sengjc Posted May 23, 2015 Posted May 23, 2015 Must have been a low month for them, I suppose - not much going on: people generally treating animals ethically etc. - had to do something to make themselves current and relevant...
Ken Gargett Posted May 23, 2015 Author Posted May 23, 2015 Must have been a low month for them, I suppose - not much going on: people generally treating animals ethically etc. - had to do something to make themselves current and relevant... every chance. that would seem to be the greens playbook here.
... Posted May 23, 2015 Posted May 23, 2015 I'm with you on this scenario 100%. Anyone that takes pleasure in the hurting or killing of another living thing has some issues imo.Strong statement... Curious about your avatar Clint... Is it a guy fishing from a boat? Hope no fish was hurt in the process...Any absolute is bound to lack the proper perspective to be easy to defend. Not trying to offend but enjoys temperance... 2
El Presidente Posted May 23, 2015 Posted May 23, 2015 Whether this is effective or not is certainly debatable. They clearly seem to think it's the best way to make their point. They apparently believe in their cause enough that they don't mind being seen as fools, radicals, clowns, etc. In a strange way I respect someone who stands so strongly for their beliefs, even if I don't agree with their actions. I was in the warehouse Tuesday where this was playing out on Talk back radio. The sad thing is the amount of commentary about people suspending their donations to the RSPCA (who are investigating the claims). Talk about an organisation (bot PETA and RSPCA) shooting themselves in the foot. 1
Ken Gargett Posted May 23, 2015 Author Posted May 23, 2015 Strong statement... Curious about your avatar Clint... Is it a guy fishing from a boat? Hope no fish was hurt in the process... Any absolute is bound to lack the proper perspective to be easy to defend. Not trying to offend but enjoys temperance... i understand that there are grey areas in any argument like this, which is why i mentioned sustenance etc etc, but i would suggest that it is all a bit absolute for the poor animal slaughtered. i am assuming you mean tolerance not temperance? i will avoid the inevitable bad joke about tolerance for temperance.
... Posted May 23, 2015 Posted May 23, 2015 i understand that there are grey areas in any argument like this, which is why i mentioned sustenance etc etc, but i would suggest that it is all a bit absolute for the poor animal slaughtered. i am assuming you mean tolerance not temperance? i will avoid the inevitable bad joke about tolerance for temperance. I actually meant self-restrain from going all in and using blunt statements to define people by the impact of their actions taken out of context. However, english being my second language, it's always possible that I failed to explain myself clearly... Thanks for helping!
perkinke Posted May 23, 2015 Posted May 23, 2015 I don't think it is a safe assumption that they were NOT serious about their complaint. In my county we just voted down a measure put forward by some very serious and earnest people that would have given rights to the soil, plants and some forms of seeds. Fortunately sanity and reason prevailed in the majority of voters and it was voted down by 3-1,, but if someone had pitched that idea to me I'd have thought it a joke.
dougincanada Posted May 23, 2015 Posted May 23, 2015 I always assumed sheep like the swearing when shorn. Case in point...... Of course all sheep are perfectly versed in the english language. God help you if your sheep are exposed to second hand smoke from your cigar. Regards, Doug
Ken Gargett Posted May 23, 2015 Author Posted May 23, 2015 i just can't believe we have not had dozens of kiwi jokes.
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now