Let’s Start Shooting Those Who Murder Animals

 

shooting

Now that I have your attention, please consider:

The enemy we are fighting is the most malevolent in human history.
The enemy we are fighting has tortured and killed more beings than all of the casualties of all the wars ever fought, combined.
The enemy we are fighting is more evil than was the government of Nazi Germany, by several orders of magnitude.
The enemy we are fighting is more barbaric than was any government or military force in history.
More brutal than Ghengis Khan, Alexander the Great, Caligula, or Idi Amin.
The enemy we face murders over a billion of our fellow Earthlings every week,150 million each day.
It is legal. Just as the Nazi Holocaust of Jews was legal.
It is acceptable to most people. Just as the Nazi Holocaust was acceptable to Germans.
It is condoned by every major religion.
But the most significant fact is that the horrors are supported by most humans.

Animal Rights advocates have been in a quiet war on behalf of the animal victims of human society.

Unlike most wars, there are no human casualties.

The only casualties are animals.

That is because we Animal Rights advocates are working within the confines of human legal systems and human governments. We shape our actions and our advocacy to comport with societal values. We observe the rules laid out by society. We buy into the peer pressure and the propaganda that force people to conform, to avoid confrontation, to not question, to not challenge, to not rock the boat, to not rise up against the powers that be.

We cannot change the world, or even impact human conduct, without bringing down the political, economic, and legal systems which allow, encourage, protect, and defend the Animal Holocaust.

To end the Animal Holocaust we must attack the people who carry out the horrors.

Were we in Nazi Germany, one hopes we would have targeted those carrying out the mass murders of our Jewish brothers and sisters. The guards, the administrators, the executioners, all should have been targeted. From the SS troops who arrested victims in their homes to the German High Command, all would have been fair game. All strategic targets. All in our cross-hairs.

The Nazis had blood on their hands, to be sure.

But the Nazis only murdered 6 million souls over ten years.

Our enemy murders six million souls every hour!

The futility of trying to end the Animal Holocaust by recruiting vegans must surely be apparent to the most myopic animal activist. What we are doing is not only not working, it CANNOT work.

Even those who struggle with math must come to the realization that veganism cannot displace carnism when we are recruiting fewer vegans than carnists are having children.

Working for the rights of animals, the legal protection of animals, or the end to human exploitation of animals cannot succeed if we accept the human proposition that humans are superior to animals, that human life is more valuable than is animal life, or that human law should allow animals to be owned by humans.

The concept that animals are property is the basic premise of almost all animal cruelty. If animals are the property of people, people have the right to do what they will with their property.

That supposition is the foundation of all animal exploitation industries. And the basis for most of the animal cruelty in the world.

We observe radical political and religious factions waging guerrilla war against those they perceive as oppressing them. Separatists fighting for self-determination, Islamic jihadists killing people for an imaginary god, political belligerents at war over who gets to call a particular piece of real estate there own.

Compared to the plight of animals being murdered at the rate of 60 BILLION per year, human internecine conflict is ridiculous. To put it into perspective, it is arguing over whether or not death camp guards should get paid leave or higher wages, or whether hunters should have to pay higher fees for permits.

From the perspective of animal victims of humans, all human conflict is of no importance.

To animal activists, the most important human conflict is the one we have been afraid to pursue. The one in which we raise arms against the killers, the enslavers, abusers, the exploiters of animals.

It is the next step in our struggle to liberate animals and to ultimately achieve our goal of winning rights for all sentient beings.

Our cause is much more just than that of crazy religious zealots following an imaginary god. Our cause carries a moral imperative that dwarfs concerns about political separatism or government oppression. Our cause is the most just, the most moral, the most imperative in history.

And it cannot be waged from inside the prison walls of the status quo.

We must target those who carry out atrocities against animals. We need the political discussion to address how animals are treated and what the motivation is of those taking out slaughterhouse grunts and Big Ag lobbyists. We must elevate the discussion of Animal Rights. It should be much more important a consideration than is ISIS, immigration, healthcare, or Donald Trump.

It should be the lead story on every news program every day. For Animal Rights to get that attention will require a concerted effort to instill fear in animal abusers, to drive up the costs of security, of wages, of insurance premiums, of public relations, of political bribes. It means we must dramatically gain the world’s center stage

We individual activists may pay a severe price for our beliefs and involvement, but placing the issue on the public’s front burner will yield remarkable results in both new recruits and emboldening Animal Rights advocates to join in direct action.

We must embrace social revolution as our ultimate goal, for revolution is the requirement to end capitalism. And capitalism is the cause of most animal cruelty in the world. Animals are exploited and murdered for profit. Businessmen. Capitalists. Conservatives. All are the architects of the Animal Holocaust. All are enemies of animals.

I am not advocating indiscriminate and mindless violence. Merely striking out against particularly reprehensible people will accomplish nothing. Indeed, I am not even suggesting this in the short term.

We must assemble a critical mass of dedicated activists committed to direct action. All our recruiting and education should be with the end in view of building a guerilla army. Not in the traditional sense, but an unrelated, amorphous network of individuals and small groups capable of carrying out missions against the most heinous targets: corporations that own and operate factory farms, feedlots, and slaughterhouses.

The result will not likely directly impact animals for some time, But the public attention drawn to the Animal Holocaust would rival the attention now given to jihadist Islam. It will polarize people to be for or against animals. It will allow us to recruit in unprecedented numbers. New leaders will emerge, animal activists will become radicalized, veganism will be discussed, extolled, and vilified. But most importantly, it will be discussed. News will focus on slaughter practices. The veil of secrecy surrounding the horrors will be pulled aside.

We will galvanize a segment of the public that we do not presently have the ability to reach.

We will draw a line between the oppressed and the capitalist state.

And it could lead to revolution.

If so, it could be the spark that ignites the world.

Enemies of capitalism greatly outnumber proponents of animal liberation. If we are successful enough, they will join us.

All who oppose capitalism are our allies. The animals’ allies. Even if they don’t give a damn about animals. Because socialism, by its very nature, reduces the number of animals that are enslaved and murdered.

Socialism removes the profit incentive from animal agriculture. The result is that socialist societies murder and consume half the animals as do capitalist societies.

Worldwide socialism would mean saving THIRTY BILLION animals each year. That is Thirty Thousand Million! 30,000,000,000 innocent lives that would not be sacrificed on the altar of capitalism!!

That fact alone should make every animal activist a socialist revolutionary.

 

 

Author’s Notes:

I am unaware of any other blog with the Armory’s mission of radicalizing the animal movement. I certainly hope I am not alone, and that there are similar sentiments being expressed by comrades unknown to me.

If you know of other blogs dedicated to animal rights and the defeat of capitalism, please comment with a link.

• Be sure to follow the Armory and share it with your Facebook friends and email contacts, as well as on Twitter, Google, and all other social media platforms. Our influence and effectiveness is dependent upon you!

If you are not already subscribed to the Armory, please do so before you leave.

There’s a button to Follow us in the upper right sidebar.

• Be sure to visit Armory of the Revolution’s new commissary and bookstore: The Supply Depot

You will find recommended reading on Animal Rights, revolutionary theory, politics, economics, religion, science, and atheism. There is also a section of supplies for animal liberationists, hunt saboteurs, and social revolutionaries. This is all brand new, and we will be adding lots more merchandise in the near future!

Feel free to comment. I encourage open discussion and welcome other opinions. I moderate comments because this blog has been attacked by hunters and right wing trolls. I approve comments that are critical as well as those which agree with me. Comments that I will not tolerate are those that are spam, threatening, disrespectful, or which promote animal abuse and cruelty

Advertisements

132 thoughts on “Let’s Start Shooting Those Who Murder Animals

  1. French, it s not easy for me to understand all the sentences. Is there your texts and the books in french? Of course, l ‘ m okay! A “war” , a Revolution is necessary if we want that win the cause animal. It s a right that we can win only by the force

    Like

  2. I agree a hundred percent. Death is the only thing that will stop these evil bastards. Next thing they will do is kill torture and rape babies. It is so heart breaking. I just do not understand it at all. What can we do to stop it??

