Why are humans fighting for animal rights when humans are still suffering?

[Tony Stacks]

How can humans begin to fights for the rights of other species when human rights have not even been accomplished?

[TheNoNamedOne]

Because a perfect world where all humans will enjoy rights will never happen. To say the animals have to wait for that, is the same as saying there will never be a fight for their rights to be established.

Besides, there are enough humans and enough recourses to multi-task on different fronts at the same time. One need not preclude the other from happening.

To say that one must be won perfectly before the other can proceed with progress towards winning to some degree is a false dichotomy.

[devine]

A better question is why are we helping children in other countries, before we help our own children. Oprah spends millions of dollars helping children in Africa before helping children in her own backyard. Animal rights is indeed something that can be more controlled then human rights.

Prosecutor I agree with your post completely.

[Sex Wax]

A better question is why are we helping children in other countries, before we help our own children. Oprah spends millions of dollars helping children in Africa before helping children in her own backyard. Animal rights is indeed something that can be more controlled then human rights.

Prosecutor I agree with your post completely.

Mess not with the Oprah. You will turn to the Dark Side or be destroyed !!!!

http://www.clubfuji.com/Ash/oprah%20vader.jpg
lol :thumbup1:

[OCanadaOurHomeAndNativeLand]

Easy question Tony. How you behave towards those least able to defend themselves against exploitation (i.e. animals) shows your true feelings. Those who harm animals willfully or care not a whit for animal welfare are likely to behave in a similar way towards oppressed peoples as well. Perhaps you've heard the expression "your actions reveal your heart".

[okisteve]

A better question is why are we helping children in other countries, before we help our own children. Oprah spends millions of dollars helping children in Africa before helping children in her own backyard. Animal rights is indeed something that can be more controlled then human rights.

Prosecutor I agree with your post completely.

I have no problem with Oprah, or our government, giving help to Africans and other people who are so much poorer than we are. But I agree, Devine, that we should be doing more for our kids too.

Depending on which way the political wind is blowing, it is sometimes easier to shame our representatives into fighting AIDS in Africa than hunger in the USA.

Too bad we don't have the resources to do it all though. Maybe once we can get out of Iraq....

[Jrocka83]

How can humans begin to fights for the rights of other species when human rights have not even been accomplished?

My friend, there is such a place that exists, beyond this physical world and beyond our imagination.

It is a place in the heart.

The moment we relize that no matter what happens in this cold and dark world, warm and enlightened world. We can enjoy happyness and serenity.

Is the moment we are free, and the fighting stops within our selves.

The choice is ours, we can choose to strive for happyness and freedom.

Take or leave it.

"Emancipate yourself from mental slavery, non but ourselves can free our minds"
-Bob Marley

[Maggie]

How can humans begin to fights for the rights of other species when human rights have not even been accomplished?

Why should fighting for animal rights preclude fighting for human rights?

Every living creature on this planet deserves the right to life without oppression and cruelty.

I hope that would include animals and people.

The only difference that I can see, is that people have a voice. Animals don't.

Maggie

[dk]

Why should fighting for animal rights shouldn't preclude fighting for human rights?
Priorities, priorities, priorities.

[BleuEneG]

Easy question Tony. How you behave towards those least able to defend themselves against exploitation (i.e. animals) shows your true feelings. Those who harm animals willfully or care not a whit for animal welfare are likely to behave in a similar way towards oppressed peoples as well. Perhaps you've heard the expression "your actions reveal your heart".

I agree with this so much that I think it's a really good idea for young children to have pets and be taught how to care for them. I think when a child has the experience of taking care of a pet it builds some compassion in his heart for all living things. And that's why it really trips me out to see children getting away with hitting dogs or just being plain cruel to animals. I had a neighbor back home who's little girl thought it was funny to hit dogs on the nose and she was not reprimanded or anything. Sucks for her if one day she does it to the wrong dog.

And don't all those head doctor's say that one thing alot of serial killers had in common was they exhibited cruelty to animals when they were kids?

[Maggie]

Priorities, priorities, priorities.

Priorities are fine, but you only have control over your own priorities.
If you try to fight against everything you think needs righting then you'll accomplish nothing. No one can do everything.

It comes down to a matter of personal choice. There are hundreds and thousands of people and organisations standing up for human rights. I've done it myself, working for Handicap International.

They have money and Government backing. They don't need me.

My choice is to try and alleviate animal suffering. If I can help a human as well, then I will, but my priorities are first and foremost to do what is within my capabilities.

Maggie

[dk]

Fair enough. I may have misunderstood. I thought you were putting animals before humans, which seems to be a pretty common misunderstanding.

[Maggie]

Fair enough. I may have misunderstood. I thought you were putting animals before humans, which seems to be a pretty common misunderstanding.

I don't think so, at least I would hope not.

