Shop More Submit  Join Login
×




Details

Submitted on
June 7, 2012
Image Size
12.8 KB
Resolution
118×70
Link
Thumb
Embed

Stats

Views
2,355 (3 today)
Favourites
246 (who?)
Comments
Disabled
Downloads
30
×
I Support Animal Rights by Galaxu I Support Animal Rights by Galaxu
:star: Re-uploading this ol' stamp. Please re-fave if you support animal rights. I lost all of the faves, darn! >_<

:iconreadplz:

STOP MISLEADING PEOPLE ABOUT THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN RIGHTS AND WELFARE!

This is a stamp for all people who support the right to live for animals! For all people who are against the horrible habit of treating animals like objects! For people who don't deny the fact that animals are living beings with their own value and nót products with a prize label. For all people who are one step ahead of other people!

:iconwingsplz::iconeeveeplz:

Animal rights means: Give every animal, human or not, the right to be free, without being property to someone else (so that also means that adopting pets would be like adopting orphans after a test or someone is suit to take care of them), the right to live and not be slaughtered simply for pleasure or luxury, not be dealt with like an object whose only value is the monetary gain a self-centered human will get from it.

Animal welfare means: only treating animals good when it's convenient for humanity. The animal-killing/mass-producing/treating animals like products itself will not dissapear with that.

:iconnaturedivider2plz::iconnaturedivider2plz::iconnaturedivider2plz::iconnaturedivider2plz::iconnaturedivider2plz::iconnaturedivider2plz::iconnaturedivider2plz::iconnaturedivider2plz::iconnaturedivider2plz::iconnaturedivider2plz:

Animal-cruelty supporters go around misguiding people about the difference between animal rights and animal welfare. They shove into peoples' throats that they have to support animal welfare instead of animal rights and lie to them that animal welfare means that animal-cruelty will stop and that the animals will get a good life.

Liars.

Animal welfare means that when people kill or abuse animals, they should do it "humane". And with "humane" they mean that the animals should get better food, clean space and maybe anesteshia before they are ripped open, poisoned, burned, skinned, being made blind, got their limbs cut off and are killed for human goals!

Yes, that's right. Animal welfare still means people can legally kill animals for their own selfish goals as long as they give them good food/space etc. Animal welfare means that the life of an animal is "less worth" than someone's fur coat or fur-collection. Animal welfare means that people can still treat animals like objects or mass-produce them like products for their own goals, completely ignoring what the animals themselves want to do with their lives, hopes and dreams. Animal welfare still means that animals should be killed in the name of money. Animal welfare means that female animals will still be tied up and forced into pregnancy to produce an unnatural amount of animals for human goals.

Animal welfare means that animals will still be treated like products with a prize

In other words: animal welfare does NOT look at the animals' feelings, but at the people's money/greed/vanity.

Animal welfare is only treating animals good when it's convenient for humanity
And that is the part the misguiding animal welfare supporters "accidently" leave out.
When it comes to the REAL protection of animals, animal RIGHTS comes in. Not welfare.

:iconnaturedivider2plz::iconnaturedivider2plz::iconnaturedivider2plz::iconnaturedivider2plz::iconnaturedivider2plz::iconnaturedivider2plz::iconnaturedivider2plz::iconnaturedivider2plz::iconnaturedivider2plz::iconnaturedivider2plz:

Same rights as human? That's NOT what Animal Rights is about.


It's about allowing animals to not be the property of humans, allowing them to decide what they want to do in their lives, them not being subject to torture and murder out of convenience or luxury.

