by basuranephilim » Thu May 12, 2016 10:25 am VDZ wrote:For the record, I am religious (Christian) myself. People can hold beliefs you consider wrong or incomprehensible for reasons other than because they must be dumb.
Well, I did state that religious people at least base their rhethoric on something that can neither be proven nor disproven. Where vegitarians clearly go against the mindset and build of their body, in most cases for guilt issues. Because let's be honest most of them aren't doing it to save the world. But because animals have big brown eyes and are floofy.
My gripe with religion would be: Blindly trusting everything in an old book. Doesn't mean there's no lessons to be taken from it, but believing everything in it 100% as truth...seems silly to me. Because a significant part of say : The bible could be considered a fantasy novel, for all the stuff written in there. At least, so it seems to me. But it's not really the point at hand, so i'll just let that rest.
Also would like to state, that however it might seem, that I do in fact respect you, religious or not.
Every so often, you will find even the most disagreeable people sometimes make valid points you did not consider.
Most of the time, I will find people that are most disagreeable, are extremist or insanely emotional instead of (even remotely) factual about their opinions.
Now, 100% discarding emotional factors is not the right way to go, but most people that I just can't come to terms with lack any real thought.
I can see how I might've misworded about everything I posted, since it seems like i'm an extreme nut going "EVERYBODY THAT DOES NOT AGREE WITH ME IS A MORON". As you can see, I like a good discussion, and I like talking about points, it just seems to me that people are way more extreme, and less thoughtful in what they bring or how they bring it. I'm hugely at fault for considering everybody to be one of ''those'' kinds of people, but in most cases nowadays, it just kinda is that way. Eloquent and thoughtful people always were rare, but everybody just seems to be more confident and open with their own ignorance nowadays, so they spout a buttload of it. What I think i'm going to with this is that: It's so damn hard to figure out who and who isn't worth listening too anymore, because everybody is so vocal about their stuff. No matter how right, wrong or poorly they go about forming their opinions.
(Not to mention the positive effects they have on society - the improved treatment of animals in modern meat production is either a commercial decision or compliance to laws made to appeal to these people. If everybody was just 'meh' about it, companies would go with the more commercially attractive option - completely inhumane treatment of animals.)
True, but where do you tell the (over)sensitive people, enough is enough. You've made a bad situation in a workeable one, still not ideal, but if you go on this path further, it will become unmanageable.
As for the Partij Voor De Dieren, their existence is actually a boon. The problem with democracy is that people who have insufficient knowledge about politics have the same political influence as any other citizen. Redirecting their votes to a practically useless party that will never be in a coalition prevents their votes from going to a relevant party that would convince them with emotional arguments (irrational votes), which would cause a lot more damage (particularly since that party will likely end up doing things the voter never wanted to happen).
Relevant to the previous quote as well. Yes and no, it's an interesting take you have on their political decisions, but my retort for it would be: They're making farmers and livestock keepers life's a living hell. One way or the other they will influence human's life's with their political decisions.
My sanitation with a brick remark:
Sounds very extreme, but if you'd sometimes hear what this party comes up with, you'd might agree with me, in a less exaggerated form ofcourse.
I tend to have tendency to repress stuff that I absolutely can't and don't want to deal with, this means I will forget certain things easily, but an example of what this party made a fuss about:
There was an easter petting zoo, in a city. There were some bunnies, and chickens and stuff, that they'd put in a little ringed off and guarded petting zoo. For city children to come in contact with some farmland and easter themed animals.
They would be allowed to pat, feed, etc. Sounds innocent enough right?
You wouldn't believe the fuss this party made about the trauma's the animals would receive from this. I'm not going to deny that the animals might find the situation a bit stressful, or maybe they'd even like the attention, who knows, not every animal is the same.
But they nearly made it sound like the animals were being sent to something that was the equivalent of a concentration camp. That's how much of a fuss they made, it was mind boggeling.
It can be a matter of perspective. Are you aware that blue and green are right next to each other on the color spectrum?
This is what I like about you, I pick some arbitrary color to paint - pun intended, my example. You take it at face value and roll with it to make your point.
I think it's amazing what you did with this, but the color was arbitrary.
Though the point you bring up in people perceiving stuff differently, which is a great point to make at the topic overal, on terms of the color it wasn't meant to go that deep.
Thanks for humoring the post though, even if it was an extremely exaggerated and poorly put ramble of yours truly!