If I thought that under privileged people needed me, then perhaps I'd re-prioritise, but I'd probably end up dishing out tea in some shelter for the homeless, most of whom don't actually want to be helped. A free meal is their priority. Not always, but mostly.

Nobody in a position of power is going to speak to me, never mind listen to me.

I like animals and we live in a society that is largely disinterested in their welfare. Abattoirs are interested in speed, not compassion. They run on money and output, not respect for life or comfort in death.

We want to eat animals, and we like to buy them packaged up in cellophane. We treat them abysmally during the short disgusting lives they suffer. We pump them full of antibiotics so that they can live in overcrowded filthy conditions, until we run the risk of becoming immune to the drugs ourselves.

None of the animal welfare organisations i.e. the RSPCA will bother farmers. They only tread on the toes of people who don't have the money to put them at risk or fight back.

I can't keep one dog in a good sized cage (not that I do or want to), but battery farms can cram as many birds as profitable into a pint size cage.

If we want to use animals we should respect their right for a decent quality life. They can't ask for themselves.

We've given up the right to make use of them.

Maggie

[TheNoNamedOne]

Excellent, Maggs. Excellent.

[OCanadaOurHomeAndNativeLand]

I agree with this so much that I think it's a really good idea for young children to have pets and be taught how to care for them. I think when a child has the experience of taking care of a pet it builds some compassion in his heart for all living things. And that's why it really trips me out to see children getting away with hitting dogs or just being plain cruel to animals. I had a neighbor back home who's little girl thought it was funny to hit dogs on the nose and she was not reprimanded or anything. Sucks for her if one day she does it to the wrong dog.

And don't all those head doctor's say that one thing alot of serial killers had in common was they exhibited cruelty to animals when they were kids?
Yes, I agree with this. This is one issue where I've had strong and heated words with close local friends. I watch as their children beg for pets (various types), get them, dote on them for a short period of time, and then become indifferent, leaving them to suffer with inadequate food, water, sanitation, and attention. The parents take over for a time, then they too begin to ignore the poor creature. The animal eventually dies much earlier than the pet shop said its lifespan would be, making them "angry customers". What a sad state of affairs.

[Isaak Brodsky]

Because a perfect world where all humans will enjoy rights will never happen. To say the animals have to wait for that, is the same as saying there will never be a fight for their rights to be established.

TP, unsure what you mean.

We'll never live in a perfect world ??

OR

Despite our best efforts, the world will never be perfect, so why waste time trying to better it. Might as well try and make it a better place for animals and hand the humans over to their own depravities ?? or something like that

[TheNoNamedOne]

TP, unsure what you mean.

We'll never live in a perfect world ??

OR

Despite our best efforts, the world will never be perfect, so why waste time trying to better it. Might as well try and make it a better place for animals and hand the humans over to their own depravities ?? or something like that

The former in red, Ian. Or at least that is the very very short version.

[Isaak Brodsky]

Yeah, could not agree with you more here.

[pardus]

The animal rights activists I know are pretty adamant about supporting human rights, as a subset of animal rights. Some are involved actively, or have been, while others speak out when opportunities come up. It's kind of hard to condone the exploitation of human animals while condemning the exploitation of non-human ones.

[NotSoAverageWife]

When we moved here. Our dogs couldn't come with us right then because they had no room on the plane. However...I missed my dogs and after finding out about the animal overpopulation problem here, and how many get put down and military leave behind...I started working with OAARS. I was able to get sev. dogs adopted. Even one of our good friends adopted one and we adopted one ourself. He started off as a foster dog. But I just felt the need to help those who couldn't really help themself and didn't ask to be in that postion.

[Asshat]

The animal rights activists I know are pretty adamant about supporting human rights, as a subset of animal rights. Some are involved actively, or have been, while others speak out when opportunities come up. It's kind of hard to condone the exploitation of human animals while condemning the exploitation of non-human ones.

Can you explain the wanton ramming and sinking of ships involved with whaling on the high seas? While I agree with that whaling should cease, I disagree with tactics that endanger the lives of humans.

[Sex Wax]

How about all them ARists use some of those protest skills and money and Save the Humans and worry about the goats later. Use them Whale Chasing Boats to bring some food to the people that really need it.

http://www.clubfuji.com/Ash/animal%20rights%20suck1.jpg

http://www.clubfuji.com/Ash/animal%20rights%20suck2.jpg
Good. She saved a chicken, now feed it to someone who is starving. Looks like she has been hitting the Burger King a bit on the side anyway.ANIMAL LIBERATOR - Australian animal rights activist Patty Mark takes a chicken from Golden Gate Poultry Farm near Pauatahanui yesterday afternoon. Picture: Diana Simpson http://www.upc-online.org/aart/010420.html

I am all against cruelty to animals, but not against using them for food. The ARists can sit at home and eat thier soybeans (Save the Veggies!)and take thier vitamin suppliments cause they can afford it. Some people just want to eat some substantial food and not a bowl of rice the UN sends them. I would rather help the people first, then worry about some baby seal that will get eaten by a killer whale anyway. When the animals stop eating each other, i'll stop also.

