Manwell Pablo Posted 9 January 2014 Posted 9 January 2014 Because it is irrelevant to the actual point, which is unnecessary animal cruelty. The majority of what Oz posts in this thread is highlighting cruel and illegal treatment of animals, he gives his honest opinion when asked about his own beliefs, including his treatment of his cat. But what does the relevance of how one man treats one pet, hypocritically or otherwise, have when he is highlighting a brutal and unnecessary cull of sharks (for example)? To keep on bringing it up to discredit every post in this thread is irrelevant and frankly boring, if all you are going to do whenever you open this thread is derail any discussion with the same tired point over and over again, then just don't open the thread. Incidentally I think the cull of sharks is disgusting. Yes but it is relevant, as, in his own words, you have no right to view it as disgusting, as a meat eater, thats one of his main points. All or nothing. But he doesn't even play by his own rules, do as I say not as I do as James has quite rightly pointed out, so it's not a red hearing, at all. So in short, by his own bent logic, if you have no right to care about the Sharks, neither does Oz, so why is he bothering to post?
Mark_w Posted 9 January 2014 Posted 9 January 2014 I don't see why his cat is a red hearing honestly. It's a topic of conversation he'd rather not have perhaps, and that is probably why he dismisses it as a red hearing, but that does not make it one. He not only imprisons it (literally, doesn't let it out) but buys it canned meat, containing dead cows, slaughtered at a slaughter house, and his whole operandus modi is to tell us all the things that are bad with "using animals for our pleasure" and tells us all we should be above it, when he does just that, if he expects us to stop shouldn't he? It actively demonstrates that he, the most devote boring and pig headed of animal rights activists can't live without using some sort of meat based products in his daily life or keeping a pet, so how's it a red hearing? In his own words....... ozleicester, on 05 Apr 2012 - 3:38 PM, said: just trying to discuss the hypocrisy Right so because King of the Vegetarian's ozleicester owns a cat, we're all wrong.
Captain... Posted 9 January 2014 Posted 9 January 2014 Yes but it is relevant, as, in his own words, you have no right to view it as disgusting, as a meat eater, thats one of his main points. All or nothing. But he doesn't even play by his own rules, do as I say not as I do as James has quite rightly pointed out, so it's not a red hearing, at all. But when has Oz ever said that? I have every right to view the senseless killing of sharks, likewise killing for sport, as disgusting, but not the killing for food, I can appreciate there is a hypocrisy in there, in that killing is killing, but killing for food serves a purpose, culls like this serve no purpose. But more importantly it is boring, it has been argued to death, you aren't changing your stand point, Oz isn't changing his, just let it go. If you have an opinion on the shark cull, I would like to hear it, but every time this thread comes up you post the same thing about his cat.
Manwell Pablo Posted 9 January 2014 Posted 9 January 2014 But when has Oz ever said that? I have every right to view the senseless killing of sharks, likewise killing for sport, as disgusting, but not the killing for food, I can appreciate there is a hypocrisy in there, in that killing is killing, but killing for food serves a purpose, culls like this serve no purpose. But more importantly it is boring, it has been argued to death, you aren't changing your stand point, Oz isn't changing his, just let it go. If you have an opinion on the shark cull, I would like to hear it, but every time this thread comes up you post the same thing about his cat. Do you think I'd make that up? This whole thread started because he got involved in the topic about the rhino with it's horn missing, I say involved hi-jack is probably a better word. His opening post was this little gem about the poachers involved. Bit hard to judge others if you are eating animals And he goes on and on, basically discrediting anyone's right to feel aggrieved about any animal killings if they continue to eat meet, I presume he did this in between buying canned meat for his cat. Search thread using the words "Normal Killing" for the full story. 2nd sentence I totally agree with you, I'm not the crazed animal rights activists telling you otherwise. I agree it is boring, as I've said before, close thread.
Mark_w Posted 9 January 2014 Posted 9 January 2014 Surely you can see that there's a big difference between killing animals to provide food for an omnivore and killing animals to provide food for a carnivore? This entire debate (which I honestly think is just your way of avoiding difficult questions that crop up, but whatever) really comes down to why Oz got the cat in the first place. If he actively set out to get any cat then you're probably right that would make him a hypocrite (not that that would make anything he's said about animal rights incorrect). If however it was a stray cat he's taken in or one that was looking at being put down then I think you can understand where he's coming from.
Captain... Posted 9 January 2014 Posted 9 January 2014 He said that on a different thread and was making a point, that being shocked at animals being killed for horns and fur is a little hypocritical when you support animals being killed for meat. He has a point. There is hypocrisy there, there is also hypocrisy in saying people shouldn't keep pets, yet have a pet. We are all hypocrites. I normally find my discussions with Oz to be very civil and the general tone of this thread is not one of being antagonistic or even preachy. I don't see why we should close this thread, because you have turned it into a personal vendetta against Oz, if you close it then such stories will be posted in new threads and other threads, this way animal rights can be discussed in a single thread, very easy for you to avoid. So rather than closing this thread, if you don't like it, just don't open it.
