(04-26-2012, 01:29 AM)Diana Wrote: If anyone likes, they are welcome to react melodramatically to my analogy, which was a direct response to Monkey's statement.
It was just so obvious to me that Monkey's statement would not hold up if we plugged humans into the equation (if humans were the ones getting hurt).
I actually did not directly mean your particular children Monkey; I meant it as a hypothetical statement, such as saying it to anyone, whether or not they had children.
But if anyone likes, they may use my "indelicate" analogy as an excuse to hate the vegetarians.
That's precisely my point too. I too made some 'indelicate' analogies. But then, others have said far worse. But it's the vegetarians who catch all the flak for it. Our 'less than perfect' comments are used as an excuse to conveniently toss out the whole discussion.
Not surprising though, because the issue is important to the vegetarians, because we're the ones with convictions. We are disappointed because, to us, this is a very crucially important issue. There's a lot at stake.
Whereas, to those who don't think animals matter, it may just be an academic exercise, or it may even just about what's for dinner tonight.
May I suggest cutting Diana a little slack. She's done an exemplary job of avoiding any personal references. Like I said, we've all gotten a little heated and sometimes our choice of words isn't perfect. We all sometimes slip up. I understand what Diana was trying to say - which was that generic analogies weren't working, so the attempt was made to get the point across in a way that could be related to. I know everyone is well aware of how strongly I feel about using personal references. And yet, in this particular case, I truly don't think it would have mattered if the analogy had been generic, because I used a generic version of the exact same analogy, and the eruption was so loud it took weeks for the dust to settle.
We're all human. As I suggested on another thread recently, why not have some compassion for the other-self and set aside any less-than-perfect choice of words, in favor of actually trying to understand their point?