The animal rights movement isn't a counter culture it is an ANTICULTURE, it bases its existence on the psychological need to have an enemy. People in an anti culture group feel that they have the only legitimate values, that all other values are illegitimate.

Violence arises in these situation because they attract people who have other agendas about power and powerlessness and the angry nature of the group gives them a soapbox from which to rail and vent.

Animal liberationists do not necessarily have an intense love of animals. Peter Singer the guru of animal rightists openly states that he is not inordinately fond of animals. But he has found a unique method of funding his affluent lifestyle.

Animal rights movement receives support because it taps into our concerns for safety, personal freedom, ecological balance, racial equality, power and powerlessness, violence, terrorism and the insatiable ability of the media to sensationalise the news in order to compete for ratings which then equal advertising revenue.

Well slavery and Hitler were the law once, that does not
make the law right, just legal at a particular time.

I actually agree with humane treatment of farm animals.
My problem lies not with the concept, but with some
of the individuals pushing that particular barrow.

When we die, we get recycled, even vegans will be
chewed up by the worms. Face it!

I see a real problem here, of people who don't know
the first thing about farm animals, confusing their
love of their pet poodle etc, with other species.

They are not all the same!

Its high time that the animal welfare lobby started
hiring some qualified people, if they want to make
valid points of reason, or they will continue to
be written off as fanatics, as they are at present.

Peta's arguments seem to be based on the knowledge of
singers or women with large breasts :) Umm, perhaps
they need to get their stuff together and become more
enlightened. Some rudimentary knowledge of the topics
they are trying to argue about, would be most welcome!

Dear Cowboy Joe

So sorry you were unimpressed with my poem and that its message escaped your "rational thinking!".

You appear enthusiastic about relaying hashed up obsolete stories,on the actions of animal libbers overseas which has prompted my memory on current media reports and right here in little old Oz:

1. "Heinous act - live kitten chopped in half with axe"

2. "Starving sick horses on rural property seized by RSPCA." Officers have managed to find good homes for some of the animals.

3. Diseased and starving dogs and puppies seized and euthanased. Owner prosecuted.

4. Four dogs euthanased after ingesting 1080 bait. Vet advises community not to take pets on to pastoral stations where baits are plentiful. She says: '1080 is a shocking bait and animals can take up to 4 days to die in agony.'

5. Owners of pastoral station charged with neglect of livestock. Officers discovered emaciated starving cattle. Cattle had no access to water or feedstuff and the property appeared to have been abandoned. Many of the cattle had to be put down.

Are these your buddies, Cowboy Joe? The above media reports are not dredged up from 1993 where you have attempted to exploit the reader but are acts perpetrated this year - 2006 - there are many more!

And I see Yabby is back peddling his 1080 vitriole and portraying those concerned with animal welfare, as "women with big breasts."

The "Yabbies" are unable to comprehend that those of us who endeavour to halt cruelty to animals are not part of a left-wing loonie culture but are ordinary citizens from all walks of life. In fact I am from a family whose members were and are "rational thinking" liberal politicians. Hardly a breeding ground for dysfunctional "women with big breasts!"

Lawyer and author, Mirko Bargavic's article on the plight of pigs sends a clear message that factory farming requires serious review. This gentleman is worthy of praise and I commend him for his unfettered appraisal on the treatment of commercialised animals -"dobra dobra Mirko Bargavic!"

Rather than focusing on the extremists in these groups people should listen to their evidence and findings which are numerous. Some of their arguments and demands may be ludicrous, but the majority are reasonable or at least debatable.

Dickie, clearly you are no Pamela Anderson, so no point having
you as a pin up girl for Peta :)

My point was that why Pamela Anderson's or Pink's opinions
should matter in the first place, has me beat. I have yet
to see a link between breasts and intelligence, but perhaps
Peta don't agree. Given that their founder wants her meat
barbecued when she dies, anything extreme from Peta is
not unusual, no wonder they have so little respect in the
community.

"Rather than focusing on the extremists in these groups people should listen to their evidence and findings which are numerous. Some of their arguments and demands may be ludicrous, but the majority are reasonable or at least debatable."

Steel I fully agree. The fact is however, that most of these
extreme groups repeat some of the same old mantra over and over,
even if flaws in their arguments are pointed out. They don't
seem to let the truth get in the way of their stories, whilst
they have their hands out for donations from a teary eyed public.

So lets debate the issues on their merit and at least have some
educated comments from qualified people, not just from vegans
who want to tippytoe through the tulips of their fantasy world.

The world is not black and white, its shades of grey, which is
what we should be discussing

madam, the quality of your reasoning brings tears to my eyes. it will indeed be a happy day when all animals are equal in all respects, and the hanibal lectors of this world can resume their rightful place at the table of mankind. after all, man cannot be expected to exist on bread and lettuce alone.