EnviroLink Forum
http://www.envirolink.org/forum/

misconceptions used in dishonest debate
http://www.envirolink.org/forum/viewtopic.php?f=8&t=2333
Page 1 of 2

Author:  wijim [ Wed Mar 29, 2006 2:42 pm ]
Post subject:  misconceptions used in dishonest debate

in looking at the debates that ive been involved in over the recent past here, i have noticed things being said like "....supporting abuse" referring to people who have different ideas etc.

why the hell is it so hard to realize that i, donnie, capitolistswine, rf, bean, wayne, archer, hunter88 (and others i may have forgotten) don't advocate the cruel treatment of animals? it has been eluded to time and time again that some or all of us who advocate animal use, would also personally advocate setting chickens on fire or some other thing the "do-gooders" (termed losely and sarcastically) would consider abuse.

is it because we refuse to infringe our view of morality on others? is it because we refuse to believe every cruelty petition and bias report of apparent cruelty? is it because their version of cruelty goes far outside the scope of what is reasonable to most (i.e. save the roaches campaigns)?

why is it acceptable to make that shit up? just curious.

Author:  wijim [ Wed Mar 29, 2006 2:47 pm ]
Post subject: 

maybe someone can actually prove use=abuse.

eta:
on one hand you have grace who has never ever hunted and knows so little about the actual activities with hunting and trapping coming up with hunting and trapping ethics, on the other hand you have animaluver, and lacy basically stating because i wont personally say i damn some ex-employee based on their word that the person is an animal abuser that i support animal abuse.

if i were to be so irresponsible as to team in with that type of bs guess i'd wind up feeling like a very gullible cheat. and i certainly wouldnt want myself as a dog owner etc to be governed by them (those who are that gullible) as well....... :roll:

then ya got barb...uh i mean sianblooz...who blatantly puts words in peoples mouths.....good grief....lmao

Author:  Origam [ Wed Mar 29, 2006 2:54 pm ]
Post subject: 

Good luck getting an answer.

I'm still trying to figure out how the AR/ARish crowd cares more about animals than the rest of us.

Author:  Origam [ Wed Mar 29, 2006 3:00 pm ]
Post subject: 

Back in the days before I went to FMB I thought a lot like Grace. Scary stuff huh? I think a few of us gals on FMB have had our minds changed a bit on the idea of hunting and animal use.

Anyway, back to the subject.

Perhaps they think that you would support the abuse of animals because they view hunting,trapping, etc. as abuse? Could be that they think that since you can kill an animal and a lot of you view pets as property (I'm sitting on the fence with that one) that you don't care about the well being of other animals? I'm just guessing based on what I would've tought back in the day.

Author:  wijim [ Wed Mar 29, 2006 3:04 pm ]
Post subject: 

Origam wrote:
Back in the days before I went to FMB I thought a lot like Grace. Scary stuff huh? I think a few of us gals on FMB have had our minds changed a bit on the idea of hunting and animal use.

Anyway, back to the subject.

Perhaps they think that you would support the abuse of animals because they view hunting,trapping, etc. as abuse? Could be that they think that since you can kill an animal and a lot of you view pets as property (I'm sitting on the fence with that one) that you don't care about the well being of other animals? I'm just guessing based on what I would've tought back in the day.


possibly.....but i guess i'd feel more abusive to animals personally if i didnt hunt them....i only speak for me on that one.

for owning pets. if i feed them and am able to keep them from biting people......i own them. what other use does a domestic dog have other than the role of pet?

Author:  Amy7779311 [ Wed Mar 29, 2006 3:07 pm ]
Post subject: 

Most of these incidents are coming from those who know better, yet they choose to act ignorant or as in Bubba's case....they make loads of false statements hoping that a few will stick in the minds of some here.

Sadly, this tactic seems to work...at least for a while.

Author:  Amy7779311 [ Wed Mar 29, 2006 3:08 pm ]
Post subject: 

No need to reply to me as I really don't have much more to say about it that won't get me banned...

