PDA

View Full Version : Does the PETA actuallly know of it's perception? POssible Anon attack?



AAAhmed46
3rd April 09, 10:22 PM
Just recently was watching a talk show, talked about the PETA making a fuss about horse drawn carriages in new york.

Now im all for people standing up for animal rights. But should this organization be the PETA? Im sure long ago they did some good work. But now they just seem to have gone off the rocker.

Almost EVERY internet forum i visit, people seem to really really hate them.

Like scientology, whenever someone would bring it up, nothing positive was said about them, few people stood up to defend them. Not surprising, Anon went after scientology.


I see the same trend for the PETA.

I wouldn't exactly support something like that, since many of it's members are well meaning despite me disagreeing with them.

But ARE they aware of themselves at all?

WarPhalange
3rd April 09, 10:37 PM
They are a negative force for animal rights. They're the type of fanatic that will help animals even if those little shits have to die in the process. I don't know their history, but it's irrelevant, because their current members are batshit insane. I mean, they don't even acknowledge that the people who they are going after might actually be treating the animals well and like them.

It's not hard to imagine the guy who owns the horses in New York has trainers/caretakers that actually like horses and want what's best for them. My cousin has been riding horses for about 20 years now and she finally got a horse of her own. You think she wants to see it get hurt or uncumfortable in any way? Of course not. She loves her horse. But these bastards would still go after her because the horse isn't free, as if that was somehow The Promised Land for all animals.

It just strikes me as incredibly odd that these people don't understand the kind of connection a person can have with an animal. I mean, I consider my dog family. I know his quirks and often times it just seems like he knows what I'm thinking. I can't see him dreaming about living out in the wild, when whenever I let him outside to do his business before I go to bed and it happens to be raining, he'll just kind of sit there and I have to tell him to get out there. He'll do his business and then run back inside. Gee, if he liked the wild so much, you'd think he might just want to stay outside all the time, huh?

AAAhmed46
3rd April 09, 10:47 PM
In canada there are two shows, one called "The hour' and the other "The micheal coren show' the micheal coren show isn't the most popular program, it's on a religious conservative T.V. station. But the show has a good current events panel.

One of the panelists, David Menzies mentioned that some lady who founded it showed up on 'the hour' and talked about how she wants to ban seeing eye dogs for the blind.

I have to see it for my self to confirm.

But seeing eye dogs for teh blind? Why don't they focus on dog fighting instead?

AAAhmed46
3rd April 09, 10:48 PM
It just strikes me as incredibly odd that these people don't understand the kind of connection a person can have with an animal. I mean, I consider my dog family. I know his quirks and often times it just seems like he knows what I'm thinking. I can't see him dreaming about living out in the wild, when whenever I let him outside to do his business before I go to bed and it happens to be raining, he'll just kind of sit there and I have to tell him to get out there. He'll do his business and then run back inside. Gee, if he liked the wild so much, you'd think he might just want to stay outside all the time, huh?

Friend of mine once lost a cat, they couldn't find it, it ran away.

When they found the thing, it NEVER wanted to leave the house.

Apparently not being fed regularly really freaked the thing out. Didn't run away again.

Doritosaurus Chex
3rd April 09, 11:17 PM
Try looking up the Penn and Teller Bullshit episode that featured Peta. They have some fucked up things like:

- On a tax return, Peta wrote off a giant freezer. A freezer that can only be used to store frozen meat or animal cadavers. Since they don't eat meat, it only leaves us with 1 other choice.
- At the time, one of the vice presidents is a diabetic and dependent on insulin injections. Guess how insulin was developed?

The only good Peta has ever done was the I'd rather be naked than wear fur campaign.

WarPhalange
3rd April 09, 11:27 PM
I wonder if the regular members are just as apeshit, though? For example, Republicans get a lot of flack for being homosexuals while espousing hatred for gays, being corrupt, racist, religious fanatics, gun fuckers, etc., but it seems like the run-of-the-mill Reps aren't so bad and it's only the "conservatives" that stain the party. Do you think something similar is going on here? Bill Maher is a PETA supporter, and, although he has a complete lack of understanding of medicine, he seems to have a good head on his shoulders.

Ajamil
3rd April 09, 11:35 PM
And here we have the HUGE difference between animal welfare and animal rights. Another great one to bring up is the spaying/neutering of house pets. Welfare advocates say of course - it makes cohabitation with humans so much easier, it removes problems of overpopulation, I think there are showable health benefits, etc. Animal rights activists say we have no right to dictate when another species can or can't breed.

To a rights activist - and PETA is certainly an extreme example of this - animals deserve all the same self-evident rights of a human. Domestication is a form of slavery and oppression, and humans shouldn't do or use ANYTHING not produced entirely from humans.