    Like

  3. Pingback: American vegans advocating in favour of mass-murder on WordPress | Project Keep Staring

  4. Pingback: Thought Police | Armory of the Revolution

  5. Unfortunately, this blog has degenerated into meaningless drivel. Donald Trump probably will love this, since he is apparently admired on this blog. And, Bernie Sanders, who is blindly followed by trendy, thoughtless liberals, is a staunch supporter of the use of guns, to kill innocent animals. So this blog preaches the blind hatred of Muslim people around the world, as the U.S. and its “coalition partners” (who also want to rekindle Empire), are continually bombing innocent children, women and men, destroying civil infrastructure.

    More over, as the U.S, propaganda machine encourages more paranoia, Muslim hating, more bombing, the young that are left as orphans will only know killing, as taught by the present Empire of the U.S. Where do all the weapons come from? Most of them are furnished by the U.S. weapons industry. And, we wonder why we have mass shootings at shopping malls, etc. The U.S. has a large investment in selling weapons to Saudi Arabia and other entities. They will sell them to the highest bidder.
    Today’s “Enemy” will become tomorrow’s new “friend,” just as Bin Laden was initially with the U.S.

    And, does anyone realize just how many innocent animals are bombed? Wars, regardless who starts them, are killing the planet.

    http://www.foranimals.org

    Like

    • I will deal with your”drivel” in order.
      I praise and criticize where I believe it is warranted. Trump’s positions on lobbyists and political fundraising are laudable, as is his position on trade agreements. I cannot think of any other things we agree upon. This blog supports Bernie Sanders, although he is not my ideal candidate. He is not vegan, he supports hunting, he would continue Obama’s outrageous drone policy, he supports militarizing Israel.
      This blog does not preach “the blind hatred of Muslim people around the world,” as you put it. I am an atheist, and have no use for any religions. My criticism of Muslims has been only to point out that those Muslims who kill animals are as abhorrent as those Muslims who kill people.
      This blog is staunchly anti-war. I have opposed all US military adventurism since my days in the streets during the Viet Nam war, and running draft resisters to Canada.
      Not quite sure what you consider “drivel.”

      Like

    • Holy Moly! Talk abou lack of concentration and focus on a topic. It sounds more like you want to rant on about your own agenda.

      Like

  6. Pingback: Are You Following the Armory Blog? | Armory of the Revolution

  7. The people who should be blamed for killing animals are the people who choose to buy from breeders and pet stores and online stores rather than adopting. If someone buys from a breeder, then a dog dies in a shelter. People who support animals rights and animal welfare and adopting and supporting rescues and shelters are the heroes. They save lives thousands of time every day.

    Liked by 1 person

    • That is a preposterous notion, propounded by ignorant goat herders in the Bronze Age. Either all sentient life has souls or none do. And as there is no credible evidence that souls exist at all, we must relegate the idea to the dustbin of ignorance and superstition.

      Liked by 1 person

      • …and I get really irate about people who don’t realize that all sentient beings have souls…
        …and “all souls weigh the same”…
        …the ignorance and arrogance of the human animal abound ☻

        Liked by 1 person

      • If people have souls, then animals must as well. And the sentiment that “all souls weigh the same” is one of the most profound I have ever heard. When you used the phrase in another post I was taken aback with its wisdom and beauty. It moved me so much that I have written an article with that title, soon to be published here on the Armory. Thank you for referring me to its original author.

        Like

    • You do not know that humans have souls … That is a human construct to make us out to be something more than we are and paving the way for the myth of eternal life. I know that animals have feelings and emotions and that, to me, is reason enough to be kind to them all, except for Muslims.

      Like

      • That is your choice to believe or not believe in souls in humans or animals, and it is not connected to religion. It is the spiritual realm, which is different than religion. I believe humans and animals have souls, and I am not a religious person in any way.

        Liked by 1 person

    • Oh, you decided that did you?? Why don’t animals have souls? I believe they do have souls.

      I also think the key word is ‘suffering’. If animals did not have souls…it should be even more important their life was long and nice.

      Like

  8. Roland, you have dogs? Is that not the same as abuse in “your eyes”? Keeping an animal from it’s natural habitat and forcing it to eat things it wouldn’t in the wild. Maybe you should have a reality check of what farmers and hunters both do. Do you drive a vehicle? Would you prefer cows, pigs, chickens and all other farm like animals to be run infront of you or being hit on roads? What do you suggest as a solution to this problem? Farmers feed and take care of every animal on their property. Between their health and so they aren’t inbreeding and leaving animals born with extra body parts or born with organ on the outside of their bodies. Maybe someone should come out of the city and tour a few farms to see how well these animals are taken care of and loved by their owners. Farming is making a commitment to animals and land to take care of it just like in a marriage. Feel free to comment as I will continue standing here petting my beautiful dairy calves and feeding them their breakfast while waiting for your rude snarky remarks due to your unability to understand the rest of the world outside your small minded ness. Have a beautiful day!

    Like

    • I oppose animal ownership by humans. I believe the relationship between people and animals should be that of guardians and wards. Similar relationships exist at law for those responsible for minors, the mentally and developmentally challenged, the incompetent, etc. Legal guardianships require the guardians to act in the best interests of those under the guardians’ care.

      Domesticated animals, generally, are unable to be introduced into the wild. Their natural instincts have long ago been bred out of them. Human society has a moral obligation to those animals that humans have domesticated.

      Animal Rights is the belief that all animals have the same right to exist as do humans. The same rights not to be exploited, enslaved, or murdered. The same rights we declare for ourselves.

      Liked by 2 people

      • OK.. I’ll go along with you as far as that animals ought to have a decent life and be treated well… but that’s where it ends.. When it comes down to having “the same rights we declare for ourselves”, that’s going too far.
        I’ve said it for a while, and this post has made it perfectly clear to me it’s true
        “The only possible end result of treating all animals like humans is that all humans will be treated like animals”

        I farm.. I have cows, and darned close to every one of them is a pet, I take care of them the best I can, and enjoy doing it, but I can’t keep them all, so I need to sell some, and I do butcher some as well.. When I do, they don’t know what hit them, and that’s the way it ought to be. If I have an animal that’s sick, I take care of it, if it’s not going to get better, I’ll put it down rather than let it suffer.

        So for all you people who are so gung-ho about animal rights, How about getting some facts straight, and not lumping all people who raise animals in the same lot, then put your money where you mouth is and seek out and support those who do it in a fashion that you agree with, whatever that may be

        Like

      • No I don’t murder my pets.. Murder by definition is the killing of a human by another human

        And on the breeding of animals getting called ‘rape’.. that’s bullshit. When a cow is in heat, she WANTS to go find a bull, and she will be receptive to his advances.

        Stop comparing animals to humans, especially when you know so little about them

        Like

      • Murder is a legal term, as differentiated from manslaughter or homicide. The mental state necessary to be guilty of murder is exactly the same as the mental state of those who commit atrocities in slaughterhouses. The only difference is the species of the victim. As a lawyer, I use the term murder intentionally, to punctuate the hypocrisy of the law and society.

        Like

    • Dairy Girl — YOU ARE A DISGRACE TO THE FEMALE GENDER. To uphold the rape and perpetual impregnation of an animal and then take it’s baby away so humans can have the milk that was intended for the baby. That’s pretty to you, huh. Veal is pretty to you, huh? That’s “love” to you. You are one sick dairy girl.

