Statement from Morrissey: It isn't nice and you shouldn't do it - TTY, 22 May 2013

Comments

CrystalGeezer

My secret's my enzyme.
Re: Statement from Morrissey: It isn't nice and you shouldn't do it - TTY, 22 May 20

MLK wasn't even a vegetarian.

So wasnt he technically "look(ing) the other away"

- - - Updated - - -



The really sad thing is that they don't do both.
Well you're not even intellectual and here you are trying to make sense so...
 

FER

Perpetual Junior Member
Re: Statement from Morrissey: It isn't nice and you shouldn't do it - TTY, 22 May 20

Well you're not even intellectual and here you are trying to make sense so...
Is that really the best you can do?
 

CrystalGeezer

My secret's my enzyme.
Re: Statement from Morrissey: It isn't nice and you shouldn't do it - TTY, 22 May 20

Is that really the best you can do?
:D
 

Johnny Barleycorn

Well-Known Member
Re: Statement from Morrissey: It isn't nice and you shouldn't do it - TTY, 22 May 20

No, please, lets cover that ground again, perpetrator. And, anyone, who stands for something, you included, tends to use whatever jolt may be in the news to get peoples' attention. But, as long as animals are treated this way lawfully, so will be humans. Non-empathic numbness and denial rule our lives. Why? We are capable of so much more - more understanding, better care, better treatment, empathy, respect, and love.

From: http://true-to-you.net/morrissey_news_110729_01

Morrissey's statement:

The recent killings in Norway were horrific. As usual in such cases, the media give the killer exactly what he wants: worldwide fame. We aren't told the names of the people who were killed - almost as if they are not considered to be important enough, yet the media frenzy to turn the killer into a Jack The Ripper star is .... repulsive. He should be un-named, not photographed, and quietly led away.
The comment I made onstage at Warsaw could be further explained this way: Millions of beings are routinely murdered every single day in order to fund profits for McDonalds and KFCruelty, but because these murders are protected by laws, we are asked to feel indifferent about the killings, and to not even dare question them.
If you quite rightly feel horrified at the Norway killings, then it surely naturally follows that you feel horror at the murder of ANY innocent being. You cannot ignore animal suffering simply because animals "are not us."
No, you are being somewhat disingenuous. What you post is his subsequent desperate backtracking.

The words he used on stage that night in Warsaw were "We all live in a murderous world, as the events in Norway have shown with 97 dead. Though that is nothing compared to what happens in McDonald's and Kentucky Fried S*** every day." Not the "Ah, yes but..." you claim.

That is why I said he used terrorism to advance his world view. Like the terrorists themselves.
 
B

billyS

Guest
Re: Statement from Morrissey: It isn't nice and you shouldn't do it - TTY, 22 May 20

Seriously, worrying about foie gras when there are so many other serious matters that need attending to in this fucked up world??? This guy is carrying on about ducks and geese????

Perhaps you simply lack empathy. And when you lack compassion, you have nothing.

When it comes to ethics, there's really no significant difference between children and animals. Yes, they're not that smart. Yes, they are actually pretty stupid compared to grown humans. And yes, therefore they are completely at the mercy of us. But this doesn't change the fact that they feel. It doesn't matter if we're talking about a newborn baby or a factory-farmed duck, they all have the same ability to suffer. And that's all that matters. In terms of suffering, factory farming is by far the greatest problem on earth today. Every year, over 60 billion (60 000 000 000) animals are forced to live their 'lives' in nightmarish conditions that have a lot in common with Nazi concentration camps. Except that they may be even worse. A lot worse, I'm afraid.