I have a hard time on this issue. I'd LIKE to be on the side of animal rights, but the practicality of the situation doesn't - to me - allow that. For another insane (my opinion) example, PETA is against the use of wool and honey due to the "freedoms" taken away from sheep and bees. Now, I'd be all for removing some of the things I've heard done to sheep in the wool industry (granted the source for this is PETA, but I've read that in order to make a better "canvas" for shearing, ranchers will cut off the flesh around the haunches of sheep so the scar tissue grows back smoothly). Or if there's any sort of inhumane treatment of bees (what the hell could a beekeeper do to upset a bee besides harvesting the honey? I suppose that's enough for PETA).

However, to ban the industry and "free" the sheep and bees is currently ludicrous. First off, being domesticated the sheep wouldn't last more than a few generations to predators (can't stop them either, of course) and do you think bees will leave their man-made hives for some esoteric idea of a "free" one. That's just the animal's welfare considerations, not mentioning job losses, material losses, etc. that would hurt human life.

It's a hard thing to wrap around when you give no special privilege to your own species, but I agree PETA takes it too far and ends up as a quasi-terrorist group that seems to advocate animal rights at the expense of humans (as if humans aren't animals too).

I just want them to be consistent and start yelling at ants to stop "farming" aphids and waging war with each other.

AAAhmed46
4th April 09, 12:06 AM
I wonder if the regular members are just as apeshit, though? For example, Republicans get a lot of flack for being homosexuals while espousing hatred for gays, being corrupt, racist, religious fanatics, gun fuckers, etc., but it seems like the run-of-the-mill Reps aren't so bad and it's only the "conservatives" that stain the party. Do you think something similar is going on here? Bill Maher is a PETA supporter, and, although he has a complete lack of understanding of medicine, he seems to have a good head on his shoulders.


Thats what im thinking too. Id hate to see alot of innocent people taking flack for the faults of those at the head. It's like muslims, we see and hear the bad and the loud, but what about the ordinary PETA?

And....what IS the brunt of their work?

Robot Jesus
4th April 09, 12:23 AM
PETA allows certain people to get worked up over things without thinking them through.

"You take an oath to a group whom you know follows the laws of providence, which it obeys independently of the influence of earthly powers, who leads the animals rightly, and who will guide the animals fate. Through your oath you bind yourselves to a group who — that is our faith — was sent to us by higher powers. Do not seek PETA with your mind. You will find it through the strength of your hearts!"


EDIT: and then theres this asshole "Many committed vegetarians in PETA were repulsed by the very idea of eating meat, even if no animals were harmed."

Steve
4th April 09, 12:55 AM
Just recently was watching a talk show, talked about the PETA making a fuss about horse drawn carriages in new york.

Now im all for people standing up for animal rights. But should this organization be the PETA? Im sure long ago they did some good work. But now they just seem to have gone off the rocker.

Almost EVERY internet forum i visit, people seem to really really hate them.

Like scientology, whenever someone would bring it up, nothing positive was said about them, few people stood up to defend them. Not surprising, Anon went after scientology.


I see the same trend for the PETA.

I wouldn't exactly support something like that, since many of it's members are well meaning despite me disagreeing with them.

But ARE they aware of themselves at all?

They're just like those Lyndon LaRouche douchenozzles that I see all around the U-District. Totally clueless, but I choose to enjoy how much they are unknowingly making fools of themselves instead of having it ruin my day.

Scientology is different because they are trying to pass themselves off as a "religion" just to avoid paying taxes. PETA may be nutty, but not that nutty.

Ajamil
4th April 09, 01:42 AM
EDIT: and then theres this asshole "Many committed vegetarians in PETA were repulsed by the very idea of eating meat, even if no animals were harmed."

See, I'm against meat-eating for various reasons, and while I'd like the ethics of the industry to be hugely revamped, I don't think it'll ever be possible to remove not just the activity, but the industry. I'd never eat meat again (intentionally or if there's choice). but I'd never try to force another to stop. Convince, sure, but not force.

The whole "lab grown" meat thing is another story altogether. With the meat never being attached to a sentient being, I'd have no problem with it being mass produced. And while I'd probably balk and say no, I've toyed with the idea of eating it myself, given the opportunity.

Robot Jesus
4th April 09, 01:57 AM
that tears it, once this whole cloned meat becomes possible I will kidnap you and force feed you standing rib roast.

EuropIan
4th April 09, 04:28 AM
The only good Peta has ever done was the I'd rather be naked than wear fur campaign.
They also made the "vegetarians have better sex with vegetables"-ad

ZuDmQt0pgMU

Kiko
4th April 09, 05:11 AM
*sigh*

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/PETA
also
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ingrid_Newkirk

Founded by extremists and probably mostly supported by the well meaning 'I like kitties and doggies' types.