      How about we talk for once about the state of the SOUL of people like you who perpetrate these sins? The executioners on the kill floor? Take a look at some of the statements and stories of people who used to work in those industries. It is not natural for us to be behaving this way. It is a betrayal of our best humanity. You are lost. Emotionally deadened. Sick. Pathological.

      People who have rescue animals do so to give refuge to them. These animals are the fall out of human wretchedness. They don’t deliberately force life into existence for the sole purpose of using that animal as a resource.

      Stop using the word Love. You have no right to it.

      “It’s difficult to get a man to understand something when his salary depends on him not understanding it” – Upton Sinclair

      Like

      • So, I’m not about to state my opinion, so I’m just asking you not to call me a psychopathic emotionally dead husk of a human. I’m just going to play the devil’s advocate here, I’m not making claims, just asking questions, I’m curious about your thoughts on this. (I just reread this and realized that I do in fact make claims, but for the most part I’m not stating my opinion still, just possible opinions, or whatever)

        So, your belief system is built on “every soul is equal”, so killing two birds is more than killing one human, the like. Does this include only the lives taken or does it also include what affects the taking of that life has on others? Would killing two birds be worse than killing one human if said human’s death caused grievances throughout their family and friends?

        You’re saying that humans should start to become vegan to lower the demand for animal deaths, but as someone else here mentioned, many products used in daily life and that are very important are made out of products from animals. Should we stop producing many of the things we have grown accustomed to in order to stop all animal deaths? Also, say that everyone on earth suddenly goes vegan. Imagine all of the space that would be taken up to make plant farms to replace that extremely major food source, taking away more environment from wild animals. Would it be worth it?

        Next, you don’t want to kill any animals, and want to stop breeding, but here’s the thing. The domesticated animal population, while I am not going to find the exact number, is waaaaaayyy up there. Say we can stop slaughtering entirely, and we are able to release all of them into fitting environments where they are capable of survival, they will no doubt continue to breed on their own, and cause a major animal overpopulation. If you believe that human overpopulation is a major problem that needs to be dealt with, and animals are equal, wouldn’t we be obligated by the moral code to step in and start lowering their population in order to keep them from depleting all of their resources and killing themselves? Would slaughtering 100 to save 200 be justified? What if for the greater good they needed to die?

        On the topic of killing so another is saved, it seems you very much believe that humans are the problem, because we are in fact the cause of this problem. If every single human on Earth simultaneously put a gun to their heads and blew their brains out of their skull, would it be justified? There are more animals than people, surely the sacrifice is worthy, is it not? Would you be willing not only to end your own life, but the lives of all of your friends and family to save these animals? Would you kill absolutely every human so that the animals that you are so against killing could be free to their own devices and end up killing themselves with their overpopulation? You’re willing to change your diet, are you willing to end your life too? Likely every day you’re using products made with bits and pieces of dead animal, you being alive and using them is giving reason to kill more and more animals, isn’t it? If you were willing to follow your belief to its very core, you’d be dead already. (No, I’m not telling you to kill yourself, just like you, I do value life, including yours. I’m just trying to give you something to think about and I’m curious what you already think of it.)

        There are a lot of humans in the world, seriously, dayum, many humans. The thing about humans though, is that we are logical, sentient creatures that are capable of adapting and building upon this world to suit our needs. Yes I know animals can be capable of similar things like adaptation, I’m talking about the scale in which humans do it being so much greater. I’m not saying that that makes our lives worth more, I’m just saying that it gives us power over other creatures, and that power due to our very nature is used to help ourselves. Can you really blame us? If cows and humans switched places, I have hardly a doubt in my mind that it would be the same situation. Are we really wrong for wanting the survival of our kind? Is it an evil thing to want to live and thrive? Of course we’re harming things in the process, and should try to hurt as little as possible, but if you were in a survival situation, wouldn’t you want to fight tooth and nail for your life? You’re shifting the blame onto people and calling them evil for simply following their nature, is that really fair? Can a dog be blamed for eating a steak if they were hungry? And if every soul is equal, wouldn’t a wolf eating another animal be just as bad as a hunter eating a deer? Why aren’t you protesting to train predators to live on a vegan diet too? Do you think “they can’t help it, it’s in their nature”? It’s in the nature of humans too, isn’t it? Not to mention, being predatory and feeding off of other beings is simply part of the cycle, throw that off and everything goes wack. I do understand where you’re coming from, humans have thrown a lot of that balance off in our control of populations, but yet again, we’re bound to do things like that for survival. Innovation+drive to survive (hey that rhymed!)=stuff happening that in this case turned out bad.

        I don’t really have any ultimate point, as the point of this was to show you that you may need to clear up a few things or build up your argument to make it more sturdy and such. That’s the point of debate, just so you know, though I hope you already did. I understand that you’re passionate about your beliefs, and so you have very emotional (AKA, pissed off) responses. I just ask that you respond to people questioning or challenging your beliefs not as a personal attack, but as an opportunity to either show them problems with their belief so that they may grow and learn from it, or to take critique for yours so that you can better understand your own argument or another’s.

        Also, on an entirely different note, you were pretty damn harsh with your reply to Dairy Girl. She just said that farmers kept inbreeding among animals from happening and you called her a “DISGRACE TO THE FEMALE GENDER”. And saying that she upholds/supports rape? Owning the same animal in both sexes doesn’t make you support rape. In a farm like the one I live on or like I’m assuming she lives on, we don’t force animals to breed, unless you call having a bull in the same area as female cows forcing them to breed. Putting a man and woman in a room isn’t going to automatically make them try for a baby, and since animals are equal, we should think of them the same way, right? Also, just so you know, there is in fact a type of cow commonly called a “milking cow”. You see, no one murders any cow cow babies to get milk from it, they just produce more milk than is necessary to feed their young. In fact, if their extra milk is not milked from them or harvested or whatever you wanna call it, it will cause them pain and discomfort. You wanna know how I know? I have one. She hasn’t been milked in a while because she hasn’t had any calves, because even though there is now a bull in the same field (yes, open grazing field with plenty of space to go) as her, we aren’t forcing them to breed. When she was milked, she’d be pet either during or after the process, or before too, would be handled gently, and afterwards we’d graze her in the tallest grass available. I’m not saying that some people don’t kill calves to get milk (which I do agree is very cruel), it’s just that if a person says “I milk a cow” it doesn’t immediately make them a bad person.

        I think one of the things that can make you come off as a bit, um, a bit of a radical easily offended and pissed off person, is that you come off like you assume all people who live on farms or hunt animals are all immediately soulless husks who are obviously the demon spawn of the world and should be punished for their horrendous crimes. I own chickens. Does that make me Hitler? I guess so. I’m sorry I’ve started to get more douchy, it’s just that I can’t sleep and it’s 2 AM and I’m too invested in this long ass post to back away now.

        Also, I’m just going to put this out there. Cows, and humans, are not equal. If souls do in fact exist (to be honest I don’t know my opinion on it), I wouldn’t be surprised if the souls were equal. But as lives and beings? No, they are not equal. Humans and chickens are not equal, humans and fish are not equal, humans and bears are not equal, bears and fish are not equal, bears and chickens are not equal, bears and cows are not equal. Other animals will never never never have the same rights as people, because give a chicken a job and a home and it will just shit on the couch and go looking for food. Put a cow in a school and you’ll just get a very distracted classroom. I get what you’re saying, that animals should be treated fairly, but you’ll never get genuine equality, ever, because they simply are not equal. Oh my god, it is 2 AM, and I don’t know what I’m doing anymore. I’ve lost track of what point I could possibly be making to summarize this, but I really have no idea anymore. I’m just gonna keep talking, because I don’t know what I’m even doing anymore but it’s too late. I’m so sorry for such a long post, oh my goodness.