I suggest you read these words of Jeremy Bentham:

The day has been, I am sad to say in many places it is not yet past, in which the greater part of the species, under the denomination of slaves, have been treated by the law exactly upon the same footing, as, in England for example, the inferior races of animals are still. The day may come when the rest of the animal creation may acquire those rights which never could have been witholden from them but by the hand of tyranny. The French have already discovered that the blackness of the skin is no reason a human being should be abandoned without redress to the caprice of a tormentor. It may one day come to be recognised that the number of the legs, the villosity of the skin, or the termination of the os sacrum are reasons equally insufficient for abandoning a sensitive being to the same fate. What else is it that should trace the insuperable line? Is it the faculty of reason or perhaps the faculty of discourse? But a full-grown horse or dog, is beyond comparison a more rational, as well as a more conversable animal, than an infant of a day or a week or even a month, old. But suppose the case were otherwise, what would it avail? The question is not, Can they reason? nor, Can they talk? but, Can they suffer?

Think about this. Have a nice day!
 

realitybites

making lemonade
Subscriber
Re: Statement from Morrissey: It isn't nice and you shouldn't do it - TTY, 22 May 20

Well you're not even intellectual and here you are trying to make sense so...
Actually, he is an intellectual. And a film buff as well.

Shut your trap! You are making a fool of yourself, yet again! You wouldn't know intelligence if it hit you in your bloated face.
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
Re: Statement from Morrissey: It isn't nice and you shouldn't do it - TTY, 22 May 20

In my opinion, speaking only for me, at this point it doesn't matter what Morrissey said in Warsaw or what he meant by it. I believe he said it intentionally because it follows PETA's method of capitalizing on stories like this that are already getting a lot of publicity. Honestly I don't think Morrissey would care if the entire audience had been the ones mowed down. It's not that he's glad it happened but I just don't think he cares at all. I believe he's not only made statements like this but actually written songs that were intended to trade controversy for publicity. The cover of the Smiths first record seemed sort of obscure at the time but it was just ahead of it's time. One Direction could do the same thing now and it wouldn't seem obscure at all.
I believe Morrissey championed the underdog, partly because he really does love the work, but mostly because he doesn't like anyone that sells as much or more than he does.

But I think it's nice that he makes these announcements, and it's too bad he doesn't seem like a friendly sensible person speaking on behalf of those without a voice that suffer horrible cruelty needlessly, and instead can come across as a bit of a crackpot.
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
Re: Statement from Morrissey: It isn't nice and you shouldn't do it - TTY, 22 May 20

Actually, he is an intellectual. And a film buff as well.

Shut your trap! You are making a fool of yourself, yet again! You wouldn't know intelligence if it hit you in your bloated face.
You should buff the film off of your teeth.
 
O

oli

Guest
Re: Statement from Morrissey: It isn't nice and you shouldn't do it - TTY, 22 May 20

Anyone who would raise their baby as a vegetarian should be jailed. It goes completely against what the body needs, especially as a baby.
Oh come on. Many of my friends have been vegetarians since birth, and they are the healthiest people I know, in every aspect :)
 

Johnny Barleycorn

Well-Known Member
Re: Statement from Morrissey: It isn't nice and you shouldn't do it - TTY, 22 May 20

Perhaps you simply lack empathy. And when you lack compassion, you have nothing.

When it comes to ethics, there's really no significant difference between children and animals. Yes, they're not that smart. Yes, they are actually pretty stupid compared to grown humans. And yes, therefore they are completely at the mercy of us. But this doesn't change the fact that they feel. It doesn't matter if we're talking about a newborn baby or a factory-farmed duck, they all have the same ability to suffer. And that's all that matters. In terms of suffering, factory farming is by far the greatest problem on earth today. Every year, over 60 billion (60 000 000 000) animals are forced to live their 'lives' in nightmarish conditions that have a lot in common with Nazi concentration camps. Except that they may be even worse. A lot worse, I'm afraid.

