yes i know there is a thread in chit chat, but that wasnt directed towards the stupidy of the comments made by the PETA 'representatives' interviewed in technician

http://www.technicianonline.com/story.php?id=012636

Quote :

""Over 27 billion animals are killed every year for food," Kumar said. "Our exhibit is trying to get people involved and help them recognize their role in active injustice." "

Active injustice? im sorry, but purchasing a sirloin from harris teeter is far from "active injustice". should we stop eating meat just because of other personal differences? should we cast away our carnivorous intuitions and dietary requirements which we established through evolution; as our bipedal abilities allowed us to hunt, and thus become stronger and smarter?

PETA denounces present day hunters for such cruelty, they denounce cattle and poultry farms for cruelty, they denounce the grocers selling the product for cruelty, and they denounce the customers purchasing the product for cruelty. (Active injustices in all of the above)

is there any aspect of animal meat production and / or consumption that they do endorse?

Quote :

"Rindos said that although it may cause controversies on campus, it's important to understand what the demonstration is trying to say. "It's to show how animal rights is a social justice issue," Rindos said. "It's showing that animals have rights too, and it's not comparing people to animals." "

hold on a minute, according to PETA, "Animals deserve rights, regardless of how they taste or how convenient it is to experiment on them. Like humans, animals are capable of suffering and have an INTEREST IN LEADING THEIR OWN LIVES. They are not ours to use for FOOD, clothing, experimentation, or entertainment."

that statement is pleasurable to the ear, and easy to argue for. we all have a soft spot for cute animals. however, is it practical? thats an easy answer. Animal activists and PETA members are so blinded by the need for disruption, recognition, and demonstration to create a public fury that they disregard practicality.

Simply, are humans going to eat meat? .. yes. Are demonstrations such as these, and activist organizations going to deter that (essentially)? .. No. Are their ideals so extreme that it hurts their initial intention? .. yes.

fighting for ending cruelty and suffering against animals is a difficult battle, and is necessary. but as long as you're endorsed by an organization who wants us to neglect our instincts, not eat meat, disrupt and ignore the need for population control, and adhere to such an extremist point of view that PETA presents... you arent going to get anywhere.

rational battles with practical ideals

[Edited on November 9, 2005 at 7:35 AM. Reason : your thoughts......]

11/9/2005 7:31:33 AM

Quote :

"Animals deserve rights, regardless of how they taste or how convenient it is to experiment on them. Like humans, animals are capable of suffering and have an INTEREST IN LEADING THEIR OWN LIVES. They are not ours to use for FOOD, clothing, experimentation, or entertainment."

All I have to say is that with rights comes responsibilities. All joking aside, when animals can assume the responsibility that is mandatory when rights are bestowed, then I might think.

Also, unless you and yours are hungry, shut the fuck up. Not everyone in third world countries has the benefit of going to the whole foods market and buying a head of organic lettuce for $5.50.

The only reason you can go out here and petition is that you're fully fed and able to.

Just shut the fuck up PETA.

11/9/2005 8:46:15 AM

god, peta pisses me off

look guys, I know you have good intentions, but you make people who care about animals, food, and the environment look like complete whackos.

11/9/2005 8:48:27 AM

DirtyGreek and I agree (first time ever). If PETA weren't so radical, they might have a coherent point. I don't think anyone gets off by slapping around their dogs (and for those who do, they're in themselves as extreme as PETA on the other side). I'll say again, with rights comes responsibility. Are you ready to arrest a lion for killing a zebra for food?

11/9/2005 8:50:54 AM

Quote :

"look guys, I know you have good intentions"

11/9/2005 8:53:11 AM

Quote :

"you make people who care about animals, food, and the environment look like complete whackos."

11/9/2005 8:58:03 AM

Cartman told me that in PETA camps, they inter-marry and live like the animals live... till P. Diddy et gang went up there and shot em all.

11/9/2005 9:00:45 AM

A conservative perspective on animal rights...