        “More brutal than Ghengis Kahn, Alexander the Great, Caligula, or Idi Amin.”
        I mean, I don’t even know how to respond to this. (I’m just going to say “you” when talking about what was said, because since you haven’t protested to the author saying that I’m assuming you agree with it. If you don’t actually agree with that, than just replace the “you”s with “the author” or something.) You’re right in saying that more animals were killed, but damn, you may as well throw in Attila the Hun. Did you know that Attila’s nickname was The Scourge of God? That’s because people believed that no god that was at all merciful would allow a being like him to walk the Earth. But, that doesn’t even matter, because ya know, a gazillion animals were killed or what not, he doesn’t even match it at all. Here’s the thing though, you’re right in saying that more animals were killed than in the holocaust or in a hell of a lot of wars, but you better stop right there. To write off all of the political issues saying that it’s more important? You have the numbers, you have “more animals dead than humans”, so just stop your comparison right there please. As soon as you started the whole “Our cause is much more just than that of crazy religious zealots following an imaginary god.” and “Our cause is the most just, the most moral, the most imperative in history” it spiraled downhill. For starters, there’s no way in hell that you can firmly say that your cause is the most moral. If everyone agreed on morals, none of this crap would be happening. Morality is pretty damn gray, so don’t go saying “we have the most noble cause” because if that was undeniably true I wouldn’t be here at 2 in the damn morning. If you go up to a person willing to die for their country and family and say “Ha, faggot, that doesn’t even compare, these cows are going through HELL and you’re sitting there firing your lead at some guys on a hill” you are not going to get positive feedback regardless of their belief. Yet again, as I’m so fond of mentioning, it is 2 in the morning, so I don’t know where I was going with this, so take it as you will. You know, I’m just gonna leave, I am not in the right mind for a good discussion. Please forgive anything I said that may have offended you or upset you (I’m not sarcastically saying this, I went into this with no intention to harm anyone). Bye.

        Like

    • Dairy Girl you ask what the solution to the problem is: People need to withdraw their support of using animals by going vegan. Gradually over time less and less animals will be bred because of decreased demand. People who make a living off of animals need to find another livelihood. Basically you are pimps, prostituting out animals. Dairy Girl — open your eyes. Do you know that there are dog brothels, where dogs are tied up for paying mutant humans to fornicate with them? Would you like to see some pictures? You don’t see that it’s all connected? You’re not concerned about animal agriculture’s causation to an overdue pandemic? You’re not concerned about animal agriculture’s major contribution to global warming? Check out the documentary Cowspiracy unless you scared to take your blinders off.

      You are the one that needs to open your mind and burst out of that bubble of conditioning that you no doubt have been inculcated into.

      Liked by 1 person

    • Sounds like the commitment Henry VIII made to his wives. He loved them, then sent them to the chopping block. Dairy girl, do you keep all the male calves or do you send them off to be raised for veal? It sounds like you know nothing at all about factory farms. Please educate yourself.

      Like

      • Show me ONE instance of the term “Rape rack” being used in the industry that doesn’t involve blogs with names like “vegan” and “feminist”, or heaven forbid, BOTH.
        Animals in heat look to get knocked up, it’s just that simple, and a lot of “natural” mating really doesn’t look all that consensual or loving.. Ever heard cats mating?

        Like

      • It is still rape even if the perpetrators do not refer to it as rape. Cows are forcibly restrained and impregnated. Bull semen is injected into them, not by bulls, but by people who wish to enslave and murder the cows’ babies. Nothing “natural” about the process. And the criminals who commit the atrocities are no less culpable because you doubt they use the term “rape rack.”

        Like

      • Totally wrong about any connection between diary and breast cancer. I have been a regular consumer of milk for over 50 years, and not a shred of cancer anywhere in me or in my family, who remains a large milk consumer. The only two confirmed things known about how cancer is contracted is by genetics and by chemicals in the environment by toxins. Nothing connected to drinking milk and cancer.

        Find something better to do with your time rather than spreading lies.

        Like

      • According to Wikipedia: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Casein

        This only states a single study which promotes a completely vegan diet. Of course, the authors of the book will conclude what they want to promote. It is their book. There is free press in this country, so just because someone writes and publishes something, doesn’t mean it is true. It is their opinion. I bet they were paid by a large number of vegan support groups.

        Like

      • Jackie Phillips — Wow thank you. Your one personal anecdotal story has really convinced me. Not. Not a shred of cancer anywhere in you or family? I certainly don’t wish it on any of you, but don’t be so sure. Cancer can take many years before there are symptoms and diagnosis. And there’s always the first. The statistic is that 1 in 8 women will be diagnosed, and most of them have no family history, and/or BRCA gene.

        No credible oncologist is okay with their patients continuing to consume dairy.

        By the way, anecdotally speaking, as a heavy dairy, egg and flesh omnivore, I had stage 2 breast cancer 17 years ago. I was tested twice for BRCA and was negative. I guess *you* would say that my going vegan has nothing to do with the fact that I am so-far-so-good cancer-free, alive, and in the best health of my life.

        I would take the word of Dr. Klaper http://doctorklaper.com/answers/answers11/ over anything a casomorphine addict would have to say. — over anything someone who sees an animal as a machine for human purposes, and a meal. Help them, they know not what they do.

        You really should read what Dr. Klaper has to say, not only about the cancer connection, but about other ailments. He makes alot of sense.

        Like

      • Oh wait — you gave me a good laugh Jackie with the statement “I bet they were paid by a large number of vegan support groups”. It is the dairy, and the whole animal agricultural industry that is a rich and powerful mafia, that has people like you totally hoodwinked, and sadly, apathetically complicit in the suffering of 60+ billion animals a year. Not including marine life. Wake up Jackie. Armageddon is upon us. What we do the animals, we do to ourselves.

        Like

      • Does it occur to you that the countries with the highest breast cancer rates are probably also the same countries with high junk food consumption, exposure to airborne chemicals, electromagnetic radiation, obesity, sedentary lifestyles, and a whole host of other factors that contribute to any cancer.

        Now “Rape rack”.. that’s something you guys made up.. it is certainly not an “Industry term”.. I have never heard of it, and I asked a few people more involved in the AI business, and they hadn’t even heard of it.
        Can you describe how this device looks?
        Now leaving artificial insemination out, how is a bull mating with a cow “rape”?

        Like

    • Qwertyuiop — Sorry for the delay in responding, just wanted to acknowledge your sincere thoughts and questions. You seem open-minded, and they deserve an answer. I or someone else will get back to you.

      Like

  9. And if you were successful at stopping all meat consumption in humans, what is next? What do you do about , Wolves, Bears, Lions etc. that predate on animals? Train them all, show them a video on why they should not eat meat? kill them? Nature is nature, unfortunately many animals, (including humans) are designed to eat meat and can not survive otherwise. You can not change nature. You need to find another planet to live on that has evolved differently.

    Like

  10. Lol we kill a billian game a week? Wow anyone that buys that lie isnt to bright. If we did that thier wouldnt be any animals in less than a week to hunt.
    But telling the truth doesnt make you idiots money now does it. To bad you dont put that money to actualy helping conservation rather than lining your own lying greedy pockets with it

    Like

    • Curious that you think so. One of the elder statesmen of the Animal Rights movement is Alex Hershaft, founder of the Farm Animal Rights Movement. Alex is a survivor of one of Hitler’s death camps. And Alex constantly equates the Nazi Holocaust with the Animal Holocaust. If he can make the comparison, who are you or I to say he is wrong?

      Liked by 2 people

  11. the irony of owning animals and forcing a vegan diet on them for your beliefs is overwhelming. you take away their choice, their freedom, and then criticize others.

