EnviroLink Forum

Community • Ecology • Connection
It is currently Wed Oct 01, 2014 12:19 pm

All times are UTC - 5 hours [ DST ]




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 23 posts ]  Go to page 1, 2  Next
Author Message
PostPosted: Fri Aug 13, 2004 8:39 am 
Offline
New User
New User

Joined: Mon Jul 26, 2004 9:04 am
Posts: 33
How did it happen? How did a forum called Animal Concerns become a forum used daily only to bash animal rights? The name is so misleading. Have you considered deleting this particular message board? The only purpose it serves is to cloud the aspirations of animal rights activists and veg*ans with anti-AR propaganda and an overall negative attitude. All believers in AR seem to be virtually extinct here. I'm sorry to complain. :oops: I'm just wondering what vision you had for this place initially? Do you feel that animal concerns is really the topic here or perhaps that it has deviated into something more like Anti-Animal Concerns?


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Aug 13, 2004 10:12 am 
Offline
Member with over 1000 posts!
Member with over 1000 posts!
User avatar

Joined: Mon Jun 30, 2003 9:27 am
Posts: 5776
Location: USA
cheerful_fawn wrote:
How did it happen? How did a forum called Animal Concerns become a forum used daily only to bash animal rights? The name is so misleading.


Only to those easily misled. Concerns deal with rights as well as welfare and other issues, obviously. :roll:

Quote:
Have you considered deleting this particular message board?


If memory serves, the Animal Concerns forum once had "Animal Rights" in it's title, but was changed for the very reason that animal issues encompassed more than extremist AR views. No need to eliminate something when it can be improved (or has been already). Reminds me of the AR view on factory farming.

Quote:
The only purpose it serves is to cloud the aspirations of animal rights activists and veg*ans with anti-AR propaganda and an overall negative attitude.


Unrealistic, misguided aspirations built on half-truths and ignorance should and will be challenged. :twisted:

Quote:
All believers in AR seem to be virtually extinct here.


Perhaps, or maybe they read and just don't post for whatever reason. :P

Quote:
Do you feel that animal concerns is really the topic here or perhaps that it has deviated into something more like Anti-Animal Concerns?


:idea: Try distinguishing the terms "concerns" and "rights", and you'll be better off.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Fri Aug 13, 2004 10:30 am 
Offline
New User
New User

Joined: Mon Jul 26, 2004 9:04 am
Posts: 33
Are you guys really concerned about animals or just obsessed with anti-AR. Come on, be honest.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Fri Aug 13, 2004 10:44 am 
Offline
Member with over 1000 posts!
Member with over 1000 posts!
User avatar

Joined: Mon Jun 30, 2003 9:27 am
Posts: 5776
Location: USA
cheerful_fawn wrote:
Are you guys really concerned about animals or just obsessed with anti-AR. Come on, be honest.


It is difficult for you to recognize others' concern because your own is limited to AR philosophy. If someone doesn't share your views, it doesn't register with you that they are concerned. This is a shame.

The plight of animals concerns me, as well as that of all living things but most importantly the environment. This is a broad concern that requires an understanding of the biological and physical world--something about which the predominantly philosophical AR movement has little clue.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Mon Aug 16, 2004 8:24 am 
Offline
New User
New User

Joined: Mon Jul 26, 2004 9:04 am
Posts: 33
"It is difficult for you to recognize others' concern because your own is limited to AR philosophy. If someone doesn't share your views, it doesn't register with you that they are concerned. This is a shame."

-I understand what you're saying and it might be true with some people, but not with me. I can recognize concern for animals in others even if they don't share my philosophies. If you actually posted here to talk about your concern for animals, I would never question it. But I don't see you and most of the others here doing that. The only thing I see is AR bashing. If I wrote something in the animal forum right now, I would get a refute almost instantly. But nobody else has written here in days. So it is to my understanding that the majority of the people who post here, view the forum nearly every day and only reply to debate when someone says something pro-veg*an or pro-AR. What do you think? Is my conclusion totally off or what?
Just out of curiosity, how does environmentalism tie into anti-AR? Is it just because of this website or are there some other major elements involved?


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Mon Aug 16, 2004 11:07 am 
Offline
EnviroLink Volunteer
EnviroLink Volunteer
User avatar

Joined: Thu Jun 26, 2003 10:45 pm
Posts: 20550
Location: Southeastern US
cheerful_fawn wrote:
"It is difficult for you to recognize others' concern because your own is limited to AR philosophy. If someone doesn't share your views, it doesn't register with you that they are concerned. This is a shame."

