Pieta House reject fundraising money from hunt

Discodog

Deleted User wrote: »

I am not excluding emotional abuse as a form of abuse.

I am excluding watching legitimate and legal sports such as fishing or hunting as being abuse, emotional or otherwise.

Look, I'll agree with Tusla's definitons and you can make up your own version of abuse and we can agree to differ...

http://www.tusla.ie/services/child-protection-welfare/definitions-of-child-abuse

This part is interesting:

Evidence of the links between child abuse, animal abuse and domestic
violence is drawn mainly from studies in the USA that relate to cases of
serious abuse. There is a growing research base in the United Kingdom.
Key findings include:
• If a child is cruel to animals, this may be an indicator that serious
neglect and abuse have been inflicted on the child.
• Where serious animal abuse has occurred in a household, there
may be an increased likelihood that some other form of family
violence is also occurring and that any children present may also
be at increased risk of abuse.
• Acts of animal abuse may in some circumstances be used to
coerce, control and intimidate women and children to remain in, or
be silent about, their abusive situation. The threat or actual abuse of
a pet can prevent women leaving situations of domestic violence.
• Sustained childhood cruelty to animals has been linked to an
increased likelihood of violent offending behaviour against
humans in adulthood. However, this does not imply that children
who are cruel to animals necessarily go on to be violent adults
and adults who harm animals are not necessarily also violent to
their partners and/or children.

lazybones32

Discodog wrote: »

You were so keen to criticise me that you missed the edit. :pac:

Don't want to be the type to bring things up 8 pages later b ut a few points need correcting.
I'd posted before you: I posted at 13:21, you edited at 13:27. How could I have missed the edit if I had posted before you?

Discodog wrote: »

Now you are being lazy. You rolled out the old townie stereotype & now it's the vegetarian one. If we let a pack of dogs tear the turkeys to pieces, for recreational pleasure, no one would eat turkey.

As for scientific research, just google surplus killing. It's instinctive. When a fox gets into a chicken coop it is faced with an unnatural situation, if it kills one chicken, the others can't escape where as in the wild, if the fox killed a pheasant, the others would fly off. This situation enables the fox to kill more than it needs and at first glance, the fox has killed all yet only takes one away. However left undisturbed the fox will return for all the birds to cache them for a day when food could be in short supply. A successful predator will always take advantage of a food supply even when it is not hungry. A well fed cat will still stalk and kill birds.

For the fox in the chicken coop, it is no different to us in the supermarket. We purchase a weeks shopping that we could never eat all in one sitting, so we store it in our cupboards, fridge and freezer. The fox will bury each carcass and return to this larder when next hungry.

You never see this because you intervene & the fox knows that there is danger nearby. I have fed foxes more than they can eat. They will take away & hide, what they can carry & then return for the rest. Plenty of people have filmed them doing this.

More rubbish....you accused people of applying anthropomorphism earlier in a post and now you do it to explain why the fox does what it does and even then, you still don't answer the Q that was put to you: I asked why the fox would bite the heads off chickens and not take any carcass? To apply the analogy you used (from whatever website or documentary you took it from), us humans would buy a week's supply of food, tear it open in the car park, spill it out and trample it without consuming any of it. That's what the fox is doing when it kills hens without taking any of them as food. And then you acknowledge that predators will kill prey (cats v birds) even when they don't need it...you were kind of arguing that foxes don't do that and don't need to. I know I'm hungover but you are contradicting yourself at every possible chance.

Discodog wrote: »

You never see this because you intervene & the fox knows that there is danger nearby. I have fed foxes more than they can eat. They will take away & hide, what they can carry & then return for the rest. Plenty of people have filmed them doing this.

No. I've never disturbed a fox approaching a hutch...only cleaned up the aftermath. All heads and bodies were accounted for: heads detached from bodies though. I've never seen a fox take a lamb - it has happened - but I have seen dead lambs with puncture marks on the neck. No flesh removed from the animal, only the blood drained.

By all means, watch your documentaries that show foxes living a balanced lifestyle where they don't consume more than they need or live in harmony with whatever...our realities are different.

