Debate Mansion
Debate Mansion

India-Forums

   

Non Vegetarians Animal Activists - Moral? (Page 2)

Dabulls23 IF-Stunnerz
Dabulls23
Dabulls23

Joined: 31 October 2005
Posts: 28768

Posted: 03 April 2007 at 2:37pm | IP Logged
Originally posted by raj5000

Animal protection guard rescuing a stressed pet from the owner later parking at BK for a nice chicken blooper burgers with extra large drink.

Animal activist giving big lecture and later ending up having a non veg meal.

Thats the build up to ask

Should law mandate animal activists and Employees working for an animal protection organisations to switch to vegetarian diet?

I personally don't think there is any base to this comparison. Non vegetarians can still be animal activist or Pet lover.  They do not need to change their diet for that.

@ sareg I totally agree with you on your examples.

souro Moderator
souro
souro

Joined: 27 January 2007
Posts: 13897

Posted: 03 April 2007 at 3:33pm | IP Logged
Originally posted by sareg

someone fighting for women's rights,you have to be a woman for that? or men do go and do a gender change?

The question is whether it's moral to be a non-vegetarian and yet advocate love for animals. No one is asking them to live like the animals do. If they ill treat women in their personal life then how can they be allowed to fight for women's rights.

when you sympathize about orphan children and want to do something about them, do you go and adopt one? if you cant, you donate money for the charity

It's not about whether it should be mandatory for every animal activist to keep a pet. If someone exploits orphaned children to serve their purpose then should they be allowed to be an activist for the orphaned.

Do all pujari's have to be sin-free before preaching?

If we've knowledge about some sins committed by the pujari which are in total contradiction to his preachings then would we take him seriously. If someone is preaching about loving animals and yet have no qualms about culling them and putting them on their dinner plate then ain't they contradicting themselves.

If they are simply against ill treating your pets then it's altogether different. Also if they are against unnecessary cruelty towards animals which serves no purpose then it's ok.

when you do a noble cause, you do what you can



Edited by souro - 03 April 2007 at 3:35pm
mermaid_QT IF-Sizzlerz
mermaid_QT
mermaid_QT

Joined: 25 September 2005
Posts: 11613

Posted: 03 April 2007 at 3:43pm | IP Logged
Originally posted by sareg

someone fighting for women's rights,you have to be a woman for that? or men do go and do a gender change?

when you do a noble cause, you do what you can



You have missed a very important point here.  People of all genders fighting for WOMEN's RIGHTS is fine, but WOMAN-BEATERS, WIFE-ABUSERS and pimps better not show up at such protests DeadDeadDead
That would be the correct analogy IMO.
sareg IF-Dazzler
sareg
sareg

Joined: 10 January 2006
Posts: 3976

Posted: 03 April 2007 at 3:44pm | IP Logged

Originally posted by raj5000

Animal protection guard rescuing a stressed pet from the owner later parking at BK for a nice chicken blooper burgers with extra large drink.

Animal activist giving big lecture and later ending up having a non veg meal.

Thats the build up to ask

Should law mandate animal activists and Employees working for an animal protection organisations to switch to vegetarian diet?

 

Let us get the employees and the guards out of the way here, that is a job

Originally posted by souro

Originally posted by sareg

someone fighting for women's rights,you have to be a woman for that? or men do go and do a gender change?

The question is whether it's moral to be a non-vegetarian and yet advocate love for animals. No one is asking them to live like the animals do. If they ill treat women in their personal life then how can they be allowed to fight for women's rights.

It is not a question of morals, it is a question of can you have both the feelings, having a passion for something and able to live your life the way you want to

when you sympathize about orphan children and want to do something about them, do you go and adopt one? if you cant, you donate money for the charity

It's not about whether it should be mandatory for every animal activist to keep a pet. If someone exploits orphaned children to serve their purpose then should they be allowed to be an activist for the orphaned.

You are missing the point, Animal activists feel for the animal, the way a person would feel for the orphans

Do all pujari's have to be sin-free before preaching?

If we've knowledge about some sins committed by the pujari which are in total contradiction to his preachings then would we take him seriously. If someone is preaching about loving animals and yet have no qualms about culling them and putting them on their dinner plate then ain't they contradicting themselves.

