I suppose are all too busy wondering how a Lancaster bomber, Spitfire and Hurricane had a clear 5 mile approach and still didn't manage to hit one of those Germans on that balcony.
Super wedding though, good luck to the newlyweds....
Speaking yet again about 1/4 of the worlds population?
Shouldn't we talk more about quality instead of playing the numbers game?
Besides, where do you think this list came from? Of course It'll be a bit biased. Just don't take it so hard...
Btw, better service might be a good place to start.
Burning Man in the 90's was great. As for Glastonbury, you've obviously never been there with that silly comment. Great MUSIC and people didn't care what they wore.
- Re assumptions, and Mabo's argument: I asked for a source only because I saw the particular assumption in question (i.e., the Canine Crusader in question could tell from his vantage point that some of the dogs were diseased) as lacking enough circumstantial support to be the crux of his argument. What is and isn't a "reasonable assumption" is of course always up for debate (even in places like the U.S. Supreme Court), but I'm pretty confident about the calls I've made above. As for the 200 dog lovers, I think you may have misread my comment: I argue (assume!) that they were /not/ there out of a concern for hotpot consumers eating diseased meat; thus, Mabo's argument is not a rebuttal to my condemnation of their actions.
- To your main point: I think I mentioned this, but let me reiterate... There's still no reason to believe that the Canine Crusader stopped the car in reaction to the mistreatment of the dogs while living as opposed to the fact that they would end up in hot-pot to be eaten. Which puts a big hole in your argument, since it centers around whether or not we should lend the fellow our moral support but offers a reason for that support only on grounds of the canines' living conditions.
Assuming that you won't buy that simple and reasonable argument, let's dig into your point about how animals are treated:
Obviously you believe that animal suffering should be opposed. Assuming that you also think human suffering should be opposed, this just becomes a question of balance. (To clarify this point, ask yourself this question: If there was an ambulance in that traffic jam with a patient in critical condition, and all parties knew it, would you still support this bloke's interception of the dog cart?) [I'm going to go ahead and ignore your comment about "alternative roads," because I assume you and other readers have been in some form of serious traffic jam, even if it wasn't in China, at some point in your/their life/lives.]
I myself do not support wanton cruelty toward animals, just as I do not support wanton cruelty of any kind. But I recognize that many of the meat-related benefits that people around the world take for granted - including affordable prices - are the result of a certain amount of cruelty toward animals. (Have you ever seen how chickens are farmed in the U.S.? It's stomach-turning.) And I accept this, because in my mind humans are on a whole different plane of importance when compared to animals. Poor living conditions for an animal prior to its planned execution is the price we pay many times over every day; I know this, I recognize this, and I accept this.
It seems that you disagree, and I respect that, but only to an extent - because after all, we use the word "evil" to describe those whose value systems oppose our own. If after considering all of the implications of the problem caused by this lone vigilante you still support his actions, then there's only so much understanding I can bring myself to feel for you and your point. Note, though, that if carried to its logical conclusion (let's conservatively put the loss-profit ratio at 16,000 people-hours per dog cart), your argument would lead to astronomically (sometimes unaffordably) high food prices, economic depression, official sanction of PETA's more 'explosive' actions, and a world of unending traffic jams. Etc.
This is all I will say on the subject, as in my mind, this is very much a case closed. Apologies the The Beijinger for the undue attention I've given this particular blog update.
It's interesting how you posted comments that are not necessarily factual (although I could be wrong and you did double check all your facts)but that someone rebutting you must have the source quoted?
How, you say, are your comments are assumptions and not factual? A few simple examples. To the hogs that you were following. How do you know those hogs are not hydrated? Did you follow them the entire way? Your challenge of the claim on the intentions of the 200 dog lovers? Did they have some ulterior motive? And what does that have to do with anything? I don't think that they are blocking the highway for fun.
And some of your arguments do not make sense. You mentioned that mabo had no way of knowing the intentions of the person stopping the truck any 500 dogs? Why bring that up? Furthermore, I think that 500 dogs is a lot of dogs on a truck, and if you are unable to see that they are mistreated, you should not be driving on the road. On the fact that the dogs are sick, Mabo may again be making assumptions there, but this is a forum, not a court of law. And the fact that dogs were dead is a very valid assumption.