Water John

Puncture neck wounds, would indicate mink. Never heard of it in relation to a fox.

jackboy

Discodog wrote: »

This part is interesting:

Evidence of the links between child abuse, animal abuse and domestic
violence is drawn mainly from studies in the USA that relate to cases of
serious abuse. There is a growing research base in the United Kingdom.
Key findings include:
• If a child is cruel to animals, this may be an indicator that serious
neglect and abuse have been inflicted on the child.
• Where serious animal abuse has occurred in a household, there
may be an increased likelihood that some other form of family
violence is also occurring and that any children present may also
be at increased risk of abuse.
• Acts of animal abuse may in some circumstances be used to
coerce, control and intimidate women and children to remain in, or
be silent about, their abusive situation. The threat or actual abuse of
a pet can prevent women leaving situations of domestic violence.
• Sustained childhood cruelty to animals has been linked to an
increased likelihood of violent offending behaviour against
humans in adulthood. However, this does not imply that children
who are cruel to animals necessarily go on to be violent adults
and adults who harm animals are not necessarily also violent to
their partners and/or children.

Interesting. Nothing to do with hunting though. Another spurious argument.

Discodog

lazybones32 wrote: »

Don't want to be the type to bring things up 8 pages later b ut a few points need correcting.
I'd posted before you: I posted at 13:21, you edited at 13:27. How could I have missed the edit if I had posted before you?



More rubbish....you accused people of applying anthropomorphism earlier in a post and now you do it to explain why the fox does what it does and even then, you still don't answer the Q that was put to you: I asked why the fox would bite the heads off chickens and not take any carcass? To apply the analogy you used (from whatever website or documentary you took it from), us humans would buy a week's supply of food, tear it open in the car park, spill it out and trample it without consuming any of it. That's what the fox is doing when it kills hens without taking any of them as food. And then you acknowledge that predators will kill prey (cats v birds) even when they don't need it...you were kind of arguing that foxes don't do that and don't need to. I know I'm hungover but you are contradicting yourself at every possible chance.

No. I've never disturbed a fox approaching a hutch...only cleaned up the aftermath. All heads and bodies were accounted for: heads detached from bodies though. I've never seen a fox take a lamb - it has happened - but I have seen dead lambs with puncture marks on the neck. No flesh removed from the animal, only the blood drained.

By all means, watch your documentaries that show foxes living a balanced lifestyle where they don't consume more than they need or live in harmony with whatever...our realities are different.

I did explain that. The first priority of a predator is to secure food. So by killing all the hens the fox is ensuring that none escape. The fox will return for the carcasses if there is no disturbance. It is likely that the commotion of the kill caused the fox to leave & hide nearby. Cats do it because, like the fox, they are pre programmed to hunt. There is no contradiction.

You have never seen the fox taking a lamb but you claim that they drink blood. The puncture marks could just as easily have been from dogs.

Again you make assumptions. I have lived in the countryside virtually all of my life. My family farmed including sheep & poultry. I also spent many years rescuing wildlife including a lot of foxes. So I am speaking from experience & reality.

By the way, in your rush to condemn the fox, you forget rats form a big part of their diet. My vixen waits behind a wall when my neighbour feeds her horses. She knows that rats will come after the feed. If she's really quick she will kill two & yes she always comes back for the second one.

lazybones32

Have seen the damage caused by mink, it was not mink.

CaptainInsano

lazybones32 wrote: »

Have seen the damage caused by mink, it was not mink.

What's your point anyway? That due to an animal's behaviour it deserves to be tortured by humans?

One_Of_Shanks

Fair play to them for refusing that donation. Went way up in my estimations. Good on them.

lazybones32

CaptainInsano wrote: »

What's your point anyway? That due to an animal's behaviour it deserves to be tortured by humans?

Go back and read my posts because I've written it already.

gctest50

Discodog wrote: »

..............

As for scientific research, just google surplus killing. It's instinctive.

Discodog wrote: »

It's instinctive.

So, because it's instinctive we should embrace it and welcome it and prance around the field ?

They don't behave as you'd expect, here's one who ran out out luck after killing about 100 chickens :

It starts trying to eat the head of the deer

WARNING : Fox getting shot at close range , NSFW etc

Discodog wrote: »

I have fed foxes more than they can eat.

You shouldn't feed wild animals

CaptainInsano

lazybones32 wrote: »

Go back and read my posts because I've written it already.

You're basically saying you don't agree with the hunt but foxes are no angels. So you can empathise with people who wish to punish foxes in this manner?

lazybones32

Discodog wrote: »

I did explain that. The first priority of a predator is to secure food. So by killing all the hens the fox is ensuring that none escape. The fox will return for the carcasses if there is no disturbance. It is likely that the commotion of the kill caused the fox to leave & hide nearby. Cats do it because, like the fox, they are pre programmed to hunt. There is no contradiction.

