strictly speaking in ethical terms: how is wearing leather shoes - made of any animal hide - different from wearing this furry thingy? or are we saying that one animal is more noble & less deserving to die than another, and therefore by extension fur-lovers are more contemptible than your run-of-the-mill cow-hide leather shoe-wearer?
Anon: Agree completely with your sentiments - thanks for stating it so clearly. I would go so far (often too far!) and say that of meat-eaters - are fish, chicken, bivalves, etc somehow more deserving to die or indeed die less painful a death than a mink? And if you carry this arguement to its logical conclusion... insects that you mindless spray to death, the bacteria that is killed - who decides the order of importance?the anti fur movement is for imbeciles with no logic. zero.
indeed. if an anti-fur person can also be consistent & refrain from using any animal products at all, then i'll grant that he/she does have a point. but until then, anti-fur is an intellectually indefensible position and, as you pointed out, hasn't any logic.