Do you mean **mhendo **or maastricht? Your original comment under reply was a reply to **Maastricht **so I assume the latter.
I don’t know that **Maastricht **has any meaningful connections to violence and illegality. Activism can mean writing to your local political representative in polite terms or it can mean planting bombs. Unless you have any actual evidence that when **Maastricht **said he was an activist he meant violence and illegality (which I doubt, and which **Maastricht **has specifically distanced himself from) you’re just making shit up and attempting to use ridiculously loose language to create “connections” that don’t exist.
Actually, no, that is what is known as a mistake. I didn’t realize that you had jumped in to take Maastricht’s place way back when. I did wonder why Princhester used Maastricht’s name in his/her post, but of course I was too mature to accuse him/her of lying simply because (I thought) s/he had made a mistake. :rolleyes:
[QUOTE=Princhester]
Do you mean mhendo or maastricht? Your original comment under reply was a reply to Maastricht so I assume the latter.
[/quote]
See above - I got the two M user names mixed up.
From dictionary.com - “an especially active, vigorous advocate of a cause, especially a political cause.” Writing your local rep isn’t exactly vigorous. Also, if Maastricht is donating to PETA or the HSUS, s/he is supporting violence and other illegal acts.
Yes, that you do appear to be. Maastricht and anyone else who identifies themselves as an activist for animal “rights” is going to be connected to the violence and illegal acts done by PETA and the HSUS, if in no other way than in the mind of the average guy on the street. If you have been paying any attention at all to the news about animal “rights” you would know this. If you have not been paying attention to news about animal “rights”, it doesn’t say much about you to have jumped in and made these statements on a subject you are not up on.
Face it, all you are doing here is picking nits and it looks like on a subject you aren’t up on. Perhaps your energies would be better served elsewhere?
Yes. So you would have to write a lot, perhaps. Note lack of mention of violence and illegality as necessary elements of the definition. But you feel free to go on digging, I’m happy to stand here watching you slowly disappear into the hole.
Yes and if you donated to NAMBLA you’d be a pedophile supporter. And if wishes were fishes we could all fly away. Making shit up, in other words
In other words, if dumb people like you make stupid connections that don’t exist because they are too lazy to use their brains, that makes it so. Gotcha.
Since you cannot seem to post anything of sense, and since I am leaving for a 30 hour drive in the morning, I’m done with you. And, since many people in here seem to have a thing about “winning”, you may consider yourself the winner of this. Whatever makes you feel better.
I actually have to admire this level of chutzpah. It ain’t everyone who can take “I was to stupid/lazy to double-check who I was referring to” and try to spin it as an act of maturity.
Because animal rights activists are the minority, especially the active ones. curlcoat blends into the majority, moreso in some regions than others, I’ll admit.
No, he’s saying that it takes very little effort to make sure you’re quoting the appropriate response and that when called on it, it is rather rude to try to make it someone else’s fault. You also appear to be attempting to undermine Princhester’s arguments by finding fault with him, rather than the argument, which is poor play, of course.
I think **42fish **is saying it takes a certain level of chutzpah to suggest that you not calling me a liar for a mistake I didn’t make amounts to some high level of maturity.
I think most people would call not calling someone a liar when they didn’t lie as “basic accuracy”.
By the way, didn’t you have to go? Or was that only face saving?
Well to be fair this is the Pit and I have been repeatedly and immaturely casting aspersions on Curlcoat’s intelligence in childish terms so I’m not about to claim any moral high ground here
Re the first part, as I said I made the mistake between the two M usernames early on, so I wasn’t aware I needed to make the effort. When Princhester used Maastricht’s name I did go back thru what I could see on preview and since I didn’t see that name I figured s/he had made a mistake. Later, when I realized what I’d done, I admitted it. The only thing I did that you might stretch to consider me making my mistake someone else’s fault is when I pointed out that I don’t belabor mistakes made by others, yet some folks here seem to follow me about trying to find mistakes I make, in order to make a big deal of them. Why I am not sure but I guess it keeps them off the street.
As for me finding fault with Princhester, yeah when folks start to get rude to me I do tend to respond in the like. I do believe that is a common fault tho. Note that s/he cannot seem to let it go even tho I told him/her that s/he could “win” this one, even tho I clearly said I am leaving in the morning, not tonite.
Out of interest Curlcoat do you believe that everyone who is anti-abortion is also inherently linked with murderers? Or that everyone in the American military is a murderer/rapist? I’m wondering how far you believe guilty by association goes?
Also I think people in this thread have failed to clearly explain what animal rights are, the term covers a broad spectrum - from the ‘animals have rights equivalent to humans’ side to a utilitarian ‘why cause more suffering than is necessary’.
Its perfectly possible to be an advocate for the utilitarian view without embracing violence, for example animal rights groups in the UK have campaigned for;
Humane and painless killing methods of livestock
Making it illegal to torture household animals
Greater funding for charities which take care of abandoned animals
Banning dog/cock fighting
Which if you take the view that animals are capable of suffering, and I do, then it is perfectly legitimate to write to your MP, newspaper, local TV station or raise donations for relevant charities RSPCA etc.
All of this is animal rights activism which I believe enhances the lives of both humans and animals. Why are you tired of us again?
This is what those who believe in animal “rights” want. In the US that is.
These things are already covered under current laws.
I don’t know anything about UK animals “rights” groups, but from what you have listed it appears that the UK is way behind the US in humane laws, unless these are things that were done decades ago? All that stuff has been covered by humane laws here for quite some time.
However, since I am writing from the US, to a person in the US, regarding what are considered the goals of animal “rights” people here, I think your post doesn’t apply.
