Why are animal rights suporters so intolerant?

Yeah because leaving a creature to die is such a more moral thing to do.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

We fight wars over human rights that include bombings that kill a lot of humans at a time, and you think that the defense of human rights is less important than this animal that might just die if the dogcatcher doesn't come plowing through the door.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

Your right this is about human rights. But sadly you seem to be of the mind that human's have a right to do with other living creatures what ever the hell they want I'm sorry we don't. This is about stopping the nonsensical ideas that humans have a right to treat animals like shit. If people would give these poor abused creatures the respect and care the deserve they would not have to worry about being charged for animal cruelty or abuse. I sorry there is every reason and right for the government and charity groups that work for it to remove an animal from a situation where its life has been put into jeopardy by abuse or neglect. It is no different from taking kids away from parents who abuse or neglect their kids.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

And you equate human rights with treating animals like shit. Human rights equals animal cruelty. Human rights equals sexual perversion. Human rights equals forcibly injecting children with heroin to make them into addicts. Nothing but nasty, these human rights, right?

 

Wow dishonest, stupid, or both. I do not equate animal abuse with human rights or for that matter any of that other shit. Your the one who is saying that the RSCPA with the government shouldn't take abused or neglected animals from people along with saying its about human rights. YOU therefore are implying animal abuse is a human right.

 

How is it not a human right?

I don't do all that many disclaimers, but it's not like I want it to be a human right. How is it that it is not a right to abuse an animal that is your property?

 

I'm sure that they would never cherry-pick cases for television.

 

I don't want to argue that there is a right to abuse one's own animals, but the animal rights activists deliberately mischaracterize hunting, farming, and pet ownership as abuse. Then their followers deliberately mischaracterize a person's desire to defend his own rights as defending the right to abuse animals. This is a device to illegitimately shame the defender of human rights. It is very dishonest and cheap.

Any law has to respect human rights. It is a right to eat meat, use leather and fur and other animal-based materials, thus it is a right to engage in the activities necessary for farming those animals. These include killing the animal and some people want to argue that that killing is abuse. How do humans have less privilege than other natural predators? It's because some other humans want some kind of control that they are not entitled to. There is no legitimate reason for humans not to predate against other animals.

Any definition of abuse has to be fair to humans and it has to allow the freedom to farm and to keep pets. Overly strict and the RSPCA gets to conduct its fraudulent prosecutions, even if the RSPCA only commits fraud in the UK, which I seriously doubt. Increasing the difficulty of keeping pets reduces the number of living non-human animals in the world.

 

Idiot.

 

Because its a living creature.

 

Proves nothing.

 

Tin Gods, dictators and fascists.

In many cases the RSPCA Inspectors do hate people, ask yourself, what kind of person wants to dress up like a Police Officer and go around telling other people what to do all day ? (parking wardens and the like)

In my expieriance You get 2 types of RSPCA Inspector, firstly the genuine animal lover who is absolutely passionate about animal welfare, then unfourtunately you get a second type, jumped up little hitlers who probably failed the Police or army entrance and were bullied at school, these lot have an axe to grind with humanity, their friends are animals because no one else understands them !

People, in their opinion are the dispicable scum who harm animals, harm their friends, they will do anything to settle the score.

Combine this with the richest charity in the UK, no controls and safeguards, political lobbying etc and you have a big problem !

Unfourtunately this type of person also extends beyond the inspectorate into the Head Office, this lot is far more dangerous because they set policy (no pets in schools, or pet shops and similar rubbish) these are the people who prosecute 15 year old girls for the fun of it, or who withold evidence or coach witnesses to ensure convictions.

And dont forget that the RSPCA have a conviction for the perversion of justice.

 

???

 

Clean your monitor if you had trouble reading what I wrote.

 

Why can't we have a genetically varied wild population?

 

I could read it just fine what i don't get is how its a valid reply?

 

It clearly was, because I demonstrated the tape to the RSCPA officer investigating, and they called the Police. They themselves called back and checked the tape that night, before the Police were called.

 

No, we love the RSCPA. Metakron is out on a limb with just his sock puppets for company here. They require £81milliion per annum to function, and get that easily in donations and via fund raising. That's a big charity effort.

For comparison, the RNLI, the national lifeboat charity that saves human lives from nautical peril has an annual income of £102million. We love animals nearly as much as people therefore.

 

No, it was me, reporting an animal abuser neighbour. I'd report you if you were my neighbour and you failed to meet acceptable standards too.