Author:  wijim [ Wed Mar 29, 2006 3:13 pm ]
Post subject: 

Amy7779311 wrote:
Most of these incidents are coming from those who know better, yet they choose to act ignorant or as in Bubba's case....they make loads of false statements hoping that a few will stick in the minds of some here.

Sadly, this tactic seems to work...at least for a while.


oh kind of like the "aren't you the same wijim that crushed his daughters cat's head in front of her?"

Author:  Origam [ Wed Mar 29, 2006 4:04 pm ]
Post subject: 

wijim wrote:
possibly.....but i guess i'd feel more abusive to animals personally if i didnt hunt them....i only speak for me on that one.

for owning pets. if i feed them and am able to keep them from biting people......i own them. what other use does a domestic dog have other than the role of pet?


(rummages through closet to find AR hat..)

It's hard for people who are AR/ARish to accept that hunters/trappers actually care about the well being of animals. AR/ARish people tend to put human emotions on animals.. heck, I do it and a few other people I know (looks around the room) still do it from time to time. When you grow up on Bambi and in a society that pretty much treats pets as part of the family and such you tend to think of anyone who could kill an animal as someone who doesn't care about them. It took me a lot of conversations, reading, and asking questions of hunters to believe otherwise.

Seems kind of funny to me that the people who claim to care more about the animals than other people know less about the critters than the people who hunt the animals.

Anyway.. on to the next one

I've got nothing against people owning pets. I do have troubles when it comes to the property part of it. If I see someone harming their dog (kicking, hitting, throwing things at, etc. not just feeding the wrong kibble or giving it tap water instead of bottled) do I look the other way because they have the right to do whatever since the dog is their property.. or do I intervene for the dog's well being? See, thats where I get torn on the whole property issue.

Other uses for domestic dogs? They make good pillows and they listen better than most men. :wink:

Author:  Amy7779311 [ Wed Mar 29, 2006 4:38 pm ]
Post subject: 

*runs back in *

Two things...

Yes. (about Bubba)

Origam, we think alike with the whole propery issue. I also get stuck on that subject, and even though I believe I've found a few outlets for my frustrations there...I still am divided in certain thoughtsabout it.

Author:  Archer [ Thu Mar 30, 2006 10:10 am ]
Post subject: 

It's a good question, Jim, but as you can see, we are short on answers.

Author:  wijim [ Thu Mar 30, 2006 10:23 am ]
Post subject: 

i think we've gotten the most honest answers that are to be had. cuz origam and amy can look back and see where they were to answer those questions.

Author:  Grace [ Thu Mar 30, 2006 11:00 am ]
Post subject: 

wijim wrote:
maybe someone can actually prove use=abuse.

eta:
on one hand you have grace who has never ever hunted and knows so little about the actual activities with hunting and trapping coming up with hunting and trapping ethics, on the other hand you have animaluver, and lacy basically stating because i wont personally say i damn some ex-employee based on their word that the person is an animal abuser that i support animal abuse.


Correction. Grace HAS hunted (once) Grace also grew up with hunting all around her and had many boyfriends, friends, friends' fathers, brothers and neighbors who hunted. Grace ate venison.

Author:  wijim [ Thu Mar 30, 2006 12:01 pm ]
Post subject: 

Grace wrote:
wijim wrote:
maybe someone can actually prove use=abuse.

eta:
on one hand you have grace who has never ever hunted and knows so little about the actual activities with hunting and trapping coming up with hunting and trapping ethics, on the other hand you have animaluver, and lacy basically stating because i wont personally say i damn some ex-employee based on their word that the person is an animal abuser that i support animal abuse.


Correction. Grace HAS hunted (once) Grace also grew up with hunting all around her and had many boyfriends, friends, friends' fathers, brothers and neighbors who hunted. Grace ate venison.


what'd ya hunt? were you successful?

Author:  Archer [ Thu Mar 30, 2006 12:28 pm ]
Post subject: 

Grace wrote:
Grace ate venison.


But you don't any more? :shock: Maybe it wasn't cooked right. :?

Page 1 of 2 All times are UTC - 5 hours [ DST ]
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group
http://www.phpbb.com/