    Like

  12. Roland, you are very uneducated and perhaps hypocritical.
    1) You say your dogs are vegan, but it’s already been pointed out that to produce the foods to feed you and your dogs, many millions of acres have been converted from animal habitat to agriculture thereby killing millions of animals.
    2) If your dogs are fed a strictly vegan diet, you are killing your own dogs, as fruits, grains & veggies do not produce all of the amino acids required by carnivores or omnivores. Ever heard of carnitine?
    3) Your solution is to create a socialist society and outlaw the killing of animals. Seriously? Try moving to China or Russia or ANY socialist society. They all still kill and eat animals and use animal products. I dare say that more animals are eaten or killed for their products in China than almost all capitalist societies combined.
    Again, you need to educate yourself. Perhaps become an advocate for worldwide humane treatment of animals. Which, by the way, is practiced by hunters and slaughterhouses. The raising of chickens and dogs in “puppy mills” (and I’m sure many other examples) needs more advocates and champions.

    Like

    • Despite you boorish condescension, I am replying to your post rather than deleting it.

      Dogs, human, and other omnivorous animals can thrive on a vegan diet,

      That vast amounts of habitat have been destroyed to make way for farms and cities underscores my belief that the Earth was not designed to be inhabited by over 7 billion flesh eating primates, and cannot withstand the effect of the depletion of natural resources to sustain humanity.

      Neither China nor Russia is a socialist state. When they were socialist states, they murdered and consumed half the number of animals per capita as capitalist states do.

      To suggest that slaughterhouses practice humane treatment of animals is as ludicrous a statement as one who utters it must be ignorant. There is no such thing as humane slaughter. Animals in the slaughterlines are terrified, they are shocked, prodded, kicked, They eventually have a bolt shot into their skulls, are hoisted up by chains and have their throats cut open. Seven percent of all cattle are still conscious when their legs are cut off by chainsaws and their skin ripped from their sides.

      You complete lack of empathy may be do to your abysmal ignorance. It may be that you are incapable of emotion and empathy. It probably results from your not giving a shit. Whatever your motivation in repeating such absurd statements in support of the Animal Holocaust, you embarrass yourself and mislead others.

      Liked by 2 people

      • I believe the size of families should be limited to one natural child and unlimited adoptive ones. Birth control should be made freely available to all. Abortions should be government funded. Financial incentives should be paid to the poor to discourage additional children. Our foreign aid should be linked to environmental and population goals as opposed to military aid and the interests of multinational corporations.

        That said, I believe change is going to exact a terrible toll on the world population. Severe weather, disease, regional conflicts over food,water, etc, will drastically reduce human population around the world.

        Liked by 1 person

      • I wasn’t going to reply to this, but you are far to condescending to not. You cannot seriously believe that all living creatures on this planet can survive a vegan diet…you just can’t be that slow. There are many animals who’s biology would not work on strictly vegan. Simply put they would wither and die, or do we remember PETA’s failed attempt at stealing a lion and forcing into veganism. A full grown male lion who passed away at 9yo and was 115lbs! an animal that should be in the range of 300-500lbs! The list is huge of the animals that cannot live on a vegan diet alone. Take humans most vegans have to have countless amounts of supplements to live that life, that is not natural. And why are you so intent on everything becoming a vegan, it is nature. Animals hunt animals simple as that, you are literally demanding that we change the laws of nature for what? Now I do agree that the way we “process” our food is inhumane. I hunt my own meat, haven’t bought it from the store for a decade. I kill what I need only to live, I take it to a proper shop where it is cleaned and used properly. Any fur or feathers goes to native reserves where they use it to maintain a living, any meat that I will not use is donated to people who could use it. This is totally natural, the way the world has been since living creatures appeared on it, the dinosaurs didn’t setup veggie trays and have tea. And then there is the impact on the planet of not taking another animals life. All species to thrive to their max? Guess what that would have such an insanely huge environmental impact. Can you imagine (well maybe you can’t) a main stay food source animal say small birds pheasants or turkeys, their population booming would cause impacts on the environment, they would eat what they eat till it was gone and other animals would suffer for that the list is endless as to why this just simply wouldn’t work. And you would be dooming every species on the planet to a long slow starvation death, or a plague like wave of destruction. Things die, they have to die, in nature everything has a place on the FOOD chain, it has to happen that way or everything goes out of wack and everything suffers not just one animal not just humans everything down that food chain suffers. Take your vegan agenda somewhere else, because worldwide veganism would be the end of the world dummy.

        Like

      • No clue where you concocted the idea that I believe all animals can be vegan. Never said any such thing, nor even hinted such a moronic thought. The Animal Rights movement is aimed at human conduct, not the animals.

        While you may subsist close to Nature and leave a small footprint in your wake, most of human civilization does not. The planet cannot withstand seven and a half billion flesh eating primates. When humans ceased being hunter-gatherers, the future of animals on Earth was unalterably cast in stone. The rise of agriculture meant the rise of animal slavery and murder on industrial scales. The advent of capitalism increased the horrors by orders of magnitude. The resulting political and legal systems protect the perpetrators and religion isused to justify the exploitation of animals. My fight is not with aboriginal peoples or subsistence hunters. My fight is with Big Agriculture and capitalism. Humans, and all omnivores can thrive as vegans. A future socialist society could feed the world’s population with the feed presently allocated to animal agriculture. Animal agriculture is incredibly inefficient in delivering usable calories to the consumer. It is a product of business in pursuit of profits.

        Under socialism, profits are excised from the production of animal corpses. The result is that socialist societies kill and consume half the animals per capita as do capitalist societies.

        Like

  13. You sound like those anti-abortionists who shoot doctors and bomb abortion clinics. Good to remember what Gandhi wrote: “I object to violence because when it appears to do good, the good is only temporary; the evil it does is permanent.”

    Liked by 1 person

  14. Well, put me in front of a firing squad. Last week I washed a spider down the drain, and every summer I clap my hands on dozens of mosquitos, brutally ending their important animal lives. Oh wait, or are you only suggesting to save the cute furry/feathery type of animals? Where is the line drawn?

    Liked by 1 person

  15. Holy crap, you people with so-called vegan dogs are the ones who are cruel. Dogs are carnivores, as are people, and you are essentially starving them. They need animal protein to survive, as do people.
    And by the way, NONE of you are vegans. You like to get on your high horse and think you are, but you clearly have no idea how many things are made with animal by products? Any glass windows in your house? Any plastic? Do you have kids that use crayons? I’m willing to bet there’s a piece of leather somewhere in your house or car. You are all the biggest hypocrites that ever lived. Animals have been eating other animals since the dawn of time, get over yourselves.

    Liked by 1 person

    • Dogs are omnivores and there are numerous instances of dogs thriving on a vegan diet. Cats are trickier, though it has been done.

      “For dogs, certainly vegetarian and vegan diets can be done, but they need to be done very, very carefully. There is a lot of room for error, and these diets probably are not as appropriate as diets that contain at least some animal protein,” Heinze says.”

      http://pets.webmd.com/features/vegetarian-diet-dogs-cats

      Like

  16. I find it hypocritical that there many supporters of this who also enslave animals. If you truly support the cause, you wouldn’t own pets. So many lives would be saved If everyone was wiling to sacrifice the personal gratification they get from living with an animal. If there were no market, people would quit breeding them. Think of all the creatures slaughtered and feral land put into harvest just so you can feed your pets. While your at it, how about giving up all those bits, saddles and other devices you use to ride around horses for your own pleasure. I imagine few of you pet owners are really willing to make those personal sacrifices and will continue to justify animal ownership.