Quote :

"May 23, 2005 Issue Copyright © 2005 The American Conservative Fear Factories The case for compassionate conservatism—for animals by Matthew Scully A few years ago I began a book about cruelty to animals and about factory farming in particular, problems that had been in the back of my mind for a long while. At the time I viewed factory farming as one of the lesser problems facing humanity—a small wrong on the grand scale of good and evil but too casually overlooked and too glibly excused. This view changed as I acquainted myself with the details and saw a few typical farms up close. By the time I finished the book, I had come to view the abuses of industrial farming as a serious moral problem, a truly rotten business for good reason passed over in polite conversation. Little wrongs, when left unattended, can grow and spread to become grave wrongs, and precisely this had happened on our factory farms. ... “What the PETA crowd doesn’t understand,” Jonah Goldberg wrote, “or what it deliberately confuses, is that human compassion toward animals is an obligation of humans, not an entitlement for animals.” "

cont...
http://www.amconmag.com/2005_05_23/cover.html

11/9/2005 10:33:48 AM

Quote :

"They are not ours to use for FOOD, clothing, experimentation, or entertainment."

I wonder how many of the PETA kids in the brickyard were wearing leather shoes

11/9/2005 11:54:34 AM

none

11/9/2005 11:59:05 AM

I'd say that's likely a strawman argument, nerdchick. I've yet to see a peta person wear leather.

11/9/2005 11:59:09 AM

If it werent for the leather that kept their caveman ancestors warm, they wouldnt be here today

11/9/2005 12:23:20 PM

Quote :

"according to PETA, "Animals deserve rights, regardless of how they taste or how convenient it is to experiment on them. Like humans, animals are capable of suffering and have an INTEREST IN LEADING THEIR OWN LIVES. They are not ours to use for FOOD, clothing, experimentation, or entertainment.""

PETA's not even honest in backing up their own statements. If they are a chicken or a cow, they have the right to lead their own life, but if they are a feral cat...then it's inhumane to let them lead their own lives.

http://www.helpinganimals.com/Factsheet/files/FactsheetDisplay.asp?ID=38 (a PETA website)

Quote :

"Feral Cats: Trapping is the Kindest Solution Andrew Rowan, former director of Tufts University’s Center for Animals and Public Policy, estimates that between 30 and 40 million homeless cats live in the United States.(1) Many of these cats are feral or “wild” cats, the descendants of unaltered tame cats who were abandoned and gave birth to kittens who never had contact with humans. Although ferals are fearful of humans, they are still domesticated and ill-equipped to survive on their own. Feral cats do not die of “old age.” They are poisoned, shot, tortured by cruel people, attacked by other animals, or hit by cars, or they die of exposure, starvation, or highly contagious fatal diseases, such as rabies, feline AIDS, feline leukemia, and feline infectious peritonitis. In one feral cat colony, half of the 32 cats were shot by a man who claimed that they were “attacking” his children.(2) Cats in another colony were shot with darts.(3) A loose dog killed several cats in another colony.(4) Even easily treatable conditions can be deadly for cats who cannot be handled and regularly taken to a veterinarian. Minor cuts or puncture wounds can turn into raging infections and abscesses. Untreated upper respiratory infections lead to eyes and noses so caked with mucus that animals can barely see or breathe. Ferals often scratch their ears bloody, driven crazy by the pain and itching of ear mites and accompanying infections. Others die of blood loss or anemia from worms and fleas. Urinary tract infections, which frequently lead to blockage in male cats, cause extremely painful, lingering deaths if not treated. Feral cats themselves are also a threat to wildlife. The American Bird Conservancy estimates that free-roaming cats kill millions of birds and small mammals in the U.S. every year, including endangered species, such as the least tern and the piping plover. Cats Can’t Live on “Bread” Alone Many people who encounter feral cats start feeding them, but feeding alone can actually make the situation worse. Feeding ferals increases their ability to give birth to even more kittens who are destined to suffer and die premature deaths. It is essential to get these cats off the streets in order to prevent not only their own suffering, but that of their offspring. Feeding should only be done as a prelude to trapping, to get cats accustomed to eating in a certain place at a certain time. ...[stuff about trapping a cat that wasn't relevant, so I cut from the quote for space but you can read at the link]... After bringing cats home from the vet, put them in a quiet place separated from other animals for a week or two to allow them to recover from surgery and become accustomed to their new surroundings. When the cats have recuperated, they can be released into the house, but it may take months (or years) of patience and kindness before the animals begin to trust you. Do not allow feral cats outside, even after months of living in your home. They are easily frightened and may bolt and become lost. Because of the huge number of feral cats and the severe shortage of good homes, the difficulty of socialization, and the dangers lurking where most feral cats live, it may be necessary and the most compassionate choice to euthanize feral cats. You can ask your veterinarian to do this or, if your local shelter uses an injection of sodium pentobarbital, take the cats there. Please do not allow the prospect of euthanasia to deter you from trapping cats. If you leave them where they are, they will almost certainly die a painful death. A painless injection is far kinder than any fate that feral cats will meet if left to survive on their own."

