Are the Gods Color-blind?

[Roy]

I’m almost speechless! Imagine that! :lol: :lol: :lol:

Tintin, it is no small wonder that you have completely disregarded and ignored the role of Indonesia in CITES or that it was among the first 27% of countries to become a CITES member. Nor is it any small wonder that you will not admit that if not for at least some of the efforts taken by Indonesia to preserve the tiger, rhino, orangutan species indigenous to Indonesia that the likelihood is those species would already be extinct. But you expect an apology from me? You’ve got to be kidding!

I admit, and already stated on this forum that Indonesia has a lot more work to do, but at the same time, let’s give some credit for the right steps it has already taken. I was simply adding balance to the argument, thus my prior comment:

“My only point here is that the initial post on this string obviously created a fury of emotions, which is understandable. Further progress in the public’s attitude about animals is certainly desirable and most worthy of continued efforts, but there have been improvements, and so I offer this as only another sign of movement in that direction.”

You further write,

“Finally, as for my consulting high priests who supposedly could explain their belief system, give me at least this credit, which is that most likely I have already done that during my many years in Bali.”

Why should I have given you this “credit” when you wrote on this string,

“...high priests (in any religion) have irrational beliefs, I am afraid it would be a total waste of my time of which I do not have much to spare.”

Give me a break! What is clear is clear, and that is that you flat out ridiculed the Balinese culture on this string, and you have done so in the past...period. Do you recall your equating Balinese temple ceremonies to “circus” which was your choice of words? If anyone has any apologies to offer here, in my mind that is you! But don't direct that apology to me, rather direct to any Balinese who may have been offended in reading your comments on this string.

Chili, you leave me gobsmacked! You write:

“From what I read in Tin Tins original post I felt an honest question from him, a question which to me made logical sense.”

Are you honestly saying that you don’t see the ridicule in his posts on this string? Are you seriously saying or implying that? Have you read this entire string, start to finish?

And please don’t criticize me for being insulting. Tintin is quite capable enough on his own for this sort of thing, or do you thing that being told that I view Bali through rose colored glasses is a compliment? Chili, I left my comment about Tintin being hopeless with a smiley. That is intended to eliminate any insulting aspects from the comment. What I may actually feel about his state is moot as my comment was clearly made with "tongue in cheek" and immediately following a friendly "jab" at BaliLife.

Good grief. I’m done with this string. It’s pointless.

 

[Roy]

BaliLife, what can I say? I don’t like this facet of animal sacrifice either. I’ve been to plenty of ceremonies where ducks have been offered up, but luckily at the few where dogs were to be sacrificed, I was forewarned and left before that happened. I won’t eat dog meat satay, nor will I eat turtle meat satay.

As I mentioned earlier on this string, this topic is clearly way, way too emotionally charged and that is because most of that emotion is coming from Western points of view of dogs as pets. That’s understandable, but it makes any possible sort of objective discussion impossible, so as I already mentioned, I’m finished with this topic because I won’t participate in it when the intentions are to ridicule or cast dispersions on the Balinese. I’ll “catch up” with you on another string, or perhaps at Nuri’s. Cheers!

 

[Jimbo]

As I read through this string the thing that I see the most is the differering points of view. Vive la difference as for me it gives insights to each individual character.

Not quite sure if I agree 100% with any of the posters but do agree with parts of all. This kind of debate is to me what makes this forum so great and long may it continue. I see strong opinion forcefully express but keeping within the bounds. So for me it is a pat on the back for all of you involved.

Now who wants to start on the next one

 

[tintin]

Roy,

A little earlier, you wrote:

Indonesia’s efforts to protect such endangered species as the Orangutan, White Rhino and Tiger have been remarkable and positive results measured by increased populations have already been noted.

I say that you are full of prunes. According to a reprint I just received from WWF and other news bulletins on this topic, there is NO such increase in any of the populations you mentioned.

So I challenge you to give us your source for making such a statement, or the obvious conclusion is that you are just bullsh*ting us.

 

[Roy]

OK, so here's some more bull*hit. Bon appetite:

http://www.cites.org/common/prog/ape/ID_mission06.pdf

Background:

At its 13th meeting (Bangkok, 2004), the Conference of the Parties to CITES adopted
Resolution Conf. 13.4 on Conservation of and trade in great apes. As part of the means
identified in the Resolution to improve the conservation of great apes, the CITES Standing Committee is directed to “consider other measures such as technical missions, organized in cooperation with GRASP (Great Ape Survival Project) and other appropriate partnerships, followed by political missions if necessary”. At its 53rd meeting (Geneva, June-July 2005), the Standing Committee instructed the Secretariat to liaise with the GRASP Secretariat with a view to conducting a technical mission to Southeast Asia regarding illicit trade in orang-utans.

