The interesting bit is that some supporters of BCR are responding to this by lashing out and even making personal attacks on those who express their disapproval of live food, which really doesn't make sense to me. Telling someone that they "suck" and to "stfu" just because they express a differing opinion isn't going to get you anywhere, other than to perhaps make the other person defensive and alienate them.
It's disgusting, really. And even though I support giving live food to cats that are being rehabilitated (note: to cats who are being rehabilitated, which are the only cats who are given live food at BCR), I found myself defending those who spoke up against it rather than those who agreed with me. I even had to point out to someone:
"*** was not slandering BCR. She was simply saying that she cannot approve of what is being done. Saying 'I cannot support BCR on this matter' is not slander. It is stating personal opinion."
What is the world coming to when someone politely stating an opinion that differs from yours is called slander?
I guess the whole point of this post is to say that I am disgusted by those who argue by lashing out at the other person rather than by calmly stating their reasoning for why they disagree. I feel like I have more in common with those who disagree with me but who are polite about it than those whose opinions I agree with but call those on the "other side" "idiots."
In conclusion, I would like to share a quote from Tamora Pierce's book Lady Knight:
"Threats are the last resort of a man with no vocabulary!"
Ok, so I think that "threats" could be exchanged for "personal verbal attacks" and "vocabulary" could be exchanged for "able to support and defend their position." But you get the picture, I think.
ps. I hope this post is coherent. It may be past my bedtime and it's my first day of spring break and I'm looking forward to spending eleven days with my friend and I'm looking forward to my grandma moving in with my family and and and...