There, you wanted me to take a side and voice my opinion. There it is.

:thumbup1:

[pardus]

I would rather help the people first.

So do the easiest thing and stop taking their sustenance away from them just to feed your environment-devastating, disease-spreading, air-water-land polluting livestock.

[pardus]

Can you explain the wanton ramming and sinking of ships involved with whaling on the high seas? While I agree with that whaling should cease, I disagree with tactics that endanger the lives of humans.

One thing to remember is that in spite of the physical attacks on the Sea Shepherd crew, they have never injured a single human being. Their actions are engineered to disable ships that are actively engaged in whaling or sealing, to document the seal slaughter using film, and to keep ships out of the area or place themselves between the ships and their quarry.

Their attitude is admittedly an aggressive one, though, which does not sit well with some who support their ultimate mission.

(There's also the question of whether they are actually acting for animal rights or animal welfare, which is forever debated within animal advocacy circles)

The human-directed violence has been directed at the activists themselves, although there have been accusations otherwise. For instance they "threw acid at Japanese whalers" but it was butyric acid, which is rancid butter, harmful only to one's olfactory sense. Watson, on the other hand, has been beaten and recently was shot.

[Asshat]

One thing to remember is that in spite of the physical attacks on the Sea Shepherd crew, they have never injured a single human being. Their actions are engineered to disable ships that are actively engaged in whaling or sealing, to document the seal slaughter using film, and to keep ships out of the area or place themselves between the ships and their quarry.

Their attitude is admittedly an aggressive one, though, which does not sit well with some who support their ultimate mission.

(There's also the question of whether they are actually acting for animal rights or animal welfare, which is forever debated within animal advocacy circles)

The human-directed violence has been directed at the activists themselves, although there have been accusations otherwise. For instance they "threw acid at Japanese whalers" but it was butyric acid, which is rancid butter, harmful only to one's olfactory sense. Watson, on the other hand, has been beaten and recently was shot.

I think you are swallowing a bit of balderdash here. First off, ramming and sinking a ship on the high seas is in violation of maritime law. To discuss the relavence of maritime law is another discussion- however this agreement is thought of the world over as legitimate.

Secondly, sinking a ship on the high seas is, and has been considered attempted murder. Sea Sheppard is equip'd with concrete bow balast as well as reinforced steel plate on her bows.

Thirdly, boarding a vessel on the high seas which is not in danger is called "piracy" and it is exactly for that reason three crew members of Sheppard were called to Oz to testify on thier actions. You wont read that in the news, but I have been talking to a friend who serves on one of the maritime commissions there.

Thank you for your comment. I am 100 percent for not hunting mamals on the ocean, however placing human life at risk is unquestionably wrong in my views, and it does not endear these nutcases to me one iota.

Watson describes himself as a modern day pirate, and has stated human life is less important than that of a worm. My view, is that he is a punk acting like an ass under the guise of something decent.

[pardus]

I have to admit, this is a tricky one. But how is this different from whacking someone with a bat because they are torturing a puppy?

By the way, have they ever actually sunk a ship with people on board?

[Asshat]

I have to admit, this is a tricky one. But how is this different from whacking someone with a bat because they are torturing a puppy?

By the way, have they ever actually sunk a ship with people on board?

Yes, they have rammed and sank ships with crew aboard.

Pretty hard to have a 150 foot long "research whaling vessel" 1000 miles out of Australia with no crew on board.

It is slightly different from whacking someone with a bat who is torturing a puppy. The puppy torturer is not doing it to feed his family, and in some places, the act is illegal.

I can appreciate Green Peace's efforts, as they have recognizability, and do not tout violence- nor do they refer to themselves as pirates. The difference is night and day.

Sea Shephard is a floating contridiction of terms skippered by a man who has stated he is a pirate and that men are less important than worms. Hard to generate any support by anyone other than the arm-chair AR'ist who lacks the intellect to fathom maritime law, or what it means to be thousands of miles off shore earning a living.

[Maggie]

Can you explain the wanton ramming and sinking of ships involved with whaling on the high seas? While I agree with that whaling should cease, I disagree with tactics that endanger the lives of humans.

No explanation should be needed.
It's obviously wrong to endanger human lives. To do so in the interests of saving any life is hypocrisy.
All life is sacred.

Maggie

[OCanadaOurHomeAndNativeLand]

How about all them ARists use some of those protest skills and money and Save the Humans and worry about the goats later. Use them Whale Chasing Boats to bring some food to the people that really need it.