Newkirk is best known for the issue awareness campaigns she organizes on behalf of PETA, in order to promote animal rights and veganism (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Veganism). In her will (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Will_%28law%29), for example, she has directed that her skin be turned into wallets, her feet into umbrella (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Umbrella) stands, and her flesh into "Newkirk Nuggets," then grilled on a barbecue (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Barbecue).[2] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ingrid_Newkirk#cite_note-Millard-1) "We are complete press sluts," she told The New Yorker. "It is our obligation.

That should say it all. I'd rather support my local branch of the SPCA and or shelter. I like to eat the tasty ones and I wish all the cuddly ones would get adopted.

Robot Jesus
4th April 09, 05:12 AM
what about the ones that are tasty and cuddly

Kiko
4th April 09, 05:15 AM
Your call.

Steve
4th April 09, 05:30 AM
Kiko, you are again a moderate and intelligent thinker, even when your own circumstances come into play. This is why I admire you.

mrm1775
4th April 09, 06:30 AM
Scientology is different because they are trying to pass themselves off as a "religion" just to avoid paying taxes. PETA may be nutty, but not that nutty.Give them time.

Steve
4th April 09, 06:35 AM
Give them time.

No, I will eat meat when ever I want.

Kiko
4th April 09, 07:26 AM
I can haz cheezburger, too!

mrblackmagic
4th April 09, 07:57 AM
Sea kittens!!!

Lebell
4th April 09, 09:16 AM
yes, you know what let's give everthing rights!

what about those poor vegetables?
being cooked or eaten raw....zomg...

voting rights for carrots you fascists!!!

[/peta]

edit: i wasnt supposed to be on this thread, but i mistakenly read anal attack...so..sorry..)

EuropIan
4th April 09, 09:24 AM
voting rights for carrots you fascists!!!

[/peta]


nbcKdc0xhNw

Kiko
4th April 09, 09:42 AM
http://rashy.org/articleimg/animals/anoncat.png

Ajamil
4th April 09, 11:06 AM
that tears it, once this whole cloned meat becomes possible I will kidnap you and force feed you standing rib roast.

Standing rib roast? I've had baby ribs and pork ribs, what's a standing rib roast?


That should say it all. I'd rather support my local branch of the SPCA and or shelter. I like to eat the tasty ones and I wish all the cuddly ones would get adopted.

YES!! Some of the best examples of animal welfare organizations. Also, I like to gauge people's reaction and try to prod at preconceived notions by suggesting cats become a regular meal here in the US. I mean c'mon, I love `em too, I own two and they are my children, but we do (or are quickly soon to have) a big problem with feral cat populations. Catch, neuter, release is working well and getting the word out, but still plenty of poor kitties being locked up too long with no-one to care for `em so we put them to sleep already. Why not make it an industry, or a sport with size and number limits? I hear cats and puppies have sweet meat.


what about the ones that are tasty and cuddly

See above.

Gbemi
6th April 09, 08:52 AM
yes, you know what let's give everthing rights!

what about those poor vegetables?
being cooked or eaten raw....zomg...

voting rights for carrots you fascists!!!

[/peta]

edit: i wasnt supposed to be on this thread, but i mistakenly read anal attack...so..sorry..)

This post reminds me of a debate on youtube between Islamic and Hindu scholars. Hindu scholar says, "eating meat not so good. proven by science, etc..." Muslim scholar says, "science proves that even plants and trees can communicate through chemical release that there is impending danger i.e. fire. So eating meat is no more savage than eating plants". I love logic...


Here is some PETA logic. Eating meat is evil. eating meat is the major cause of green house gasses. Stop eating meat. Demand for meat should go down.... which means number of cows will go down.. Therefore, the extinction of cows and pigs IS innevitible. Yeah PETA.

They've always rubbed me the wrong way. Which is why there is much cognative dissonance whenever I see Bill Maher supporting them. PETA's approach to animal rights is no less absurd than some of the wacky religious practices he chides on his show.

Virus
6th April 09, 09:51 AM
Cows are a major contributor to GG emissions and reducing the number of cows doesn't necessarily mean they will go extinct.

Dagon Akujin
6th April 09, 10:14 AM
Founded by extremists and probably mostly supported by the well meaning 'I like kitties and doggies' types.

What is really especially funny though is that PETA does not support keeping pets, so those poor "i like kitties and doggies" people are considered devils by PETA.

Oh, and PETA is full of hypocrits and liars. I knew a guy in college who was a big-time animal rights defender. The dork would hand out fliars as if PETA was his religion. He once helped break into a lab to let free the rats and other animals. This dick said that nobody should have a domesticated animal. That all dogs, pigs, cows, etc., should be killed off (animal welfare is a joke) because they are not natural.

And this dick owned a dog. He said he should kill it though.

See, the thing is, PETA hates animals. Hates them. They just have this invented fantasy world where humans don't exist and everything is "natural". Bullshit.