11/9/2005 12:41:01 PM

^^ yep.

except they would argue that we have the technology to make synthetics now.

I don't have any problem with (and I do engage in) eating and wearing animals. You should treat them wth respect, let them live as they would normally (ie feed cows grass, not grain, and don't force animals into tiny boxes and pump them with antibiotics), and kill them humanely, but otherwise, eating and using animals is part of what makes us human.

11/9/2005 12:48:43 PM

Quote :

"They are not ours to use for FOOD, clothing, experimentation, or entertainment."

But cockfights are so funny! And chickens are yummy. And pimps wear feathers in their hat. Don't take away this!

11/9/2005 1:15:21 PM

So PETA jumps down people's throats for eating animals? "Over 27 billion animals are killed every year for food," I don't see much of a problem with that considering that they were killed for food. Killing for sport is another issue.

I wonder how many animals are killed each year for food by other animals? More than 27 billion? If PETA cared so much they would also have problems with carnivorous animals. They can't kill the carnivorous animal because that would be wrong. Maybe they should go out and do missionary work to try to convert them to herbivores. They would probably get the same results.

[Edited on November 9, 2005 at 1:50 PM. Reason : -]

11/9/2005 1:48:27 PM

the same positive results.

11/9/2005 1:52:00 PM

probably not... according to the tech today, some people (18 or something like that) contacted PETA and became interested in going veggie

i don't think they'd do that well with animals

11/9/2005 2:02:28 PM

Personally I was hoping they would try that "id rather go naked than wear fur" thing again...

11/9/2005 2:06:42 PM

11/9/2005 2:15:10 PM

Oddly enough, that ad gives me a strong craving for a steak.

11/9/2005 2:16:07 PM

i'd eat that

11/9/2005 2:16:19 PM

Quote :

"god, peta pisses me off look guys, I know you have good intentions, but you make people who care about animals, food, and the environment look like complete whackos."

11/9/2005 4:23:57 PM

11/9/2005 4:42:50 PM

Yeah, the guy tied to hand me a PETA flyer...

I looked at him and said:

"I'm wearing boots, a belt buckle, and a Renegade Farms employee shirt... I ride horses and rope down cows for fun. I like rodeo and enjoy BBQ... Do I look like the kind of person to hand that shit too?"

He didn't know what to say, so I walked away....

11/9/2005 4:55:16 PM

This was an awesome South Park.

11/9/2005 4:56:34 PM

PETS ARE PRISONERS

11/9/2005 5:50:43 PM

Quote :

"People Eating Tasty Animals"

11/9/2005 5:52:02 PM

Animals DO deserve rights. They may not be the same as humans (for example, the right to vote), but as feeling beings we should acknowledge their ability to suffer. You may not think that a child in China is as important as your little brother, and you give your little brother the best life you can without giving a thought to the foreigner- but would you, in the right mind, torture, confine, and murder a foreign child simply for your brother's luxury?