I am all against cruelty to animals, but not against using them for food. The ARists can sit at home and eat thier soybeans (Save the Veggies!)and take thier vitamin suppliments cause they can afford it. Some people just want to eat some substantial food and not a bowl of rice the UN sends them. I would rather help the people first, then worry about some baby seal that will get eaten by a killer whale anyway. When the animals stop eating each other, i'll stop also.

There, you wanted me to take a side and voice my opinion. There it is.

You raise some good points. There is at least one member here that has spent a significant amount of time in various locations in Africa who could probably explain this a lot better, but there is a lot of time and money being spent on the Africa situation. Problems with dodgy agencies skimming money, dodgy governments skimming money, food, and materials, and a whole lot folks & groups that profit greatly by things not improving.

[Asshat]

You raise some good points. There is at least one member here that has spent a significant amount of time in various locations in Africa who could probably explain this a lot better, but there is a lot of time and money being spent on the Africa situation. Problems with dodgy agencies skimming money, dodgy governments skimming money, food, and materials, and a whole lot folks & groups that profit greatly by things not improving.

That is very true eele and something we touched on here once concerning AIDS. There is much money to be made conducting research, and raising money. It is sad that there are so many people with their fingers in the pie.

One can easily buy CARE products over the counter from local North African vendors.

[OCanadaOurHomeAndNativeLand]

Yeah Umin, that's one way funds get diverted. Another example I heard about was clothing donations. People donate old clothes to charities that will send them to Africa. Thing is, many charities ask for money to clean the clothes and ship them, in addition to your material donation. They then sell the clothes to brokers in Africa, who pass them on to local hawkers for a song. Sure, Africa is awash in cheap clothes, but the local spinning and tailoring industries are completely destroyed in the process. Before the donation program, few places were without their own local clothing making. Now, few places make their own. One of those cases where making it easy for the donor took precedence over what was really necessary "on the ground".

[Maggie]

[The human-directed violence has been directed at the activists themselves, although there have been accusations otherwise. For instance they "threw acid at Japanese whalers" but it was butyric acid, which is rancid butter, harmful only to one's olfactory sense. Watson, on the other hand, has been beaten and recently was shot.[/QUOTE]

It's also interesting to note that in Mozambique, sacks of food were being taken off the lorries by supposedly starving people and sold by them at the side of the Road.

In Bosnia, clothes that were sent to the Bosnians were refused because they were "second hand" and not new.

It would be pleasant to think that we could help people less fortunate than ourselves, but greed is forever present, because it's human nature.

Animals would appear to have higher morals than the sad and starving people shown for effect, but who are more than happy to make a profit on the backs of their neighbours.

Maggie :rolleyes:

[Asshat]

[The human-directed violence has been directed at the activists themselves, although there have been accusations otherwise. For instance they "threw acid at Japanese whalers" but it was butyric acid, which is rancid butter, harmful only to one's olfactory sense. Watson, on the other hand, has been beaten and recently was shot.

Check this out Maggie. On the high seas, boarding a ship is considered piracy. I posted a link many moons ago.

I don't advocate violence unless life is at stake. However if someone were to board my boat on the high seas, I would be within my rights to kill them.

This has happened many times around the world, and two years ago to a friend of mine.

[Maggie]

Check this out Maggie. On the high seas, boarding a ship is considered piracy. I posted a link many moons ago.

I don't advocate violence unless life is at stake. However if someone were to board my boat on the high seas, I would be within my rights to kill them.

This has happened many times around the world, and two years ago to a friend of mine.

Much as I love you to death, I have to say, that I didn't write that.

It was Pardus :D


If someone boarded my boat (should I be lucky enough to own one) I would use everything within my power, including any amount of violence, to get rid of them. In exactly the same way as I would my home.

Maggie :cool:


Maggie

[Asshat]

Much as I love you to death, I have to say, that I didn't write that.

It was Pardus :D


If someone boarded my boat (should I be lucky enough to own one) I would use everything within my power, including any amount of violence, to get rid of them. In exactly the same way as I would my home.

Maggie :cool:


Maggie

Yeah, that is my only issue with these people. The problem is, Watson describes himself as a pirate. It seems he gets a thrill out of doing the boarding for the sake of boarding. His boat, the Steve Irwin is ballasted in the bows with concret and reinforced with steel for ramming.

In any Western court of law, that constitutes attempted murder.

[Maggie]

Yeah, that is my only issue with these people. The problem is, Watson describes himself as a pirate. It seems he gets a thrill out of doing the boarding for the sake of boarding. His boat, the Steve Irwin is ballasted in the bows with concret and reinforced with steel for ramming.

In any Western court of law, that constitutes attempted murder.

