IronChariots.org

[ChristOnIce]

While I am pretty much done discussing animal rights altogether, I did notice several people in the chat room session today saying that we had no place discussing the issue since we aren't advocates. Horse shit.

We were addressing arguments that we do hear from many animal rights advocates. We made it clear that we were addressing only specific arguments and in no way implied that they were universal. It was handled the same way religious arguments are. We obviously understand that not all people of any one position hold that position for the same reasons or use the same arguments.

Some listeners who support animal rights may not use the same rationale as those whose arguments were discussed. If that's the case, we were not talking about you. We were talking in a general sense about specific arguments. It is no different than when we discuss Christian intolerance of homosexuality or Islamic mistreatment of women. Of course there are portions of these groups that do not claim the positions we attack. Despite general use of terms, we are not talking about these people.

Most of our discussion centered on the ethics of human meddling in animal breeding which (while sparked by AR) is largely tangential. It is hypocritical to accept general conversation about the ideas of others (namely the religious) and then get your panties in a twist when we do the same to ideas you hold.
_________________
Hitler burns Anne Frank for a day, and it's evil.
God burns Anne Frank for eternity, and it's just.