Humans are not true carnivores, and unlike carnivourous animals, as you would point out, we have a superior intellect- an intellect which allows us to think and make choices about what we do every day. Yes, we can choose to make their lives full of suffering and pain before you choose to whether or not to eat them, or you could treat them with respect and give them a fulfilling life before chosing whether or not to eat them.

On the topic of tamed animals, such as cats, Tom Regan, a famous NCSU philosophy prof and animal rights activist, has this to say::

"[talking about how the death of his dog turned him towards animal rights] Once I realized there was nothing different from our dog to a hog to a chimp, it was hard for me to continue the exploitation. That's almost always the point of shared value, through companion animals. We know two things: (1) companion animals are like displaced people; they don't belong in appartments, (2) they don't belong in the wild either. They are refugees, caught between two worlds. There's a tragedy about their plight- to be in the world and not belong. Not a place to fulfill their nature. The best we can do is to limit their population through spaying and neutering. And dif we take the refugees in, then we have the obligation to provide them with as rich and varied a life as we can. We have a high obligation. Most people treat their pets deficiently in this respect. An animal's needs are like a jug with a hole in the bottom. You realize you can't fill their needs up all the way"

We are responsible for the overpopulation and condition of feral cats- and we can either give them loving homes, or, failing that, euthanize them in place of a painful and lingering death. (By the way, cats are the most destructive alien species in the Americas)

No one in PETA wears leather, wool, etc- most PETA activists are vegan. Vegans do not consume animal products (meat, dairy, eggs) and do not wear/use any animal products either. Veganism is also about practicing compassion to the furthest extent you can- and encouraging others to do so. While you might not "beleive" in giving up meat, what about treating the animals you do eat humanely?

And just to put things in perspective, PETA is more about getting in the news- controversial, "nut-job", tame- any way. Obviously it's gotten you to talking... while you might not be swayed, those who would ARE.

-"Rindos"

11/9/2005 5:59:35 PM

see, what pisses me off is that of all the liberal causes you guys could focus on, you choose the one that helps the disadvantaged in the world THE LEAST.

we cant take food off the market when so many people CANT GET IT

take in mind, i only eat fish and chicken for health reasons, and i have plenty of vegan/vegetarian friends that i understand, but noone should take food off the market when people cant get it, so fuck people who want to get rid of all the meat, a possible food supply.

why cant you guys help us out with labor, or the environment, or fair trade, stuff that, you know, AFFECTS PEOPLE.

11/9/2005 6:21:02 PM

Personally, I'm involved with fair trade and environmental groups (notably the NC Conservation Network). You probably don't realize that most animal rights activists don't limit their activities solely to animal rights- some people actually come to animal rights as a result of their involvement on human rights issues. The laws protecting slaughterhouse workers are as weak as those protecting slaughterhouse animals. In 1991, for instance, the government sued one of the larger slaughterhouse companies for "egregrious violations of safety laws" (and earlier in the 80s as well...)

For example, did you know that meat processing industries advertise heavily in Mexico for workers? Whom, once they start work, can't complain about deplorable conditions because they're illegal immigrants?

Or take, for example, Purdue chicken shacklers. Over 60% of their employess report to the nurse every morning to have painkillers and bandages applied to their hands (shackling is a repetive task- you have to shackle 1 chicken every 3 seconds to keep the pace).
Slaughterhouse workers have the highest rates of on-the-job injuries of any profession. Injuries and illnesses of slaughterhouse workers have been rising since the 1980s- they have not been getting better.

Starvation in other countries?
"It is depressing to consider that throughout the last big famine in Ethiopia, that country was exporting desperately needed soy to Europe to feed to farmed animals. The same relationship held true throughout the famine in Somalia in the early 1990’s. And the same relationship holds between Latin America and the United States today. As just one example, two-thirds of the agriculturally productive land in Central America is devoted to raising farmed animals, almost all of whom are exported or eaten by the wealthy few in these countries."
Instead of raising animals for food and feeding large amounts of grain to them, that grain can be used to feed many starving humans. World hunger problems may be alleviated when we stop cycling grain through animals"

Taking animals off our food supply will free up grain. It won't "starve people"- it takes 7 kilos of grain to make 1 kilo of beef. Those 7 kilos of grain could instead create 7 kilos of bread.