But enough of that. Your challenge to mabo just reinforces my opinion of the kind of person that you are.
To your original comment on how disgusted you are that the truck was stopped, which caused a massive jam on an entire highway for a personal crusade, which annoyed you, since people were inconvenienced. Can I take it that your view is that animals are eaten anyway and that the eating of dogs is legal makes the ill treatment okay, this is how animals are transported in China, and people are inconvenienced for no good reason? I'm sorry, but just because something is eaten does not mean that it should have to suffer before it dies. Now, it may be the usual practice of transporting animals here in China, but I think that the fact that someone stood up and put a stop to it should be saluted rather than ridiculed by you. The fact that an immoral act is widely practiced in a country does not make it acceptable. And if some people are caught in a traffic jam to make a wrong right, then, well, all I can say is that when I drive on the road, I expect to be caught in a jam and will always look for alternative roads.
How does the legality of eating dogs make the treatment any more justified? Beef is also eaten. Are we justified in mistreating them before we slaughter them?
I am an animal lover, but I'm afraid that faced with this situation, I will also not have the moral courage to do what that blogger did.
In this regard, I am no better than you in that I will also most likely turn a blind eye to the mistreatment of animals as seen in the transport of livestock.
Umm, isn't this an eg of what's killing music? It's not about fashion. Just go, wear whatever, get drunk, dance about, spill beer on yourself, get muddy... and erm what else, oh yeah, appreciate the MUSIC.
It's not about making sure you look like a bohemian-hippy-indie chick/guy who is more connected to nature and the elements than Gandalf and lives and breathes music - when really Monday to Friday you're an uptight city slicker who freaks out when they have to sit on a bare patch of grass or when they don't have a pair of matching socks, and who thinks Rancid refers to gone off cheese.
They are desperate for Business in their Restaurant,otherwise none one will promote such disgusting overeating.
Pityful for a 5 star chain to downgrade them selves like that.
I don't get it. what is the point of these food contests? how can you promote food culture when you put together activities where the aim is to eat as fast and as much as possible? what respect for the people who suffer hunger? didn't you learn that one should not play with food?
promote quality, not quantity. educate and respect people.
this is culture for fat brainless people.
Absolutely you are not a fan of Man vs. Food. (http://www.travelchannel.com/TV_Shows/Man_V_Food) . Similar food challenges are happening globally, and there is always someone who loves the game and someone who loves knowing and watching it. Can you tell me why?
What!?!?? Of course people care! They OVER-CARE! kate bosworth and her stylist picked out her outfits for coachella, including her jewelry (in America she has a jewelry line out called JewelMint).
Also, nobody goes to Burning Man except drug addicts. And let's not bring up Kate Moss at Glastonbury.
This is a wonderfully written article by Ms. Wang. I'm looking forward to my first visit to these Spring festivals! As a man of simple tastes and pleasures :), I think I'll have no problem fitting in with this comfy style. Loafers, linen, and lemonade...my inspiration! Hope to see you there!
J Latty
NO NO NO NO NO!!! You've got it all wrong, the very last thing any self respecting festival goer worries about is fashion! Jeeeez. Sample a weekend at Glastonbury, Glade, Burning Man and Bena Kasim and then you might have an idea of what a festival is actually supposed to be about.... Jimi must be spinning in his grave.
Re: The Royal Wedding: Where Can You Watch It?
I suppose are all too busy wondering how a Lancaster bomber, Spitfire and Hurricane had a clear 5 mile approach and still didn't manage to hit one of those Germans on that balcony.
Super wedding though, good luck to the newlyweds....
Re: Full Guide To This Weekend’s Music Festivals
the camping site is outside the festival...
Re: Beijing Blogger Saves Dogs From Cooking Pot
Summary is: eating dogs is ok cause other animals are eaten too. Poor guy prbly never had a puppy growing up.
A: he has family members that eat dogs
or
B: he eats dogs himself
Re: Full Guide To This Weekend’s Music Festivals
What do you mean no camping?
At MIDI there is a camp site marked on the map (Right hand side labelled S). Has it been canceled?