I suggest you read these words of Jeremy Bentham:

The day has been, I am sad to say in many places it is not yet past, in which the greater part of the species, under the denomination of slaves, have been treated by the law exactly upon the same footing, as, in England for example, the inferior races of animals are still. The day may come when the rest of the animal creation may acquire those rights which never could have been witholden from them but by the hand of tyranny. The French have already discovered that the blackness of the skin is no reason a human being should be abandoned without redress to the caprice of a tormentor. It may one day come to be recognised that the number of the legs, the villosity of the skin, or the termination of the os sacrum are reasons equally insufficient for abandoning a sensitive being to the same fate. What else is it that should trace the insuperable line? Is it the faculty of reason or perhaps the faculty of discourse? But a full-grown horse or dog, is beyond comparison a more rational, as well as a more conversable animal, than an infant of a day or a week or even a month, old. But suppose the case were otherwise, what would it avail? The question is not, Can they reason? nor, Can they talk? but, Can they suffer?

Think about this. Have a nice day!
Well... I believe we humans share this planet with other species and should do our best by them in general. We do this on one hand by trying to protect endangered species, yet we farm others for food. Humankind could not currently survive without food derived from animals, at least not in our current numbers. It's very easy for us in the first world to decide that tomorrow we shall become vegetarians, but far less easy if we live in a disagreeable district of Lubumbashi. When we in the first world talk of overpopulation I assume we aren't putting ourselves forward as being part of the excess human baggage worth letting go. We mean those strange chaps in Bangladesh or Niger, don't we? Not us.

It seems one or two people on this thread consider mankind to be almost a cancer on the planet, rather than what we are, the flawed, yet most extraordinary creature that ever walked the earth. As much as I adore elephants or dolphins we'd still be twiddling our thumbs (...) waiting for Jumbo to launch Hubble, or for the first dolphin rock band. We run this ball of dirt, and yes, it could be better, but by God, it could be a damn sight worse too.

A cat lives with me. I don't own him. We're a team. "This is only a suggestion, Thomas, but let's not forget who's making it..." "Meow." I look after his interests voluntarily, and for his part he lets me. He has yet to put his hand in his pocket to help out with the mortgage, but I overlook that. When he complains he is hungry, which is constantly, and often when he has food in his bowl already, I give him three choices, to evolve and open his own tin, to eat what he already has, or wait. He chooses b) or c).

Despite this he sticks around and we get on just great. I occasionally wonder how different our relationship would be if he was my size, and I was his. I would be long dead at his paws, and the chances are he'd have been taken down by police marksmen some time ago. The point I'm making is we control the animals, or they control us. That goes for big cats and little ones.

Interestingly, we despicable capitalist westerners with all our time, money and resources, so fashionably derided across the globe by people whose idea of animal husbandry and slaughter is whether to hit it over the head once, twice or not at all, are often all that stands between many species and extinction.

On balance I'd give us a B-.
 
Last edited:

MORRIZSEY

Wrong species
Re: Statement from Morrissey: It isn't nice and you shouldn't do it - TTY, 22 May 20

Well... I believe we humans share this planet with other species and should do our best by them in general. We do this on one hand by trying to protect endangered species, yet we farm others for food. Humankind could not currently survive without food derived from animals, at least not in our current numbers. It's very easy for us in the first world to decide that tomorrow we shall become vegetarians, but far less easy if we live in a disagreeable district of Lumbumbashi. When we in the first world talk of overpopulation I assume we aren't putting ourselves forward as being part of the excess human baggage worth letting go. We mean those strange chaps in Bangladesh or Niger, don't we? Not us.

It seems one or two people on this thread consider mankind to be almost a cancer on the planet, rather than what we are, the flawed, yet most extraordinary creature that ever walked the earth. As much as I adore elephants or dolphins we'd still be twiddling our thumbs (...) waiting for Jumbo to launch Hubble, or for the first dolphin rock band. We run this ball of dirt, and yes, it could be better, but by God, it could be a damn sight worse too.

A cat lives with me. I don't own him. We're a team. "This is only a suggestion, Thomas, but let's not forget who's making it..." "Meow." I look after his interests voluntarily, and for his part he lets me. He has yet to put his hand in his pocket to help out with the mortgage, but I overlook that. When he complains he is hungry, which is constantly, and often when he has food in his bowl already, I give him three choices, to evolve and open his own tin, to eat what he already has, or wait. He chooses b) or c).