    Liked by 1 person

    • Most people here likely rescue pets. I have three rescued dogs and six rescued parrots. As long as animals become unwanted, rescuers will take them in. The answer is to ban all breeding, and the domestic animals will die out.

      Like

      • Why are the lives of your three dogs more important than the many more animals that die to support them? I’m not asking to single you out or be cruel, I’m asking to understand and maybe to get others to think about it. It’s cruel to feed a carnivore a vegetarian diet and just further subjects them to manipulation for our own benefit. Even if every pet owner did so, millions of acres of land would have to be put into production to support it which in turn pushes out more wildlife and broadens our footprint on this earth. Banning breeding won’t stop it and pretending that will ever happen is just silly, wishful thinking. There is absolutely no way people will forgo owning pets. That can be seen by all the people here supporting violence against humans for slaughtering animals when they are not willing to acknowledge their own contribution to it. The only way to put a stop to pets being bred/born it is to end the demand for them.

        It’s a horrible catch 22 isn’t it? You can argue that ANY reduction in animal slaughter is progress, but to really honor that means you’d have to kill your own three dogs to stop the slaughter of the possibly hundreds of other animals it takes to support them. Tough call and it’s a weighty thing to play God and decide what animals are more worthy of living; chickens or dogs. (Dogs will most always win as us humans love soft cuddly things 🙂 ) People will point the finger and call for the death of some guy shooting a deer and eating it, but those same people find it convenient to ignore the hundreds of other animals that are killed just so they can keep their pets. I would argue the deer led a much better life and had a more noble death than most any domesticated animal raised for slaughter.

        If people would opening admit they are wiling to sacrifice one animal so they can own another, I would at least respect the honesty. It’s the hypocrisy of claiming the are not part of the cycle at all that gets me. If the nearly 16 million vegetarians in just the US would forgo pet ownership and the demand for them dropped, think how many hundreds of millions of animals would not need to die to feed them. Stopping slaughter is not going to be easy or convenient 😉

        Liked by 2 people

      • My dogs are vegan. No animals die to feed them. But you are quite correct, many rescuers feed their dogs the flesh of other creatures murdered in the food system. That is why I am opposed to carnivores in captivity. Cats, ferrets, snakes, etc, require a carnivorous diet. And it is indeed hypocritical to argue for veganism for people while supporting the killing of some animals to feed other animals.

        Liked by 1 person

      • “The answer is to ban all breeding, and the domestic animals will die out.”

        This is genocide. You get to choose the fate of species? Snuff out life to stop it’s suffering?
        Not very life affirming.

        Like

      • WTF? Genocide? I am not suggesting we kill a single animal. I am advocating that breeding be banned. How is that genocidal? All domesticated animals would live out their normal lifespans. But they would not be replaced. Simple.

        Like

    • I feel so sorry for you, not knowing the incredible depth of life with animals. As I write, I feel the utter peace of a tiny body relaxed and content, draped across my legs. There is nothing like sharing your life with a creature who offers you his complete trust and faith and certainty, who feels utter joy at your presence.

      The physical benefits of owning animals are well documented. Lower blood pressure, better physical condition, a more positive outlook on life, increased longevity. Working side by side with purpose bred animals – horses, hounds, livestock – brings us closer to our own purpose (we are animals, too).

      There is no life without death. Even as vegans, more animals are killed to feed you than are killed to feed omnivores; or do you not count the vast deaths of earth dwelling animals and insects, birds, and reptiles? Are those lives less important because they are neither cute nor mamalian? Do you weigh the importance of life by size? Or by the numbers of individual lives killed to feed one individual? At what point will you give into the basic design of a species? You may survive without animal products (though by doing so you kill even more lives – big agriculture kills many more than livestock farming), but other species cannot. Will you kill those animals, because they must eat meat to survive? How will you judge the importance of each life?

      Radical messages such as this blog are thought provoking, but do nothing to aid the plight of animals today; they only alienate those with the capacity to effect change. You accuse others of causing death without acknowledging your own culpability, without honoring the deaths of the billions of animals (that die to grow your soybeans and vegetables and rice) that are part of your own survival.

      Many of us who work with animals honor them far more than you do, with your empty and angry words. We acknowledge the cycle of life, and give ours to care for every creature that might come into our sphere. By giving our life, our time, our love, we acknowledge their gifts and our responsibilities, and by making them a part of our lives, we celebrate our place on the wheel of life,

      Liked by 1 person

      • Well said. I too enjoy a life with animals and am not embarrassed to be part of the life/death cycle. What we owe to animals is to treat them with care and dignity while in our care. It’s especially important when we bring them death to benefit ourselves. Having someone else else do the “dirty” work for you does not make you superior to those who are willing to do it themselves. Bless those who raise animals ethically for the rest of us.

        Like

      • Thank you Rita..
        I agree with you that blogs like this alienate people who would otherwise be advocates

        @Roland. STOP with the misuse of the word Murder. It’s impossible to murder an animal, the same works the other way, animals don’t “murder” humans. That said, I also don’t agree with the new politically correct term “harvesting” animals.. That term is good for people who don’t want to think about what’s happens to get the meat to the table,.. it is a cop-out.

        Also, get your numbers straight.. you say humans slaughter 160,000,000,000 animals daily… you do realize that works out to every man, woman and child in the world killing 20 animals each day???

        Lastly, your true colors show when you think abortion should be promoted

        Like

      • People use words to mask and condone conduct. By applying the word murder exclusively to human victims is to dismiss the crimes against non-human animals. Animal Rights advocates believe all sentient life is of equal value. The belief that human life is somehow more precious is speciesism, the most repugnant concept of all. Speciesism is the author of more atrocity and death than all other human endeavors combined.

        Murder is a legal term, as differentiated from manslaughter or homicide. The mental state necessary to be guilty of murder is exactly the same as the mental state of those who commit atrocities in slaughterhouses. The only difference is the species of the victim. As a lawyer, I use the term murder intentionally, to punctuate the hypocrisy of the law and society.

        Like

    • I do TNR, rescue, and fostering of cats. I am acutely aware of the abandoned/feral cat problem. I am a vegan and activist also, and except for that infinitesimal drop in the ocean, I feel completely impotent to help other animals. I can handle a few cats in a mentally healthy way in my apartment. And so I do, as a coping mechanism against all the pain and despair — to say that to that one individual creature who values his/her life, my help made a difference. I cannot save the billions of animals that need saving. But I can try and save a few in my lifetime. There is an expression in the Talmud “to save a life is to save the world” — which I’m sure was not intended to include non-human animals, but, we vegans take the liberty to exalt the meaning even further.

      With multiple cats, some with senior health issues, it is too logistically difficult for me to experiment with vegan cat food. I rationalize this position by framing it with where we are in time in our relationship with animals. We have only just begun to shift the paradigms. In the meantime, each one is a person to me. I can do nothing else but help where I can.

      And yes my rescue cats do give me alot of pleasure. But if I were to be alive when animal liberation is achieved, I would gracefully say goodbye to it. In the meantime, individuals need help … some will get lucky and some not … but we do the best we can in the times that we live in.

      Ingrid Newkirk is against TNR and advocates for euthanasia of all abandoned cats. I don’t gasp in horror at that suggestion as I see how these animals suffer on the streets, but I just can’t bring myself to fully embracing that scenario.

      The whole thing is very complicated and difficult. Domestication has made a real mess of things. Let’s leave it at that.