The CITES Secretariat subsequently contacted the CITES Management Authorities of
Indonesia and Malaysia, as these countries are the orang-utan range States, and requested an invitation to conduct technical missions to both countries. Similar requests were made to Cambodia and Thailand, as these countries have been destinations for significant illegal trade in orang-utans. Indonesia, Malaysia and Thailand all indicated their willingness to receive technical missions. At the time of writing (May 2006), no response had been received from Cambodia.

Conduct of the mission:

The mission to Indonesia was conducted from 8 to 15 May 2006. The mission team was
composed of Ms Melanie Virtue, Team Leader, GRASP, UNEP and Mr John M. Sellar, Senior Officer, Anti-smuggling, Fraud and Organized Crime, CITES Secretariat.
This was the second occasion on which a CITES technical mission visited Indonesia. The first was in 1999, when the CITES Tiger Missions Technical Team visited the country (travelling to Jakarta and Way Kambas National Park in Sumatra). That team was led by Mr Sellar of the CITES Secretariat. Although the CITES Tiger Missions Technical Team considered illicit trade in other CITES Appendix-I species, the illicit trade in orang-utans was not noted to be a significant issue in 1999. The Tiger Missions Technical Team report can be viewed at: http://www.cites.org/eng/com/SC/42/42-10-4.pdf

Following a practice adopted for previous CITES technical enforcement-related missions, such as those conducted in relation to the illicit trade in caviar, ivory, the Tibetan antelope and the tiger, the CITES Secretariat wrote to the national CITES Management Authority of Indonesia identifying the aims of the mission, the type of activities the team would wish to undertake and the various organizations it would wish to consult. A draft programme was subsequently prepared and agreed with the mission team.

On its first day in the capital of Indonesia (Jakarta), the team met with and briefed the
Minister of Forestry on the purposes of the mission. It then participated in a seminar,
organized by the CITES Management Authority, to which almost 70 persons had been invited. Representatives of Customs, the Forest Department, the police, prosecution authorities, quarantine service, the wildlife trade association, media and non-governmental organizations were present. Presentations were made respectively by GRASP, the CITES Secretariat and the Forest Department on the aims of GRASP, illicit international trade in wildlife and national measures for the conservation of orang-utans.
Thereafter, the mission team travelled to Kalimantan and Sumatra, visiting orang-utan rescue and rehabilitation centres and meeting with government officials engaged in wildlife law enforcement and also NGOs that support such activities and general orang-utan conservation. The team also visited the airport and seaport of Medan in northern Sumatra. During the visit.

Indonesia acceded to the Convention on 28 December 1978 and it entered into force on
28 March 1979. It has notified the CITES Secretariat of one Management Authority, two
Scientific Authorities and 16 Enforcement Authorities. Orang-utans have been protected in the laws, ordinances or government regulations of Indonesia since 1925. They are one of 12 species that require, in addition to CITES provisions, the specific authority of the President of the Republic of Indonesia before any specimen may be exported from the country. Other examples of species that are allocated such special protection are the elephant, the Komodo dragon, rhinoceroses and the tiger. Indonesia’s national legislation for implementation of the Convention, the Regulations of the Government of the Republic of Indonesia Number 8 Year 1999 on the Utilization of Wild Plants and Animal Species, has been assessed as part of the CITES National Legislation Project and has been classified as being in Category 1, i.e. it is adequate for the implementation of CITES. Persons engaging in trade contrary to these regulations are liable to a maximum fine of IDR 100 million and/or the suspension or cancellation of their trade permit. Orang-utans are also protected under Article 21 of Act No. 5 Year 1990 concerning Conservation of Living Resources and Their Ecosystems. This makes such activities as the capture of, injury to, transporting, transferring or possession of orang-utans (whether live or dead) an offence. This is punishable by a maximum fine of IDR 100 million and imprisonment to a maximum of five years. At the time of the mission IDR 100 million was approximately equivalent to USD 10,200. In 2005, Presidential Instruction No. 5 was issued that requires government agencies with law enforcement responsibilities (a total of 18 altogether) to increase their efforts to combat illegal logging and also calls for increased effort to combat illegal trade in wildlife. Indonesia signed the Kinshasa Declaration, adopted by delegates to the Intergovernmental Meeting and first GRASP Council meeting that was held in Kinshasa, the Democratic Republic of the Congo, in September 2005. Indonesia was elected at that meeting to be a member of the GRASP Executive Committee. Signatories to the Kinshasa Declaration, among other commitments, resolve to improve “the protection of individual great apes and their habitats everywhere by demonstrably improving where necessary the quality and the enforcement of relevant laws, as well as the capacity of law enforcement agencies”.

