News posts, but one moderator suggested to combine some of your single posts into one thread, and I agreed, because by only posting one post pr. thread, the active posters will dominate the subforums and make threads started by others unvisible on the main page of each forum. None of your posts have been removed (as far as I know), except when you post the same stuff several times. So the size of the forum is not reduced by anyone, the number of posts are not reduced either. The number of threads are removed by using the same procedure we do in all other subforums: combine similar posts/threads into a less number of threads. This makes the site more readable.

    The articles I post are quality posts from dozens of
    excellent AR sources. When you suddenly gathered
    and assigned all my posts to that one post "January
    Animal News", that in turn reduced the amount of
    information I could place in the post.
    No - you misunderstand.



    I may be misinterpreting your post here, but my
    impression overall is that you do not see the benefit
    of animal rights articles or actions ("horrific" articles
    as you have referred to them) being posted in Vegan
    Forum.
    My viewpoints are not relevant here.
    1) I do see the importance of posting information about cruel treatment of animals and activities done to reduce this.
    2) I appreciate that people are doing this.
    3) Not that it matters, but it wasn't me who used that 'horrific'-term...


    I also get the impression you have a limited
    view of animal rights activism, believing it
    does not include promoting veganism and that
    animal rights activism is a less effective way
    to promote change than leading a vegan lifestyle.


    I think animal rights activism in some cases helps animal a lot, and promotes veganism, and in other cases I think some of these actions makes people turn away from veganism, and even causes more animals to be harmed and killed. I have no view on 'animal rights actions' as such, because the term covers lots of different activities. Anyway - just ignore my views, they are neither relvant or interesting here, neither am I.


    My impression is also that you feel being vegan
    is all one really needs to be to bring about change.
    I don't think so, and again, if I did, that wouldn't mean anything for this site.


    Regarding this poll question - "How important are animal
    rights to you"? Why did you change the 2nd choice?
    I didn't. I didn't change any of your reply options.

    I added an option, to make it possible for more people to find a reply that they felt suited their situation...

    I think the reply options weren't representative for what people may want to reply (I still think the reply options aren't good enough). What we see, when people have no reply-options that feels right for them, is that they simply don't vote.

    'Important' is a relative description. There are people who start to eat vegan for health reasons, and then become very dedicated to animals rights. There are people who find poor treatment of animals too horrible to even think about, and who may even try actively to not focus on it. There are people who go vegan for spiritual reasons, where the respect for animals is just as important as respect for humans or for all life. They may find all these things 'very important', or they may find all these things 'important'.

    'Importance' in itself isn't even important, if you don't spend any time on what's important for you. Personally I can say that animals' rights are very important to me, but I never read about animal cruelty these days: just looking at an animal is what it takes to be reminded that they - of course - have rights, rights far beyond not being tortured or not be killed for food. So 'Very important' would in a way be wrong for me, because I don't focus a lot on ie cruelty against animals.

    'Important' would be wrong too, because when I focus on these things, I find it very important that people on this planet realize how we treat animals and that something needs to be done to change that. There are many important issues, respect for animals, respect for humans, focus on the environemnt, respect for nature, respect for children's rights, woman's rights and so on. To me, your orignal poll didn't reflect any priority of how important 'something' was compared with the importance of 'something else'. But I'll change the poll back, removing the extra reply option I added if you want, even if I think it makes the poll less interesting - no big deal.


    Do you think that subsections like " sweet" or "chit chat"
    are equivalent to "animal news", when "animal news" is
    the section for all mention of issues about the use/abuse
    of animals?
    No, and I don't really see why you ask that question...




    As I said earlier, if this is so, then why were my animal rights articles all assigned to a post you called "January Animal News"? It was not another subsection as far as I can tell, so it limits the quantity of information I can post.
    You are wrong again... You can post the same amount of information, but by combining similar posts into threads, not only other members threads will become more visible on the first page of that subforum, but your own posts from last month will be too. And, if people click on one of your January posts, they'll see all of them, if they are in the same thread.