I would think that the name of his boat "The Steve Irwin" would be a slight indication of his personality

I VERY much doubt that the late Steve Irwin would want his name connected to someone who calls himself a Pirate. He certainly would never have rammed boats and put people's lives in danger :thumbdown:

I truly believe that we should try to put a stop to killing baby seals, but I don't think behaving like a character out of Thunderbirds helps the cause in anyway whatsoever.

Maggie

[Asshat]

I would think that the name of his boat "The Steve Irwin" would be a slight indication of his personality

I VERY much doubt that the late Steve Irwin would want his name connected to someone who calls himself a Pirate. He certainly would never have rammed boats and put people's lives in danger :thumbdown:

I truly believe that we should try to put a stop to killing baby seals, but I don't think behaving like a character out of Thunderbirds helps the cause in anyway whatsoever.

Maggie

I feel exactly the same way. It is a dishonor to Steve Irwin. But as long as ARsts feel that the antics of this criminal are honorable, public opinion will continue to sway the public face of governments.

A friend (Oz) in the maritime industry told me that the three boarders from the Irwin were brought back to Oz under secrecy and that we would never hear about it.

I need to ask him what the outcome was..

But yeah, we dont need to kill endangered animals...by the way, the whale in the Antarctic are eating the krill underneath the melting pack, so the seals are starving.

[TheNoNamedOne]

I VERY much doubt that the late Steve Irwin would want his name connected to someone who calls himself a Pirate. He certainly would never have rammed boats and put people's lives in danger.


Steve Irwin was alive long enough to know of Capt Watson's direct action, and I never recall him condemning it. In fact, I think he and his wife had a friendly relationship with him (though not 100% certain of that). I do know that Steve's wife approved of the honor of the ship being named after him and IIRC thanked that gesture and attended the ceremony for it, and I also think she is a public supporter of The SeaShepherd.

With all that in mind, I think his wife probably has a better understanding of what Steve would accept connected to his name.

Edit to add:

Here is a video of Steve Irwin's wife re-christening the ship to "The Steve Irwin," and stating her hope that it stops whaling ships during an interview in the presence of Capt Watson:

http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=4fd_1196856546

[Maggie]

I feel exactly the same way. It is a dishonor to Steve Irwin. But as long as ARsts feel that the antics of this criminal are honorable, public opinion will continue to sway the public face of governments.

A friend (Oz) in the maritime industry told me that the three boarders from the Irwin were brought back to Oz under secrecy and that we would never hear about it.

I need to ask him what the outcome was..

But yeah, we dont need to kill endangered animals...by the way, the whale in the Antarctic are eating the krill underneath the melting pack, so the seals are starving.

Whales, dolphins and seals have existed millions of years in "harmony"
I would hazard a guess that it's human interference in a number of ways that has upset the balance.

I thought seals ate fish and squid, or do you mean that the whales are disrupting the food chain.

I'm afraid I'm not very quick at picking up the obvious.

Maggie :o

[Asshat]

Whales, dolphins and seals have existed millions of years in "harmony"
I would hazard a guess that it's human interference in a number of ways that has upset the balance.

I thought seals ate fish and squid, or do you mean that the whales are disrupting the food chain.

I'm afraid I'm not very quick at picking up the obvious.

Maggie :o

Global warming Mags, Global Warming. As the polar caps shrink, so does the habitat of the krill which thrive beneath it to breed. The krill of course spend much of their time in the open ocean, but when they come in to breed, the penguin use them as a food source. The whales are now getting at them, eating the seals out of existance.

[Maggie]

Steve Irwin was alive long enough to know of Capt Watson's direct action, and I never recall him condemning it. In fact, I think he and his wife had a friendly relationship with him (though not 100% certain of that). I do know that Steve's wife approved of the honor of the ship being named after him and IIRC thanked that gesture and attended the ceremony for it, and I also think she is a public supporter of The SeaShepherd.

With all that in mind, I think his wife probably has a better understanding of what Steve would accept connected to his name.

Edit to add:

Here is a video of Steve Irwin's wife re-christening the ship to "The Steve Irwin," and stating her hope that it stops whaling ships during an interview in the presence of Capt Watson:

http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=4fd_1196856546

In which case, I stand corrected.
I had no idea that they even knew each other, although that's a very naive statement, considering Steve Irwin and his wif's concern for conservation

Maggie :o

[Asshat]

In which case, I stand corrected.
I had no idea that they even knew each other, although that's a very naive statement, considering Steve Irwin and his wif's concern for conservation

Maggie :o

I doubt Ms Irwin has any idea that a ship with her husband's name sake is involved in attempted murder. She seems too decent to be involved with piracy.

This is what I meant by the politics of the situation. Everyone cries about about saving the whale without realizing that criminals and cowboys are out there taking the lives of humans so lightly. That ideology rests of course only with the very few nutcases who give ARsts a bad image.

