Copy of my last post to a certain forum

I wasn’t going to include my last post on a particular forum on this blog.  Though I decided to in light of recent censorship by one of the moderators of one of my posts to an obviously anti-abolitionist thread.

Here is the link to the thread, if it stays up, and the post below.

Final Post.

All,

It’s been a few days since I last made a comment on many of the different threads, I was going to reply to each then decided that I would start my a new one and respond to all those that I can remember.

Whilst I am not conceding defeat, I am taking a break from this forum for who knows how long.  As the overwhelming wave of ignorance and hypocrisy is getting too great, and I do have more important things to focus on.

There are those who puff their chest up and say that this forum is all about open discussion, blah blah blah.  Yet as soon as the discussion moves away from the mutual back patting and highlights the hypocrisy of their arguments they resort to personal attacks and bullying tactics, then it usually goes to the whole proverbial pi**ing contest, “I am/have done this for the animals, what have you done?”

Further evidence of this hypocrisy is the deletion of my post, by a moderator, to a thread where I highlighted the original post breached the forum rules.  Mind you, I believe the thread was started by a moderator, so I guess that goes to show how “impartial’ the mods are…

For those who seem to think that abolitionism is an unattainable position. It is not, for example, who would have thought a little over 30 years ago that Australian Constitution would be changed to recognised the Indigenous population. The same things goes for women’s rights. These days females are accepted in all areas of society, bar a few clubs and some “front-line” combat roles.

In reality, the only difference between the two above and the Animal Rights issue, is that the animals are relying on us to speak up with one voice and not take no for an answer. Which is something that is not happening.

You cannot deny that the vegan message is the best one for all the animals, yet it still never ceases to amaze me the number of vegans that will blow wind up the backside of someone that “has taken the first step” and become vegetarian.

As some additional input to the “where do you draw the line thread” I was out at a lunch thingy at a friends place over the weekend and it was interesting to see that all the people there were conscious of where they sat/stood/walked, so as not to disturb/kill any of the ants that were scurrying around. Even though they are “just insects”

Zany Zebra:
You keep saying that this isn’t a contest at all, yet you were the one that created the thread about having a competition/bet between abolitionist and welfarist tactics to see which one was more effective.

*Cerberus*:
You made a comment that abolitionists must be supported by the MLA. Yet you fail to see how vegetarians support the dairy industry, the leather industry and so on. Also, how many vegetarians actually take the time to buy “non animal” rennet cheese?

Do you really think that with 2 704 000 000, less meat meals being consumed, your figures, that the MLA, etc. would stand idly by and let that happen?
And what would you use as the reason for not eating meat on those days?
That it is wrong to consume animals? That would be hypocritical, because what about the animals that are consumed on other days?
That it is unhealthy to eat meat? The MLA would once again pay the CSIRO to say otherwise.
That it is cruel to the animals? Then you would probably see a rapid increase in “happy meat” production.

You also neglect to mention with every vegan “conversion” there is the flow on effect of a reduction in the demand for other products that are “animal based”. Once again, highlighting the short-sightedness of those that adopt the welfarist position, as they only focus on one species of non human animal, not ALL of them.

Dark Horse:
You are failing to see the reason why vegetarians are part of the problem, not the solution. Depending on their original motivation for being vegetarian in the first place, it could be easier for them to become a “conscious carnivore” than to actually go vegan.

Roy:
You advise against starting a new group, which is fair enough and I do actually agree with that. Though what do you do when the only group that you could possibly join is old, stale, and fails to move with the times, or even accept as legitimate the views that are held by yourself and a growing number of other people?

I am flabbergasted by the number of people here that can not see that inconsistent messages do not work. The message that is being sent out by the welfarists and those who condone/support vegetarianism is. It is ok for you to have animals killed, exploited, etc for your shoes, handbag or jacket/jumper. It is also OK for you to have male calves killed/become veal and male chickens ground up alive, crushed and/or starve in bins, or suffocated in garbage bags, just so you can enjoy your cheese, eggs, cake and biscuits or whatever it is that contains dairy/eggs.

In general, humans will only ever do “just enough”, as opposed to “all that they can” or even “the best” that they can do.  If there are groups telling them that a “meat free Monday” or buying happy meat is “good enough” for them to do, then usually that is what they do.

In closing, I would like to say that it was good whilst it lasted, and I thoroughly enjoyed it all, including the deliberate slander attack by Admin towards me.  I will continue to sit in my penthouse of moral superiority knowing that I am doing ALL that I can for ALL of the non-human animals that are being exploited/abuse/killed, etc…

Cameron