But we, as humans, are out of balance. Because it's beneficial to us, we hide behind the "inferior" argument. We argue they are less intelligent. We argue they don't have "society" as we have. We argue they have no "culture". And that suddenly makes it "okay". Makes it "okay" that we cage thousands, no millions of animals into a space where an individual can hardly move. Makes it okay that we force pregnancy. Makes it okay that we practically rape them, mutilate their bodies, often without painkillers (not that it'd make much of a difference). Makes it somehow acceptable to take away their kids as soon as they're born, makes it "humane" to shove them, "guiding" them to the place where they'll be slaughtered. Makes it just a simple "nuisance" when they try to escape, makes us think: "Come on, just follow the orders, it'd be much simpler, you wouldn't feel anything…" We think we have a right to "domesticate" those animals, denying them their own, chosen lifestyle, maybe a partner, a few kids. We think they're "cute" when we force them into little sweaters and think they like it when we force them in front of crowds where we show off "our pets".

Wake up: We ARE already forcing them into a human mindset. Or none at all – we deny them every right. Only those who are "cute" or "useful" or "beautiful" deserve to be, but then, too, it can only be to our rules, playing OUR game. Just because they don't break free, doesn't mean they are happy. Every now and then it does happen – humans get killed – and we are all shocked and angered at those "monsters"… And yet we don't realise that WE are the true monsters who just fail to see how what we are doing affects millions of lives.

A few things for the end: Animal, for me, includes humans. I am as much against human exploitation as against the exploitation of other animals. Also, I realise that a perfect world will never exist. Murder happens, even though it's generally accepted to be a crime. But there can be a state in which there is a balance. And that is where I'm getting at.
There will always be a certain rivalry. We must protect ourselves, that's for sure. But we don't have to make them our slaves – it's disgusting, perverted and sick. Not to mention that to them, it's their everything that's lost. They never had it. Food is not everything. Many captured individuals in zoos go mad. Animals need freedom. Movement is one of their key needs, as is a life in their natural environment.

"Animal Welfare" is a fake word. It only makes ourselves feel better.

:no:

*Wasserbienchen


:iconnaturedivider2plz::iconnaturedivider2plz::iconnaturedivider2plz::iconnaturedivider2plz::iconnaturedivider2plz::iconnaturedivider2plz::iconnaturedivider2plz::iconnaturedivider2plz::iconnaturedivider2plz::iconnaturedivider2plz:

It's called animal rights instead of human rights for a reason.


Human rights =/= animal rights
Voting, going to school, driving a car etc. are HUMAN rights. Not animal rights. Of course no one wants animals to go to school or vote! Have you ever seen an animal rights supporter who said "I want animals to get married, go to school, drive a car and vote!!" ? No? There you have it. Animals aren't capable of doing things like that nor is it useful to them. Their lifestyles are different from ours and they speak in a very different type of language. Giving animals animal rights is not the same as giving them human rights. There's a difference.

Animal rights = protection against the hand of humanity; the rights to their own bodies.
Human rights = protection against the hand of fellow humans + carrying responsibility.

Being able to carry responsibility is no required component to deserve rights


Babies for example have rights, but no responsibilities. They don't have to. Same for animals. The only ones who should carry responsibility are adult humans (and teens sometimes). Animals and babies/children shouldn't, but that doesn't mean that they don't deserve any rights at all.
Stop pretending animals should play our game and understand our ways of life in order to deserve to be protected from our cruelty! Stop pretending that people killing animals is the same as animals hunting other animals, because every retard knows there is a huge difference, since first; we are extremely overpopulated [link], second; There is nothing natural about fur farms where animals are pushed inside tiny cages, only to be skinned and killed in the name of fashion. There is nothing natural about the mass-production of animals in a factory, stuffing them with countless amounts of antibiotics and growth hormones to make them so fat that they can't even stand on their legs anymore so you can get an unnatural overconsumption of steak. There's nothing natural about mass-hunting animals on an unnatural great scale with unnatural fireweapons and planes and consider them products that should be "managed" (which is very hypocritical because the most hypocritical species can be found in the mirror). There's nothing natural about locking millions of animals up in cages and inject deadly diseases in their body they normally wouldn't get and force them into other painful tests. And there is also nothing humane about everything I just wrote. If you want to ask yourself or something is humane, imagine putting your own species (like your family) into the animals' place and ask yourself or it would still be humane when the very same things were done to them as to the animals. If the answer is no, it's not humane. Not for people, not for animals. Just because animals are different from us doesn't mean that oppressing them instead of our own species is suddenly "humane". Humane slaughter doesn't exist. We only tell ourselves it does to make ourselves feel better. And third; our ways to treat animals cause global warming and other damage to the planet, unlike the ways of other animals. [link]

