Animal "rights" on bionet (was Re: being recrutied unawares vs. being intimidated out of the)

[Jim Wellehan]

In article <23kddv$slb at max.physics.sunysb.edu>
mhollowa at ic.sunysb.edu (Michael Holloway) writes:

> More effort is needed in communicating that the animal "rights" activists are
> actively misrepresenting the facts, not in convincing any uninformed
> observers that the animal "rights" movement represents a legitimate
> "viewpoint".

How we communicate this is very important.  As an example:

You go to a seminar on "Polytransloxal cistoflarglation of the
blargleflarg"

1.)  Five minutes into the seminar, X stands up and shouts "This is
insanity!" and stomps out of the room.

2.)  X sits patiently through the seminar. During questions afterward,
X says, "That was very interesting work, but...", and proceeds to ask a
series of questions that dismantle the theory of the presentation.

Cistoflarglation is not your specialty.  In which instance are you more
likely to respect X's opinion?
 
> There is a large and rather obvious difference between considering a
> harmful viewpoint and defending it.

Exactly.

Jim