You have never seen the fox taking a lamb but you claim that they drink blood. The puncture marks could just as easily have been from dogs.

Again you make assumptions. I have lived in the countryside virtually all of my life. My family farmed including sheep & poultry. I also spent many years rescuing wildlife including a lot of foxes. So I am speaking from experience & reality.

By the way, in your rush to condemn the fox, you forget rats form a big part of their diet. My vixen waits behind a wall when my neighbour feeds her horses. She knows that rats will come after the feed. If she's really quick she will kill two & yes she always comes back for the second one.

Aw jeez....do I dare start in correcting you? If I do, I'll only get stuck with you...
One question though: if your family have indeed farmed with sheep and poultry, have you never, ever suffered a loss on account of a fox?

Discodog

jackboy wrote: »

Interesting. Nothing to do with hunting though. Another spurious argument.

Is it ? Cutting off a fox's tail & wiping the blood on a child's face. Telling children that it's perfectly acceptable to chase an animal until it's exhausted. Allowing children to be part of an act of cruelty.

Discodog

gctest50 wrote: »

So, because it's instinctive we should embrace it and welcome it and prance around the field ?

They don't behave as you'd expect, here's one who ran out out luck after killing about 100 chickens :

It starts trying to eat the head of the deer
You shouldn't feed wild animals

Hunters feed them in order to attract & shoot them. Hunters feel Magpies in Larsen traps in order for them to lure in Magpies to shoot. Some hunters even put down meat & sit in a tree waiting for their prey.

You need to start knocking on doors - your neighbours might be feeding the birds :pac:

Discodog

lazybones32 wrote: »

Aw jeez....do I dare start in correcting you? If I do, I'll only get stuck with you...
One question though: if your family have indeed farmed with sheep and poultry, have you never, ever suffered a loss on account of a fox?

Trust me there is no chance of you being stuck with me. You just don't like debate. You want to be the expert farmer telling all the clowns & townies how wrong they are.

Yes I have personally lost hens to a fox & it was my fault. I made a better hen house & never lost another. In any event I would never blame the fox for being a fox.

Killing the fox is a very short term solution. Another fox will soon move into the vacant area.

One_Of_Shanks

Discodog wrote: »

Trust me there is no chance of you being stuck with me. You just don't like debate. You want to be the expert farmer telling all the clowns & townies how wrong they are.

Yes I have personally lost hens to a fox & it was my fault. I made a better hen house & never lost another. In any event I would never blame the fox for being a fox.

Killing the fox is a very short term solution. Another fox will soon move into the vacant area.

good post.

jackboy

Discodog wrote: »

Is it ? Cutting off a fox's tail & wiping the blood on a child's face. Telling children that it's perfectly acceptable to chase an animal until it's exhausted. Allowing children to be part of an act of cruelty.

I know many children (now adults) that were raised by hunters. I know none who had blood wiped on their face and none who turned into abusive psychopaths.

TheRiverman

I am not a member of a hunt club nor do I ride horses,but I do go to hunts due to my association with a club over a number of years.In all my time following the hunts I have never seen a fox killed and in fact very rarely have seen a fox.There are many many more foxes shot by farmers protecting lambs, people with poultry in rural areas and by people in gun clubs than there are killed by hounds on hunts.I have also seen people out a night in cars/jeeps shining big lights into fields in order to dazzles foxes and then shoot them.Those people to best of my knowledge have no association with any hunt club.
I think many people including those in charities need to be educated about hunts and how they operate.

gctest50

Discodog wrote: »

Hunters feed them in order to attract & shoot them.
..............

:pac:

That's a little different, as you say in your own post there, they are feeding them to attract and shoot them

darkpagandeath

Discodog wrote: »

This part is interesting:

Evidence of the links between child abuse, animal abuse and domestic
violence is drawn mainly from studies in the USA that relate to cases of
serious abuse. There is a growing research base in the United Kingdom.
Key findings include:
• If a child is cruel to animals, this may be an indicator that serious
neglect and abuse have been inflicted on the child.
• Where serious animal abuse has occurred in a household, there
may be an increased likelihood that some other form of family
violence is also occurring and that any children present may also
be at increased risk of abuse.
• Acts of animal abuse may in some circumstances be used to
coerce, control and intimidate women and children to remain in, or
be silent about, their abusive situation. The threat or actual abuse of
a pet can prevent women leaving situations of domestic violence.
• Sustained childhood cruelty to animals has been linked to an
increased likelihood of violent offending behaviour against
humans in adulthood. However, this does not imply that children
who are cruel to animals necessarily go on to be violent adults
and adults who harm animals are not necessarily also violent to
their partners and/or children.