    Everytime you start a new thread instead of adding a post in an existing one, you bump your old threads down. Right now we have a lot of threads visible on the main page of each forum (35), but this takes some extra bandwith, and we may change it back to showing 20 or 25, or even 15. To have a subforum where your (or anyone else's) threads (one for each post) take up half the main page of that forum doesn't make sense.


    I'm aware you definitely have opinions about groups like ALF
    Yes, I have, I strongly disagree with some of their activities, and it has been necessary to write about this here for reasons I hope you understand.


    ...and I am more aware of your opinions about the importance
    the role animal rights play in veganism
    No, you are not! You misunderstand our (very normal) policy about having separate forums for separate topics.


    ... and in turn this forum and since you moderate this forum, your opinions do count and are not neutral.
    This forum is moderated by 5-6 people, and among people I have invited to become moderators, you'll find people who not only have different focus, but also different opinions than myself. But I have spent more time and money on this site than anyone else, and have written the board guidlelines. The forum are moderated according to these, not according to my personal opinions or my interests. Please note that there's a big difference between the two...


    I rarely posted outside animal news until you gathered
    all my posts without discussion and placed them inside
    one post within Animal News which reduced information.
    Again, I didn't do it, but I support those who did it for the practcial reasons explained above.

    You have limited information by limiting my posting access as subject titles relating to date do not indicate much about content.
    See above.

    <<<<You wrote: When vegans are against using fur,
    it's not for health reasons: as we know, veganism is
    not only about food or personal health, it's about respect
    for animals and their rights, which IMO go a lot further
    than the AR movement in some cases give the impression of. >>>>


    You views about the Animal Rights movement are mistaken.
    I do not know any animal rights group which does not
    promote veganism. It would be somewhat foolish to wish
    people stop eating animal products or using products which
    involve animal exploitation without giving them information
    on an alternative lifestyle. I don't know how you arrived
    at this conclusion.
    [/quote]
    You need to look closer. I clearly wrote
    in some cases...



    You obviously haven't visited our groups site.
    I'm not discussing your site.
    I wrote "We've had some people"...

    My interest in animal rights extends to any non human animal which is exploited, tortured and or and killed for any purpose.
    Only 'non-human'?

    I think you need to correct your mistaken view of true animal rights activism.
    I haven't said anything about my views of '
    true animal rights activism'. I haven't said my views of 'animals rights activism' either. I have been talking about 'some people', and 'some cases', which IMO cause a lot of harm in the name of AR-activism.

    It is you who is insisting that animal rights activists ONLY focus on animal rights as a means to end exploitation. Where did you arrive at this limited view ?
    No, I haven't.
    Where did you arrive at this limited view?

    ... and represent an 'animal welfare'-kind of viewpoint, which in the end could lead to a way of thinking we have seen here sometimes: 'my main reason to go vegan is what happens in factory farms, but what's wrong with eating and killing a wild animal? It has had a happy life...[...]
    In my opinion, these viewpoints shows lack of respect for animals' rights. Just like with humans, animals deserve a good life, not to be hurt physically or emotionally, not have their freedom taken away from them..: they deserve to not become food, /whether they've had a happy life or not. /Just like humans.>>>>>>>>


    they deserve not to be tested on and fed toxins and cosmetics till they die a torturous death or hunted till they
    are ripped apart, or skinned while they are still alive or chained and imprisoned, or have their
    habitat impinged upon until they are extinct, or bred with genetic mutations just for "research"
    and on and on. There is so much more to being vegan than the food, ecology & health element.
    Sure. This is a vegan forum, which means that it is a forum for people who agree that veganism is not only about
    food, ecology and health. Isn't it obvious that vegans, who are against harming and killing animals, and who find it wrong to kill 'a happy animal' for food, find it even more horrible that animals who are killed for food haven't even had a normal life before they got killed? There should be no need to tell each other this on a vegan forum.