I understand what you're saying and it might be true with some people, but not with me. I can recognize concern for animals in others even if they don't share my philosophies.


So you have a special power to detect "true" animal concerns based on postings to a forum? I hope you use this power only for good ... :lol:

Quote:
If you actually posted here to talk about your concern for animals, I would never question it.


Well, the problem is this board crashed and several years of prior discussions were lost, which those of us, like Fosgate, who were here before have not rehashed old postings just to be typing.

Quote:
But I don't see you and most of the others here doing that. The only thing I see is AR bashing. If I wrote something in the animal forum right now, I would get a refute almost instantly.


Only if it were in need of bashing, which might be the case with a pure AR statement, but not with an AW statement that also can show concerns for animals.

Quote:
But nobody else has written here in days. So it is to my understanding that the majority of the people who post here, view the forum nearly every day and only reply to debate when someone says something pro-veg*an or pro-AR.


They reply if there is something that piques their interest. the only problem with pro-veg*n diet statements are when they misrepresent the diets. There is nothing wrong with either diet as long as they are balanced and proper supplements are taken, which is the same for any diet. If there is a morality benefit presented that can be a point of contention.

Quote:
What do you think? Is my conclusion totally off or what?


Pretty much .. :lol:

Quote:
Just out of curiosity, how does environmentalism tie into anti-AR?


That is Josh's call. I fought him tooth and nail over the combination of the two as I was involved with the separate environmental board when they combined the two (more history lessons can come form this) and I had no interest in the AR discussions. Until I saw some misrepresentations and got some things cleared up in another aspect of the involvement, and I was sucked in to trying to correct those misrepresentations.

Quote:
Is it just because of this website or are there some other major elements involved?


My vote is that it is just this website as the only connection between the two is when the AR movement tries to use an environmental issue to further their goals instead of allowing a mitigation of the problem.

_________________
With friends like Guido, you will not have enemies for long.

“Intellect is invisible to the man who has none”
Arthur Schopenhauer


"The difference between genius and stupidity is that genius has its limits."
Albert Einstein


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Tue Aug 17, 2004 9:26 am 
Offline
Member with 500 Posts!
Member with 500 Posts!
User avatar

Joined: Thu Apr 01, 2004 11:28 am
Posts: 865
Quote:
I understand what you're saying and it might be true with some people, but not with me. I can recognize concern for animals in others even if they don't share my philosophies. If you actually posted here to talk about your concern for animals, I would never question it. But I don't see you and most of the others here doing that. The only thing I see is AR bashing.


The reason that you see "AR bashing (although that isn't what it is)" is that very frequently, AR is not about the animals at all.
AR seeks the end of companion animals, domestic livestock and all interaction with animals.
Frankly, I don't see their concern for animals very frequently, as they would rather involve themselves in campaigns to promote donations to their organizations rather than actually hands on helping animals.
The animal welfare movement has actually gone out and made changes in laws, for stricter enforcement of cruelty and neglect, more laws and guidelines for humane treatment of livestock and lab animals and educated people on spaying and neutering their companion animals, and on responsible breeding practices.


Quote:
If I wrote something in the animal forum right now, I would get a refute almost instantly.


When you post false information relating to diet and 'compassion', you are definitely going to get responses.
Posting actual numbers and figures to refute the lies published by AR groups is not "bashing" AR, it's correcting false information. You may not like it, but the facts are that AR groups lie to further their agenda. That is why you get so many responses.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Sep 30, 2004 10:45 pm 
Offline
Member with 50 posts!
Member with 50 posts!

Joined: Tue Jun 29, 2004 10:59 am
Posts: 158
cheerful_fawn wrote:
Are you guys really concerned about animals or just obsessed with anti-AR. Come on, be honest.


Just because I wouldn't hold up a protest sign at a fast food restaurant and I eat meat and drink milk doesn't mean I don't like animals. In all seriousness, do you think that you are only concerned about animals if you go with everything PETA and other similar groups say?


