VoyForums
[ Show ]
Support VoyForums
[ Shrink ]
VoyForums Announcement: Programming and providing support for this service has been a labor of love since 1997. We are one of the few services online who values our users' privacy, and have never sold your information. We have even fought hard to defend your privacy in legal cases; however, we've done it with almost no financial support -- paying out of pocket to continue providing the service. Due to the issues imposed on us by advertisers, we also stopped hosting most ads on the forums many years ago. We hope you appreciate our efforts.

Show your support by donating any amount. (Note: We are still technically a for-profit company, so your contribution is not tax-deductible.) PayPal Acct: Feedback:

Donate to VoyForums (PayPal):

Thursday, May 23, 22:59:59 [ Login ] [ Contact Forum Admin ] [ Main index ] [ Post a new message ] [ Search | Check update time | Archives: 1, 2, 3, [4] ]

[ Next Thread | Previous Thread | Next Message | Previous Message ]

Date Posted: 22/07/03 15:22
Author: patsy
Subject: Re: 小動物和大城市
In reply to: Peter 's message, "Re: 小動物和大城市" on 21/07/03 23:22

為免惹來無聊「咒罵」，對留言應該不回應的，但見網友那麼熱心反駁，恕我直言，其中有比喻不當和論點錯誤的。
相信真理愈辯愈明的話，不妨問清楚才爭辯，問愛護動物協會遭遺棄動物的下場，被人道毀滅百分比多少？香港有多少土地可稱大自然？香港的私人屋苑和公屋為什麼有合約禁養寵物？世界各地可有同樣條例？公屋居民爭取什麼？要求將寵物養到老死，還是要求取消禁養寵物條例？（據傳媒報道，是前者。）
居民遣反合約是不對的，但趕絕小動物是另一回事，牠們被人飼養，不是自己走去公屋做非法住客，小動物不懂得爭取自己的生存權，給牠們一條生路有什麼問題呢？

[ Next Thread | Previous Thread | Next Message | Previous Message ]

Replies:

[ Contact Forum Admin ]

Forum timezone: GMT+8
VF Version: 3.00b, ConfDB:
Before posting please read our privacy policy.
VoyForums(tm) is a Free Service from Voyager Info-Systems.
Copyright © 1998-2019 Voyager Info-Systems. All Rights Reserved.