By giving animals rights, some luxury is taken away from us. But what is having to give up some luxury we can easily live without, compared to animals who lose their entire lives and existence for our luxury?

It are usually the selfish people among us who oppose the idea of animal rights. Whenever they hear the word, they go "What? But animal rights means that I can't wear fur anymore! And my fur coat is so much more important than the life, hopes and dreams of animals! I support animal welfare instead. Let those nasty animals die for me and my luxury I could easily live without! Let them all die for human goals to make life easier for humans!"
Pretty selfish indeed. People like that disgust me. They remind me of Nazis. And I hate people who think like Nazis... they only focus on what's convenient for themselves, no matter how many others have to suffer for it. They go around and spread bullshitty ignorant lies like that the economy and envoirment would be" fucked without modern hunting", denying the fact that there are enough alternatives to blood spilling. They try to convince people that without animal testing "we all will die" etc. while denying the fact that animal testing is the most misguiding type of testing ever and slows down the process of testing medicines. They compare factory farming, the worst thing you can do to the envoirment and animals, to animals hunting with their bare hands and claws in the wild, claiming it "natural" where we get our meat from. No. There is nothing natural about that. Nothing. And comparing factory farming to people who live like animals in small tribes and hunt with their bare hands and spears because there are no alternatives to food around is outright an insult to those tribes.

Pet abolishment is not an animal right
Pet abolishment is NOT an animal right! Because pet abolishment means that we have to kill all pets, so it can't possibly be considered an animal right, since it's in fact animal cruelty. Sure, bad pet owners who keep their bunny all alone in a small cage or horse owners who use their animals as cars to pull their stuff will have to change their ways... but technically pet abolishment is animal-cruelty and cannot be considered an animal right. A happy Chihuahua does not suffer. A happy bunny, running around in your garden also isn't.

I have seen some animal-activists who want all pets to go extinct by loosing them into the wild, claiming this as an "animal-right". Well then explain to me how releasing domestic animals into the wild where they're chanceless to survive and will most likely starve, be attacked by wild predators or die of diseases is in any way an animal right while it's the animal who has to suffer. I find the activists who support pet abolishment hypocrites who should really look up what "rights" actually means. Releasing a dog into the wild for example also means that the dog will die of a trauma because dogs are capable of missing their owner who raised them with love. If the dog won't cry because of this loss until he dies, he'd probably attacks a small human child passing by to survive, only to be killed by other people who don't understand him in the end. So how, fake animal-activists, is that an animal right? How?

I talked to some animal-welfare supporters before and all they could talk about was what's convenient for themselves. Not even once they considered the animals' feelings or what the animals would want.

Just because we can't avoid all animal-cruelty in the world, doesn't mean that we shouldn't even try at all.

I support animal rights.
People who consider those who are different from themselves to be of "lower value"... are the people Í shall look down upon.

:peace:

:star: [link] <--- More stamps you might like.

The Meaning of Animal Rights For MeMany have said that the term and idea of 'rights' should, and can only apply to humans as a species. Many claim that animals will 'never' be equal to humans no matter how much animal advocates try to bring about the change. A lot of people misunderstand the concept of animal rights and this is why many do not wish to support it. They believe that giving animals rights would allow them and force them into human rules and a human mindset, that is, giving non-human animals the right to vote, use public transport, use computers, purchase houses, and pay bills. Many also believe that animal rights would mean that carnivorous animals would not be a
The owner of this deviation has disabled comments.