    <<<You wrote: Limiting the focus of lack of respect for animals to the extreme cases seen in factory farming is in my opinion abig mistake - but works well as an eye-opener.>>>>>
    Once again, I don't know what animal rights group or activists have given
    you this mistaken impression.
    I could mention examples, but persons are not important.

    You also underestimate my activism.
    I don't even know what your activism is focused on, but have just looked at some of your posts, which got me thinking that your info and opinions would have a lot more effect outside a forum which is reserved for people who are against cruelty against animals - I assume you are posting in non-vegan media as well... And since you have a tendency of getting me wrong; this does NOT mean that your posts are not welcome here.

    If your family were being put in cages and given taser shocks to test tasers efficacy (like the pig taser experiments at UMW), or electrodes strapped to their brains or if your mother was being fed toxins to see how long it takes for her to die, would you not do your utmost to try and stop it? Would you not be posting this information and speaking out to anyone who will listen?
    Sure, and again, your question is IMO not relevant to what we are discussing. I have OF COURSE never said or written to anyone that they should not write about cruelty against animals (or humans). I'm really wondering why you get things so wrong...


    How do you know what members are interested in. Do you take the number of views of an article as
    member's interest? or how many animal rights posts are made by various members? I still think that
    "animal news" deserves a bigger section than "sweet" or "chit chat".
    Again (and again, and again...): The size of a forum is dependent of how many posts/characters that are written in it, and I'm not influencing this in any way - why would I?


    Its interesting you pick this quote "continuously start threads of a horrific nature". or "some people need to vent their anger". Do you think this is why people post animal rights arcticles? because they are angry?
    I used the post from that other admin at another site as an example of other forums that also prefer to have stuff about animal cruelty in separate sections, because you didn't seem to understand why we do what we do in one of your first PMs.

    I still hink you still over-emphasize my role here, I've just defined some basic rules, which are very similar to rules at other boards, and spend some time doing some work with the forum. I'm no authority, no leader, nobody is expected to agree with me... You're only expected to agree with yourself and the board guidelines you signed when you registered here, which is not about opinions, but about 'forum behavior'.

    Talking of some animal rights activists, I have noticed that some of them sometimes have a tendency to tweak reality a bit to make it fit in with their own assumptions, and when they've had conflicts with other members, they tend to go into some sort of 'attack/escape' pattern more often than others, a kind of "If this forums doesn't change itself into the way I want it to be, Ill leave!!!"-thing.

    These people seem to be more angry in general, not only with the horrible situation many animals are in, but also with other forum members, with our board guidelines, with other moderators at other sites etc.

    I think anger disturbs intelligence. It reduces the most important ability of all: to see thing as they really are instead of seeing the reality mixed up with one's own (maybe repressed) emotions and assumptions. I have seen some AR activicts act out of personal anger and end up in a lot of conflicts with a lot of people, including other vegans, and I've also seen AR activists do a great job. But why do you ask? There are many ways of treating humans, nature and animals that can cause anger, and of course this anger can be used as a motivation for changing the world towards something better, but again... just ignore my opinions and priorities. They have nothing to do with separating our site into subsections or merging similar posts: all moderated forums do it more or less the same way.



    I think you misunderstand the intention behind
    animal rights posts. it is not to vent anger, it is to
    motivate people to do something to end it and
    hopefully contained within the post is an action link.
    I not only think, but I know that you misuderstand me.

    If you deter these posts by limiting space...
    1) I have never read any of your posts until you complained because I asked you to post threads in their relevant forums.
    2) Nobody have been 'limiting space', not one single character has been removed. We follow the same system for merging/moving threads for your stuff/posts about animal cruelty as we do with all other members/all other topics...


    Indirect censorship by limiting posts or detering it indirectly or concern about upsetting people just plays into the hands of corporations. Nothing to me is more upsetting than vegans or animal rights or animal welfare people trying to limit dissemination of information because of its content or becauseit doesnt suit their particular ideology or trying to protect others sensitivities.
    Well, this isn't happening here, because no information is held back, no posts are removed, and the only thing we do to 'protect others sensitivities' is to limit posts about animal cruelty to a dedicated area. We only remove personal attacks on other members and posts that encourage or support illegal activities, which shouldn't be a problem for our members, since they have agreed not to post such things when they registered.