Manwell Pablo Posted 9 January 2014 Posted 9 January 2014 Surely you can see that there's a big difference between killing animals to provide food for an omnivore and killing animals to provide food for a carnivore? This entire debate (which I honestly think is just your way of avoiding difficult questions that crop up, but whatever) really comes down to why Oz got the cat in the first place. If he actively set out to get any cat then you're probably right that would make him a hypocrite (not that that would make anything he's said about animal rights incorrect). If however it was a stray cat he's taken in or one that was looking at being put down then I think you can understand where he's coming from. Cats can actually survive without meat. But regardless, if your dead against produced meat don't take on a animal that eats produced meat. Find me one question I haven't answered, I think you'll find that's yours and the rest of the pro animal brigades trick Funny that you view taking on a stray cat as a good thing to do as one thing he wants to do is make all cats stray (really caring) I believe it was from home and may/may not of been put down but the back story to how he got is the real red hearing. He coops it up inside which isn't natural and feeds the beast he tells us all we can't feed.
Manwell Pablo Posted 9 January 2014 Posted 9 January 2014 He said that on a different thread and was making a point, that being shocked at animals being killed for horns and fur is a little hypocritical when you support animals being killed for meat. He has a point. There is hypocrisy there, there is also hypocrisy in saying people shouldn't keep pets, yet have a pet. We are all hypocrites. I normally find my discussions with Oz to be very civil and the general tone of this thread is not one of being antagonistic or even preachy. I don't see why we should close this thread, because you have turned it into a personal vendetta against Oz, if you close it then such stories will be posted in new threads and other threads, this way animal rights can be discussed in a single thread, very easy for you to avoid. So rather than closing this thread, if you don't like it, just don't open it. Not how I view myself as I see not using animals for any human purpose for what it is, lowering the standards of human living and that to me is more important. And WTF it doesn't matter where he said it, he said it, that's the important part. You find him civil because you don't t exception to some of the things he has said where as I have, and I'd also say there is no discussion in this thread anymore me and Oz ranting at each other is the closest this has got to a discussion in about 6 months, it's just somewhere for him to dump news stories, and as a flip side, I don't care that you find this boring, if this thread remains open I have every right to come in here with my "personal vendetta" and post my opinions, and if you don't like that, you don't have to come in here and argue with me. It's very easy to avoid, just don't open it. And more importantly if you want to read animal rights news, go to the F8cking appropriate site. For the record I have no vendetta just deeply disagree with 1) Telling people they have no right to have views on animal rights when they eat meat when also making use of the meat industry himself 2) thinking a world without at least some captive animals kept for human use is even plausible.
Manwell Pablo Posted 9 January 2014 Posted 9 January 2014 Right so because King of the Vegetarian's ozleicester owns a cat, we're all wrong. In short yes, if you listen to the author of this thread. As I say I'm not the one saying you have to be an angel in order to have an opinion.
Guest MattP Posted 9 January 2014 Posted 9 January 2014 Vegetarians would be the fattest people in the World if they could feed off attention.
ozleicester Posted 16 January 2014 Author Posted 16 January 2014 http://au.news.yahoo.com/thewest/business/wa/a/20787632/mass-sheep-death-on-horror-voyage/ A modern 1st world country treating animals as though they have no value other than as food,
Manwell Pablo Posted 16 January 2014 Posted 16 January 2014 http://au.news.yahoo.com/thewest/business/wa/a/20787632/mass-sheep-death-on-horror-voyage/ A modern 1st world country treating animals as though they have no value other than as food, You've linked to the wrong article, that one is about a shipment from Australia.
Buce Posted 16 January 2014 Posted 16 January 2014 I don't see why his cat is a red hearing honestly. It's a topic of conversation he'd rather not have perhaps, and that is probably why he dismisses it as a red hearing, but that does not make it one. He not only imprisons it (literally, doesn't let it out) but buys it canned meat, containing dead cows, slaughtered at a slaughter house, and his whole operandus modi is to tell us all the things that are bad with "using animals for our pleasure" and tells us all we should be above it, when he does just that, if he expects us to stop shouldn't he? It actively demonstrates that he, the most devote boring and pig headed of animal rights activists can't live without using some sort of meat based products in his daily life or keeping a pet, so how's it a red hearing? In his own words....... ozleicester, on 05 Apr 2012 - 3:38 PM, said: just trying to discuss the hypocrisy Is it ok to eat red herrings?
Mark_w Posted 24 January 2014 Posted 24 January 2014 Gervais.. gotta love the man. Listen to reason, just kill pigs, cows, sheep, chickens etc.
Webbo Posted 24 January 2014 Posted 24 January 2014 Gervais.. gotta love the man. He looks devastated at the plight of those poor sharks, he must have spent seconds worrying about them.
Manwell Pablo Posted 24 January 2014 Posted 24 January 2014 Listen to reason, just kill pigs, cows, sheep, chickens etc. Much tastier than sharks.
Captain... Posted 24 January 2014 Posted 24 January 2014 Much tastier than sharks. and more abundant, probably responsible for more deaths too.
Manwell Pablo Posted 24 January 2014 Posted 24 January 2014 and more abundant, probably responsible for more deaths too. Indeed, I have a deal with the sharks anyway, I stay out their water, they stay out of my pub. So far, no shark bites.
Mark_w Posted 24 January 2014 Posted 24 January 2014 Indeed, I have a deal with the sharks anyway, I stay out their water, they stay out of my pub. So far, no shark bites. How many chickens have attacked you in the pub?
Manwell Pablo Posted 24 January 2014 Posted 24 January 2014 How many chickens have attacked you in the pub? Does Old Speckled Hen count?
ozleicester Posted 10 February 2014 Author Posted 10 February 2014 http://www.theguardian.com/world/2014/feb/09/marius-giraffe-killed-copenhagen-zoo-protests A glaring example of humans belief that an animals value is only as we decide it to be... no use as breeding stock.. kill it.
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.