tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8158319986602952349.post2000710674405062953..comments2023-08-16T12:44:15.891-05:00Comments on Primate Freedom: My first little book.Unknownnoreply@blogger.comBlogger2125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8158319986602952349.post-42768388417458642782009-07-25T18:01:22.925-05:002009-07-25T18:01:22.925-05:00Luella said, "Violence is NOT acceptable.&quo...Luella said, "Violence is NOT acceptable." But I don't believe s/he means it. If someone really believed that, they'd have to remain non-violent as someone raped and killed a loved one. Maybe a few people are so committed to non-violence, no matter the circumstance, but not protecting or defending loved ones, even with violent means, seems morally deficient. Maybe Luella just means that no evil heaped on animals is an adequate justification for violence, but if I would defend a loved one or a neighbor's child with violent means, if necessary, then not doing the same for animals places them in a significantly lower moral category. Following that line of thinking, maybe it is ok to hurt them if humans might benefit in some way. That's the status quo.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8158319986602952349.post-78132782882167769212009-07-21T17:55:18.448-05:002009-07-21T17:55:18.448-05:00Dude. Violence is NOT acceptable. If you kill vivi...Dude. Violence is NOT acceptable. If you kill vivisectors, you will just be put in prison and make animal rights look evil. Killing does NOT change the status quo. If it were successful even in the short-term, which I find unlikely, it still wouldn't change anyone's mind about animal rights. There is no use in playing with this question. It's not entertainment, but indulgence. Just as there are better solutions than vivisection, there are better solutions to other forms of violence.Luellahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00756410146756239731noreply@blogger.com