Quote:
Originally Posted by SunshineSlayer
Thanks for stating the obvious.  I think you missed my point entirely. |
If it was so obvious then perhaps you should have rethought that analogy. My point is that you were trying to make an analogy using the idea that a lion kills for food, not for looks. However, because lions don't actually have a choice in the matter, your analogy falls flat. Period. No analogy, no point - which was mine.
To Demure - In no way did I indicate anyone was approving of child labor exploitation. To infer so shows an extreme failure in general logic and understanding. Similarly, I never did suggest that buying real fur would save anything - please see the next response for a clear declaration of my point, something you failed to address. To your most recent comment regarding how the animals are brained, beaten, and otherwise put to death in fur farms, I ask that you admit that any site against such a thing would choose the worst of the worst, the cruelest of the cruel to make their point whereas you might have a hard time finding any sort of zealous website about the humane treatment of animals in some facilities. Also, please look into such things as pig farming, chicken farming, and calf-raising for the purposes of veal (yes, I know, you stated some animals are taken for meat, but you neglected to address the simple fact that they, too, can and often are treated horribly in the process). There's a reason why they're called "free-range" chickens, yeah? It's either naivety or oversight to compare the two without acknowledging such.
Finally, to Impact. No, that's entirely understandable. I do understand that certain of the things I mentioned have a large impact on global economy - but have you thought about how many people might make their livings off of fur trade? I do not have - and I assume neither do you - any hard census data indicating what sort of impact a complete banning of real-fur trade across the globe might have. Remember now, it's not just "real fur - oh baby!" - by oversimplifying the situation you are removing the hundreds of thousands of people that might be affected by it. (note: I am not necessarily suggesting that the real-fur trade has as significant an impact as oil on global whatnots, but it's not as if just a few rich people would be affected, either.)
Also, by pointing out that real fur, too, is possibly processed by this same labor, you get to the core of my point - there are more things in this world worse than killing an animal for its fur - yet people here are judging others because of their belief that there can be humane fur trading. (Here is the point I made, Demure) I think most of us would agree (or have) that the overly cruel or inhumane treatment of animals for any purpose is, well, just that - cruel and inhumane.
I'm just saying that there CAN be a middle ground - you don't need to be ZOMGNOFURZ4EVA or KILLDATANIMALZnTAKEITZFURZ, you can still think that wearing real fur is acceptable as long as it was obtained through humane means.