Guest guest Posted July 31, 2001 Report Share Posted July 31, 2001 Ryan One's philosophical stance on AR and ones stance on activism methods are two different things. It's those against AR that want us to believe that AR always means violence and harassment. As far as what animal abusers " deserve " (ie level of harassment), I think it is more important to be active in a pragmatic way that is going to bring 1)positive view of AR in the public mind, 2)long term results. It is more important to work towards reducing the suffering of animals than increasing the suffering of animal abusers. Since 99% of animals in the us are killed for food, no matter what I think of lab animals, etc., I primarily support organizations like vegan outreach who want to educate the public and promote veganism. How can we convince the public that it is not justified to torture and kill animals in order to support public health(what the public generally believes) when 95% of us in the US support torturing and killing animals for a far less important purpose, food that demotes public health? Ryan- In the 5 yrs I have been veg, I have encouraged others to either go veg or eat about half as much meat/dairy as they did before, as well as educate people about AR and show them that AR is something that is a reasonable viewpoint held by reasonable people. Changing your tactics does not necessitate leaving AR. Do whatever you think will bring LONG term change, not what pleases others. Think effective strategy. You have worked very long, don't give up, it is for something! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You are posting as a guest. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.