Despite this he sticks around and we get on just great. I occasionally wonder how different our relationship would be if he was my size, and I was his. I would be long dead at his paws, and the chances are he'd have been taken down by police marksmen some time ago. The point I'm making is we control the animals, or they control us. That goes for big cats and little ones.

Interestingly, we despicable capitalist westerners with all our time, money and resources, so fashionably derided across the globe by people whose idea of animal husbandry and slaughter is whether to hit it over the head once, twice or not at all, are often all that stands between many species and extinction.

On balance I'd give us a B-.
In truth I think one main reason is because animals can't fight back.
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
Re: Statement from Morrissey: It isn't nice and you shouldn't do it - TTY, 22 May 20

While I don't agree with foie gras, because it is incredibly cruel...it isn't any of Morrissey's fucking business what any woman decides to eat during her pregnancy. Saturated fat is nourishing for the baby and his/her development, especially the brain and nervous system.

Since he doesn't have a clue about health and nutrition in ANY aspect, he ought to shut up. But of course, he won't, because he isn't getting any attention otherwise.

Anyone who would raise their baby as a vegetarian should be jailed. It goes completely against what the body needs, especially as a baby. Breast milk is mostly saturated fat and it gives a little one everything they could possibly need nutrient wise.

I know many of you will shit your pants reading that, but it's the truth. Tell the Masai otherwise, and every other tribe on the planet who eat meat, fat and dairy and are exceptionally healthy with no degenerative diseases known in the first world.
Your statement is utter bullshit. Only ninety year old doctors whot derive their philosopohies from antiquated information and inflexible tradition tell people that it is unhealthy to raise children as vegetarians. The fact is that all nutrients needed to be healthy can be found in a plant-based diet; in fact, more and more physicians are currently recommending that. People are malnurished because they eat fast-food and processed garbage, and this is true for both carnivores and vegetarians. I raised two children as vegetarians, and they are completely healthy, and I am certainly not alone. So, why should we be jailed? It is estimated that over 10% of the population is now vegetarian, and the trend is growing. People don't need meat, they want it; they choose to consume it, totally disregarding the fear and pain that is inflicted upon its source, just so they can stuff something 'tasty' in their mouths. If you show a child how a cow is killed before he/she is about to eat a hamburger, and explain the process, that child will most often refuse to eat it because human nature tells us that it is morally wrong to torture another living creature.

lynnda
 

MIDNITE

Active Member
Re: Statement from Morrissey: It isn't nice and you shouldn't do it - TTY, 22 May 20



This is how they "feed" the ducks and geese to fatten them up to make foie gras.

The feed is administered using a funnel fitted with a long tube (20–30 cm long), which forces the feed into the animal's esophagus; if an auger is used, the feeding takes about 45 to 60 seconds. Modern systems usually use a tube fed by a pneumatic pump fed via a slit cut in the esophagus; with such a system the operation time per duck takes about 2 to 3 seconds. During feeding, efforts are made to avoid damaging the bird's esophagus, which could cause injury or death, although researchers have found evidence of inflammation of the walls of the proventriculus after the first session of force-feeding. There is also indication of inflammation of the esophagus in the later stages of fattening. Several studies have also demonstrated that mortality rates can be significantly elevated during the gavage period.
I wasnt even aware about this discusting "food" - foie gras, till I read morrisseys latest online post and googled it 2 see what it was!

A "food" fit only 4 dining in hell and by satan! :(

Equally as sickening is the "pigs of gold" in asia / china (sorry cant recall the exact country, but its in asia somewere! I first highlighted this terrible abuse and murder, approx, 7 years ago on a different online forum I use 2 visit ! )

The "Pigs of God" contest and monsterous "festival" causes extreme suffering and pain 4 these poor innocent creatures.
Pigs are confined and force fed for up to two years, reaching six times their normal natural weight. casuing all there organs, not just there livers (as in foie gras) 2 enlarge burst and fail !
Most cant walk or stand up and have 2 be hauled 2 slaughter by up to 20 "men"
The pigs are slaughtered in public while fully conscious.
The suffering these poor creatures are forced 2 endure thru out the last few years of there lifes is boyond Imagination!!!!!!!!!!!!

