Why are animal rights suporters so intolerant?

I'm not going to give you any satisfaction, Asguard, because you accused me of being a moron and raping my dog. You are a moderator and at the same time you are using verbal abuse to try to get this thread locked. Please try to behave with a little more maturity.

You shouldn't have done it but I'm glad you did, because your behavior proves my point.
 
MetaKron said:
So I have to ask the rhetorical question: Why are animal rights activists allowed to lie so much?
Click to expand...

You've given no examples of any lies.

Fenrisulven said:
The RSPCA claims that schools pets corners should be closed down because the children 'might' not know how to care for the animals.
Click to expand...

All of them?

The RSPCA wroite to all local authorities stating that it did not support the sale of animals in pet shops. It asked them to bear this in mind when the licensing of pet shops came up for renewal.

Do you really think that the RSPCA can be obfective when it visits a pet shop and assesses whether the animals are being properly cared for?
Click to expand...

As the law stands, pet shops are legal. The RSPCA rightly has concerns about them, though.

MetaKron said:
One of the proofs is that RSPCA calls for a ban on private ownership of most animals.
Click to expand...

Which animals, specifically? Please provide a link.

The RSPCA has been caught pursuing several outright fraudulent "private prosecutions" against individuals.
Click to expand...

Please provide links to your sources of these claims.

---

All this is unsubstantiated, so far.
 
James, when you accuse me of being someone who was attacked by the RSPCA, that helps prove me right about all this. This is also true of Asguard's personal attacks against me. There isn't a difference in this case between being someone who helps hide the agenda and activities of animal rights and playing a game of "let's mess with the paranoid."
 
MetaKron:

You have not denied that you have been prosecuted by the RSPCA and thus bear a grudge.

Please post to confirm that you have not been prosecuted for animal cruelty, if that is the case, and put my suspicions to rest.
 
What is the difference between being prosecuted myself for animal cruelty, and learning beyond a shadow of doubt that many innocent people are being prosecuted for animal cruelty when I am one hundred percent certain that the prosecutions are malicious?

I have to live on the world that they create. Even being prosecuted for something that I actually did, or something that I didn't do, is not as bad as living in a world that has been corroded by the effect of doing this to thousands of people.

No, I have never been prosecuted for animal cruelty.

If you want to be suspicious, suspect me of having a conscience and caring what happens to humans and animals. The activists are knowingly using "kindness" as a smokescreen for killing off animals.
 
What's your trip, anyway, James? If I have sympathy for gays, I must be gay? This kind of nonsense only gets corrected little by little and most people simply back up to say something like "If you have sympathy for perverts you must be a pervert." Or if I have sympathy for the wrongly accused, which you would think any sane person would, I must have been wrongly accused myself. What's your problem, then? What's your trip?
 
MetaKron:

Ok, fine. So you haven't been prosecuted. But you still come across as paranoid and a conspiracist about the RSPCA.

You don't present any specific allegations and evidence. All you do is make provocative statements about how evil the RSPCA are (and animal rights activists in general), with nothing to back up what you say.

How are people supposed to take you seriously?
 
How do you expect people to take you seriously, James? I put up links in the first thread and in this thread and you are saying that I have nothing to back up what I say. You have already seen some evidence and that is more than no evidence, so your statement is obviously wrong.
 
The Law and the RSPCA

It is a matter of public record that in this case the RSPCA had illegally entered property, and illegally seized animals The recent RSPCA television series Animal Squad – Undercover which appeared on , Channel 4 featured Chief Superintendent Donald Balfour, Head of the RSPCA Special Operations Unit. He was asked on camera by a police officer if he had any legal powers to do what he was proposing to do. His reply was "Officially no, but we do it all the time."
Click to expand...

There is no good reason for the RSPCA to violate laws to seize animals. Suspicion of cruelty to animals is not a good reason to violate laws. When that suspicion is manufactured, it is illegal to even obtain a warrant, and I will address that later.
 
MetaKron said:
What's your trip, anyway, James? If I have sympathy for gays, I must be gay? This kind of nonsense only gets corrected little by little and most people simply back up to say something like "If you have sympathy for perverts you must be a pervert." Or if I have sympathy for the wrongly accused, which you would think any sane person would, I must have been wrongly accused myself. What's your problem, then? What's your trip?
Click to expand...


You don't have sympathy for them your using what has happened to people for your own fucking crack pot agenda which is appartantly that humans have the right to torture and abuse other living creatures so long they not human. Pain and suffering only seem to matter to you if it is human.
 
James R said:
MetaKron:

Ok, fine. So you haven't been prosecuted. But you still come across as paranoid and a conspiracist about the RSPCA.

You don't present any specific allegations and evidence. All you do is make provocative statements about how evil the RSPCA are (and animal rights activists in general), with nothing to back up what you say.

How are people supposed to take you seriously?
Click to expand...

note he refuses to back up his general claims about animal rights activists and has attacked me for asking him to do so. He is clearly a nut with an ax to grind.
 
PJ, you are aware that there are ways to write more effectively, aren't you?

pjdude1219 said:
note he refuses to back up his general claims about animal rights activists and has attacked me for asking him to do so. He is clearly a nut with an ax to grind.
Click to expand...

Are you saying that you are a sock puppet for James R? That message was for James R. It was also a more or less rhetorical question.

Your slip-ups are showing. Please pull your hem down.
 
Last edited:
MetaKron said:
Are you saying that you are a sock puppet for James R? That message was for James R. It was also a more or less rhetorical question.
Click to expand...
I am not a james R sock puppet. unlike you he nor I need to resort to such tactics. We have things called facts on our side.
Your slip-ups are showing. Please pull your hem down.
Click to expand...
How could my slip ups be showing when i didn't make any?
 
You, James, and Asguard LOOK like I'm not proving anything, don't you?

People are going to start thinking that you all are my sock puppets.
 
MetaKron said:
You, James, and Asguard LOOK like I'm not proving anything, don't you?

People are going to start thinking that you all are my sock puppets.
Click to expand...

Don't worry no one is going to think the three of us are sock puppets of yours. No one is going to be that stupid.
 
pjdude1219 said:
Don't worry no one is going to think the three of us are sock puppets of yours. No one is going to be that stupid.
Click to expand...

If I were going to use sock puppets, the smart thing would be to have them respond the way that you three have been responding. The way that you express disagreement makes me look really good and proves my point. Ask your English teacher if you don't believe me.
 
One more thing that gets old: Animal rights activists spend a lot of time both publishing their intent when it serves their purposes, and covering it up and lying about it when that works better. Then when they are called on it they lie about it and immediately pull out their assortment of stale insults and even more stale pseudo-morality. It's beyond tedious and it insults my intelligence.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top