My point in this case is that you think you have the right to decide what is abuse with regards to animals. I think there is a line beyone which we all would agree that there is abuse, but there is also a lot of grey area and reasonable people can disagree.
I'm not trying to compare the two issues, I'm talking about the point where people start deciding they have the absolute right to determine right and wrong when it comes to the actions of others.
And I of course think that anyone can hold whatever belief they would like, but when it comes to involving the police and trying to get someone incarcerated I think that there needs to be a very high and clear standard.
My childhood dog spent most of her life outside, even in the winter. She also was always chained up. There was always food, always water, always blankets in the doghouse, but I'm sure you'd have tried to put my dad in jail for what was typical dog ownership standards in the midwest in the 70s and 80s.
And your comment about puritanical religious freaks just shows that you are tolerant of anything that you believe in, but fuck anyone else's opinion.
It can't be a rational opinion that prostitution and sex work is immoral? The fact that people break their marriage vows with you should be 100 percent morally justified even though it is illegal?
The problem with you is that you cannot engage in intellectual discourse about something without making everything personal and getting defensive and then going on the attack.
The world is a complicated place, and none of us are the sole arbiters of right and wrong. It is noble to go out and make the world a better place, but please, take a deep breath every now and then.
None of us are perfect. Not even you.