|
Post by Dragos Voda on Jan 24, 2008 10:53:43 GMT -5
I`ve seen more squirrels that are grey in Romania. I didn`t know they are not indigenous. When and why were they introduced in Europe? Grey squirrels came from North America, I don't know exactly when, probably on boats. They're bigger and more aggressive than the native European red squirrel so they have been taking over red squirrels' territory. In the UK they've almost totally replaced the red squirrel. Romanian shepherds treat animals better than anyone. Their sheep and goats can roam free and aren't confined to little stalls where they can't move around and never see the light of day.
|
|
|
Post by jerryspringer on Jan 24, 2008 12:50:11 GMT -5
Ticalosul is not so ticalos.
As for you, BR, if I remember it correctly from our previous debate on the issue, you appreciated animals for their biodiversity and viewed them as ornaments of nature. That opinion conflicts with your recent comment on animal welfare. Usually, one is concerned about animal welfare because they care about the animal itself--not just what it offers us and the nature. Unless you care about the animal itself, your concern of animals versus those who view animals as tools that can be used to their interest, is just a conflict of interest.
And I can't imagine the reason to explain to housewives about the bad thing about hunting whales. They hold little influence in that subject.
|
|
|
Post by jerryspringer on Jan 24, 2008 19:37:37 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by BibleRiot on Jan 25, 2008 4:27:54 GMT -5
Heh ... yep, thanks.
I haven't touched a cigarette for a year now. But even though it doesn't affect me anymore, I would support animal research to find a safer cigarette IF I was convinced that the inferences from animal to human physiology were valid in this particular case.
We're animals too,, and omnivorous like our cousins, the Chimps who eat meat when they can catch it. From there to herding cattle and the modern abattoir is not such a big jump. But you'reright, my conservation concerns are essentially for humans, that our children should not live in a poorer, less amazing world.
As for the housewives, well I gave my talk to whatever group invited me to do so. Housewives can change the world too - especially if they get together to BOYCOTT NORWAY!
|
|
|
Post by jerryspringer on Jan 25, 2008 9:42:48 GMT -5
Congratulations. Yes, we're animals, too; and we view the world as our buffé. We think of our reproduction as sacred and struggle for continuity. True goodness doesn't come in just protecting your own interests and the interests of your specie. It lies in celebrating existence for its own sake and downgrade the suffering of other animals that can suffer and who may have personal interests. I disagree that those dogs should suffer because of what humans choose to do. If you smoke, then drop dead. I shouldn't pay for your medical care and animals shouldn't suffer for your own sake. That's bloody ridiculous. If you drink and harm your lever, then drop dead! I think it's outrageous that dogs should suffer--and they do have the ability to suffer--because of some stinky junkie. Well, BR, I'm afraid I've gotten a bit too aggressive and this forum is no longer safe for you. You better return to the skinny Albanians and the chubby Greeks. They are the Alpha Male who try to impress girls by hurting animals and laugh like retards.
|
|