The whole original post of the thread is based upon  practice/be(veg) what you preach, so if that the case, is the pujari sin free? and the examples all of them become valid

when you do a noble cause, you do what you can

souro Moderator
souro
souro

Joined: 27 January 2007
Posts: 13897

Posted: 03 April 2007 at 3:58pm | IP Logged
Originally posted by sareg

Originally posted by souro

someone fighting for women's rights,you have to be a woman for that? or men do go and do a gender change?

The question is whether it's moral to be a non-vegetarian and yet advocate love for animals. No one is asking them to live like the animals do. If they ill treat women in their personal life then how can they be allowed to fight for women's rights.

It is not a question of morals, it is a question of can you have both the feelings, having a passion for something and able to live your life the way you want to

If their passion and their way of life contradicts each other then doesn't that become hipocrisy.

when you sympathize about orphan children and want to do something about them, do you go and adopt one? if you cant, you donate money for the charity

It's not about whether it should be mandatory for every animal activist to keep a pet. If someone exploits orphaned children to serve their purpose then should they be allowed to be an activist for the orphaned.

You are missing the point, Animal activists feel for the animal, the way a person would feel for the orphans.

But if their feelings suddenly get lost at their dinner table then what's the point.

Do all pujari's have to be sin-free before preaching?

If we've knowledge about some sins committed by the pujari which are in total contradiction to his preachings then would we take him seriously. If someone is preaching about loving animals and yet have no qualms about culling them and putting them on their dinner plate then ain't they contradicting themselves.

The whole original post of the thread is based upon  practice/be(veg) what you preach, so if that the case, is the pujari sin free? and the examples all of them become valid.

The pujari tries to practice as he preaches at least conciously. If some of his actions are in contradiction to his preachings or if he commits some sin then as I said no one will take him seriously.

when you do a noble cause, you do what you can



Edited by souro - 03 April 2007 at 3:59pm
sareg IF-Dazzler
sareg
sareg

Joined: 10 January 2006
Posts: 3976

Posted: 03 April 2007 at 4:18pm | IP Logged
Originally posted by souro

Originally posted by sareg

Originally posted by souro

someone fighting for women's rights,you have to be a woman for that? or men do go and do a gender change?

The question is whether it's moral to be a non-vegetarian and yet advocate love for animals. No one is asking them to live like the animals do. If they ill treat women in their personal life then how can they be allowed to fight for women's rights.

It is not a question of morals, it is a question of can you have both the feelings, having a passion for something and able to live your life the way you want to

If their passion and their way of life contradicts each other then doesn't that become hipocrisy.

It would be hypocritic if the human every did any harm to any other living being, if that the defination all humans are hypoctices, if that the case no human is allowed to be a animal activistWink

We are not talking about being hypocrites, we are talking about serving the cause in whichever is the best way the person feels suitable 

when you sympathize about orphan children and want to do something about them, do you go and adopt one? if you cant, you donate money for the charity

It's not about whether it should be mandatory for every animal activist to keep a pet. If someone exploits orphaned children to serve their purpose then should they be allowed to be an activist for the orphaned.

You are missing the point, Animal activists feel for the animal, the way a person would feel for the orphans.

But if their feelings suddenly get lost at their dinner table then what's the point.

If that is the case, why only food, and if that the case, no human will be allowed to be animal activitist, you do what you can for the cause

Do all pujari's have to be sin-free before preaching?

If we've knowledge about some sins committed by the pujari which are in total contradiction to his preachings then would we take him seriously. If someone is preaching about loving animals and yet have no qualms about culling them and putting them on their dinner plate then ain't they contradicting themselves.

The whole original post of the thread is based upon  practice/be(veg) what you preach, so if that the case, is the pujari sin free? and the examples all of them become valid.

The pujari tries to practice as he preaches at LOLleastLOL conciously. If some of his actions are in contradiction to his preachings or if he commits some sin then as I said no one will take him seriously.

Dancing around the logic arent we, or you want to giveLOL

when you do a noble cause, you do what you can

...M... IF-Sizzlerz

Joined: 20 October 2006
Posts: 21657

Posted: 03 April 2007 at 4:20pm | IP Logged
THE ACCOUNT OF THE MEMBER WHO POSTED THIS MESSAGE HAS BEEN TEMPORARILY BANNED.