You know Tintin, if I have to continue to provide you with an education, I think I should be able to charge for it. :lol: :lol: :lol: No worries though, as you won't have to put any money in my pocket, rather, I'll send you a list of my favorite NGO's. Cheers!

 

[Kadek]

I have been reading and thinking about this topic since yesterday. Has it offended me? To be honest, yes it has. Then I asked myself is it worth it to write something to express my view, perhaps as the token Balinese person on this Bali Expat Forum? Why should I bother when the people are not willing to hear a different viewpoint (as I had experience in some other threads in the past)? I love a good discussion and I have no problem with that, but often in this forum a discussion turns into slinging match of insults and personal attacks with endless array of mein is better than yours kind of things.

Welcome back and thank you Sergio for your postings and I agree with you, where should the line be drawn when it comes to animal cruelty? Don’t all living things on this planet have a right to live just by their own existent? No living thing needs our values to make them worth something!! But as human we only think something is of value once we assigned our anthropogenic values upon them. What makes us so important to have this right?

First of let me say that even as a Balinese who has been brought up in quite a religious manner and where my parents are temple priests, I find the animal sacrifices to be upsetting and unnecessary. I love my culture and many of its traditions, these are what make Bali and Balinese unique and different and for lack of a better word this is the soul of my people. Sometime I find it ironic that people could praise and then ridicule in one breath.

I also believe that with time all cultures change – some things survive change whilst other practices become irrelevant. In my upbringing and learning about my culture and tradition, I know that Balinese people and its custom and tradition have changed and still can and do allow changes!

Roy has suggested that if people are really interested in finding out more information, they should really seek to have a discussion with a high priest or some knowledgeable people.
perhaps in that quest find some things about Balinese tradition become clearer.

High Priests in Bali are not like the religious leaders of other religions (middle eastern originated religions), who direct and command and no questions can be asked (this is only my impression). Nor are they inflexible with their views. In Bali, high priests are open for discussion and can shed information that ordinary people like myself will not be able to provide. From my understanding, with all of the ceremonial requirements in Bali, many things are flexible and things can be substituted if they are not available or cannot be sourced. There are even substitutes for the most complex of ceremony like Ngaben (the cremation). If people really want it and can be comfortable with this choice, it is really not necessary to do all this big elaborate cremations costing millions upon millions that people cannot afford. A simple offering will do instead and it will release the soul of the dead to the after life in the same way as an elaborate cremation. So it is not a matter of what the high priests tell and command people to do, it is a matter of what the people want to perform and at what expense they are willing to make it as original to the old days and to their own satisfaction (perhaps driven also by norm). The role of the high priest is to give advice!

This is all I am going to say to this discussion.

But just for a thought (for me more than anything) but perhaps some other people can help to shed some lights on these issues.

Balilife brought up the topic about Buddhism as practised in Thailand. So I will asked you whether you think the commercial trapping of birds to be put in cages so that the people can purchase and then do their good act of the day to release these birds as is required a good thing? Are people who want to profit from certain religious activities (some not so pleasant), keep these activities alive?

Tintin as a scientist, I will ask this? Are the ten of thousands of animals caged, tortured and killed every year on the altar of scientific labs necessary? I thought by now we should have substitutes for these cruel practices.

As a global society driven by economic values and commercialisation, I will ask this. Are the killings of countless of animals for unnecessary products when substitutes are readily available, necessary?

Are the wasteful ways we generally live our life (especially in the developed and educated countries), where consuming and wasting are our daily rituals (supposedly to keep the economy growing), necessary?

Regards
Kadek

 

[mimpimanis]

For me this has been a hard topic to think about answering. My intial thought is no, sacrificing dogs is wrong. But when I first came to Indonesia, I was against all animal sacrifice and refused to have a chicken sacrificed when we started work on our well. I was told the sacrifice was to ensure that we always had water even in the dry season. Well anyone who knows us will know that water is one of our biggest problems and hurdles that we address at Mimpi Manis. Was this because we didnt sacrifice the chicken? I dont honestly beleive so, (as the whole village has a problem) but some people do.