And your "reward" 4 inflicting such evil suffering and producing the fattest pig? a complety worthless crappy "medal" of gold! of no value whatso ever eccept as a reminder of evil !!!!!!!!!!

I sumtimes almost give up!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! :(

But I know morrissey wont! :)

Morrissey obviously feels that the pleasure he derives from eating yogurt and cheese trumps the pain of dairy cows who suffer from non-stop pregnancies, infected, painfully swollen pus filled udders, and years of confinement while being hooked up to milking machines so that their milk can be sold to humans rather than be given to their offspring, who are taken from them after birth to be raised for veal--if male--or to become dairy cows like themselves, if female (longest sentence I have written on Solo, btw).
Perhaps morrissey buys milk and yougurt ect ONLY from proper organic dairy farmers that dont slaughter there cattle, who treat there cattle with the love and respect they deserve and allow interactions with there young, hand milk there cattle, dont inject anti-biotics without reason ect ect ect and not from cows kept in the discusting cruel conditons, which exist in mass farming methods, some of the methods which as you rightly highlight here!

Perhaps "prince" charles will now reconsider his position on fox hunting 2!
Charles, suposedly chats with plants and flowers discusing nature ect - and if he does, will know there opinions and objections in such matters!

Morrissey has anti royalist views, just as I do, ( but he has never once said he HATES hate kate middleton! ) as the royal family are a family who endorse and participate in discusting blood sports, (fox hunting) and get sadistic pleasure out of causing exstreme suffuring out of another Intellegent being by frieghtning the life of of them by chasing and then killing them!
There is no place in a civilised society 4 such behaviour! , certainly not as figure heads of our nation here in the united kingdom!

Unfortunatly 4 the royal family and other such "peolple" - fox hunting is my "pet hate" it bugs me beyond belief !!!! :(
Its like a great weight on my weary shoulders, crushing me!
I will endlessly continue 2 campagin and speack out against fox hunting untill it is banned forever!

Oh and johnny barleycom, u have almost completly lost me on this topic, (dispite some good points made!) so many contradictions and circles, id be here almost forever quoting and correcting all the ridiculous nonsense posted about morrissey !

It is nonsene 2 sugest that animals bigger and stronger than humans would choose hurt us ect, the old engilsh mastiff the largest most formidible, couragous gaurding type breed of dog on earth, could easily destroy any person in an instant should it so desire, and yet this loverly little friend is docile and kind in nature, it will only become aggressive in order 2 protect its "owner" ! :)
 
Last edited:

MIDNITE

Active Member
Re: Statement from Morrissey: It isn't nice and you shouldn't do it - TTY, 22 May 20

Your statement is utter bullshit. Only ninety year old doctors whot derive their philosopohies from antiquated information and inflexible tradition tell people that it is unhealthy to raise children as vegetarians. The fact is that all nutrients needed to be healthy can be found in a plant-based diet; in fact, more and more physicians are currently recommending that. People are malnurished because they eat fast-food and processed garbage, and this is true for both carnivores and vegetarians. I raised two children as vegetarians, and they are completely healthy, and I am certainly not alone. So, why should we be jailed? It is estimated that over 10% of the population is now vegetarian, and the trend is growing. People don't need meat, they want it; they choose to consume it, totally disregarding the fear and pain that is inflicted upon its source, just so they can stuff something 'tasty' in their mouths. If you show a child how a cow is killed before he/she is about to eat a hamburger, and explain the process, that child will most often refuse to eat it because human nature tells us that it is morally wrong to torture another living creature.

lynnda


Thanks for this wonderfull post! :)