11/9/2005 6:56:27 PM

i love steak.

11/9/2005 7:02:17 PM

I love hummus

11/9/2005 7:03:22 PM

^^^i do know that, ive been working with CIW in Florida and UFCW in NC for almost a year now.

fair wages/working conditions have no connection to whether or not someone chooses to eat meat. animal rights activists might stand for the same causes i do, but keeping people from eating meat/wearing leather isnt going to help the conditions of these people in any way, and its naive of you to think so.

If someone chooses to eat meat or not eat meat, i dont fucking care. the capacity is there for this planet to be able to support more grain and more animals. if you have stats showing otherwise, please give me a link to them. id like to think we can hold them both, but if you know otherwise, please tell me. im not trying to get mad at you, i just dont see proof for this. please provide some kind of substantial evidence. nothing pisses me off more than when dumb fellow liberals dont provide evidence.

i might be a fucking stupid liberal to some, but i do have common sense as well. cultures who have been eating meat in their dishes for hundreds of years arent going to change for your morals.


[Edited on November 9, 2005 at 7:21 PM. Reason : .]

11/9/2005 7:15:29 PM

Quote :

"we cant take food off the market when so many people CANT GET IT"

A FUCKING MEN

Quote :

"You may not think that a child in China is as important as your little brother, and you give your little brother the best life you can without giving a thought to the foreigner- but would you, in the right mind, torture, confine, and murder a foreign child simply for your brother's luxury?"

You people will ignore the suffering of that same chinese boy but put all your energy in saving the one thing that could end the suffering of that child.

It's all you liberal nut jobs out there that really give the left wing a horrible name. You'll protest genetically altered foods when those same foods are able to be grown in subsaharan africa and FEED PEOPLE WHO WOULD OTHERWISE NOT BE FED. You protest altered foods that yield more crop per acre than the inorganic ones. You protest on a full stomach. You vouch for animal rights on a full stomach. You don't realize that if these people in Africa didn't have an ox and genetically altered crops THEY WOULDN'T EAT!

IF YOU AND YOURS ARE NOT HUNGRY THEN SHUT THE FUCK UP. YOU HAVE NO RIGHT TO TAKE ANY FOOD OFF THE MARKET THAT ARE FEEDING PEOPLE AND SAVING LIVES. GET A REAL FUCKING CAUSE.

GODDAM I'M PISSED NOW.

[Edited on November 9, 2005 at 7:31 PM. Reason : .]

11/9/2005 7:24:22 PM

yeah, i mean, youre heart is in the right place, but if you want to go tell poor, starving families in latin america or africa who have been eating meat in their cultures for 1000 years, by all means do it.

unless you can provide an abundant alternative that provides the human body with necessary protein and can be phased into their diets without just chopping off meat consumption all together and telling them to go eat the new stuff. i mean, thats just bad planning, thats some Mao Zedong shit.

[Edited on November 9, 2005 at 7:33 PM. Reason : .]

11/9/2005 7:31:26 PM

I don't even think their heart is in the right place. They want to feel heroic. They want to feel like they're saving something... that they're doing good somewhere. But they simply don't realize that they're vouching for the wrong cause. People are hungry. That is a real cause to get fired up about. If a cow can feed a village of 20 people, if an ox can plow a field so they can store the food for winter, if a genetically altered crop will help them feed their people, who in the hell are you to take that away?

11/9/2005 7:34:12 PM

well, like i said, unless you can find an abundant, affordable alternative to be phased in (ie: affordable farm machinery, a protein supplement that can be grown in mass).

oh yeah, and if you wanna find new jobs for thousands of poor wage workers in america today, go ahead, its all some people have. oh yeah, and those jobs should pay living wage and be subject to strict safety inspection

[Edited on November 9, 2005 at 7:41 PM. Reason : .]