As time went on I accepted animal sacrifice, as the animal was then to be eaten. Who am I to say it is wrong, when I happily eat meat every day. And a village chicken, with his throat cut in a ceremony has probably lived a better life than the battery hens, whose meat I usually buy.

When it comes to dogs though, I think it is because I can not conceive of eating dog. So it doesn't sit right with me. And when I try to rationalise it, as it sounds from what Roy says that the dogs are also eaten.... well then maybe if the dogs were especially bred & sold for meat, then it would be different. But from all I have read and heard about this it seems that pet dogs are at risk of being stolen and sacrificed. If that is the case, how is stealing your sacrifice for God acceptable?

 

[Roy]

Not ignoring these two last posts by Kadek and Mimpi, I only have a follow up for Tintin regarding the WWF.

While I have nothing that bad to say about the WWF, let’s be honest and recognize the WWF for what it is...an NGO...a non governmental and private organization. It is an independent conservation organization, much like Greenpeace. It is also a very effective lobbying group in Washington. Unlike CITES, the WWF has conflict of interest issues, and much of what they publish should be more closely inspected. WWF has been accused by a number of environmental groups and campaigners, such as Corporate Watch and PR Watch of being too close to businesses to “campaign” objectively. Any scientist who is relying on WWF statistics is NOT practicing science. A case in point is this blurb published by them:

“Unsustainable and illegal wildlife trade: Wildlife over-exploitation is severe in Indonesia, where human resources and funding are inadequate to monitor the wildlife trade and enforce existing protection laws.3”

The footnote to substantiate that claim is this, and it hardly supports the conclusion, as it is based on only one study made in North Sulaewesi:

“3 Gorog, Dwiyahreni, Siwu, Riley, Alexander, Paoli, Ramono, Lee. 2005. Wildlife trade and implications for law enforcement in Indonesia: a case study from North Sulawesi. Biological Conservation [Biol. Conserv.]. Vol. 123, no. 4, pp. 477-488.

I only offered my counter points on this string to reflect a true and objective reality that Indonesia is in fact doing something about animal protection and “rights.” Unlike you Tintin, I have supported my claims with documented evidence which is only presented as proof that Indonesia is doing something along these lines. In other words, it is NOT my opinion that I express, rather, it is FACT.

But as for me personally, I’ll gladly leave it up to the readers of this forum to separate the chaff from the wheat.

 

[Roy]

Kadek and Mimpi, your posts are most thoughtfully penned in my humble opinion. Had this discussion been initiated in an objective manner, then much of the needless anger and insults could have been avoided.

Kadek, you have voiced an insight that I hear more and more frequently among Balinese:

“First of let me say that even as a Balinese who has been brought up in quite a religious manner and where my parents are temple priests, I find the animal sacrifices to be upsetting and unnecessary.”

I’ve never revealed this before, but when our Kintamani puppy died after being bitten by a green viper, Eri cried. Sure, I cried, (expected enough) and our three boys really cried (very expected), but Eri...a Balinese, crying over the death of a dog? This caught me totally off guard as it was completely unexpected. It is just one thing, of many things, that I add up to what I really believe is a change in the Balinese approach to animals, and in particular, those animals that are most often taken as pets.

As you point out, cultures do change. As I have pointed out, let those changes come from within the culture.

Matur suksma! And, how about a report of what you and Thorsten have been doing in Germany?

 

[Roy]

And as one final point, I direct this to Tintin.

Without any interest in continued argument with you, I only ask you to direct your attention to what Kadek wrote:

“I have been reading and thinking about this topic since yesterday. Has it offended me? To be honest, yes it has.”

I’m very confident that if Kadek was “drilled” by questions, she would readily admit that to acknowledge what she publicly stated is very rare amongst Balinese, and likely only to be found among those Balinese who are most highly educated and exposed to other cultures. In short, your “average” and by that I only mean typically encountered Balinese in Bali would never acknowledge that. That she did is evidentiary of her education, accumulated knowledge, and most importantly, (as I see it) her commitment to express her views in amongst a venue that is western dominated. For the majority of the Balinese, it would simply be impolite to engage with such truthfully spoken words unless absolutely necessary. What I am really saying is that took a great amount of courage!

My wife Eri read this string, and she just shrugged her shoulders. She then admonished me for wasting my time here, and went back down stairs...all the while muttering something I couldn’t make out. I kid you not. Several folks on this forum have met my wife, and they all know her for being a non sufferer of fools. Eri would never show the patience that Kadek has, over and over again. So I wonder, and I hope others wonder too, that if we want more Balinese insight on this forum, should we not expect some simple politeness and respect towards them?

