New User? Register Now
Dabulls23
IF-Stunnerz
Joined: 31 October 2005
Posts: 27873
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
IF-Sizzlerz
Joined: 27 January 2007
Posts: 13491
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
mermaid_QT
IF-Sizzlerz
Joined: 25 September 2005
Posts: 11613
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
sareg
IF-Dazzler
Joined: 10 January 2006
Posts: 3976
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
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
IF-Sizzlerz
Joined: 27 January 2007
Posts: 13491
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
sareg
IF-Dazzler
Joined: 10 January 2006
Posts: 3976
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 activist
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 
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.
Dancing around the logic arent we, or you want to give
when you do a noble cause, you do what you can
...M...
IF-Sizzlerz
Joined: 20 October 2006
Posts: 21657
souro
IF-Sizzlerz
Joined: 27 January 2007
Posts: 13491
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 activist
A non-vegetarian doesn't harm an animal??
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. 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 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.
Dancing around the logic arent we, or you want to give
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.
| Topics | Topic Starter | Replies | Views | Last Post | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| In wake of SKS: censorship/moral responsibility? | --arti-- | 9 | 515 | 12 August 2009 at 8:52pm By angelic_devil |
|
| Animal Captivity - Sad ? | raj5000 | 21 | 877 | 30 December 2007 at 10:59pm By ~globetrotter~ |
|
| Fashion or Animal cruelty | Swar_Raj | 9 | 583 | 05 October 2007 at 2:11pm By Swar_Raj |
|
| Soldiers killing is moral? | raj5000 | 15 | 585 | 02 October 2007 at 8:38pm By sareg |
|
| Moral Inspector of TV? | realitybites | 8 | 402 | 07 February 2007 at 2:15am By realitybites |
Be the part of India's biggest discussion portal.
It’s easy to Join and it’s free.
Register now while it’s free!
Already a member? Close this window and log in.