Full page MIDI Map
Re: "World's Best Restaurants": No Beijing?
Speaking yet again about 1/4 of the worlds population?
Shouldn't we talk more about quality instead of playing the numbers game?
Besides, where do you think this list came from? Of course It'll be a bit biased. Just don't take it so hard...
Btw, better service might be a good place to start.
Re: Festival Fashion Tips: What (Not) to Wear to Midi, ...
sad.
Re: The Royal Wedding: Where Can You Watch It?
can we at least have some tasteless jokes about the royal wedding?
Re: The Royal Wedding: Where Can You Watch It?
Wish William and Kate happy forever!
Re: Festival Fashion Tips: What (Not) to Wear to Midi, ...
Burning Man in the 90's was great. As for Glastonbury, you've obviously never been there with that silly comment. Great MUSIC and people didn't care what they wore.
Re: Beijing Blogger Saves Dogs From Cooking Pot
summary please? I can't read so much text in one spot outside of a novel
Re: Festival Fashion Tips: What (Not) to Wear to Midi, ...
No Badr, it's not allowed at any of them... sadly...
Re: Moral Courage
- Re assumptions, and Mabo's argument: I asked for a source only because I saw the particular assumption in question (i.e., the Canine Crusader in question could tell from his vantage point that some of the dogs were diseased) as lacking enough circumstantial support to be the crux of his argument. What is and isn't a "reasonable assumption" is of course always up for debate (even in places like the U.S. Supreme Court), but I'm pretty confident about the calls I've made above. As for the 200 dog lovers, I think you may have misread my comment: I argue (assume!) that they were /not/ there out of a concern for hotpot consumers eating diseased meat; thus, Mabo's argument is not a rebuttal to my condemnation of their actions.
- To your main point: I think I mentioned this, but let me reiterate... There's still no reason to believe that the Canine Crusader stopped the car in reaction to the mistreatment of the dogs while living as opposed to the fact that they would end up in hot-pot to be eaten. Which puts a big hole in your argument, since it centers around whether or not we should lend the fellow our moral support but offers a reason for that support only on grounds of the canines' living conditions.
Assuming that you won't buy that simple and reasonable argument, let's dig into your point about how animals are treated:
Obviously you believe that animal suffering should be opposed. Assuming that you also think human suffering should be opposed, this just becomes a question of balance. (To clarify this point, ask yourself this question: If there was an ambulance in that traffic jam with a patient in critical condition, and all parties knew it, would you still support this bloke's interception of the dog cart?) [I'm going to go ahead and ignore your comment about "alternative roads," because I assume you and other readers have been in some form of serious traffic jam, even if it wasn't in China, at some point in your/their life/lives.]
I myself do not support wanton cruelty toward animals, just as I do not support wanton cruelty of any kind. But I recognize that many of the meat-related benefits that people around the world take for granted - including affordable prices - are the result of a certain amount of cruelty toward animals. (Have you ever seen how chickens are farmed in the U.S.? It's stomach-turning.) And I accept this, because in my mind humans are on a whole different plane of importance when compared to animals. Poor living conditions for an animal prior to its planned execution is the price we pay many times over every day; I know this, I recognize this, and I accept this.
It seems that you disagree, and I respect that, but only to an extent - because after all, we use the word "evil" to describe those whose value systems oppose our own. If after considering all of the implications of the problem caused by this lone vigilante you still support his actions, then there's only so much understanding I can bring myself to feel for you and your point. Note, though, that if carried to its logical conclusion (let's conservatively put the loss-profit ratio at 16,000 people-hours per dog cart), your argument would lead to astronomically (sometimes unaffordably) high food prices, economic depression, official sanction of PETA's more 'explosive' actions, and a world of unending traffic jams. Etc.
This is all I will say on the subject, as in my mind, this is very much a case closed. Apologies the The Beijinger for the undue attention I've given this particular blog update.
Moral courage
To: ethanjrt
It's interesting how you posted comments that are not necessarily factual (although I could be wrong and you did double check all your facts)but that someone rebutting you must have the source quoted?
