Wow, so many assumptions and unnecessary ego-stroking in this thread.
Ok, I don't think a thread made where the OP wishes to share a documentary, maybe even present some information, some facts, for the purposes of education is a bad idea or anything that should be bashed. However it's been said already that it doesn't really seem that thats all this thread is about. Theres a difference between presenting information, information a person has the opportunity to take on board on not, and a deliberate attempt to guilt people into thinking the same way you do, and taking what could easily be seen as a moral highground in the process. Do this and people will respond aggressively, regardless of the topic.
This quote:
Quote:
Originally Posted by Phantom Limb
PPPS. If you don't separate yourself from the equation you are actively supporting this kind of torture.
|
is why you are receiving a lot of aggressive feedback. Maybe the aggression is warranted, maybe it isn't, I couldn't really care less - but I can certainly see the reasons for it and I also think that because of the aggressive nature of the reaction you received, you overlooked a lot of the content. I consider a lot of it to be valid argument.
What exactly are you trying to say with the comment I highlighted? Is it the torture you are objecting to? Do you think it's important that this is reduced or better policed? Would you think any differently if animals are not being tortured, but still ended up being killed? Is it the killing of the animal you have issue with, or the conditions it is subjected to before it is killed?
Depending on your answers to those questions it seems that you are either:
Concerning yourself with the treatment of animals before they are slaughtered, and where animals are found to be particularly mistreated, kept in poor conditions, or subjected to cruelty and abuse, or
Objecting to the killing of animals for produce altogether, regardless of the conditions preceeding this.
If you are better described as the former, then do you really feel that all meat eaters also don't care about these issues? Judging by your comment, a meat eater is not removing themselves from this equation, therefore they are actively supporting the abuse of animals, and this really is not the case. You can't remove an individuals choice to eat meat, I'm afraid. By eating meat, you aren't supporting the inhumane treatment of the animal.
If you're the latter then you are presuming that all meat eaters dont care about the same issues you do, when in reality they may well do, but they choose to eat meat. And if you're condemning the act of eating meat altogether, regardless of the circumstances, then you really are making yourself oblivious to so many different factors, most of which seem to have already been mentioned here. And also, if this is what you are doing, and you are going to look down on meat eaters in general for their decision to be one, I feel you should prepare yourself for some opposition much stronger than what you have seen in this thread.
I'd liken it, in some ways, to preachers. A preacher can stand on my street corner, or on my local, busy shopping high street, and they can preach to passers by about God. Thats fine, they arent imposing on me and I can respect what they are doing. I can choose to listen to them and I can choose not to. Once they ring my doorbell, at my home, and try to judge me for the choices I have made with my own life - they will have the door closed in their face or worse, and honestly this would be their own decision to subject themselves to that by intruding into peoples lives and questioning decisions they have no right to question.