Response to comments

Someone calling himself "Joey" recently left some comments on an old post that are worth sharing for the purpose of exposing their idiocy. Here is the fine little piece of wisdom left by Joey:

"Have you even read ANIMAL FARM? That Orwell qoute is totally out of context.
Ever hear of a 'confirmation bias'? Look it up and scratch your red neck cuz it applies to YOU!"

Let's dissect Joey's little attack. Yes, I have read Animal Farm. I am well aware, and most readers probably are as well, that the quote from the character Napoleon I use is not used in the context of the book. I use it on the header of the blog because, when placed into the context of animal rights and "speciesism", it becomes quite witty and amusing. If I had used this quote out of context in an attempt to support a specific argument, Joey would have a valid point. However, nowhere on this blog have I used this quote to support an argument. It is simply there to provide wit ( wit which apparently eludes Joey ) and to provoke thought.
As for "confirmation bias", the astute reader will notice that Joey gives no specific examples of said confirmation bias that he is accusing me of, making said accusation rather hollow. It is also quite amusing to me that someone who I assume is an AR supporter would accuse someone who doubts the validity of the AR ideology of confirmation bias. In fact, it is quite laughable. ARAs start from a predetermined position that their ideology is morally correct and righteous. They then use all kinds of fallacies and circular reasoning to try to "prove" the validity of that belief. One need only skim through any number of pro-AR blogs, websites, or FAQs to see this in action. For someone who supports AR to accuse someone who is skeptical about the rational validity of the AR ideology is the height of living in a glass house and throwing stones.
Joey's attack gets really funny at this point. He goes from trying to impress with a big term like "confirmation bias" to an utterly mindless ad hominem fallacy. Really, Joey, "red neck"? Is that all the better you can do? "Redneck" is so tired, so passe', so lame. If you're going to engage in this kind of idiotic name-calling, at least try to be funny, clever or witty. You have been none of the above. Thanks for playing, Joey. Anytime you want to embarrass yourself again, I'll be happy to post your comments for other readers to see.

I, "meddlesome" anti-animal rights blogger

One thing I'm finding out that is kinda cool, in its own way, about blogging on a controversial subject is looking at the amount of juvenile, idiotic hate that gets thrown your way. A reader, someone calling himself "johnny" recently left some comments for me that I thought I would share. In my experience, anger, vitriol, belligerence, and intolerance for others' ideas are often hallmarks of many ARAs, and Johnny is a textbook example. Let's have a look at a little of Johnny's idiocy.

"Hopefully Grizzly will suffer the same fate as that "Grizzly Man" ( see the movie ) and we can all breath a little easier."

" Yes I too call on someone ( or some animal ) out there please will you not rid us of this meddlesome Grizzly"?



I've actually got to thank Johnny for dubbing me with the term "meddlesome". I like it. Johnny's comments are indicative of a person who feels threatened by someone else's ideas, and by the fact that those ideas are being shared. When somebody calls you a term like "meddlesome", you know you are doing something to get under their skin. You know your ideas are really bothering someone when you get termed "meddlesome" and get a death wish in the same sentence! I thought animal rights was all about compassion, peace, love, and all that other feel-good hippie type stuff. Can't you just feel the love and compassion coming from Johnny? And such tolerance for free speech and the open exchange of ideas! Johnny, please feel free to take a break from PeTA2 anytime and come by and throw more hate speech at me. I will gladly post it for all to see.