Blog Widget by LinkWithin

Bunny Wants Your Money

12 comments | 12:01 am | top |
A few months back I saw the SAFE poster with the little tear-off tabs, asking for volunteers to help with the annual appeal. SAFE is an organisation which seeks to be a voice for animals in New Zealand. As they can't speak for themselves, it is only right that someone should. Being strongly opposed to animal abuse myself (after watching a video here), I tore off one of the little tear-off tabs and got in touch with the team at SAFE to let them know I was keen to help out.

Arrived at the SAFE headquarters at 10am where they kitted me out with a bunny suit, and where I was loathe to part with my cellphone and wallet, as there are no pockets on a bunny suit. Bunnies as you may know, are not marsupial. Together with a female leopard, I walked from the SAFE office to our possie on what is basically the busiest intersection in Christchurch - returning passer-bys' incredulous stares or giggles with looks of placid contentment and self-confirmation. Of course the floppy ears weren't helping much, one was standing up nicely but the other one kept falling over, resulting in the appearance of a rather large, dejected-looking bunny.

The cow across the intersection from me who was suffering from an identity crisis informed me of the time when I asked him (12:45pm), and also that he didn't know exactly which animal he was. His sister, a canary sympathised with me as I related to her the incident where an extroverted, middle-aged female had grasped my tail and commented, "aw, what a cute little tail the bunny has". I did not share her sentiments, and looked at her blankly while she laughed awkwardly with her friend.

A photo-blogger stopped and asked for a photo, and in return I asked her to email me it. There's another one on her blog...

Standing within view of McDonalds, KFC and Burger King, and having skipped breakfast, after 3 hours I caved in, and together with the canary and the cow-who-didn't-know-what-he-was, I walked back to the office for debriefing. After getting back into civvies and a glass of something fairly warm and organic, it was all about making a bee-line for Burger King. Anyway, in all seriousness, animal abuse is a terrible blight on our society, and we have a duty to speak out against it. It is impossible for you to care about it unless you know what it is, so I encourage you to look into it yourself.

Labels:

12 Comments:

Anonymous lydie said...

hahaaa! that was so funny. Loved the cow with the identity crisis.. wish I could have been there. Were there any frog costumes? I would have been a frog..
btw, did you get much money?

5:52 pm, December 21, 2009 
Blogger Andy Moore said...

not sure how much money I got, maybe they'll tell me...

10:11 pm, December 21, 2009 
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Hey Andy

You must really love your animals, love enough to collect to stop the cruelty yet still eat them. Are you a vegan now or just continuing being a dickhead. Why dont you stick to abortion or politics or just go an dissapear. By the way if there is a god I am sure he would give an animal a soul. Love that Athiest bus campaign too, have you ridden an Athiest bus yet? lol That would be funny, you on an Athiest bus.
Get a life, but keep up the blog, you got a good following laughing at you. Lol

You Loser

1:48 pm, December 22, 2009 
Blogger Andy Moore said...

There's a difference between abusing an animal to death, and killing it painlessly for the purpose of consumption.

The God described in the Bible did not give animals souls.

I'm glad that the "There's Probably No God" bus campaign can go ahead in New Zealand.

Who's the loser? I'm not the one hiding behind anonymity.

5:49 pm, December 22, 2009 
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Lol I am not hiding Andy I am just having fun with others laughing at you. Seriously Andy, put that bible rubbish aside and go live, go get laid and dont worry about abortion. So no soul equals no entry into heaven? well i don't know if I like your bibles vision of heaven Andy, i think I would like my pet to be in there with me. also if there are no animals in heaven because of no soul, then are all souls in heaven vegeatarians. Or is food of the menu. MMMMmmm.

9:38 am, December 23, 2009 
Blogger Andy Moore said...

I'm not sure either of us knows what you are trying to accomplish here, but whatever it is, it's not working.

1:11 pm, December 23, 2009 
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Just poking fun at you Andy. I am not trying to accomplish anything other than laugh at you. Don't take yourself so seriously, no-one else really do's! But please answer me Andy, if animals have no souls as you said, do they go to heaven? Surely killing for consumption as you put it might be a little bit of a downer for the animal being killed. I just like to see if you can answer questions such as above, because you would have to be one of the most ignorant people I have met. I am an athiest but can respect other peoples religious views. I seem to find religious people who can't accept other peoples views though tend to be the very reason that religion has such a bad name. Not only are you a crackpot who really only appeals to the same crakpot fringe. Thanks Andy you are the posterboy for why religion is littered with unsustainable idiots. Keep up the good work as you are doing a great job. lol

2:50 pm, December 23, 2009 
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Hey you're cool. You care about animals too. Some folks just talk but you put your life into it ...... you give yourself and your time. I'll read more from you thanks.

2:32 am, December 27, 2009 
Blogger ZenTiger said...

I am not trying to accomplish anything other than laugh at you.

And you wont accomplish anything else in life with that attitude.

I am an athiest (sic) but can respect other peoples religious views

Prove it.

11:57 pm, December 30, 2009 
Anonymous Mr Dennis said...

Anonymouse is just being an idiot, ignore him/her/it.

Andy, my personal view on SAFE, the SPCA and other similar groups is that they are well-intentioned, but distract resources from more important causes, and also can spread misinformation.

Distracting resources because as long as there are starving or aborted children, I cannot morally justify taking money that could have been used to help them and giving it to animals.

Misinformation because practices like cage-rearing hens are generally presented as pure evil, without actually considering it from both sides. One of the advantages of caged hens is that they are generally healthier than free-range, according to the research I've read. The disadvantage is that they have less space to move. SAFE just push one point of view.

Just have a quick look at the nonsense presented on their website. Their "factory dairy farming" panic is very uninformed, and ignores the environmental benefits of the proposed farms they oppose. They even want to ban duck shooting - ignoring the fact that ducks are an agricultural pest that must be controlled. The money that is being used to support Jumbo the elephant now could help many more human children.

Furthermore they are a bunch of statists who keep pushing for bans - banning rodeos, particular farming methods, duck shooting - and are therefore morally and politically opposed to the individual liberty you generally stand for.

It is one thing to oppose animal cruelty - it is another to support an organisation like SAFE. You might as well say "I care about the environment, I better vote for the Green party" - you of all people know how ridiculous that statement is!

2:46 pm, January 06, 2010 
Blogger Andy Moore said...

I know what you're saying Mr Dennis, and you're pretty much spot on. I disagree with a large number of SAFE's policies, however that doesn't have to stop me from supporting them, just like the fact that I disagree with a large number of National Party policies doesn't have to stop me from giving my electorate vote to my local National MP.

9:18 pm, January 10, 2010 
Anonymous Mr Dennis said...

I think there is a big difference between supporting a charity and voting in an election. In the election you vote strategically for the best (or least worst) option from a defined number of choices. You could even decide the best candidate option was in Labour, that's one of the quirks of MMP.

But you can support as many or as few charities as you like, to any extent. So there is no need to support a statist charity to help animals - you should be able to find another way to help them without providing funds to an organisation that is morally opposed to most of what you believe in. Especially when that charity could end up using your money to lobby for policies or even directly support political parties you disagree with.

9:04 am, January 11, 2010 

Post a Comment

Note: only a member of this blog may post a comment.

Links to this post:

Create a Link

<< Home

blog design by equipbiz | this blog is best viewed with Firefox. Remember: Friends don't let friends use Internet Exporer. :)