My only reason for posting here again is to make a request. That request is to Tintin, who while very often citing his prior experiences here in Bali, has yet to demonstrate, (IMHO), any understanding of the Balinese as human beings. Nor has he ever shown an inkling of understanding of Balinese culture aside from what can be garnished from books, or web sites.

IMHO, if this forum is to have credibility, then its posts should be credible. If not that, then is too much to ask that this forum does not allow ridicule of our hosts, wives, mothers in laws, sisters in law, cousins and friends?

 

[Roy]

"But to me, any religion, including the Agama Hindu Bali, is a circus. Since religion in Bali is so integrated in the daily lives of the society, how can I truly, sincerely integrate this society? It is a fact that I can only be a non-participant spectator." 11, 03, 07

Sorry Tintin, but you did get one thing totally right in that quote from only a year ago, that being, that you are only a “non-participant spectator.”

You might consider making that point more clear, from time to time, lest others who read your posts think otherwise.

 

[tintin]

Roy,

You don't have to provide me with an education, I can Google as well as you do.

1) You will notice that I have NEVER mentioned, much less denied Indonesia's participation in CITES, and I know that there are many dedicated Indonesian scientists and staffs trying to reverse, or at least contain the destruction of Indonesia's fauna and flora. So, on that point, you are beating a dead horse, and Eri is right: you are wasting your time.

2) I have personally observed on the ground, on several occasions, the destruction of the forests in Tanjung Putting and Way Kambas. This destruction was already going on when I first went to Camp Leakey, in 1992, and it is still going on, as it is in Way Kambas, as I write, except on a grander scale, right under the nose of the Indonesian Government. And if you had bothered to read the CITES report that you quoted, you would have seen that it is exactly what I am saying about the realities on the ground.

3) Since I know that you know how to read, I conclude you use an old debater trick which consist in switching the subject of a discussion when one cannot sustain a particular point, by introducing irrelevant subject (in this case your introducing CITES).

I only challenged you and I challenge you again to back up your statement

Indonesia’s efforts to protect such endangered species as the Orangutan, White Rhino and Tiger have been remarkable and positive results measured by increased populations have already been noted (my emphasis).

But you wont because you cannot: you wont admit it was just wishful thinking on your part. As a matter of fact, the CITES report, which you keep referring to, does not in any shape or form mentions any improvement in the situation.

4) Although you claim to be an Obama supporter, you sound more to me as a member of the Bush administration. When you don't like the message, backed up by sound scientific data, you trash the messenger, in occurrence the WWF report on the faster decline than expected of the orangutan population. This is what the Bush's administration is (in)famous for doing with the many US Government studies that did not conformed to the Administration's philosophy (like reports by its own agencies on climate changes). Where would Indonesia's conservation effort be without NGOs, like WWF, to name only one?

5) Finally to answer your last question in your last post.

But to me, any religion, including the Agama Hindu Bali, is a circus. Since religion in Bali is so integrated in the daily lives of the society, how can I truly, sincerely integrate this society? It is a fact that I can only be a non-participant spectator.

"

Anybody with an IQ higher than his or her body temperature would understand what I meant. But I guess I must "make you a drawing" so you will understand the obvious. Since 1) Religion is an integral and indivisible part of the Balinese society; 2) I do not believe in religions; and 3) I could probably fool people, but I cannot fool myself, ergo, I cannot become an integral part of the Balinese society. I don't know how I can explain it more plainly. :lol:

 

[tintin]

Mimpimanis

For me this has been a hard topic to think about answering. My intial thought is no, sacrificing dogs is wrong. But when I first came to Indonesia, I was against all animal sacrifice and refused to have a chicken sacrificed when we started work on our well. I was told the sacrifice was to ensure that we always had water even in the dry season. Well anyone who knows us will know that water is one of our biggest problems and hurdles that we address at Mimpi Manis. Was this because we didnt sacrifice the chicken? I dont honestly beleive so, (as the whole village has a problem) but some people do.

Now that is, in my opinion, a beautiful testimony, a tribute to rationality., what I call THINKING with one's head.

If that is the case, how is stealing your sacrifice for God acceptable?