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Apr 19, 2005 11:02 am 
Offline
Member with over 1000 posts!
Member with over 1000 posts!
User avatar

Joined: Wed Mar 02, 2005 12:59 am
Posts: 2277
Location: Central Colorado
The real concern for animals in an environmental forum should be for habitat destruction and species loss. It should also be about management of wildlife and habitats, varying carrying capacity and number of hunting licenses/tags issued and where. There should be a lot of argument against "development", and overpopulation of humans causing habitat loss and extinction of species throughout the world.
The treatment of pets, animals for useful experimentation, fur use and eating of meat should only be in there IF it relates to the ecology/environment.
Definitely, it should not be used to promote vegetarianism, when we are omnivores by evolution and dietary micronutrient needs.

_________________
"With every decision, think seven generations ahead of the consequences of your actions" Ute rule of life.
“We do not inherit the earth from our ancestors; we borrow it from our children”― Chief Seattle
“Those Who Have the Privilege to Know Have the Duty to Act”…Albert Einstein


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Tue Apr 19, 2005 7:07 pm 
Offline
Member with 200 posts
Member with 200 posts
User avatar

Joined: Tue Feb 17, 2004 12:18 pm
Posts: 481
Location: Swansea
I knew over population was going to get in there somewhere.

Unfortunately, what oinks says is quite right with certain organisations. Thats kinda why I created my own help organisation as I know my own agenda. You know what I mean. I personally see myself as an AWA with a few AR tendencies, such as I think animal cruelty should carry a bigger sentence than it does. Although that could be AW... At the moment PETA is fairly infamous although I do stress that they do some good work although, for the amount of money, they should do a lot more. It has become a corporate charity.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Apr 19, 2005 9:33 pm 
Offline
Member with over 1000 posts!
Member with over 1000 posts!
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jun 24, 2003 11:53 am
Posts: 2281
Location: Pittsburgh, PA USA
Johhny Electriglide wrote:
The real concern for animals in an environmental forum should be ...


Please read the topic of this particular posting area. It is not to debate issues, that's best done elsewhere in the EnviroLink Forum. While you may feel the need to express your opinion about everything, unless it is direct feedback for EnviroLink, your post belongs elsewhere.

Thanks,

-josh


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Jul 25, 2005 9:54 am 
Offline
New User
New User

Joined: Sun Jul 24, 2005 11:29 pm
Posts: 3
Location: Canada
Dear Cheerful Fawn:

I completely agree with you. I didn't realize this was actually an anti-animal rights forum. The heading was misleading, to say the least, and I'm very unhappy about it.

I, too, think that they should either completely delete this forum or delete anti-animal posts.

Choo


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Mon Jul 25, 2005 12:14 pm 
Offline
Member with over 1000 posts!
Member with over 1000 posts!
User avatar

Joined: Wed Dec 29, 2004 9:34 am
Posts: 6321
Location: Texas
I guess it's a good thing your opinion doesn't matter.

_________________
"Yes like I said it all boils down to morals. What you think is right doesn't make a person wrong because they think different ;)" X-Black


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Tue Jul 26, 2005 12:12 am 
Offline
Member with over 1000 posts!
Member with over 1000 posts!
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jun 24, 2003 11:53 am
Posts: 2281
Location: Pittsburgh, PA USA
As one of the people in charge of this forum, I can tell you that it exists for the discussion and debate of environmental and animal concerns issues. It's not a place for everyone to agree about stuff on any particular issues. That's kind of boring and doesn't help to bring about any change in the world.

Open up your mind and learn to interact with those that disagree with you. That's a message for folks on all sides of the issues discussed here.

-josh


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Tue Jul 26, 2005 4:04 pm 
Offline
Member with 200 posts
Member with 200 posts
User avatar

Joined: Tue May 18, 2004 12:33 pm
Posts: 460
Location: Sacramento, CA
The existance of the board for debate and discussion is great, and I believe that many on that board are mentally stable enough for civilized discussion. Archer, mostly, and a few others have given me items to think about and I have enjoyed their company at times despite the fact that I disagree with their base philosophy. Unfortunately, once a good discussion is flowing, a select few enter the board and destroy it all. They incite anger, resentment and defensiveness. A discussion about a specific item turns into an all out attack against the AR philosophy.

I admit that I have been sucked into this game and have swung back when I should not have.

I believe that anti-AR posts are what keeps the AR philosophy true to itself.
On the other hand, I would like to see a few individuals banned from posting to the discussion.

_________________
"Not to hurt our humble brethren (the animals) is our first duty to them, but to stop there is not enough. We have a higher mission - to be of service to them whenever they require it."

Saint Francis of Assisi


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 23 posts ]  Go to page 1, 2  Next

All times are UTC - 5 hours [ DST ]


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum

Jump to:  
cron
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group