      Like

      • Wow I find it extremely weird that people think that they can convert a nation to Vegan and push their views on others and think they can change the world religions also. As for Ingrid Newkirk thinking that she has the right to destroy animals because in her little mind no human shall have contact with other species is a crock. That women is a mass murder and when you follow her ideas you are the same as her. It is not our judgement to kill animals for no reason, like you think it should be done if they have a chance to survive let them it may not be the best conditions but it is their life. Then this other person saying do away with animals by not breeding them that is genocide thru and thru and who are you to play God and push your views on others do you think you are Jim Jones with your little cult of people that are stealing the forest to produce your palm oil and other crops in order to feed your vegan agenda. Wildlife becomes extinct with crops and farms from native fauna and flora. At least some species can share habitat with food animals so all wildlife does not become extinct. I guess maybe you people should quit thinking you are God and get a life and now a days just for your information we import animals from other countries for shelters instead since there is not abundance of so called rescue dogs.

        Like

    • FeeFee, you think animal ownership is bad? There are many of us that don’t look at it as ownership, my dog is as much my kid as a human would be. When I got my dog, she was one day away from being euthanized, I had to pay them to put the paperwork in to stop it than pay for the adoption. She was a mess when I got and I don’t question why the were ready to put her down. I worked my ass off to get HER to respect me and love me not to dominate her, but to make her part of my family. When I found out she was half coyote (not really that much of a surprise) I paid a vet to do a check on her and give me any dietary concerns. There was a lot of heart ache involved in raising that dog and I have had a lot of good times too. I have gone through great personal cost both monetary and mental to have this dog and I would do it again in a blink of an eye. And when she does take that sad trip across the Rainbow bridge I WILL do it again. My dog is now ten years old, she had two years of misery and now going on eight years of being spoiled rotten and unconditionally loved. Was there some personal gratification of course but that was the last on my mind. Mind you I am not vegan and I would never force it on my dog, but I wanted to comment because I frankly found a large part of your post offensive.

      Like

  17. A question for Bill Williams:

    Bill Williams December 28, 2015 at 8:24 PM
    Animals eat other amimals. We are animals by evolution. What’s the difference to a deer if its eaten by a puma, a wolf or a human. None.

    Let me try to get this. Human beings are animals. Animals eat other animals. So why the big commotion every time a bear eats a hiker? An animal is eating another animal. Very sad that officials in Yellowstone Park recently killed a grizzly for no reason.

    Liked by 1 person

    • here I tend to agree , frankly I don’t care if a hiker gets eaten by a bear, they are in their home, and if not prepared than that’s the hikers problem. bear shouldn’t have been killed. Would a human being walked downstairs and found a strange person sitting in your living room wouldn’t the first reaction be “potential threat”

      Like

  18. The ways humanity has devised to torture animals has an almost demonic quality about it. But farm animals bear the worst in numbers and degree of suffering from birth to death. They are squeezed into cages and crates, crammed sick and injured into trucks for long and miserable trips to the slaughterhouses, and forced into production lines whose rates have increased until any attempts to stun and reduce the pain of death are lost. And we’re told that as the human population grows and the middle class increases in developing countries one of the main demands will be for more meat. Of course, there are also the fur farms, the research labs, circuses, race tracks, puppy mills, etc., etc.

    I would love nothing more than a revolution that would stop it all. But my imagination fails when I think of attaining the number of activists it would need to bring that about–and not just the numbers but the motivation and self-sacrifice that would be required. If activists took this literally and started shooting, they would be met with the full force of the law. In the battle of ideas, we haven’t had much luck combating centuries of religious teachings and legal codes that have created the chasm that separates animals from people, classifies them as property, and allows us to torture them. The enmity that PETA has earned among many people for its uncompromising stand is an example of the resistance we face.

    I also think about this suggestion: “Socialism removes the profit incentive for people to kill and sell animal corpses.” But would socialism remove the desire for meat, the pleasure people take in it? That pleasure creates the demand for the jobs in the slaughter houses and on the factory farms in the first place.

    I think of a story about the Buddha, probably apocryphal but with a kernel of truth about human nature: “Although the Buddha taught and practiced vegetarianism, the funeral fires of his cremation had hardly cooled when a contingent of Buddhist monks began constructing sophistries to justify meat eating.” The Longest Struggle, Norm Phelps, p. 21.

    But if a socialist revolution would create a more fair world and also reduce the killing of animals, that would justify the all work and the sacrifice required. But we will have to be satisfied with planting the seeds in our lifetime.

    Liked by 1 person

    • Human cruelty and human exploitation of animals will exist as long as humans do. The constraints placed upon human actions by society are dependent upon the type of society we agree to live by. I have no problem with severe limitations on personal freedoms to harm animals. I place animal welfare and human welfare on a par. The only type of society I can envisage where that could be possible would be a socialist one.

      Like

    • Clearly you have no experience in animal production and have never seen it first hand. What you describe is not what happens in the U.S.

      Like

      • This is what happens in the U.S: Thousands of animals packed into factories for almost all of their miserable lives, and then they’re hauled to slaughter and get murdered. Whats so pleasant to see? Don’t tell me blood coming out of an animal’s throat.

        Like

      • So bridlehorse — do tell us what happens in animal production since you have experience. Have you commandeered animals like expendable chattel into concentration camps and deprived them of all their joys and natural behaviors? Stolen their babies? Bred and rendered them to mere units of production? Smited them out with a captive bolt gun? A knife? A gun? A bow and arrow? Tell us how that all feels. Please. Really want to know.

        Like

    • Hardly. But it will afford us the opportunity to place the Animal Holocaust on the world stage. We are not trying to convince a majority of people of the moral imperative of ending the murders of sentient beings. We are trying to grow our base to a critical mass that can impact public policy, at the minimum, or ideally, can trigger social revolution.

      Like

  19. This so called enemy has donated more money from the sales of sporting equipment for wildlife habitat, than any of the PETA organizations. Rocky Mountain Elk Foundation, Ducks Unlimited has aquired more land, and set aside, never to be developed saving nessessary winter range,, paid for by the hunting community than the so called animal lovers, ever will.

    Liked by 2 people

      • That is a pretty horrible and misleading comparison. Your ignorance is bested only by your condescending attitude towards anyone whose opinion differs from yours. Bravo for taking a stand but reality being what it is dictates progress.

        Like

    • Yes, Jim, that is great, very generous of the hunters to donate land for the animals, BUT why do you think they are appropriating this land, for selfish reasons!! They want the animals to propagate freely so there will be more animals for them to HUNT!!!!! The animals, for years, kept the herds strong in ALL species, as they just KILLED to survive and it was usually the old and weak, keeping the herd strong, but MAN JUST HUNTS, for the ego trip (i got a bear, or a deer, or elk, etc…….) BIG MAN ON CAMPUS. Hunters do not hunt to survive, purely an ego trip, and don’t weed out the weaker ones, as the only true hunters are the WILD animals!!!!! It would be a much more fair hunt if MAN would put down his weapons and hunt like the animals do with pure GRIT!!!

      Liked by 3 people

      • Do you realize that if no one hunted, the land would be overrun with predators? They breed naturally every year, on their own. We don’t. They would out number us quickly, and given that there isn’t enough land for them, with the enormous population growth, we’d quickly be fighting for space. Someone would have to die. You’re okay with your kid getting eaten by a bear, because it got in his way? You’d let it kill your child before shooting it? Clearly you are the deranged one. Trust me that animal would have no problem taking you out to protect its young. You have zero understanding of animal behavior, yet you think you know everything.

        Like

      • Jane I hunt to survive, I do not use a gun, I use a bow and arrow. I hunt because it saves me money but also because I can know where every part of the animal im killing is going, and I only use a butcher that allows me to determine that. There are lots of people like me in north America with low incomes that do the same thing. Don’t lump us in with sport hunters who do it for fun. Im not a vegan and I never will be it’s not natural for humans to be vegans imho, but I have not shopped for meat in a grocery store in a decade. and guess what hunting animals, is how our species and many many other species on this planet have been able to survive. it is nature….things have to die, and population has be controlled, if not we all suffer and die.

