tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2685698485860402737.comments2023-07-03T10:34:14.805-05:00Zombie JesusUnknownnoreply@blogger.comBlogger619125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2685698485860402737.post-60918406963059004842009-08-23T14:24:33.133-05:002009-08-23T14:24:33.133-05:00Hysterical! Thank you.Hysterical! Thank you.Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06599462856576556143noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2685698485860402737.post-26508163846755749082009-08-19T21:35:17.080-05:002009-08-19T21:35:17.080-05:00Obviously, you're a Nazi.
:)Obviously, you're a Nazi. <br /><br />:)Clairehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02503319755093772976noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2685698485860402737.post-23708165407523872522009-07-15T18:18:04.040-05:002009-07-15T18:18:04.040-05:00Excellent points.
I should say that when I said I...Excellent points.<br /><br />I should say that when I said I won't deny that animal research achieves certain goals, all I mean is that (1.) it is an empirical matter if it does or doesn't, not a moral one, and (2.) things can be "good science" and still be utterly, totally wrong. Experimenting on humans may well be great science, but it doesn't make it right.<br /><br />Also, I'm going to have to steal your last paragraph next time I'm having one of these conversations ….Ryanhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11333879625502795277noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2685698485860402737.post-24211219958237610292009-07-15T18:06:35.288-05:002009-07-15T18:06:35.288-05:00I think there are plenty of good scientific reason...I think there are plenty of good scientific reasons for scientists to be against animal testing. This isn't the 18th Century anymore. I think we've pretty much learned everything there is to know about the macro level of biological functions in animals and humans. At the cellular level there is a wide variability between humans, let alone the variability between humans and non-human animals. That's why so many drugs that were "proven" safe in animals have ended up killing humans. <br /><br />Animal testing is supported by scientists for three reasons. 1.) It's easier to do quick studies and therefore more studies. More studies means more papers published, means more grant money, means more profits. 2.) Animal tests help protect drug companies etc. from lawsuits when their products make people sick or kill them. They can defend themselves by saying that animal tests showed the product was safe. And 3.) Science has become an institution and like all institutions it has become resistent to change. University professors teach the philosophies that they were taught. A paradigm shift is needed. <br /><br />Ask the vivisectionist why s/he tests on animals to find cures for human diseases and s/he will tell you it is because animals are so much like humans. Ask the vivisectionist why it is morally acceptable to test on animals and s/he will tell you it is because animals are not like humans.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2685698485860402737.post-2398717081410042102009-07-09T09:11:40.458-05:002009-07-09T09:11:40.458-05:00Yes, of course libertarianism is used by a variety...Yes, of course libertarianism is used by a variety of people to mean a variety of things, all in opposition to various forms of authority. I am pretty explicitly only referring to the minimal-state capitalist variety, because that's the most popularly self-identified sort. I tend towards utopian classical anarchist (libertarian socialist) views myself, though I also tend towards pragmatic liberal-state market socialist views.<br /><br />And sure, maybe in a state-free libertarian world compassionate people could destroy factory farms without fearing repercussions. More likely, though, they will still have to fear repercussions — from the people whose factory farm they just destroyed. And there will be no overly powerful state authority and its institutionalized laws to protect the compassionate people from revenge carried out by people controlling a lot of resources.<br /><br />If we're talking libertarian socialism, the acceptance of factory farming would have to be decided through some form of direct democracy, either a worker's council or a municipal council. If the community accepted factory farms and one was destroyed, the aforementioned compassionate people would still face repercussions in the form of exile, noncooperation, or whatever other sanction the community uses to deal with people that violate its norms.