And if the kid is not being abused.....

Nekarsulm

Better?

http://www.anglocelt.ie/news/roundup/articles/2016/12/28/4132309-the-hunt-is-on/

learn_more

Depp wrote: »

so foxes destroying livestock is a bad argument, because foxes look cuter than chickens?

Well, if your want to talk about livestock, you have to ask the question is the livestock actually 'yours'.

If you didn't keep the chickens then they would be easier for the foxs to capture, as they would be running wild.

If the chickens were not farmed ,running around left to their own devices, they probably wouldn't hang around in groups of 20, 40, whatever.

The fox would prolly catch one chicken and then go on it's way; as it is, because a fox attacks a coop, they could kill a huge amount of them in one go.

Why shouldn't foxs eat chickens anyway? I didn't realise they were put on earth just for humans Sunday roast.

Even so, I don't see how it could be so hard to confine a brood of chickens and block foxes from entering their coop? That would be the responsibility of the farmer and if they can't be bothered to protect their stock you can't feel too sorry when they have been raided.

Discodog

TheRiverman wrote: »

I am not a member of a hunt club nor do I ride horses,but I do go to hunts due to my association with a club over a number of years.In all my time following the hunts I have never seen a fox killed and in fact very rarely have seen a fox.There are many many more foxes shot by farmers protecting lambs, people with poultry in rural areas and by people in gun clubs than there are killed by hounds on hunts.I have also seen people out a night in cars/jeeps shining big lights into fields in order to dazzles foxes and then shoot them.Those people to best of my knowledge have no association with any hunt club.
I think many people including those in charities need to be educated about hunts and how they operate.

This is a common & rather strange comment in support of hunting. If the hunts don't kill foxes then why have them ? One minute we are told that the hunt is essential & the next we are told that they don't kill foxes.

We also never hear about the life of the foxhounds. I have never heard of one being rehabilitated & rehomed. I know a lot of country vets & I have never heard of a foxhound receiving treatment. The rule is that, if the dog can't hunt, then it's killed. Yet again we have this perverse way of viewing one breed as an exception. You wouldn't treat any other dog this way & if you did it would be considered as cruelty.

I do agree about the lamping crowd, who in some cases, will shoot anything including pet cats etc.

qo2cj1dsne8y4k

Any foxes I've seen in recent times has been in bad condition, tattered and starved looking. They're hungry. Can you really blame them killing chickens when they have nothing else to eat? It's nature

Winterlong

LexieOnRale wrote: »

Any foxes I've seen in recent times has been in bad condition, tattered and starved looking. They're hungry. Can you really blame them killing chickens when they have nothing else to eat? It's nature

I guess it differs across the country. The foxes in our area are well nourished and council looking at doing a 'humane cull' whatever that means. Still probably cruel.

Their poo stinks and they seem to like pooing in my garden.

Discodog

LexieOnRale wrote: »

Any foxes I've seen in recent times has been in bad condition, tattered and starved looking. They're hungry. Can you really blame them killing chickens when they have nothing else to eat? It's nature

That usually means that they have mange. A friendly vet can give a treatment that you put into food left out for them.

Parchment

Late to the party - but well done to Pieta House for this. Hunting is a vile "sport".

If you cant see that there is something wrong with you.

Parchment

Parchment wrote: »

Late to the party - but well done to Pieta House for this. Hunting is a vile "sport".

If you cant see that there is something wrong with you.

Still though, it's only foxes, not humans. The way some wring their hands...

If you cant see that there is something wrong with you

1eg0a3xv7b82of

[Deleted User] wrote: »

Still though, it's only foxes, not humans. The way some wring their hands...

If you cant see that there is something wrong with you

Ok Donald we get the point, if humans are not allowed hunt foxes than we could end up with the terrible situation where foxes hunt people.
Just to set your mind at ease animal farm was a work of fiction.

Ember Scarce Mind

Ember Scarce Mind wrote: »

Ok Donald we get the point, if humans are not allowed hunt foxes than we could end up with the terrible situation where foxes hunt people.
Just to set your mind at ease animal farm was a work of fiction.