        Like

    • Yes, we are the more intelligent of the ANIMAL SPECIES, (allegedly) but we have NO right to consider ourselves MORE IMPORTANT than other animals. ALL LIVING SENTIENT BEINGS have a purpose on this planet, but God did not create the (so-called) lower beings to be hunted to extinction, exploited, abused, etc……These (so called) lower beings could show us more about FAMILY, LOVE, FORGIVENESS than any human animal!!!

      Liked by 1 person

      • What’s extinct? Cattle, bears, deer, pigs, chickens? No. Have you ever been to a cattle ranch and seen cattle grazing lazily all day long? They are not slaves, they are not tortured, they are not abused. And here’s a bit of knowledge for you… once they get to production, it is in the producer’s best interest to NOT abuse the animal, because it effects the quality of the meat, therefore it effects his bottom line. Sometimes you need to think about things from a logical perspective and not such an emotional one. Why would a business person do something to effect his income?
        And here’s another bit of info for you….while you’re dog may love you, cattle, deer, bear, etc., really don’t give a crap about you. They will show you no love or forgiveness, and in fact a bear would just as soon eat you and feed you to her family. Anthropomorphism does not work folks.
        All beings have a purpose on this earth, you’re right, and the purpose of some is to feed others. It’s called survival.

        Like

      • Yes, *allegedly* more intelligent but it depends on what criteria one uses to define intelligence. For me the “intelligence” factor doesn’t even compute for me. It ultimately infers superiority and then its all downhill from there. I agree with you. And love this quote: “We patronize them for their incompleteness, for their tragic fate of having taken form so far below ourselves. And therein we err, and greatly err. For the animal shall not be measured by man. In a world older and more complete than ours they move finished and complete, gifted with extensions of the senses we have lost or never attained, living by voices we shall never hear. They are not brethren, they are not underlings; they are other nations, caught with ourselves in the net of life and time, fellow prisoners of the splendour and travail of the earth”.
        — Henry Beston

        Like

      • Ok first leave god out of it. That’s a cop out. And second there are many many animals that were bred by evolution that were bred to be food, that live specifically to be food for another animal. Hunt to extinction no. but are their animals on this planet that are supposed to be hunted most certainly yes.

        Like

      • @bridlehorse
        Clearly you have limited experience with animals too… Yes, I do think anthropomorphism is taken to extremes too often, but if you’ve had any experience with other animals you’d find they are just as as affectionate as your dog or cat, and relate to you just as much, if given the chance.

        Like

  20. It seems that if I see one of the anti hunters on this page it would be prudent to defend myself by shooting them before they can shoot me. Those who equate animal life to human life are the most immoral and unethical on this planet.

    Liked by 2 people

      • Humans are OMNIVOROUS. End of point. We are no more or less than any other animal. We eat fruit, vegetables, roots, animals, and eggs. Many scientific studies are showing the mental stresses and fatigue caused directly from forcing a human and other omnivore into a strict vegan diet. It IS NOT healthy!!!

        Like

      • That is ridiculous. While we are biologically omnivorous, few people would relish eating raw carion or live insects. The Animal Holocaust is the most unnatural source of food imaginable.

        Like

      • Animals eat other amimals. We are animals by evolution. What’s the difference to a deer if its eaten by a puma, a wolf or a human. None.

        Liked by 2 people

    • I am no animal rights whacko but I have no problem with putting my dogs lives over people. Both sides of this battle want to make us all believe that it is all black or white and we must believe in one thing or the other..WRONG..I can see points on both sides of this I can agree with and disagree with but both sides pushing their agendas down my throat gets you nowhere…

      Like

  21. I agree…
    And if some people cannot see the symbolism re: “shoot people” to make an important point, then they are not true animal advocates…
    and I’m an “anti-gun” person…
    although I love animals more than people…
    and people deserve to be “shot” more than animals, IMO…

    Hey, people! Don’t be so literal.
    See the message of what is being put forth here!

    Sheesh!

    Liked by 1 person

    • Yeah, I agree completely with your sentiments—and Roland’s—but most people are bound to take this essay literally.

      I reposted the diatribe in a LiveJournal veganism forum—which was fairly dead, and there was little-to-no discussion—and immediately after, I was banned. This is unfortunate, and shows that in a literal-minded world, you cannot imply things or state things obliquely.

      Liked by 1 person

      • I am not a stupid person, but I confess I did take it literally, with some shock at the blatantly public advocacy for violence. It has been on my mind since I first read it. Haven’t known what to think about it and wonder if Roland has any fear of being on an FBI/AETA list. Being “oblique” in this way will no doubt be misunderstood and get you into a mess of trouble.

        Now if my dull, dense brain may ask … please decode and explain what are you really saying? Thank you.

        Liked by 2 people

      • As with most of my writing, I am trying to radicalize the animal movement. We are hardly in a position to wage war against the system. One day we might be. But we are so preoccupied with daily brush fires and one crisis after another, that we fail to see the big picture. The animals are losing. We aren’t doing anything at all in the scheme of things. We save a few fortunate creatures here and there, we convince a few people to stop eating their flesh. But, meanwhile, over a BILLION animals per week are murdered. We have no effect upon them or the system that tortures and murders them. We are powerless as long as we buy into the idea that we are not supposed to use force to stop violence. The law is our jailer. WE are the keepers of their values, not our own. And the animals keep dying. Ten thousand per second, around the clock, day in and day out, 365 days per year.

        And so it will continue until we have the ability to bring about either a political or a social revolution. Political revolution is preferable, of course, as it is peaceful. But I have grave doubts we can compete on an unlevel playing field against capitalist money and special interests who already control the government.

        Like

      • Roland, so when you say “to end the Animal Holocaust we must *attack* the people who carry out the horrors” what do you mean? How does this kind of language, whether obliquely or literally meant, “radicalize” the animal rights movement? Or is what you are saying really just a general cathartic vent on your part with fantasies-only of killing people who hurt animals (which I’m sure all of us who feel your pain have fantasized about too)? P.S. What do you think of this Humane Party/Clifton Roberts?

        Liked by 1 person

      • I believe the only possiblity for animals is the destruction of capitalist society. I do not believe that will happen in my lifetime. But it should be part of our long term strategies and goals. Animal activists could precipitate it or we might just tag along behind others bent on dismantling capitalism.

        As for the Humane Party, I am afraid it is a complete waste of time. Professionally, I am a political strategist. I have run political campaigns and consulted to politicians for 40 years. The American political process is designed to cripple third party efforts. The only effective thing a third party can do is throw a monkey wrench into extremely close contests, as Ralph Nader did in Florida in 2000.

        The only a third party actually displaced a major political party was when the Whigs were replaced by the Republicans in 1854, and that was a result of the Whigs being a part of the new Republican coalition.

        A much more effective strategy would be to exact conditions from the Republicans for AR support, forcing the Democrats to cover the bet. I don’t think the Humane Party is a reasonable expenditure of money or effort. It may be one day, but there are much more productive things we can do politically than howl at the moon.

        Like

    • “Let’s Start Shooting Those Who Murder Animals” is not literal.
      “What if we said “Let’s Start Shooting Those Who Murder Animals” is literal. No ?

      Like

  22. This post leads me to ask you to discontinue my relationship to your group and any continued blogs or activism of the nature you put it here asking for us to shoot people. I am a conscientious objector and do not believe in raising arms to resolve conflict. I am a pacifist and believe in finding diplomatic solutions that use science to motivate conscience and collective choice. Brain over brawn because our art is to impart the power of heart to show how we are all a part and never apart. I know it will take a lot of convincing but I will not use the gun barrel as my method. Good bye.

    In love and health, Eric Triffin, MPH The TranscenDancer

    >

    Liked by 2 people

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s