All the gruesome acts committed against nonhuman animals who can’t fight back are also committed against humans who can’t fight back against their captors and aggressors.
Why then do social engineers insist on allowing these gruesome acts against nonhuman animals to occur when they know full well that it does not stop or discourage similar acts against humans?
• It’s like the death penalty not being a deterrent, yet the scientists keep placating the politicians who want to keep it in play by indicating it does.
Why not try stopping said acts against nonhuman animals, and see what happens? What do you have to lose? It must be something, otherwise you wouldn’t hesitate, would you?
Do you really think said horrendous acts will rise against humans? And even if they did, why feed perversity with the destruction of lives to satisfy it? Who’s the pervert now?
And what scientific data, that hasn’t been corrupted by agenda related to profit and politics, proves that theory? There is none. There is only lazy conjecture that is meaningless when discussing atrocities of any nature, whoever commits said acts against whomever they commit said acts.
When, where and under what conditions was that theory tested?
This sounds like legalizing prostitution to keep the rape rate down.
It wasn’t tested, because the scientists knew in advance the answer. Some so-called theories don’t need to be tested or even studied. Humans inherently know a bad plan when they see, read or hear it.
Where is the data that proves that theory to be statistically significant? Any question or answer can be proven to be statistically significant by the fact that it was asked and answered.
Bold moves are needed to stop the atrocity holocaust against all animals now, not in twenty years.