Someone missed the whole point about Animal Farm.

Read it as an allegory about capitalism and communism, not as a lesson that humans are the same as foxes. Trust me, it works much better.

1eg0a3xv7b82of

Deleted User wrote: »

Someone missed the whole point about Animal Farm.

Read it as an allegory about capitalism and communism, not as a lesson that humans are the same as foxes. Trust me, it works much better.

Good to read the above, now use this intelligence when making posts here.
only foxes, not humans, wringing of hands, your better than that.

Ember Scarce Mind

Ember Scarce Mind wrote: »

Are u a Donald?

Ember Scarce Mind wrote: »

The following would be a response of a donald.

Ember Scarce Mind wrote: »

Are you also a donald.

Ember Scarce Mind wrote: »

Ok Donald we get the point...

Ember Scarce Mind wrote: »

...now use this intelligence when making posts here...

Snigger...

Widdershins

Discodog wrote: »

This is a common & rather strange comment in support of hunting. If the hunts don't kill foxes then why have them ? One minute we are told that the hunt is essential & the next we are told that they don't kill foxes.

We also never hear about the life of the foxhounds. I have never heard of one being rehabilitated & rehomed. I know a lot of country vets & I have never heard of a foxhound receiving treatment. The rule is that, if the dog can't hunt, then it's killed. Yet again we have this perverse way of viewing one breed as an exception. You wouldn't treat any other dog this way & if you did it would be considered as cruelty.

I do agree about the lamping crowd, who in some cases, will shoot anything including pet cats etc.

Ridiculous, isn't it? Trying to deny killing foxes has much to do with the hunt at all. Why not omit that part from all hunts then if it's just the fresh air and gallop on a filly they like so much.

Better for the poor foxes, better for the hounds, better for landowners.

Parchment

Widdershins wrote: »

Ridiculous, isn't it? Trying to deny killing foxes has much to do with the hunt at all. Why not omit that part from all hunts then if it's just the fresh air and gallop on a filly they like so much.

Better for the poor foxes, better for the hounds, better for landowners.

Exactly - as someone who has rode horses for years i could never understand this. If its about the galloping/chase why not do a good cross country course?

Hunting is dying out - hopefully it will be gone soon along with other blood sports.

HellSquirrel

It is dying out and damn well time too, but I do recall something a couple of years ago where there was a backlash against one of the big Irish hunts and a spokesman said something along the lines of "Cruelty to foxes? We've not had a sniff of a fox in twenty years!" or something of that sort. Drag-hunts (I wish I could be sure that is the term!) seem to be the common method now, where a lure is dragged to create a scent for the dogs to follow.

Probably why it can be both considered cruel and absolutely, harmlessly, pointless at the same time

Overall, I am pro-banning the bloody business though. It's a thoroughly rotten sport, unless it is just drag-hunts (I'm not insisting on banning that too, since it is ultimately harmless). But that could be kept and live quarry hunts banned without really making much difference to anyone.

1eg0a3xv7b82of

Deleted User wrote: »

Snigger...

typical donald, Being honest this age belongs to people like you.
But beware the ides of march and the age of the vampire foxes.

As long as men massacre animals, they will continue to kill each other.
Wise words by one of the wisest.

HellSquirrel

Ember Scarce Mind wrote: »

typical donald, Being honest this age belongs to people like you.
But beware the ides of march and the age of the vampire foxes.

As long as men massacre animals, they will continue to kill each other.
Wise words by one of the wisest.

I gotta ask..what in god's name are you talking about?

Widdershins

HellSquirrel wrote: »

It is dying out and damn well time too, but I do recall something a couple of years ago where there was a backlash against one of the big Irish hunts and a spokesman said something along the lines of "Cruelty to foxes? We've not had a sniff of a fox in twenty years!" or something of that sort. Drag-hunts (I wish I could be sure that is the term!) seem to be the common method now, where a lure is dragged to create a scent for the dogs to follow.

Probably why it can be both considered cruel and absolutely, harmlessly, pointless at the same time

Overall, I am pro-banning the bloody business though. It's a thoroughly rotten sport, unless it is just drag-hunts (I'm not insisting on banning that too, since it is ultimately harmless). But that could be kept and live quarry hunts banned without really making much difference to anyone.