    Its unfortunate there isn't a filter on the forum for people who do not wish to view animal rights articles.
    To have these kinds of post in a certain subforum IS that filter.


    Do you think only leading a vegan lifestyle or promoting veganism
    without mentioning animal exploitation is effective?
    I think that there are many, different, effective ways, and mentioning/showing/describing examples of the most extreme cases is one of them, a necessary one.

    Is there a way that animal rights groups who are trying
    to end vivisection can end it without giving
    the public the facts of what is actually happening
    and why animal testing and animal experimentation
    is wrong ?
    Now please tell me: why you are asking me these questions?

    What do you think would be the most common
    catalyst that makes most people decide to be vegan?
    That would depend on who you are talking to. Almost every time there has been documneted cases of extreme cruelty against animals on TV where I live, some represent for the industry has been interviewed afterwards and said that 'this was an exception, we'll improve the situation for these animals now'. So showing the most extreme situations may influence a lot of people, at least for a while, while others only will trust that 'this was an exception', or think that eating meat is OK as long as we don't treat the animals in what they consider 'extreme ways'.

    Do you feel most decide to be vegan because
    its a healthy choice?
    There have been various polls on various sites showing that very few people who call themselves vegans claim that they people go vegan for health reasons only (this wouldn't make sense anyway - why should they ie. stop using fur to improve their health?).

    Korn, you personally may be aware of animal exploitation
    now and not need or wish to know or take action against
    animal exploitation except through your own private
    vegan lifestyle and via this forum, but there are others who
    do not know why people are vegetarian or vegan or why they
    should be vegan. If they don't know the background
    information, why would many people who enjoy the taste
    of eggs, dairy or meat become vegan?
    I'm becoming more and more convinced that you misunderstand/misinterpret me more than anyone else has done before .


    Is the solution at this forum to be vegan and
    thats the extent of it?
    There isn't such a thing as '
    the solution at this forum'. This is a dynamic site, not a static site: people can discuss, disagree, influence each other. I think this is the most important thing that you are missing.


    However as I said I do have a problem with you
    limiting the amount of animal article posts by myself
    and the length of posts on animal topics within the
    Animal News section.
    My friend, you really need a realty check. Your number of posts' have NOT been limited - ever.
    That to me is unfair unless you have stated it up front there is a limit.
    All forums normally have a limit re. how many characters that can be put into ONE post. We have changed it up and down a few times, and as I mentioned, I just increaed it again (from 10,000 to over 30,000 characters) to make room for your reply.

    Do you limit the number of posts from other members
    in other sections?
    There is no - and has never been - a limit setting for number of posts; not for you, and not for anyone else.

    I still don't understand why "Animal News" is a subsection
    along with "sweets" and "chit chat".
    First you reacted against my PM about posting threads in their relevant forum. Then you wrote (above) that it's OK to have these things in a separate section, and even wanted to introduce a filter so people couldn't see them at all. Now you are against having animal related news in a subsection again "along with sweets and chit-chat". Animal News are not located along with Seets and Chit-Chat. Animal News are located inside the Animals forum, which makes sense.

    Don't you think that maybe news about animal exploitation is more important than posts about sweet food?
    Why this obsession with 'important'? We have a subforum about Health, we have one about Food, we have one about Sweets, we have one about Animals etc. How can that cause so much trouble for you? Should I number the forums, in order to make sure they read the posts I persoanlly found most importnat first?



    I'm sorry but I really don't agree with your rationale that they all deserve to be subsections.
    All.... what 'all'? Let's get the terminology right (I may have been using confusing terms myself):
    The Vegan Forum is a forum. VeggieBoards is a Forum. VeganFitness is a forum.

