QueenZone discussion #1331769

The Real Wizard wrote: Once again, conservatives in their myopic world of binary thinking wanted to paint him as hypocritical because he makes different decisions based on varying factors. Deer hunting is necessary. It controls over-population. Most vegetarians and vegans even understand and accept this. This stance based on reality doesn't somehow discredit him in his fight against the culling of another species. Do not take on Brian May with a war of words on this issue. You'll lose every time.

Zebonka12 wrote: "There are very few people here, if anyone, who is qualified to comment on the issue" That's indicative of a severe lack of imagination. There really aren't many things to take into account - the impact of the deer on his property and the ecology in the area, vs. the cost of either offing some of them or letting them run free, vs. the property owners feelings about culling in general. I left out the consideration of 'how other people feel about you performing a cull' because really, who gives a fuck.

thomasquinn 32989 wrote: Translation: whenever you say something bad about conservatives (and it'd be a challenge not to), GratefulFan will start yelling at you.

AlexRocks wrote: Animals have no rights. They are meant to pull things and be eatten.

Brian May needs to read a book or educate himself on the constant murder and rape of human beings that happen around the world. Fifty thousand human beings were killed in Syria recently. Why is that not on his radar? Is he a coward?

The Real Wizard wrote: I suggest you research the current water crisis that is a direct result of factory farming. link Furthermore - 36 of the world's poorest 40 countries export the overwhelming majority of their wheat because the governments have sold out to US corporations like McDonalds. Instead of using this wheat to feed their starving populations, it is exported to the USA becoming feed for the cows that become your 10% beef burger. Whether or not animals exist for our benefit can remain up for debate, but the facts written above are not up for debate. They are facts.

Don't piss on the parade of people who are trying to make a difference in some way. Brian might not be perfect (who the hell is?), but at least he isn't just sitting on his computer complaining. He only does that after coming home from trying to make the world a better place.

AlexRocks wrote: I support those who bring forth freedom and capitalism. Those two things together in their purest forms have brought forth more peace and prosperity to all walks of life from all corners of the globe than any other systems or ideologies.

You understand that the country you attempt to demonise freed most of the world from slavery and genocide?

The term "making a difference" is not only ambiguous but entirely manipulative. You know Hitler used that, right?

GratefulFan wrote: I was struck a couple of years ago by a piece by George Monbiot stepping back from some of his beliefs about veganism and the sustainability and ethics of raising meat for food. It was based on a book called 'Meat: A Benign Extravagence' which tears down some often parroted bad arguments on both sides and proposes changes in farming practices that would result in sustainable meat production at about half it's current rate. link

Or any number of other beings outside of his empathy and compassion glasses so narrow and rigid he may as well have none at all.

AlexRocks wrote: RealWizard responding with horrible things does not change any of the points I made.

Donna13 wrote: I don't see anything wrong with adapting to this idea that wild animals should be given rights.

Donna13 wrote: But if Brian is being too hasty, and using incorrect statistics and numbers that could cause a loss of credibility in his arguments, then that should be corrected ASAP. I don't think it should just be an issue of how many cows are sick now anyway, but based on higher principles of long term thinking. Sure, there could be loss of income for farmers, but that could just be passed on to the consumer in the form of higher milk and beef prices.

The Real Wizard wrote:

GratefulFan wrote: I was struck a couple of years ago by a piece by George Monbiot stepping back from some of his beliefs about veganism and the sustainability and ethics of raising meat for food. It was based on a book called 'Meat: A Benign Extravagence' which tears down some often parroted bad arguments on both sides and proposes changes in farming practices that would result in sustainable meat production at about half it's current rate. link

He had me until he said this: "many vegetable oils have a bigger footprint than animal fats, and reminds us that even vegan farming necessitates the largescale killing or ecological exclusion of animals: in this case pests." Great, so veganism is unequivocally a sham because their ideals haven't been fully realized just yet. Perfect. So let's go back to 100% reliance on animals. Crisis averted.

Or any number of other beings outside of his empathy and compassion glasses so narrow and rigid he may as well have none at all.

You keep toting this one, and it is beyond flawed. So if he doesn't have compassion for the ignorant people who can't be bothered to listen to a new point of view, he is the one at fault? It is ok for others to be intolerant, but for him to be "intolerant" (for lack of a better word) of their intolerance is a problem? It's like blaming a cancer expert for not curing polio. How about blaming Terry Fox for not running for starving children? These circular arguments get you absolutely nowhere. They merely justify sitting on your arse while demonizing others who are actually trying to do something. Pick them apart all you want - at least they're out there doing their best, trying to help someone or something. Such a stance always reminds me of this quote: "Anti-intellectualism has been a constant thread winding its way through our political and cultural life, nurtured by the false notion that democracy means that 'my ignorance is just as good as your knowledge.'" -- Isaac Asimov