Religious Right and Animal Rightists

[sevendogs]

There are interesting similarities between the two.
1. Both Religious Right and Animal Rightists emphasize ethics and emotions.
2. Both base their arguments of their own believes and ideology.
3. Both are anti science. RR tell us not to use fetuses or their tissue in research, it would be not ethical. AR tell us not to use animals in experiments, it would be not ethical.
4. Both have a fanatical wing ready to violence.

[The Bacon Guy]

I can see the similarities certainly, but I think AR activists' intentions are at least more honourable. Religious fanatics would tend to push their arbitrary morals upon others for their own gain; to produce a society in which everyone is like them. The actions of animal rights activists on the other hand are, for the most part, carried out in order to protect animals. However misguided and unacceptable the actions from either side are, I see the motivation of the AR campaigners as more agreeable.

However, I agree that they can be as irrational, dogmatic and dangerous as religious fanatics.

[sevendogs]

Religious Right has more suporters then AR, but I hope they both can not chieve their goals.

[RickSp]

I have long contended that animal rightists and extremist vegan are more a religion than a school of thought, rational or otherwise. Like religion the animal rightist claims are largely based on emotion and faith.

[Apeman81]

Quote by: RickSp I have long contended that animal rightists and extremist vegan are more a religion than a school of thought, rational or otherwise. Like religion the animal rightist claims are largely based on emotion and faith.

The list should well include the following:
Human influenced global warming
Former smokers
Evolutionists
Among others

Each of these groups, along with those suggested by Rick, have extreme adherents for whom it is a mission to spread the word and deny any controdictory opinion.

[sevendogs]

Quote by: RickSp I have long contended that animal rightists and extremist vegan are more a religion than a school of thought, rational or otherwise. Like religion the animal rightist claims are largely based on emotion and faith.

Yes, but they do not belong to any of the major religions; they are critical of them, because those are religions of meat eating people. However, they are talking about souls in animals. It seems they are a kind of New Age religion. While speaking abour respect to animals, they are promoting mass spayng and neutering, which is pretty unceremonious. If animals deserve right, like humans do, why they do not want spaying and neutering each other, but so enthusiastic about spaying and neutering cats and dogs? This is a hypocricy in their phylosophy, which they want to teach the rest of us.

[Hmm]

Quote by: sevendogs However, they are talking about souls in animals. It seems they are a kind of New Age religion.

<laugh>

Never have I heard an AR activist argue their beliefs because "animals have souls."

[RickSp]

Quote by: Apeman81 The list should well include the following: Human influenced global warming Former smokers Evolutionists Among others Each of these groups, along with those suggested by Rick, have extreme adherents for whom it is a mission to spread the word and deny any controdictory opinion.

You keep my laughing Ape.

Evolution is such bedrock basic science that only the creationist crazies and their followers question it anymore. Evolution is at the core of all modern life sciences.

Regarding global warming I will admit to enjoying watching those who deny it. Sen. James M. Inhofe was a hoot. A real carnival sid show. I haven't seem Gore's movie, but do respect lots of the scientists who are very concerned about global warming.

[RickSp]

Quote by: Hmm <laugh> Never have I heard an AR activist argue their beliefs because "animals have souls."

I have heard lots of AR talk about animal "personhood" under the law. If a chicken is legally a person, it is not much of a stretch from "personhood" to "souls".

[Eclipse]

Every concept has its unreasonable, ignorant champions. I hope that you are able to see past that and not judge a book by the people who chuck it at you so ruggedly. Be skeptical of what you hear and see but also be analytical to the actual issue and try to understand that there are some fundamentals that may be reasonable.

Quote by: sevendogs Yes, but they do not belong to any of the major religions; they are critical of them, because those are religions of meat eating people.

Lol. I was an athiest before I was into anything associable to AR. See? These are stereotypes and almost assumptions based upon them. Did you make that up?

Quote by: sevendogs If animals deserve right, like humans do

Just neutralizing their lack of "rights" in a method parallel to our faltering need upon them. Not giving them any. Not forcing it upon others.

Quote by: sevendogs This is a hypocricy in their phylosophy, which they want to teach the rest of us.

Maybe with that made up philosophy of yours. You already made a thread about ARists and their "perfect world" and you already made unsupported propaganda against them. I've addressed my issues in that thread thoroughly enough. If you want more, come and get it. Don't skip along the boundary and restate the same thing in another thread.

Quote by: sevendogs 1. Both Religious Right and Animal Rightists emphasize ethics and emotions.

Oh really? Well, here's one exception then so it must not be 100% true.

Quote by: sevendogs 3. Both are anti science. RR tell us not to use fetuses or their tissue in research, it would be not ethical. AR tell us not to use animals in experiments, it would be not ethical.

Anti-science? Oh please. In the case of unnecessary experiments I would prefer that they don't but anti-science?

Quote by: sevendogs 2. Both base their arguments of their own believes and ideology.

You base your defense on your beliefs. In fact, you haven't defended anything in your other thread that is so similar to this. Downsizing while avoiding any confrontation?

Quote by: sevendogs 4. Both have a fanatical wing ready to violence.

Lol. Some perhaps. Again a stereotype.

Quote by: Bacon Guy However, I agree that they can be as irrational, dogmatic and dangerous as religious fanatics.

Again, some are. I frown upon it myself.

Quote by: sevendogs Religious Right has more suporters then AR, but I hope they both can not chieve their goals.

You mean my goals of supporting the production (and helping myself when possible) of alternative choices so people can choose themselves? One day those choices may be marvelous compared to today. It's what science allows us to do; marvelous things.

Hmm, maybe AR is not the right word for me since I fail to see solid reason behind natural rights. I don't like classifications in this sense anyhow. Leads to stereotypes like this.