Humans, biologically, are actually herbivores by design and nature, we get no real benefit from eating meat along with feathers and bones ect like true carnavioures do such as tigers and lions ect, just look at the largest and strongest animals on earth who are not lacking in protein and muscle, such as rhino, elephant and the gorilla ect and what do they eat? plants!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
All our protien needs and amino acids, can easily be met, and are actually more readibly accessible, via eating a varied diet of vegetable matter! :)
 

Johnny Barleycorn

Well-Known Member
Re: Statement from Morrissey: It isn't nice and you shouldn't do it - TTY, 22 May 20

In truth I think one main reason is because animals can't fight back.
Lions disagree. Perhaps that's why you never see a lion being experimented on. Mind you, lions aren't vegetarian either. You see how complicated all this is?

Look, it's awful. We know that, but man has risen to his preeminent position by the use of animals. It's been going on for tens of thousands of years and will not end anytime soon. One day it will, though. Then you will need to visit a zoo to see a cow or a chicken, there will be so few of them.

Is it wrong to experiment on animals for, for example, cosmetics? Unequivocally yes. It should be banned. We do not need more boswollox in the world. We never needed it at all.

Is it wrong to experiment on animals for medicine? Probably not. Or not yet, at least. Again awful, but on balance probably necessary. I'm sorry, but the advancement of science is intrinsic to our development as a civilisation. If that means animal testing then, suitably monitored, so be it. The alternative was explored some years ago by a Dr. Josef Mengele. It proved unpopular.

I'd be far, far happier if it was taken out of the hands of Dow Jones listed profit driven companies and into trusts for the good of us all, but that Utopian ideal is a long way off. One day we will tour the galaxy as in Star Trek, like some intergalactic Liberal Democratic party, perhaps with a transgender Captain and a Downs Syndrome engineering officer. Just not yet.

The other day I was reading the speech JFK was due to give to the Dallas Trade Mart on the day he was assassinated. It included the following passage: "There will always be dissident voices heard in the land, expressing opposition without alternatives, finding fault but never favor, perceiving gloom on every side and seeking influence without responsibility. Those voices are inevitable." In many ways those words could have been written about Morrissey. It's the easiest thing in the world to point out what is wrong. The trick is in explaining how to put it right.

Animal testing, specifically for medical research is a dreadful necessity. Those who disagree should wait until they have a loved one dying in hospital and get back to me.
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
Re: Statement from Morrissey: It isn't nice and you shouldn't do it - TTY, 22 May 20

Sexist and misogynistic...this man seems to despise motherhood and the physical effects it has on a woman. "smiling mother-to-be"..."Kate will wobble in"...etc. I love Morrissey and completely agree with his sentiment around foie gras but as a relatively new mother myself I really despise his cheap sarcasm and nastiness around this unborn child. Yes Morrissey, we know you hate the royals. Yes, we know you support animal rights. This doesn't give you the right to degrade pregnancy and motherhood.
I don't think that his statement was meant to slight or demean motherhood; he seems to be gunning for one particular pregnant woman. Obviously, I can't speak for Morrissey; but I imagine that he is trying to describe her in the most unfavorable light because he views her as a calculating woman who bagged a prince and immediately fulfilled her duties by getting knocked up with a little future king or queen. Morrissey has demonstrated his great affection for many of the women in his life and for some of his favorite female musical artists. I am a mother, and I honestly was not offended by this statement; but, I am sorry that it upset you. Enjoy your children; it sounds cliche, but they grow up so quickly. One moment I had this sulky, blue-eyed baby boy; the next moment, I had this sulky, blue-eyed, hairy twenty year old who lives upstairs, refuses to leave the house, refuses to get a job....wait, that sounds somewhat familiar...anyway, good luck with your family.

lynnda
 

MORRIZSEY

Wrong species
Re: Statement from Morrissey: It isn't nice and you shouldn't do it - TTY, 22 May 20

Lions disagree. Perhaps that's why you never see a lion being experimented on. Mind you, lions aren't vegetarian either. You see how complicated all this is?

