You are apparently a supporter of factory farming, and I am an opponent. So criticizing me simply because my articles all support my view to me is unfair. I would expect you to use supporting evidence that supports your view, as well. I do not think balance is expected or desirable when one is involved in an argument with two completely distinct sides. What would the point be, Oral?
Where I do take exception is that you continually challenge the authenticity and accuracy of my source materials, and yet they are the same source materials, for example, that Martin Scully, Bush's speech writer, used when he wrote the anti-factory farming article for The American Conservative. I also use quite a few materials from agricultural universities and the Hog Board or whatever it is called, and a poultry industry publication. You can call my articles one-sided, but to dispute their accuracy I don't believe is fair or accurate.
I also think it is unfair to insist that all of my ideas are basically insanely LEFTIST and lack any basis in reality when you refuse to read the Scully article, which explains why factory farming is completely wrong and sinful from a conservative Christian perspective, and expresses all the thoughts I have about the subject very succinctly.
I have never said I presume to know everything. But there is a growing body of evidence that factory farming is not only completely immoral, but also a perversion in the largest sense of the spirt of man in relationship to animals, not to mention the fact that is spreads disease and pollutes the environment terribly. You can call that slanted if you want, but I am sure I will continue fo feel like talking about it here, because I think it is a very important issue. |
