Home Notes
Parasite protecting community
In an uncertain future, when the planet finally managed to...
Parasite protecting community In an uncertain future, when the planet finally managed to...
 |
20 april 2021
|
Parasite protecting community
In an uncertain future, when the planet finally managed to achieve equality in rights between humans and animals ...
However, at that wonderful time, the words "man", "animal" were already out of use. They were deemed not politically correct. It turned out that it is offensive for animals when they are called that.
Therefore, the word "animals" was canceled, and at the same time the word "people" - too. Now everything, both people and animals, was named simply by the digital identifiers of objects.
But I will continue to call people - people, animals - animals, so that you can understand, as long as it is not prohibited.
So...
The issue of animal rights has been settled. They already had the same civil rights as people, the right to vote in elections, the right to nominate themselves for the post of governor and even for the post of president.
The phrase "put the pig at the table*" now had no humorous connotation and was perceived as an instruction for action.
*in Russian there is a joking saying that if you put a pig at the table, soon her legs will be on the table. This proverb plays out here
The phrase "put the pig at the table*" now had no humorous connotation and was perceived as an instruction for action.
If earlier people often kept animals in order to then cook barbecue or sausage out of them, now everyone was obliged to keep several representatives of the animal world in their home and take care of them, please in every way. In order to atone for at least a little the guilt of people for all centuries of cruelty to animals.
The cats didn’t think that people used to treat them badly, but now they were treated even better, and the cats didn’t mind ...
Of course, such a shameful practice as people eating animal meat was out of the question.
The killing of animals was now equated with the killing of a human, and was punished even more severely.
However, predatory animals that continued to hunt and eat other animals were not punished for this.
It has been scientifically proven that the natural instinct that tells the lion to hunt the zebra is, although a bad habit, but at the same time it is an innate feature of the lion and part of its genetic code, its natural identity. You can't deprive a lion of its natural identity.
It is easier for a human to give up meat-eating. A man can and should control, eradicate his vile habits, but a lion is different. But let's not go deep into this topic. It's not about that.
So, with animal rights, everything was already more or less good.
The issue of plant rights was worse. But we also worked on this and the process was going in the right direction.
The most progressive part of the public tried to convey to the identifiers that the cabbage or banana was not created to be eaten. And if you really want to, you should at least ask permission from the banana.
The question of a complete ban on eating plant foods was still a subject of controversy, still could not be finally decided. The proponents of such a prohibition wanted people to stop the shameful practice of eating poor plants and switch to chemical vitamins and energy from the sun. It was assumed that the ban would not apply to animals, at least at first.
Meanwhile, the most, the most progressive part of the public has finally (!) raised the issue of the rights of parasites!
Parasites of all types and sizes that have ever adhered to the human body or penetrated into its interior. For many years, man mercilessly dealt with these unfortunate creatures, not realizing one simple thing ... Parasites do what they do, not because they treat a person badly and wish him harm! No, they just treat a person very well, do not want evil, but sometimes they get carried away and are unable to stop and then - only then do they harm the irreparable object of their sympathy.
But does a humans have the right to exterminate parasites that have stuck to his body from the outside or from the inside ?!
Does a humans have the right to deprive parasites of their habitat ?!
Does a person have the right to deprive parasites of food ?!
A human, as a being endowed with consciousness, must show consciousness and be patient! Parasites are the same creatures of the Universe as a human, no worse, and if their genetic code tells them to be parasites, who has the right to forbid them to do so ?!
It must be said that at the beginning the ideas preached by the Parasites Protection Community did not find understanding either in humans or in animals ... Those who learned to understand the language of plants said that plants also perceived these slogans ambiguously.
But the explanatory work, agitation, which the PPC activists were engaged in, brought their results and gradually, here and there, there was a human with a well-developed consciousness and a sense of duty, who understood and accepted the right of parasites to suck blood from him ...
See also Fantastic story about a virus from which you can only be saved by getting on all fours
https://en.unila.ru/notes/1024
In an uncertain future, when the planet finally managed to achieve equality in rights between humans and animals ...
However, at that wonderful time, the words "man", "animal" were already out of use. They were deemed not politically correct. It turned out that it is offensive for animals when they are called that.
Therefore, the word "animals" was canceled, and at the same time the word "people" - too. Now everything, both people and animals, was named simply by the digital identifiers of objects.
But I will continue to call people - people, animals - animals, so that you can understand, as long as it is not prohibited.
So...
The issue of animal rights has been settled. They already had the same civil rights as people, the right to vote in elections, the right to nominate themselves for the post of governor and even for the post of president.
The phrase "put the pig at the table*" now had no humorous connotation and was perceived as an instruction for action.
*in Russian there is a joking saying that if you put a pig at the table, soon her legs will be on the table. This proverb plays out here
The phrase "put the pig at the table*" now had no humorous connotation and was perceived as an instruction for action.
If earlier people often kept animals in order to then cook barbecue or sausage out of them, now everyone was obliged to keep several representatives of the animal world in their home and take care of them, please in every way. In order to atone for at least a little the guilt of people for all centuries of cruelty to animals.
The cats didn’t think that people used to treat them badly, but now they were treated even better, and the cats didn’t mind ...
Of course, such a shameful practice as people eating animal meat was out of the question.
The killing of animals was now equated with the killing of a human, and was punished even more severely.
However, predatory animals that continued to hunt and eat other animals were not punished for this.
It has been scientifically proven that the natural instinct that tells the lion to hunt the zebra is, although a bad habit, but at the same time it is an innate feature of the lion and part of its genetic code, its natural identity. You can't deprive a lion of its natural identity.
It is easier for a human to give up meat-eating. A man can and should control, eradicate his vile habits, but a lion is different. But let's not go deep into this topic. It's not about that.
So, with animal rights, everything was already more or less good.
The issue of plant rights was worse. But we also worked on this and the process was going in the right direction.
The most progressive part of the public tried to convey to the identifiers that the cabbage or banana was not created to be eaten. And if you really want to, you should at least ask permission from the banana.
The question of a complete ban on eating plant foods was still a subject of controversy, still could not be finally decided. The proponents of such a prohibition wanted people to stop the shameful practice of eating poor plants and switch to chemical vitamins and energy from the sun. It was assumed that the ban would not apply to animals, at least at first.
Meanwhile, the most, the most progressive part of the public has finally (!) raised the issue of the rights of parasites!
Parasites of all types and sizes that have ever adhered to the human body or penetrated into its interior. For many years, man mercilessly dealt with these unfortunate creatures, not realizing one simple thing ... Parasites do what they do, not because they treat a person badly and wish him harm! No, they just treat a person very well, do not want evil, but sometimes they get carried away and are unable to stop and then - only then do they harm the irreparable object of their sympathy.
But does a humans have the right to exterminate parasites that have stuck to his body from the outside or from the inside ?!
Does a humans have the right to deprive parasites of their habitat ?!
Does a person have the right to deprive parasites of food ?!
A human, as a being endowed with consciousness, must show consciousness and be patient! Parasites are the same creatures of the Universe as a human, no worse, and if their genetic code tells them to be parasites, who has the right to forbid them to do so ?!
It must be said that at the beginning the ideas preached by the Parasites Protection Community did not find understanding either in humans or in animals ... Those who learned to understand the language of plants said that plants also perceived these slogans ambiguously.
But the explanatory work, agitation, which the PPC activists were engaged in, brought their results and gradually, here and there, there was a human with a well-developed consciousness and a sense of duty, who understood and accepted the right of parasites to suck blood from him ...
See also Fantastic story about a virus from which you can only be saved by getting on all fours
https://en.unila.ru/notes/1024