If you think this is an error please Contact us.
souro Moderator
souro
souro

Joined: 27 January 2007
Posts: 13897

Posted: 03 April 2007 at 4:51pm | IP Logged
Originally posted by sareg

Originally posted by souro

Originally posted by sareg

Originally posted by souro

someone fighting for women's rights,you have to be a woman for that? or men do go and do a gender change?

The question is whether it's moral to be a non-vegetarian and yet advocate love for animals. No one is asking them to live like the animals do. If they ill treat women in their personal life then how can they be allowed to fight for women's rights.

It is not a question of morals, it is a question of can you have both the feelings, having a passion for something and able to live your life the way you want to

If their passion and their way of life contradicts each other then doesn't that become hipocrisy.

It would be hypocritic if the human every did any harm to any other living being, if that the defination all humans are hypoctices, if that the case no human is allowed to be a animal activistWink

A non-vegetarian doesn't harm an animal??Confused

We are not talking about being hypocrites, we are talking about serving the cause in whichever is the best way the person feels suitable 

So, if a person feels that by supporting animal activists he's serving the cause but doesn't want to cause inconvenience to his personal lifestyle by turning vegetarian then it's acceptable.Confused If a person wants to support anti-fur campaigners to serve a purpose but doesn't want to stop using fur in his/her life, should that be acceptable too.

when you sympathize about orphan children and want to do something about them, do you go and adopt one? if you cant, you donate money for the charity

It's not about whether it should be mandatory for every animal activist to keep a pet. If someone exploits orphaned children to serve their purpose then should they be allowed to be an activist for the orphaned.

You are missing the point, Animal activists feel for the animal, the way a person would feel for the orphans.

But if their feelings suddenly get lost at their dinner table then what's the point.

If that is the case, why only food, and if that the case, no human will be allowed to be animal activitist, you do what you can for the cause

Do all pujari's have to be sin-free before preaching?

If we've knowledge about some sins committed by the pujari which are in total contradiction to his preachings then would we take him seriously. If someone is preaching about loving animals and yet have no qualms about culling them and putting them on their dinner plate then ain't they contradicting themselves.

The whole original post of the thread is based upon  practice/be(veg) what you preach, so if that the case, is the pujari sin free? and the examples all of them become valid.

The pujari tries to practice as he preaches at LOLleastLOL conciously. If some of his actions are in contradiction to his preachings or if he commits some sin then as I said no one will take him seriously.

Dancing around the logic arent we, or you want to giveLOL

Can you be more clear as to what was so funny about the word 'least'.

when you do a noble cause, you do what you can

What I have understood so far from your argument is, it's fair to join and support a group fighting against certain practices even if they follow similar practices in their personal life just because s/he's trying to serve a purpose.

 

Go to top

Related Topics

  Topics Author Replies Views Last Post
In wake of SKS: censorship/moral responsibility?

Author: --arti--   Replies: 9   Views: 714

--arti-- 9 714 12 August 2009 at 6:04pm by angelic_devil
Animal Captivity - Sad ?

2 3

Author: raj5000   Replies: 21   Views: 1248

raj5000 21 1248 30 December 2007 at 12:42pm by ~globetrotter~
Fashion or Animal cruelty

Author: Swar_Raj   Replies: 9   Views: 877

Swar_Raj 9 877 05 October 2007 at 8:50am by Swar_Raj
Soldiers killing is moral?

2

Author: raj5000   Replies: 15   Views: 820

raj5000 15 820 02 October 2007 at 10:28pm by sareg
Moral Inspector of TV?

Author: realitybites   Replies: 8   Views: 576

realitybites 8 576 07 February 2007 at 12:13pm by realitybites

Forum Quick Jump

Forum Category / Channels
Forums

Debate Mansion Topic Index

Disclaimer: All Logos and Pictures of various Channels, Shows, Artistes, Media Houses, Companies, Brands etc. belong to their respective owners, and are used to merely visually identify the Channels, Shows, Companies, Brands, etc. to the viewer. Incase of any issue please contact the webmaster.

Popular Channels :
Star Plus | Zee TV | Sony TV | Colors TV | SAB TV | Life OK

Quick Links :
Top 100 TV Celebrities | Top 100 Bollywood Celebs | About Us | Contact Us | Advertise | Forum Index