    Food is a subforum inside The Vegan Forum
    'Sweet', another subforum, is located inside Food, because sweet food is about food as well, and we are grouping thisngs that are relevant to each other in the same areas.
    Animals is a subforum under The Vegan Forum.
    The subforum called Animal News is located inside Animals, for the same reason.

    Everything that is posted here, is posted in a 'subforum'. The only thing that is not a subforum, is The Vegan Forum, which is the name of the site, and which covers all subforums of The Vegan Forum.


    As I mentioned, if this were an forum about living a life in which all humans were respected, we wouldn't call a section regarding slavery as human news".
    The Animal News section isn't meant only for bad news about animals, it could also be news about newly discovered species etc. Of course we could have a separate section only about Animal Cruelty, but that would mean that only people who already would be interested in news about cruelty against animals would see these messages. Is that what you want?

    My feeling is that you feel news or action regarding animal exploitation is not very important to being vegan.
    In Norway, there is a law saying that if you have a cow, you are obliged to have a matress it can sleep on. There are inspectors now who are perforiming random controls to check if people actually follow this law. I can see that if vegans and AR activists focus too much on poor treatment of animals, the argumention using horrible example will loose their meaning when/if animals in the future are treated better. If we focus on animals, and not on 'exploited animals' our wrtings will be as valid in the future as they are now. I think focus on both animals and on exploited animals has it's effect, if it's done right.

    My focus is more on 'respect for nature' than on 'exploited animals', because respect for nature covers all the aspects: not exploiting animals, not exploiting humans, not exploiting our soil,air and water. I've heard a couple of vegans say 'I don't care much for humans', or that 'I don't buy organic food because it hasn't been proven that it is more healthy for ME' (which, by the way is wrong, but which ignore what's healthy for the earth; instead the ego is in focus).

    I'm not interested in saying that 'respect for nature' or 'respect for humans' is less important than 'respect for animals', because I don't see a conflict: all these things are important. I've heard people who sympathize with ALF say that a lot can be achiveed (to help animals) just by killing a few humans, and I want to make it 100% clear that I'm against what they represent. One can achieve a lot by killing humans (and save a lot of fish by killing seals etc), but am NOT interested in spending a lot of time and money running a site where killing humans to help animals, or kill polar bears to save seals, or kill all big fish to save more small fish are being discussed. Murder isn't on our reportoire. I don't want to support a tendency I have seen with A FEW vegans, namely that animals are more imortant than anything else.

    I also get the impression that you feel being vegan is probably
    the most effective and active way one can be.
    I have responded to that earlier in this post. It's interestring that you want to waste so much energy on me, who after all probably is one of the few people in the world that has spent so much time building up a vegan site as I actually have, which - believe me - requires a lot more effort than just 'being vegan'...


    I think I am barking up the wrong tree in this forum.
    At least we agree in something!

    Thanks,
    Korn


    PS - there's no spelling checker in FireFox on Mac, I'll look over the post later and see what I've actually written...


  30. #30
    FR
    Guest

    Default Re: How important are animal rights issues to you?

    I went with very important.

  31. #31
    Seaside
    Guest

    Default Re: How important are animal rights issues to you?

    I voted very important. I really can't think of any other reason for going vegan. The health aspect is nice, but I wouldn't care if it made me sick. There's no other way to be, for me.

  32. #32

    Default Re: How important are animal rights issues to you?

    I also choose very important. The health benefits are a bonus but definately not the reason I became a vegan.

  33. #33
    baffled harpy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Location
    UK
    Posts
    6,655

    Default Re: How important are animal rights issues to you?

    I agree it is a very important issue, but I'd still prefer to have the posts on that issue in a specific section of the forum, so that I can read them when I'm feeling strong

  34. #34

    Default Re: How important are animal rights issues to you?

    I agree with Harpy concerning the locations of the posts. Somedays I just can't handle the suffering very well. It's not that I don't care it's just that it can cut too deep.