[Maggie]

Global warming Mags, Global Warming. As the polar caps shrink, so does the habitat of the krill which thrive beneath it to breed. The krill of course spend much of their time in the open ocean, but when they come in to breed, the penguin use them as a food source. The whales are now getting at them, eating the seals out of existance.

Then whatever happens, and however hard we try to preserve life, we're blithely destroying whole species because of greed and our need to destroy other animals habitat and food source.

I don't agree with putting peoples lives at risk, and I do find the actions Capt Watson theatrical. His actions wouldn't necessarily be the ones I'd take, but I think that without direct action by a few, our species will continue to turn a blind eye to the far greater damage we are causing by pollution and such like.

You'd think we'd learn though. Asthma, cancer, auto-immune diseases and loads more are increasing at a rate of knots because of pollution. We wont even help ourselves because of our greed for ever more useful technology.

We'll probably end up as the last dying species on the planet.


Maggie :(

[Asshat]

I don't agree with putting peoples lives at risk, and I do find the actions Capt Watson theatrical. His actions wouldn't necessarily be the ones I'd take, but I think that without direct action by a few, our species will continue to turn a blind eye to the far greater damage we are causing by pollution and such like.

We'll probably end up as the last dying species on the planet.


Maggie :(


Maggie I agree with you. I refuse to swallow the koolaide on Watson. But your words are true. And perhaps Watsons comments about we humans being lower than the worms has a lot of truth in it.

But Watson is one of the worms. At least he makes the news..barely.

Why didn't Steve Irwin do this while he was alive? A decent man, a hero to many, yet he was silent in comparison to his first love. (crocs)

[Maggie]

I doubt Ms Irwin has any idea that a ship with her husband's name sake is involved in attempted murder. She seems too decent to be involved with piracy.

This is what I meant by the politics of the situation. Everyone cries about about saving the whale without realizing that criminals and cowboys are out there taking the lives of humans so lightly. That ideology rests of course only with the very few nutcases who give ARsts a bad image.

Every one I know who are involved in animal rights are ready and willing to take whatever direct action they can in order to protect and preserve animals. None of them however would condone killing people.

Only a very, very small number would consider that to be warranted.

I would say though, that I'd have no problem whatsoever in using violence to stop cruelty, and by that, I don't mean right across the board. I mean that if I was present, and saw a cruel act committed, I'd definitely go for the "an eye for an eye" philosophy without the slightest hesitation.

Maggie

[Asshat]

I would say though, that I'd have no problem whatsoever in using violence to stop cruelty, and by that, I don't mean right across the board. I mean that if I was present, and saw a cruel act committed, I'd definitely go for the "an eye for an eye" philosophy without the slightest hesitation.

Good point Maggie. I would too. Yet I see someone beating a chained dog in a slightly different light than fishermen engaged in whaling as a livlihood.

[Maggie]

Maggie I agree with you. I refuse to swallow the koolaide on Watson. But your words are true. And perhaps Watsons comments about we humans being lower than the worms has a lot of truth in it.

But Watson is one of the worms. At least he makes the news..barely.

Why didn't Steve Irwin do this while he was alive? A decent man, a hero to many, yet he was silent in comparison to his first love. (crocs)

Steve Irwin chose to put his life at risk using the media to try and educate people.

He achieved a huge amount during his lifetime. Very few people don't know his name, The Crocodile Hunter was, and still is one of the most popular programs watched.

People will remember him for years to come, and he will also be seen by generations to come.

He left behind a never ending lesson, because of the way he chose to represent the rights of animals to exist and be preserved.

I think his method of reaching as many people as possible, and changing the way many of them now regard animals was absolutely brilliant

Maggie

[Asshat]

And the current marketing strategy is absolutely brilliant. :) I do agree with you...I just wish his message could have included the denizens of the deep on a larger scale.

I wonder if the Oz Gov will force Terry back to the US? The require a million dollar (US) investment to stay there sans spouse.

She hails from my neck of the woods...not far from where I grew up.

[Maggie]

Good point Maggie. I would too. Yet I see someone beating a chained dog in a slightly different light than fishermen engaged in whaling as a livlihood.

I'd like to say that I agree, but I can't.

There are other ways of making a living, which doesn't include horredous acts of cruelty.

I am terrified of sharks, but dragging them onto a boat, cutting off their fins, and throwing them back alive in no way justifies eating shark fin soup.

Whales are gentle and inteligent animals. Most governments have stated that killing whales is wrong, and most countries have agreed.

They managed to find way to make a living, other than killing whales. I can't see why the few remaining countries, which aren't poverty stricken, can't do the same.

Maggie

[Maggie]

And the current marketing strategy is absolutely brilliant. :) I do agree with you...I just wish his message could have included the denizens of the deep on a larger scale.