Maybe he was lying. I've friends who are into sabotaging the hunt. They see the foxes being caught. Now that's in England, not Ireland, but I have seen young lads with caged foxes in the village in Ireland where my parents live, coinciding with a hunt. I don't know what the idea behind it is, but there clearly were foxes involved in that.

HellSquirrel

Widdershins wrote: »

Maybe he was lying. I've friends who are into sabotaging the hunt. They see the foxes being caught. Now that's in England, not Ireland, but I have seen young lads with caged foxes in the village in Ireland where my parents live, coinciding with a hunt. I don't know what the idea behind it is, but there clearly were foxes involved in that.

That's interesting, I didn't/wouldn't know that, if there's private individuals capturing (or buying?) foxes to release to be hunted. If so, that's horrendous. As if the poor creatures don't undergo enough being hunted in the wild and torn apart by dogs without being captured and held in cages beforehand to make it easy.

So much for being "sporting".

1eg0a3xv7b82of

HellSquirrel wrote: »

I gotta ask..what in god's name are you talking about?

I gotta ask have you not read the whole thread.Yet again someone posting without reading the thread.
Please take your time to read the whole thread before u post about something u know nothing about.
Thank you Sir.

Winterlong

Ember Scarce Mind wrote: »

I gotta ask have you not read the whole thread.Yet again someone posting without reading the thread.
Please take your time to read the whole thread before u post about something u know nothing about.
Thank you Sir.

It would be easier if your posts simply made sense though?

1eg0a3xv7b82of

Winterlong wrote: »

It would be easier if your posts simply made sense though?

Again, read the whole thread and they will make sense.
I cant make it anymore simpler.
So please Sir, read the whole thread it is very interesting and you will be more educated.

Buford T. Justice XIX

Ember Scarce Mind wrote: »

Again, read the whole thread and they will make sense.
I cant make it anymore simpler.
So please Sir, read the whole thread it is very interesting and you will be more educated.

Jaysus, I read the whole thread from the start and I haven't a clue, not one iota what you're on about.

If he's a Donald, does that make you a Hillary?

Pray, enlighten us....

Winterlong

Buford T. Justice V wrote: »

Jaysus, I read the whole thread from the start and I haven't a clue, not one iota what you're on about.

If he's a Donald, does that make you a Hillary?

Pray, enlighten us....

At this stage I would prefer if they did not enlighten us!

1eg0a3xv7b82of

Buford T. Justice V wrote: »

Jaysus, I read the whole thread from the start and I haven't a clue, not one iota what you're on about.

If he's a Donald, does that make you a Hillary?

Pray, enlighten us....

You seem confused, take a break.
I do not have one clue what you are on about?
How about some enlightenment for me, conor and the winter guy.

Depp

Ember Scarce Mind wrote: »

You seem confused, take a break.
I do not have one clue what you are on about?
How about some enlightenment for me, conor and the winter guy.

what a donald thing to say!

1eg0a3xv7b82of

Depp wrote: »

what a donald thing to say!

Thank you very, very, very much. Lots of People have posted that fox hunting is ok, I dont know but Its what people are telling me.
Someone is killing sheep and livestock, now it might not be foxes but someone is doing it. Believe me.
Foxhunting is a past time of our forefathers and its going to be huuuge, its going to be amazing.

Depp

Ember Scarce Mind wrote: »

Thank you very, very, very much. Lots of People have posted that fox hunting is ok, I dont know but Its what people are telling me.
Someone is killing sheep and livestock, now it might not be foxes but someone is doing it. Believe me.
Foxhunting is a past time of our forefathers and its going to be huuuge, its going to be amazing.

there are bigger problems in the world than hunting a species with such huge numbers like foxes. your faux outrage would be far better spent elsewhere

1eg0a3xv7b82of

Depp wrote: »

there are bigger problems in the world than hunting a species with such huge numbers like foxes. your faux outrage would be far better spent elsewhere

Thanks for the advise.
2 Questions.
Can you clarify something for me, why do you get to decide where I spend my faux outrage?
Also as you seem to be in the know, is fake outrage the same thing as faux outrage?
1 True Statement:
Fox hunting raises so many real outrages that there is need for the faux outrage.

Depp

Ember Scarce Mind wrote: »

Thanks for the advise.
2 Questions.
Can you clarify something for me, why do you get to decide where I spend my faux outrage?
Also as you seem to be in the know, is fake outrage the same thing as faux outrage?
1 True Statement:
Fox hunting raises so many real outrages that there is need for the faux outrage.

here, ring joe duffy or something none of us care