In a message dated 98-11-18 19:15:56 EST, you write:
<< It insults all of us.
>>
Hi! Why don't you just speak for yourself? I said I wasn't going to post
anything more about the sacred and ecofeminism not to the list - but since you
personally addressed me and put my screen name in (Ecolody) I felt compelled
to reply. FYI my screen name was used to help people remember it easily- I
work for an environmentally aware paper and printing company on line and I
needed an e-mail address that was easy to remember and immediately connected
me to ecology issues. I was never asserting that I was an ecology goddess -
so emphasising the name is a little silly!
About being silly Sarah - Ecofeminism is not about blasting Christianity - it
is about all people from diverse beliefs changing to accomodate a better world
order - If it isn't it should be!
Peace!
Angela
>From [EMAIL PROTECTED] Thu Nov 19 04:13:43 1998
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Thu, 19 Nov 1998 06:12:49 EST
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Compassion to the animals!/fur/vegans
In a message dated 98-11-18 19:24:31 EST, Margueritte writes:
<< Yet if those same consumers were
to follow an animal from its life on a farm (not an intensive hell farm but
a farm where animals were allowed to roam and chickens were allowed to
scratch in the dirt) and watch this animal dragged to slaughter to lose its
very life, perhaps more people would carefully consider being vegan and
perhaps more people would consider the lives of animals in general and try
to change things. >>
Hi!
This is a good point and probably true - I was watching a woman's show on TV
while lunch was cooking for the kids - laughing, absorbing some useful
information about life and suddenly one of the woman was wearing a FUR collar
on her suit - she spoke "next segment about furs!" The woman sitting next to
her rubbed the fur collar and said - oh, the animal is dead, come on!" and
she said "I didn't kill it!" I turned off the TV, I thought I was going to be
sick - she removed herself from the actual killing - that makes it OK - As if,
if she didn't actually slaughter the animal, she could wear it's fur - there
were no remains of blood -it was apparent she wasn't wearing the fur to stay
warm, she was wearing it to look glamorious! If it was below zero and she had
nothing else to keep warm and she had to kill the animal to survive -Ok maybe
that's acceptable - but to wear it's fur for what they call glamour - YUK! I
think we need to redefine glamour people! Woman need to look at fur as murder
not glamour! Avarice - pure avarice - the animals do not exist for our
avarice!
Re: Vegans - maybe the actual slaughter of the animals on farms need to be
portrayed MORE visually to society? Afterall, it is a very audio/visual
world!
Maybe then vegans can bestir complacency and bring about more empathy for the
animals plights!!
Peace!
Angela
>From [EMAIL PROTECTED] Thu Nov 19 04:14:44 1998
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Thu, 19 Nov 1998 06:13:41 EST
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Compassion to the animals!pet obedience
In a message dated 98-11-18 19:42:41 EST, Tasha writes:
<< Owning pets is a form of crueltly to animals for many reasons, mostly
>because they are _confined_ in unnatural habitats (and are made to walk
>outside only with leashes and to "obey their masters").
> >>
Hi!
I think the point Tasha were trying to make was about humans wanting to be
"masters." How having a pet and teaching it obedience makes us their master
- puts us in a position of supremacy (where we are happy?) - I feel that that
can be true in some pet ownership - some people want that power - and being a
master over another living thing gives them that sense of power and happiness.
It has been said that humans want everything to obey their laws _ the animals,
nature till humans become the masters - however, we will learn that in the
right the master becomes the servant -
peace!
Angela
>From [EMAIL PROTECTED] Thu Nov 19 04:15:21 1998
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Thu, 19 Nov 1998 06:15:11 EST
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Compassion to the animals!/$ business/sin
In a message dated 98-11-19 02:23:36 EST, Margueritte writes:
<< Pets are also a money business - for breeders, vets, pet food companies and
others. The lucky "pets" end up in good homes, the unlucky ones (and I would
say that the unlucky "pets" outweigh the lucky "pets"), end up mis-treated,
under-fed, abandoned (eventually) or sent for euthanasia (murder in my view).
"Pet" animals are really animals that are exploited by humans who wish to
"own"
an animal for whatever reason. The "pets" have to fit in with the owners or
else they die.
Marguerite
>>
Hi! This is true - It seems that everything is turning into a "money
business" including EDUCATION. My sister-in-law works in a college admissions
- she took a sales course? They treat the students like "customers?" It
seems like "anything or everything for money is the status quo" it should be
"anything and/or everything for LOVE! Love of fellowship, love of nature,
love of animals, love of self . . .
I know that Sarah mentioned "sin" in a past post - Sin is our moral directive
- without it - how would we decide what is good and what is bad - and for that
matter who would decide Sarah - you? Greed is a "sin" - a radical sin - makes
it bad, very bad - the world would be a better place without it!
Peace!
Angela