11/9/2005 7:36:18 PM

and I'll go back to my point made earlier. With rights comes responsibility. Unless you're willing to patrol the wild and convert the carnivores, they don't deserve rights nor responsibilities.

11/9/2005 7:37:14 PM

Not eating meat will not change the welfare of workers immediately- but I refuse to support industries who exploit humans with my money.
I'm not advocating taking meat from people in starving countries- I'm saying you should think about what you support in your actions. As a developed nation, we don't need meat. Seriously. Or at the very least, not in the quantities we consume it today, and not by the means we use.

As for GMO high-yield foods, starving people can't afford them. There is not a worldwide lack of food- there is a problem in distribting food. We're lucky in the US- we have some of the most fertile land in the world. Others aren't (for more info, see <a href="http://www.mindfully.org/GE/GE4/Feed-The-World-GMOs.htm"> here </a>

11/9/2005 7:42:27 PM

So given that PETA is dumb, and has little to no influence on politics,

Why does it get everyone's panties in a wad?

I swear Harris Teeter must be having a run on tampons tonight.

11/9/2005 7:45:29 PM

Ever heard of Bjorn Lomborg? Of course not. It's estimated that with his philanthropy and going to other nations and living and teaching them how to grow these genetically altered foods that he has saved ONE BILLION LIVES.

bullshit poor nations aren't benefitting.

11/9/2005 7:47:29 PM

Poor nations ain't beneffitting because of the cost of genetically modified foods. Sure, teach them to grow them, but if they can't afford to buy them, bullhoey.

11/9/2005 7:48:17 PM

CAN YOU READ? ONE BILLION PEOPLE! LOOK IT UP!

And tell me again that they haven't benefitted. This tears you up because by you "saving the animals" you've saved ZERO lives. You're not so heroic anymore.

[Edited on November 9, 2005 at 7:50 PM. Reason : .]

11/9/2005 7:49:36 PM

A vegetarian saves approximately 68 lives a year due to a decrease in pressure for grain.

Please post your info/link on Bjorn to prove your point

11/9/2005 7:54:40 PM

that bullshit episode was pretty good about Norman Borlaug

[Edited on November 9, 2005 at 8:05 PM. Reason : wrong guy]

11/9/2005 7:55:16 PM

Quote :

"I refuse to support industries who exploit humans with my money."

and this is why we have unions and organizations like OSHA, organizations that need your support to ensure that workers DONT get exploited.

you respect our cause and we'll respect yours.

Quote :

"A vegetarian saves approximately 68 lives a year due to a decrease in pressure for grain. "

link?

Like i said, i want to see where youre coming from on all of this, but since you wont respond to your PMs, i guess you'd rather me argue with you or just be blissfully ignorant and agree. I want to learn, i like knowledge, its good.

11/9/2005 8:02:59 PM

Here is the support behind my claim:
"To produce a pound of protein, it takes 1065 gallons of water for soybeans, 1490 gallons for corn and a whopping 3,000 to 5,000 gallons for meat. Not so amazingly, more than half of the water consumed in the U.S. each year is used up in factory animal farming! If you are concerned about world hunger, consider these comparisons--twenty vegetarians can be fed on the land needed to feed one person consuming a meat-based diet. If Americans reduce their meat intake by only 10%, 60 million people (the number of people who will starve to death this year) could be adequately fed by the grain saved, because for the feed cost of an 8 oz. steak, 45 to 50 people could each have a full cup of cooked cereal grains."
from here:http://people.qualcomm.com/sriharid/info/vegetarianism/veg.html

and all I've found so far on Bjorn is his 27 accusations against him filed with the Danish Committees on Scientific Dishonesty (DCDS)

11/9/2005 8:08:25 PM

the thing I hate is how children are basically tricked into eating meat. I've seen parents lie to their kids telling them that the meat their eating isn't the same as the animals they're learning about in school. That's just wrong. You shouldn't intentionally delude your children.

11/9/2005 8:27:35 PM

So, you're against Santa Claus, the Easter Bunny, and the Tooth Fairy?

11/9/2005 8:32:43 PM