  35. #35
    Ex-admin Korn's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Location
    Europe
    Posts
    4,830

    Default Re: How important are animal rights issues to you?

    Hi Trisha,

    I'm sorry to hear about the situation with your mother.

    I read your post now (the one you wrote while I was replying to the other). I won't come up with positive comments about 'the movement' as a whole, because it's IMO not even possible to have one opinion about a movement as a whole if part of that movement is meaning or doing things that others in that movement find totally wrong.

    I think I may leave the issue as it is, because I've said
    all I need to.
    Same here...

    Please don't spend too much time with the
    reply Korn.
    Too late!

    My long reply to your long post wasn't only about you or about our general practice of merging posts into threads etc....

    My disagreement with what some (a few) people in the AR movement do/mean (possibly combined with our rule about not allowing posts that encourage/support anything illegal) can obviously be misunderstood as if I or this site not supporting animals' rights or not finding it important to document the many horrible things that happens in factory farms and test labs, so a comment about this was maybe needed anyway. Maybe things are more clear now.

    All the best,
    Korn

  36. #36

    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Location
    Uk, Reading, Emmer Green
    Posts
    133

    Default Re: How important are animal rights issues to you?

    Hi,

    I think most of this thread is irrelavent as the question in the poll is meaningless. The whole problem here is summeried in Korn's second post and again mentioned in Geoff's RSPCA post - what do we mean by animal rights?

    My dad, who is a keen meat eater, believes it's wrong to abuse your pet and supports laws enforcing it. Those animals have a right - the right not to be abused by their owners, and the owners have been denied the right to abuse their pets, and that right is enforced by fines and imprisonment - by the law. That is, in essense, a right.

    When you become vegan you "act" as though animals do have the right not to be eatern by humans - but they don't. Vegans are in favour of the right for animals not to be eaten by humans. When we enshire this in law, it will then be a right. To get to that point we need to persuade the vast majority of the population to give up their right to eat animals.

    It is therefore impossible for vegans not be in favour of animal rights, and to go vegan you have to be pretty dedicated - certainly animal rights are very important too all of us here.

    The real question is what animal rights are you in favour of and what tactics you think should be imploded to make them rights. There are plenty I would not be in favour of ... the right to education, the right to life, the right to abortions, the right to happiness, the right to free housing etc because they are all absurd when applied to non-humans (and to humans in some cases).

    And in respect to Trisha's main argument with korn, the WHOLE site is dedicated to animal rights!


    Stephen

  37. #37
    rxseeeyse
    Guest

    Default Re: How important are animal rights issues to you?

    I think eating flesh in general is an insult. Because for human, we would like to bury them instead of eating them after they died after a happy life...I believe body and soul are connected, therefore attack a body is attacking a soul. I think in buddism it's actually like the animals will have grudge towards those who eat their dead body and thus curse them to go to hell after death.

  38. #38
    megrainbows's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Location
    Norwich
    Posts
    87

    Default Re: How important are animal rights issues to you?

    Animal rights is one of the most important things in my life :')
    "Life is life – whether in a cat, or dog or man. The idea of difference is a human conception for man’s own advantage."

  39. #39

    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Location
    Florida
    Posts
    16

    Default Re: How important are animal rights issues to you?

    I initially became a vegan for better health, but I also quickly learned (and am still learning) about the unethical treatment of animals. I do not believe animals need to be farmed, and I think they have the right to live free and happy lives.

  40. #40

    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Location
    Southern USA
    Posts
    15

    Default Re: How important are animal rights issues to you?

    Animal rights are important, but I think human rights are more important.
    A friend is just a known enemy.

  41. #41

    Default Re: How important are animal rights issues to you?

    I have a simple answer to this. If you honestly look at the human beings and animals, such as oyster, it's self-evident that human beings are on a different level from animals.

    Oysters can not invent the word wide web, which we all are very fond of. The "rights of animals" to live if we can call it such is dependent on the rights of human beings. If the very fundamental right of humans to have the freedom of choice is not safeguarded, then even the welfare of animals can not be safeguarded at all. Therefore, human rights are very very important as it is the basis of a happy and democratic society in which animals can also live.

