(07-02-2012, 08:27 AM)ShinAr Wrote: It is quite another to think that we can save every animal on the planet that finds itself in distress,
No, not save them from distress. Just not cause their distress, and if we do cause their distress, take responsibility for our actions.
(07-02-2012, 08:27 AM)ShinAr Wrote: or to attempt to control the natural process in ways that benefit us at the expense of other species.
There's nothing natural about what humans have done and are doing to the Earth and her inhabitants. It's an aberration.
(07-02-2012, 08:27 AM)ShinAr Wrote: many issues and problems have arisen around this way of life that are beyond the scope of human compassion to bring under control.
Right. But meat isn't one of them.
(07-02-2012, 08:27 AM)ShinAr Wrote: One can be a Ghandi or a Mother Theresa, and accomplish much more on a grander scale.
Or one can simply take responsibility for the animals one is directly affecting by one's choices.
(07-02-2012, 08:27 AM)ShinAr Wrote: The human is destroying this planet by their very existence on it.
I disagree. It's not our existence itself, but the bellicose nature of the population that resulted from what was a rather unique experiment. We can't change the whole population. But we can change ourselves.