In the village of Nyuh Kuning, near Ubud, where I had a residence for twelve years, one of my friends leaving there recently complained that many dogs are disappearing from the village. She writes that in Nyuh Kuning "…all the children are frantic because their dogs are disappearing." And later on, "… Little Uki, whose beloved dog Kapu was recently stolen is frantic that her dog Pudgie will be next." Hey, Mimpimanis, you think too much: the Gods accept any "donation." :lol: :lol:

 

[tintin]

Hi Kadek,

Tintin as a scientist, I will ask this? Are the ten of thousands of animals caged, tortured and killed every year on the altar of scientific labs necessary? I thought by now we should have substitutes for these cruel practices.

Yes, this is for me a great moral dilemma that I have not resolved yet and probably never will. Regrettably, the reality is worse, and you are off the mark in your quantitative evaluation of the problem: the numbers of animals, and I am talking only of vertebrates, being "killed every year on the altar of scientific labs" is more in the tens of millions, There are some clear cut cases, such as the countless rabbits that are tortured in testing cosmetics, which by all accounts is totally unnecessary. There is also useless animal testing going on in pharmaceutical companies, where alternatives are already available, but the "regulations" do not allow it. And the list goes on.

Hopefully, this is situation will partly be solved in the near future with the advent of a switch in treating diseases at the microscopic iso at the macroscopic level, due to the extraordinary progress made in the field of DNA research.

Here is a brief recounting of a personal experience of this dilemma I went through in 1978. Through some lucky circumstances, I had come across the opportunity to apply one of my gamma-ray instrumentation designed for a space experiment on gamma ray burst toward the enhancement in the sensitivity and resolution of instrumentation used for heart imaging. This was done in collaboration with MGH (Massachusetts General Hospital, in Boston). It was a fascinating experience and soon it developed in the opportunity to become employed by MGH, in its physics and nuclear medicine departments. I became more involved with their research teams in the cardiology department, while the "paper work" for my employment was proceeding. Up to that point, I had been using dead rabbits provided to me by the doctors. Then one day, I came to an actual live experiment where a totally health dog was going to have a heart attack induced by a physician, after which my prototype would be used in imaging the damages. Subsequently, the dog would not be resuscitated (too expensive and time consuming, I was told). I was in the lab for the test and almost threw up. As I left the lab, every inch of my body ached. Useless to say that I never joined the MGH team...

 

[Roy]

You know Tintin, if I could get away with calling you a pompous ass without Bert getting pissed off, I would...but I can’t, so I won’t.

 

[tintin]

Hey Roy, I've wouldn't have expected less from you: when you have run out of arguments, just use insults... That's pretty typical, as a pompous ass would say, it's your modus operandi. :lol:

 

[Roy]

If you want me to bury this forum with CITES published documents that at least prove Indonesia is doing something about animal rights, I will do so, but I don’t think it’s necessary to take up all that space...do you?

Not surprising that in your reply to Kadek, who clearly indicated that she felt insulted by this string, that you didn’t even suggest an apology. No, she didn’t mention you specifically, nor would she. But it’s crystal clear where the ridicule (and insult) came from, isn’t it?

IMHO, your post reply to her was condescending.

For a guy who purports to have a vast knowledge and living experience here in Bali, you constantly prove, to me anyway, that you have very little, if any, understanding of the Balinese psyche or persona. If you do have such knowledge, then you surely lack respect for the Balinese.

Talking down to the Balinese, or patronizing them, is something from the old colonial days that I had hoped was long, long gone. Clearly, I am mistaken in that belief.

 

[chilli]

Hello Roy,

I wouldnt like you to think i am ignoring you by not replying.

I will take Eri's advise and stay out of it.

 

[Roy]

I will take Eri's advise and stay out of it.

Eri is a very wise lady, as some members of this forum can attest. Taking her advise is a real “Martha Stewart” good thing.

She puts up with me because she understands testosterone. After all, her favorite food is rooster balls ala bumbu. :shock:

 

[Jimbo]

Tintin

Right after I made the post congratulating all on a topic well discussed you have to spoil it all by making personal remarks. There is nothing wrong with proving someones point of view is incorrect but there is if you go about it by insults. Your choice, but your point of view is less likely to be accepted if you go about it like that.

Kadek

It is a pleasure to read your post and take on this subject of animal sacrifice. Logic (or my western values) says it is wrong but who am I to apply either to a culture that is as old as this one.

In my wifes culture there are also animal sacrifices made..not to a God or Gods per se but out of respect for those who have died. For some it would be barbaric to see but then they like others on this topic do not always understand the reasoning behind it.

I have always said that for me I wish the emotions shown on behalf of animals to be shown or behalf of humans....unfortunately they are not.