<br /><br />But this is all caricature. The bottom line is that libertarianism as a political philosophy, whether capitalist or socialist, minarchist or anarchist, has very little to say in and of itself about social issues, of which I consider animal rights to be. Questions about abortion, racism, sexism, homophbia, and the treatment of animals won't be answered by abolishing or minimizing government. They are political issues, to be sure, but they are system-independent issues — a super-conservative capitalist world could be one devoid of factory farms, too, if those super-conservative people boycotted them.Ryanhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11333879625502795277noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2685698485860402737.post-69748624443677461472009-07-08T17:21:45.917-05:002009-07-08T17:21:45.917-05:00Gotta say I like your blog and agree with much of ...Gotta say I like your blog and agree with much of what you have written in this, and other posts. But I should point out to you that Libertarianism is a term used by a broad spectrum of political philosophies which seek to maximize individual liberty and minimize or even abolish the state. Libertarians embrace viewpoints across that spectrum ranging from pro-property to anti-property, from minimal government to openly anarchist. The word libertarian is an antonym of authoritarian.<br /><br />Depending on one's view of libertarianism, a libertarian world could mean one devoid of factory farms because compassionate people would be at liberty to destroy such facilities without having to worry about repercussions from an overly powerful state authority and its institutionalized laws that protect capital over the rights of sentient beings.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2685698485860402737.post-59736596250811155562009-04-10T19:57:00.000-05:002009-04-10T19:57:00.000-05:00Gary Francione doesn't just argue against bree...Gary Francione doesn't just argue against breeders. He argues against legal ownership. That's not the same thing as saying you can't have an animal companion. We have children who depend on us, but we don't legally "own" them. Similarly, a man used to "own" his wife, but not anymore. Francione even says that he "owns" his animal companions because, technically, he does. Legal ownership presents all kinds of problems. It means the animals are essentially slaves.Luellahttp://www.blogger.com/profile/00756410146756239731noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2685698485860402737.post-74449712492293031382009-04-07T10:22:00.000-05:002009-04-07T10:22:00.000-05:00I take it from the last sentence that you don'...I take it from the last sentence that you don't consider zombies sentient, you insensitive clod :-)Shawnhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/05130451325928484008noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2685698485860402737.post-69677949760364258612008-09-03T15:45:00.000-05:002008-09-03T15:45:00.000-05:00While I can understand your point, I believe where...While I can understand your point, I believe where you err is in your definition of atheism.<br><br>Atheism is not the lack of belief in a god, but the belief that there is no god. It requires belief to be an atheist. An atheist BELIEVES that there is no god.<br><br>An agnostic on the other hand does not neccessarily believe in a god, but has also not decided that a god definately does not exist. An agnostic accepts that they just don't know and gets on with their life.Donhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/15406528871343850072noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2685698485860402737.post-29087219552989477462008-08-31T10:14:00.000-05:002008-08-31T10:14:00.000-05:00I am quite sure that if I merit being on PETA'...I am quite sure that if I merit being on PETA's radar, I already am. I'm in regular contact with plenty of PETA members.Ryan McReynoldshttp://www.blogger.com/profile/11333879625502795277noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2685698485860402737.post-17335874050109031472008-08-31T00:37:00.000-05:002008-08-31T00:37:00.000-05:00I would prefer that the whole animal rights moveme...I would prefer that the whole animal rights movement be exposed for what it is - Not the world as it is, but the world as it should be-a "the biggest fairytale I've ever seen" (sorry Bill, had to borrow it) A movement that is to the detriment of humanity and denies animals their right to interaction with and direction from mankind. I will forward your blog to PETA anyways, always nice to sow disharmony amongst the animal lovers/human haters.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2685698485860402737.post-14720333165229177602008-07-25T08:46:00.000-05:002008-07-25T08:46:00.000-05:00Robin, think of yourself as a caretaker, obliged b...Robin, think of yourself as a caretaker, obliged by circumstance, in an imperfect world :)alextababahttp://www.blogger.com/profile/12202036694403647481noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2685698485860402737.post-53598317724716938832008-07-24T20:35:00.000-05:002008-07-24T20:35:00.000-05:00If you were going for "radical animal rights ...If you were going for "radical animal rights activists are creepy and kinda dangerous," bravo, you really nailed it. Also, who is PETA member, and how many homes does she have?Ryan McReynoldshttp://www.blogger.com/profile/11333879625502795277noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2685698485860402737.post-36872459750002302622008-07-24T19:50:00.000-05:002008-07-24T19:50:00.000-05:00I would prefer to stage "home demonstrations&...I would prefer to stage "home demonstrations" at PETA member's homes.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2685698485860402737.post-82772394310351519072008-07-19T11:03:00.000-05:002008-07-19T11:03:00.000-05:00And for my money vegetarian is the same as vegan, ...