I wonder if the Oz Gov will force Terry back to the US? The require a million dollar (US) investment to stay there sans spouse.

She hails from my neck of the woods...not far from where I grew up.

I hope not.

She's doing a pretty good job of trying to take over what Steve began.

Maggie

[TheNoNamedOne]

I think his [Steve Irwin's] method of reaching as many people as possible, and changing the way many of them now regard animals was absolutely brilliant

Maggie

I respectfully disagree with that, Maggie. While I give credit to Steve for his passion and his intent, I do not agree with what his method was i.e. provoking animals by not only getting in their space, but by prodding them and scaring them into reactions. I also think it was irresponsible of him to show techniques on how to catch wildlife and get so close to them in the process of filming.

That he paid with his life is proof of that. And that is sad.

I think there is something inconsistent in teaching respect for wildlife and promoting that if you disrespectfully invade their homes and provoke them.

[Asshat]

I am terrified of sharks, but dragging them onto a boat, cutting off their fins, and throwing them back alive in no way justifies eating shark fin soup.

I agree. I have never had fin soup, but I have eaten shark that I caught. I did not like it at all.

Whales are gentle and inteligent animals. Most governments have stated that killing whales is wrong, and most countries have agreed.

So are swine. Not as gentle perhaps, but then they weigh much less than a humpback. As far as the hunting of whales, this gets into a legal issue whereby the Japanese talk about research. (Yeah that is BS) Still, it is a legal loophole they are sliding through.

They managed to find way to make a living, other than killing whales. I can't see why the few remaining countries, which aren't poverty stricken, can't do the same.

It is no easy thing to ask a person who has been earning a living the same way for years or generations to suddenly stop doing so, just because whales are gentle creatures. Moreover, asking these people to change jobs requires a little more than ramming the ships they are on in an attempt to sink the ship.

[Maggie]

And the current marketing strategy is absolutely brilliant. :) I do agree with you...I just wish his message could have included the denizens of the deep on a larger scale.

I wonder if the Oz Gov will force Terry back to the US? The require a million dollar (US) investment to stay there sans spouse.

She hails from my neck of the woods...not far from where I grew up.

Quite a lot of his later programs were devoted to sea life. He was expanding his views on conservation to include a number of sea animals.

Unfortunately he didn't live long enough for people to think of him as a representative of all animals, sea creatures included.

It was tragic that he was killed whilst making a program about sea life.

It should also be noted that he took time out on a film shoot to rescue someone lost at sea, with no consideration of his own life or money.

That will have cost the film company thousands, and until Steve actually found and helped the person concerned, they would probably also have been extremely pissed off.

I do a lot of film work, and film crews, especially specialist ones cost a fortune.

He's one of only two people I think of as a true hero.

Maggie

[Maggie]

[QUOTE=Asshat;107499 It is no easy thing to ask a person who has been earning a living the same way for years or generations to suddenly stop doing so, just because whales are gentle creatures. Moreover, asking these people to change jobs requires a little more than ramming the ships they are on in an attempt to sink the ship.[/QUOTE]

No, it isn't easy, but we are supposed to be the superior species, and as such we shouldn't need to make laws denying people the right to kill whales. They should have enough intelligence to see that what they're doing is both cruel and wrong.

The people who are killing whales for a living should be able to see that what they're doing is immoral themselves, and make the right choice.

The countries that have outlawed the killing of whales have found other means of making a living. I know it's difficult for people to change the traditions of a lifetime, but they can do it.

It's hard for them and probably turns their lives upside down.

But they have choices. Whales don't.

Maggie

[Maggie]

I respectfully disagree with that, Maggie. While I give credit to Steve for his passion and his intent, I do not agree with what his method was i.e. provoking animals by not only getting in their space, but by prodding them and scaring them into reactions. I also think it was irresponsible of him to show techniques on how to catch wildlife and get so close to them in the process of filming.

That he paid with his life is proof of that. And that is sad.

I think there is something inconsistent in teaching respect for wildlife and promoting that if you disrespectfully invade their homes and provoke them.

I know his methods were very invasive, but he did reach an awful lot of people, by making his programs entertaining.

Using animals for entertainment is something I don't like, but he achieved a great deal of interest in conservation by doing it.

No one in their right mind would copy his methods of animal handling, unless they had a death wish.

There are a lot of things that were wrong, but I think the good he achieved made his methods worth it, and outweighed the negatives

Maggie

[Zorro]

Why are humans fighting for animal rights when humans are still suffering?

Because you dont hire a bridge engineer to do a brain surgeon's job?

Everyone has their specialties and the causes they are most dedicated to. Pull them from what motivates them and you will get unmotivated people doing a poor job.