    I think it is being insane to say an oyster has its right. The world is a place of birth and death and there is also a natural relationship among all living entities on this planet. We "kill" microbes just by breathing. We "kill" insects just by taking a walk. We "kill" microbes by washing our mouth with listerine and we all know that is intentional killing. But we also need microbes in our stomach to maintain a proper digestive process and that is a positive relationship; it's symbiotic. There is a give and take relationship between human beings and other living entities on this planet to a certain extent. But in many ways, we can say that "man is king" on this planet.

    If I can go back to the oyster example. In my opinion, the welfare of oyster or any animal for that matter is dependent on the compassion of humans. To ascribe any right to an oyster is like worrying about our existence itself.
    Respect for all living entities

  42. #42
    Ex-admin Korn's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Location
    Europe
    Posts
    4,830

    Default Re: How important are animal rights issues to you?

    Quote rrqu View Post
    Animal rights are important, but I think human rights are more important.
    For humans of for animals?

    Quote Jivattatva View Post
    I have a simple answer to this. If you honestly look at the human beings and animals, such as oyster, it's self-evident that human beings are on a different level from animals.

    Oysters can not invent the word wide web, which we all are very fond of.
    I don't think oysters really miss the www either.


    Humans, IMO often do a big mistake; they evaluate all other beings based on their own set of... 'parameters', so to speak. Many humans have more respect eg. for a chimp it it's proven that it can recognize hundreds of words from the human language. And if they were to eat a bird, they'd rather eat a chicken than a parrot who's able to pronounce human words. It's not really about empathy/compassion, it's just another fragrance of 'human-centricity'.

    If we remain ego-centric, or 'human-centric' in this way, the underlaying ethics (or lack of it) isn't really that far from eg. racism: "the less they look/behave similar to how I behave, the less I respect them".

    Don't get me wrong, I'm also human-centric in many situations. I saw a dead, little animal on the highway the other day, and while it's sad that it was killed by a car, my reaction would have been stronger/different if I would have seen a dead human there. I guess most people are like that, including vegans.

    But that doesn't keep us from using "their life, frustrations and suffering is as important for them as our life, frustrations and suffering is for a human" as a reference for how we treat animals.

    To ascribe any right to an oyster is like worrying about our existence itself.
    Some people insist that it doesn't matter much if animals has any rights or not, and even that "right" just is a theoretical concept anyone can claim to support or not. But that doesn't keep us from treating animals as if they would have the equal right to respect as humans have either, because if 'rights' is just a theoretical phenomenon - where would we get the rights to harm them from?

    From wikipedia:
    The Golden Rule

    The Golden Rule or ethic of reciprocity is an ethical code, or a morality[2], that essentially states any of the following (see examples below):
    One should treat others according to how one would like others to treat one's self (positive, passive form)
    Treat others as you would like to be treated (positive, active form)
    One should not treat others in ways one would not like to be treated (prohibitive, passive form)
    Do not treat others in ways you would not like to be treated (prohibitive, active form. Also called the Silver Rule)
    The Golden Rule has a long history, and a great number of prominent religious figures and philosophers have restated its reciprocal, bilateral nature in various ways (not limited to the above forms).
    The Golden Rule is arguably the most essential basis for the modern concept of human rights, in which each individual has a right to just treatment, and a responsibility to ensure justice for others.[3] A key element of the Golden Rule is that a person attempting to live by this rule treats all people with consideration, not just members of his or her in-group. The Golden Rule has its roots in a wide range of world cultures, and is a standard which different cultures use to resolve conflicts.[4]

    More here.
    I will not eat anything that walks, swims, flies, runs, skips, hops or crawls.

  43. #43

    Default Re: How important are animal rights issues to you?