<b><i>And for my money vegetarian is the same as vegan, i always have to explain these differences anyway as most people don't know, don't care, don't understand or have media inspired misconceptions that they believe to be true, they let the media do their thinking for them. So it really makes no difference.</i></b><br><br>It may or may not make a difference for the general public, but the difference for those who are supposed to know better (like PETA) is huge. PETA doesn't claim to be an animal welfare organization, they claim to be <i>the</i> animal rights organization, and as such they ought to promote choices that respect animal rights. The problem is that if they get 100 people to "go vegetarian," that's still 100 people who are exploiting animals through eggs and dairy that now think they've "done their part" because they're copacetic with the crazy radical PETA people. If they just asked people to go vegan from the start, they might find progress slower, but those that did it would be actually respecting the rights the organization claims to stand for. If activists should feel free to ignore our values in the name of expediency, PETA may as well declare it OK to eat meat—after all, they'd get a lot more support that way!Ryan McReynoldshttp://www.blogger.com/profile/11333879625502795277noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2685698485860402737.post-39501042071146042202008-07-19T00:19:00.000-05:002008-07-19T00:19:00.000-05:00Hi Ryan. To me there are two ways to look at this....Hi Ryan. To me there are two ways to look at this. One is that as long as animals are horribly abused, tortured, treated like commodities and raised only to be brutally slaughtered, then there will always be a need for PETA and other high profile animal rights organizations. There are the de facto leader of the movement -and the most visible AR organization, they do alot of good and i am glad they are there. Two is i often wonder if they are fast becoming the Greenpeace of the animal rights movement. As you have pointed out some of their campaigns silly and go beyond a typical AR focus. And i find this bit of glorifying vegetarians and meateaters to no end in their campaigns to be disiingenuous, dishonest and downright harmful and a slap in the face to everyone who knows the difference and knows better. But the bottom line is they are there when you need them and they are good at what they do. They have to try to reach people however possible and spread the message of animal rights and compassion to anyone that will listen. And for my money vegetarian is the same as vegan, i always have to explain these differences anyway as most people don't know, don't care, don't understand or have media inspired misconceptions that they believe to be true, they let the media do their thinking for them. So it really makes no difference.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2685698485860402737.post-21995751743744058712008-07-17T14:58:00.000-05:002008-07-17T14:58:00.000-05:00I posted this comment in response to a post on the...I posted this comment in response to a post on the PETA Files blog, it ties into the above, and I'm rather proud of it:<br><br>While modesty prevents me from thinking the second paragraph was entirely influenced by my recent prolific spate of comments, I have certainly been critical as of late. Please indulge me one somewhat more lengthy comment here and I will try to keep them brief and pithy in the future.<br><br>My critique of PETA's "victories" on this blog (and elsewhere) has always been predicated on one simple notion: it is morally and strategically incoherent to advocate animal rights while celebrating, awarding, and congratulating people who violate those rights. I oppose the perpetual conflation of "vegetarianism" and "veganism" not etymologically, but because it congratulates people for adopting an animal exploiting lifestyle. I oppose giving awards to e.g. Wolfgang Puck for his choice of veal not because I would rather he torture animals more, but because it celebrates an animal exploiter for continuing to exploit animals. I oppose ending boycotts in response to welfare improvements not out of opposition to improving animal lives, but because it gives the impression of a fresh PETA "seal of approval" to carry on consuming the products so boycotted.<br><br>If the Myanmar junta started giving its political prisoners beds rather than concrete floors, I wouldn't expect Amnesty International to issue a press release congratulating them and giving them a "most improved dictatorship" award. I merely expect the same sort of consistency from PETA and any other group that claims to be in favor of actual rights for animals.<br><br>This is not to imply that welfare improvements don't mean something to animals. It is not to imply that vegetarians aren't doing better than omnivores at avoiding the infliction of harm. It is rather a matter of overarching policy and vision. I expect PETA to get endorsements from vegan celebrities, for what they're worth. I expect PETA to celebrate when an exploitative practice is actually ended, such as a circus ending animal use, or a clothing company halting the use of fur. These are consistent with advocacy for animal rights. They are real, solid, meaningful victories--not PR victories for companies who can now sell "humane" death to people whose consciences have been cleared by PETA's congratulations.