Havent read the whole thread yet so forgive me if its been mentioned. But people who dont respect animals are also likely to not respect people. Not 100 percent, sure, but its happens often enough. Better start people out respecting all living things, particularly animals and particularly the higher ones. Bring them up in a world that cares nothing about the pain of animals, and you have lowered one of the barriers that says its also wrong to not care about the pain of humans. In short, you actually do more to hurt humans by pulling the animal rights people off their job.

Of course some people care more about some animals than some humans, but hey, you dont care more about a murderer than even some random guy down the street do you? If you see people behaving barbarically toward animals, I think its natural to think less of them, just like you would someone who behaved barbarically toward humans.

And I tell you what, if my cat was still alive and I had to choose between his life or yours, if I dont know you you better start demonstrating to me how you are going to make up for the loss of my cat or pray you will go to heaven when you die. :cool:

[Maggie]

Because you dont hire a bridge engineer to do a brain surgeon's job?

Everyone has their specialties and the causes they are most dedicated to. Pull them from what motivates them and you will get unmotivated people doing a poor job.

Havent read the whole thread yet so forgive me if its been mentioned. But people who dont respect animals are also likely to not respect people. Not 100 percent, sure, but its happens often enough. Better start people out respecting all living things, particularly animals and particularly the higher ones. Bring them up in a world that cares nothing about the pain of animals, and you have lowered one of the barriers that says its also wrong to not care about the pain of humans. In short, you actually do more to hurt humans by pulling the animal rights people off their job.

Of course some people care more about some animals than some humans, but hey, you dont care more about a murderer than even some random guy down the street do you? If you see people behaving barbarically toward animals, I think its natural to think less of them, just like you would someone who behaved barbarically toward humans.

And I tell you what, if my cat was still alive and I had to choose between his life or yours, if I dont know you you better start demonstrating to me how you are going to make up for the loss of my cat or pray you will go to heaven when you die. :cool:

I can't think of a decent reply. So I'll just say that I agree completely with your post, and I wish I'd written it.

Maggie

[zenzelle]

Because you dont hire a bridge engineer to do a brain surgeon's job?

Everyone has their specialties and the causes they are most dedicated to. Pull them from what motivates them and you will get unmotivated people doing a poor job.

I do agree that each person has their own cause that is dear to their heart and they should work towards that. Because I spent much of my professional career as a zookeeper caring for African mammals, I am mostly concerned (& passionate) with conservation of these species. But I do prefer to support programs that take into account the social and economic situation of communities in the area of the conservation effort. Conservationists are finding that programs that do this have a much higher success rate. You cant just tell people to stop dealing in the bushmeat trade unless you give them a reasonable alternative of income or food (it is really a matter of economics). And you cant expect people to care about conservation when their country is in the midst of civil unrest. So I guess I am passionate about programs that take into account BOTH human and animal rights.

But I think it is great that there are people out there that focus on other aspects of the world's problems. With everyone doing a little here and there - then maybe the world can be a better place.

[zenzelle]

I respectfully disagree with that, Maggie. While I give credit to Steve for his passion and his intent, I do not agree with what his method was i.e. provoking animals by not only getting in their space, but by prodding them and scaring them into reactions. I also think it was irresponsible of him to show techniques on how to catch wildlife and get so close to them in the process of filming.

That he paid with his life is proof of that. And that is sad.

I think there is something inconsistent in teaching respect for wildlife and promoting that if you disrespectfully invade their homes and provoke them.

I feel like a walking contradiction on the subject of "Steve."

I fully agree with what the prosecutor says above - no zookeeper in their right mind would do some of the things he did to animals whether in the wild or in captivity.

But at the same time - I liked that he showed animals on tv and gave a lot of great information about animals that have been "vilified" so to speak (like crocs, snakes, sharks, and the like). And he really got kids excited about conservation of these species who are often neglected because they are not warm and cuddly - which is a good thing. But was he teaching them how to be responsible and respect animals by running through the bush and grabbing venomous snakes - probably not. But then again would anyone have watched his programing if he weren't doing those things? Probably not. And therein lies my internal contradiction.

I guess I am most sad that it took his "extreme" ways to get American's attention - we have to have everything EXTREME! But I suppose in the end I resolved myself to accepting his stupid antics and focusing on the fact that he did a lot for conservation awareness. So I guess I respectfully agree (& disagree) with both Maggie and The Prosecutor.

[zeldan]

I don't know. Maybe because humans can stand up and speak for themselves, while many can't even stand, or speak, for themselves.

Just because humans view themselves as the higher power in respect to animals doesn't mean we can treat them badly. I will NOT look for this, but there is a video out there of a Marine throwing a little puppy off a very rocky cliff. That sickens me. I don't care if was something as cute as a little puppy, or big and nasty like an alligator, no living breathing thing deserves that. Just because someone can execute a certain action, such as harming an animal, doesn't mean they should.