Look, it's awful. We know that, but man has risen to his preeminent position by the use of animals. It's been going on for tens of thousands of years and will not end anytime soon. One day it will, though. Then you will need to visit a zoo to see a cow or a chicken, there will be so few of them.

Is it wrong to experiment on animals for, for example, cosmetics? Unequivocally yes. It should be banned. We do not need more boswollox in the world. We never needed it at all.

Is it wrong to experiment on animals for medicine? Probably not. Or not yet, at least. Again awful, but on balance probably necessary. I'm sorry, but the advancement of science is intrinsic to our development as a civilisation. If that means animal testing then, suitably monitored, so be it. The alternative was explored some years ago by a Dr. Josef Mengele. It proved unpopular.

I'd be far, far happier if it was taken out of the hands of Dow Jones listed profit driven companies and into trusts for the good of us all, but that Utopian ideal is a long way off. One day we will tour the galaxy as in Star Trek, like some intergalactic Liberal Democratic party, perhaps with a transgender Captain and a Downs Syndrome engineering officer. Just not yet.

The other day I was reading the speech JFK was due to give to the Dallas Trade Mart on the day he was assassinated. It included the following passage: "There will always be dissident voices heard in the land, expressing opposition without alternatives, finding fault but never favor, perceiving gloom on every side and seeking influence without responsibility. Those voices are inevitable." In many ways those words could have been written about Morrissey. It's the easiest thing in the world to point out what is wrong. The trick is in explaining how to put it right.

Animal testing, specifically for medical research is a dreadful necessity. Those who disagree should wait until they have a loved one dying in hospital and get back to me.
The principal comes back to whether I put you forward for vivisection without your consent, and whether you could object. If you were mute you would be dragged against your will, and some other people may benefit as a result, and that's roughly how it proceeds

EDIT: Show disabled
 
Last edited:

Johnny Barleycorn

Well-Known Member
Re: Statement from Morrissey: It isn't nice and you shouldn't do it - TTY, 22 May 20

Perhaps morrissey buys milk and yougurt ect ONLY from proper organic dairy farmers that dont slaughter there cattle, who treat there cattle with the love and respect they deserve and allow interactions with there young, hand milk there cattle, dont inject anti-biotics without reason ect ect ect and not from cows kept in the discusting cruel conditons, which exist in mass farming methods, some of the methods which as you rightly highlight here!
Still theft though, innit?

Perhaps "prince" charles will now reconsider his position on fox hunting 2!
Charles, suposedly chats with plants and flowers discusing nature ect - and if he does, will know there opinions and objections in such matters!
He's definitely a Prince. You're probably thinking of Will Oldham.

Morrissey has anti royalist views, just as I do, ( but he has never once said he HATES hate kate middleton! )
That's right. He just had t-shirts made up.

Oh and johnny barleycom, u have almost completly lost me on this topic, (dispite some good points made!) so many contradictions and circles,
But, respectfully, that's partly the point. It isn't a black and white issue.

It is nonsene 2 sugest that animals bigger and stronger than humans would choose hurt us ect, the old engilsh mastiff the largest most formidible, couragous gaurding type breed of dog on earth, could easily destroy any person in an instant should it so desire, and yet this loverly little friend is docile and kind in nature, it will only become aggressive in order 2 protect its "owner" ! :)
Doesn't that depend on the animal and the circumstance? The Panda, for example, that adorable symbol of the World Wrestling Federation (eh?) is, apparently, by nature, a vicious bugger and would have your bloody head off given half the chance.

Similarly few of us would choose to wander through the Amazon rain forests or the African veldt unarmed and expect to come out in one piece.

- - - Updated - - -

The principal comes back to whether I put you forward for vivisection without your consent, and whether you could object. If you were mute you would be dragged against your will, and some other people may benefit as a result, and that's roughly how it proceeds

EDIT: Show disabled
You are absolutely right, but we are where we are.
 

Trending Threads

Top Bottom