How, you say, are your comments are assumptions and not factual? A few simple examples. To the hogs that you were following. How do you know those hogs are not hydrated? Did you follow them the entire way? Your challenge of the claim on the intentions of the 200 dog lovers? Did they have some ulterior motive? And what does that have to do with anything? I don't think that they are blocking the highway for fun.
And some of your arguments do not make sense. You mentioned that mabo had no way of knowing the intentions of the person stopping the truck any 500 dogs? Why bring that up? Furthermore, I think that 500 dogs is a lot of dogs on a truck, and if you are unable to see that they are mistreated, you should not be driving on the road. On the fact that the dogs are sick, Mabo may again be making assumptions there, but this is a forum, not a court of law. And the fact that dogs were dead is a very valid assumption.
But enough of that. Your challenge to mabo just reinforces my opinion of the kind of person that you are.
To your original comment on how disgusted you are that the truck was stopped, which caused a massive jam on an entire highway for a personal crusade, which annoyed you, since people were inconvenienced. Can I take it that your view is that animals are eaten anyway and that the eating of dogs is legal makes the ill treatment okay, this is how animals are transported in China, and people are inconvenienced for no good reason? I'm sorry, but just because something is eaten does not mean that it should have to suffer before it dies. Now, it may be the usual practice of transporting animals here in China, but I think that the fact that someone stood up and put a stop to it should be saluted rather than ridiculed by you. The fact that an immoral act is widely practiced in a country does not make it acceptable. And if some people are caught in a traffic jam to make a wrong right, then, well, all I can say is that when I drive on the road, I expect to be caught in a jam and will always look for alternative roads.
How does the legality of eating dogs make the treatment any more justified? Beef is also eaten. Are we justified in mistreating them before we slaughter them?
I am an animal lover, but I'm afraid that faced with this situation, I will also not have the moral courage to do what that blogger did.
In this regard, I am no better than you in that I will also most likely turn a blind eye to the mistreatment of animals as seen in the transport of livestock.
Re: Festival Fashion Tips: What (Not) to Wear to Midi, ...
Umm, isn't this an eg of what's killing music? It's not about fashion. Just go, wear whatever, get drunk, dance about, spill beer on yourself, get muddy... and erm what else, oh yeah, appreciate the MUSIC.
It's not about making sure you look like a bohemian-hippy-indie chick/guy who is more connected to nature and the elements than Gandalf and lives and breathes music - when really Monday to Friday you're an uptight city slicker who freaks out when they have to sit on a bare patch of grass or when they don't have a pair of matching socks, and who thinks Rancid refers to gone off cheese.
Re: Festival Fashion Tips: What (Not) to Wear to Midi, ...
go home Frau Wong...
Re: Eat For Free! Man vs. Food comes to Langham Place
Do you have any better idea for their business?
Re: Eat For Free! Man vs. Food comes to Langham Place
Absolutely you are not a fan of Man vs. Food. (http://www.travelchannel.com/TV_Shows/Man_V_Food) . Similar food challenges are happening globally, and there is always someone who loves the game and someone who loves knowing and watching it. Can you tell me why?
Re: Festival Fashion Tips: What (Not) to Wear to Midi, ...
What!?!?? Of course people care! They OVER-CARE! kate bosworth and her stylist picked out her outfits for coachella, including her jewelry (in America she has a jewelry line out called JewelMint).
Also, nobody goes to Burning Man except drug addicts. And let's not bring up Kate Moss at Glastonbury.
Re: Festival Fashion Tips: What (Not) to Wear to Midi, ...
This is a wonderfully written article by Ms. Wang. I'm looking forward to my first visit to these Spring festivals! As a man of simple tastes and pleasures :), I think I'll have no problem fitting in with this comfy style. Loafers, linen, and lemonade...my inspiration! Hope to see you there!
J Latty
Re: Festival Fashion Tips: What (Not) to Wear to Midi, ...
NO NO NO NO NO!!! You've got it all wrong, the very last thing any self respecting festival goer worries about is fashion! Jeeeez. Sample a weekend at Glastonbury, Glade, Burning Man and Bena Kasim and then you might have an idea of what a festival is actually supposed to be about.... Jimi must be spinning in his grave.