    There are issues in this world that need urgency like, the right to have same sex marriage, right of people in poor countries to have 3 square meals a day, or the high rate of infant mortality in Africa. Please note that dogs in the west have better lives than millions of people in many parts of the world. Of course these are separate issues.

    I think you are overrating the similarities you find in some advanced animals with the human beings. The majority of the members of the animal kingdom is not like the chimpanzees or dogs which you have in mind, they are of various kinds like insects, mussels, oysters and snakes, etc. I note that one of the big deal studies on animals by Harvard biologist, cognitive scientist Marc Hauser on tamarin monkeys was recently found to be fabricated. In one of his studies he claimed that the tamarins can recognized themselves in the mirror, like having self-awareness and so have memories. His data were all found to be bogus. He is now I think banned from doing any more researches, I don’t know if the ban is permanent or temporary. He is at the moment on compulsory leave.

    Anyway, I think we should be honest enough to admit that beyond what we have in common with the animals, apes for example , and while the similarities are interesting, the DIFFERENCES ARE PROFOUND.

    Your equating racism with the rights of animal issue is not reasonable , afterall, black or brown people are still homo sapiens like white people. Oyster is mullosca and man is homo sapiens.

    I don’t see it unreasonable to be human centric. We “make this world”. Just look at the march of history, the advancement of civilization (of course it’s not without pain). We have creativity, the gift of language, beautiful poetry and music, free will, desires, and a “rich inner life”. I do not know if that can be said of animals, any animals.

    Also I remember reading in Scientific American magazine that scientists say that man is the pinnacle of evolution because they reckon man in its present form will not evolve anymore although our technology will keep on evolving to create a new “social man”. Futurists say that in the future we can upload “ourselves” into the computers. Of course that is controversial because we will ask, can computers be able to have consciousness or what they call “rich inner life”? Man is a really a genius. And animals are nowhere near that. So being human centric is being rational.

    Talking about rights of animals is very problematic. What rights do animals want? Did they tell you? Do oysters want the same type of rights parrots want? I’m not being sarcastic here. I’m just trying to tease out this topic.

    Where do you draw the line? If it was rational for dogs to have separate rights from its owners, are we being sane to ascribe oysters any rights? Or is it pick and choose, some animals deserve to have its own rights, like dogs, etc but oysters do not.

    If you say it’s not pick and choose, then if you give oysters their rights, is it now OK for vegans who are pro-abortion (ok, the right term is pro-choice) to give human fetuses their own rights? Afterall, a fetus is a complete biological unit. Or if you say a fetus is dependent on the mother for sustenance and therefore is under the rights of the woman, then would that not be the same for the dog and the owner?
    How do we go about codifying (legislating) the rights of animals? Do dogs sit at the board with humans to discuss what are those rights might be and the scope and limits of those rights?

    I’m at the moment thinking, what implications would a codified animal rights take? Should scientists be jailed for using animals for research on new medicines that will save millions of human lives from many years of pain and suffering?

    What exactly do you mean by animal rights? Are you just talking of a sort of metaphysical rights? As you know I’m talking of a physical in this world kind of rights.

    At present there are some sort of rules or laws to guide us on how to treat animals decently, in the west at least. Of course, human beings being humans, many would still eat animals or be cruel to animals. And of course these laws are not enough or exhaustive but its something that we can build on especially as we hopefully all come to the realization that the man to the animals is like a king, who has the primary responsibility of caring for and protecting his citizens or subjects.
    Respect for all living entities

Similar Threads

  1. Animal welfare and animal rights
    By fiver in forum Animals
    Replies: 57
    Last Post: Sep 13th, 2008, 09:01 AM
  2. Animal rights, human rights and environmental activism (on myspace page)
    By DancingWillow in forum Projects, companies & links
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: Jun 16th, 2007, 08:36 AM
  3. Animal Rights in the UK?
    By Gal in forum UK
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: May 16th, 2006, 12:25 AM
  4. Animal Rights in the UK
    By eve in forum UK
    Replies: 14
    Last Post: Dec 21st, 2004, 09:00 PM

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •