How come animal rights activists only get mad when humans.....?

hunt or kill animals? Should they be against ALL carnivoris creatures?





PETA against lions, tigers, bears, snakes...etc....





Thank g-d for the food chain!

How come animal rights activists only get mad when humans.....?
We can't speak to the animals.
Reply:because we don't need to hunt.


animals do.


it's in their nature.








and dont say that it's in ours,beacuse it's been bred into our nature,we don't NEED to hunt to live.
Reply:It's a sad shame how unsophisticated our organizations are with in our meager earth.











I like my snake with salt, thank you! =)
Reply:NO because we kill animals and they have no chance and in nature its about the food chain, and humans can live without eating meat (ex: all the vegetarians in the world) so we are pointlessly slaughtering animals-how horrible is that!!!!
Reply:What would happen to all the animals if they were left to their own devices? If it is bred to eat, eat it.


I'm not a big fan of hunting game, we have enough choices in the butchers as it is.
Reply:Because humans have a choice. Carnivorous animals don't know any better, and in any case can't survive as vegetarians. Humans, on the other hand, can live perfectly well without killing or abusing animals (in fact, they're healthier for it).





Plus, for most humans, it is possible to explain how cruel and wrong it is to abuse animals, and how irrational it is to say it's wrong to hurt a puppy for fun, but ok to torture and kill a pig or chicken for sport or for the taste. So, animal rights activists target humans for their message, because they can understand the message and change their habits to more compassionate ones, just like abolitionists tried to convince people to give up slavery.





Also, it's worth noting that animals killed by carnivores are part of a natural cycle. If they stopped hunting prey, there may be negative environmental impacts with hurt the animals -- for example, the prey species might overpopulate and starve. Humans get their meat from farms that are not part of a natural cycle and have a devastating impact on the environment (#1 cause of water pollution, #1 consumption of water, among the biggest causes of global warming, biggest cause of deforestation and destruction of biodiversity, etc.) Human hunters are also not part of any natural cycle, but just add misery for no reason.





Note too that, in the case of animals raised on farms, modern industrialized farms abuse animals horribly their entire life -- keeping birds in cages so small they can never stretch a wing, manipulating animals to grow so fast they cripple under their own weight, drowning birds in tanks of scalding water, chopping off body parts (beaks, tails, genitals) with no anesthetic, beating pigs to death with gate rods, using electric prods to shock animals, keeping breeder animals in a state of constant near-starvation, and so on. In the wild, the animals eaten by carnivores at least get a life beforehand, so what humans do is far, far worse.





That said, in my opinion (but not that of all animal rights activists), ideally we'd find a solution that allows us to spare animals from carnivores too. But that will never happen until after we humans get our own act together.





By the way, there's no such thing as a food chain, it's a "food web," plus it's just a description of what we see and not a justification for anything. In any case, if we're to justify getting rid of the part of the "food chain" that eats us humans, as we have, then we can't be hypocrites and use it to justify our own savagery.





If you're interested in what the argument behind animal rights is, I recommend Animal Liberation, by Peter Singer. It's the fundamental book of the movement, and an easy read at that. It's what convinced me, so worth taking a look.