<br><br>The world will not stop seeing animals as property to be used and abused overnight, or likely even in our lifetimes, we agree on that much. That's why it is all the more important for caring people with a platform--PETA and its bloggers, for example--to encourage people to genuinely opt out of that use and abuse, and to do so transparently, calling a spade a spade; calling a vegan a vegan. It means that when our side wins a welfare improvement, we ALWAYS follow it up with the statement that it is nowhere near enough, and that we NEVER give awards to those who continue to do the things we oppose. It's simple, honest consistency I ask for, nothing more.<br><br>I enjoy the PETA Files. I'll keep reading, and I'll keep commenting. Always on topic, always constructive. We're on the same team here, and we can stand side by side and fight the good fight while continuing to challenge each other when we have differences. Thanks.Ryan McReynoldshttp://www.blogger.com/profile/11333879625502795277noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2685698485860402737.post-50220392965978000702008-07-01T14:29:00.000-05:002008-07-01T14:29:00.000-05:00Can't help with the word verification -- that&...Can't help with the word verification -- that's Google's business, I just use it!<br><br>I also have doubts that the UN can be reformed, but then I have doubts that meaningful progress can be made on most issues of import. In any case, to paraphrase Eugene Debs, "It is better to ask for what you want and not get it than to ask for what you don't want and get it."Ryan McReynoldshttp://www.blogger.com/profile/11333879625502795277noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2685698485860402737.post-34759681202056421982008-07-01T14:11:00.000-05:002008-07-01T14:11:00.000-05:00I have trouble with word verification on this blog...I have trouble with word verification on this blog, from my home computer.<br><br>I have doubts that the UN can be reformed. I'm for formations as a united socialist Middle East.Renegade Eyehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/03536211653082893030noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2685698485860402737.post-17517456051334592912008-07-01T10:24:00.000-05:002008-07-01T10:24:00.000-05:00Thank you for the link. I know there are several o...Thank you for the link. I know there are several other UN democratization campaigns around as well.Ryan McReynoldshttp://www.blogger.com/profile/11333879625502795277noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2685698485860402737.post-89670097680251377792008-07-01T06:28:00.000-05:002008-07-01T06:28:00.000-05:00Hey, you should check out the international Campai...Hey, you should check out the international Campaign for a UN Parliamentary Assembly. Did not see any numbers on seats per country on their website, but it seems they're the prime movers towards a world parliament at the moment. URL is http://www.unpacampaign.org/Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2685698485860402737.post-81769518243011368782008-05-19T14:57:00.000-05:002008-05-19T14:57:00.000-05:00Beautiful post! Beautiful Clementine!Beautiful post! Beautiful Clementine!Andréa N.http://www.blogger.com/profile/10308011753128104930noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2685698485860402737.post-67560110245187293692008-05-10T08:01:00.000-05:002008-05-10T08:01:00.000-05:00Thanks for the link love :)Thanks for the link love :)Elaine Vigneaulthttp://www.blogger.com/profile/02678177594055407926noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2685698485860402737.post-26092659823790597212008-05-06T20:00:00.000-05:002008-05-06T20:00:00.000-05:00That's great Ryan. So many people totally sell...That's great Ryan. So many people totally sell out when they have kids... it's so discouraging and gross. It's a relief that it doesn't sound like you're going to be one of them.Pamelahttp://www.blogger.com/profile/08127408964931368857noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2685698485860402737.post-13631346990459149482008-05-04T05:49:00.000-05:002008-05-04T05:49:00.000-05:00Grrr. When I first read that obnoxious George Monb...Grrr. When I first read that obnoxious George Monbiot article I remember starting out being so happy, could this really be happening? And then as I read on....reality sunk in. No, of course he would not promote the benefits and ease of veganism, instead he would further alienate and belittle the vegan lifestyle as hard, unnatural and unhealthy. I cringed at the line that mentions the pale and sickly grey vegans. Oh really? Not in my house. Since becoming a vegan I feel more vibrantly alive every single day. I can run faster, bike harder, and play longer than I ever did as an omnivore. If a vegan diet is so unhealthy why is it proven to lower your rate of obesity, diabetes, heart disease, stroke and many kinds of cancer? Hmmm.The Vegan Revolutionhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/10173787788401384967noreply@blogger.com