Gbemi
6th April 09, 10:44 AM
Cows are a major contributor to GG emissions and reducing the number of cows doesn't necessarily mean they will go extinct.

Of course cows won't go extinct, but only because we aren't insane enough to listen to PETA. Domesticated animals, largely exist only because humans want them to. But cows are to big and costly to keep just for fun. And they are really bad at learning tricks. Without economic incentive, the won't be kept at all.

Aside from the PETA convo, I agree that it would be a good idea to reduce the number of bovines, but how? Taxing the meat to make it prohibitively high so only the well-to-do can afford it? Even if you don't tax, if you artificially limit the number of cows in the world, the demand will be high, supply low, which willl translate to higher prices anyway.

This will of course make meats that don't produce gg emissions more popular, and PETA won't be happy about that either. Not to mention the unintended effects thay may arise. For example, poultry waste I think is high in arsenic, which finds its way into the rivers and soil.

You'll just be changing one problem for another. Probably breeding or bio-engineering cows to produced lover levells of gg emissions is the best long term plan, but, I'm no expert.

Doritosaurus Chex
6th April 09, 12:55 PM
See, the thing is, PETA hates animals. Hates them. They just have this invented fantasy world where humans don't exist and everything is "natural". Bullshit.

So they basically share the same vision as Dr. Manhattan or Kefka.

Phrost
6th April 09, 01:31 PM
The whole "lab grown" meat thing is another story altogether. With the meat never being attached to a sentient being, I'd have no problem with it being mass produced. And while I'd probably balk and say no, I've toyed with the idea of eating it myself, given the opportunity.

You don't eat hamburgers because you think cows are self-aware?

Did the meaning of the word "sentience" change or has it been strategically co-opted by the animal "rights" movement.

WarPhalange
6th April 09, 01:48 PM
Is an infant sentient? Would you be alright eating a baby burger?

EuropIan
6th April 09, 01:54 PM
Is an infant sentient? Would you be alright eating a baby burger?
Now now, such modest proposals are for NOMNOMNOM

Ajamil
6th April 09, 02:34 PM
This post reminds me of a debate on youtube between Islamic and Hindu scholars. Hindu scholar says, "eating meat not so good. proven by science, etc..." Muslim scholar says, "science proves that even plants and trees can communicate through chemical release that there is impending danger i.e. fire. So eating meat is no more savage than eating plants". I love logic...
That Hindu should read his Vedas. The Vedas know that eating plants is still killing. It mentions that walking, tilling the soil, and pouring water into your hands all kill things - in other words you can't live without something else dying in this world. The point is to lessen the suffering, and the point for my specific sect is that Krishna has outlined what he likes to eat, and if you cook food for Him, then the repercussions go to Him...but this is way off topic.


Of course cows won't go extinct, but only because we aren't insane enough to listen to PETA. Domesticated animals, largely exist only because humans want them to. But cows are to big and costly to keep just for fun. And they are really bad at learning tricks. Without economic incentive, the won't be kept at all. Plenty of people keep cows as pets, but I agree that they are much more costly than a dog or cat. Well, seeing the lavish amounts of money Western families spend on their pets, this might be arguable. Still, they most certainly can learn tricks - see a cow raised in a family that loves it, then come say this.


You don't eat hamburgers because you think cows are self-aware?
Did the meaning of the word "sentience" change or has it been strategically co-opted by the animal "rights" movement.

I think so:

Sentience is the ability to feel or perceive subjectively (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Subjectivity). It is an important concept in philosophy, particularly in the philosophy of animal ethics (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Animal_ethics) and in eastern philosophy (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eastern_philosophy), as well as in science fiction (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Science_fiction) and the study of artificial intelligence (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Artificial_intelligence), although in each of these fields the term is used slightly differently. Advocates of animal rights argue that all animals are sentient in that they can feel pleasure and pain, which entails the presumption of certain moral rights (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rights) and ought to entail some legal rights. In eastern philosophy (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eastern_philosophy), sentience is a metaphysical quality of all things that requires our respect and care. In science fiction, sentience is "personhood": the essential (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Essentialism) quality that separates humankind from machines or lower animals. Sentience is used in the study of consciousness to describe the ability to have sensations or experiences, known to Western academic philosophers as "qualia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Qualia)".
The only definition I don't agree with in the wiki, however, is "personhood" because it seems very arbitrary and circular. What's the difference between that kind of sentience and saying the difference between us an animals is a soul?

Then again, perhaps I meant sapience. Either way, I DO believe cows are self-aware, or at least I don't think you can devise a test that fairly decides this. I've always hated the "find an unseen spot with a mirror test" as I don't think" it properly takes into account the way information is acquired (if your main sense is smell, a mirror is just flat glass that has pretty shifting colors) or intelligence levels. Probably wrong there, though.

No, I don't eat hamburgers because I can live without them, because (through whatever reason) it is a healthier lifestyle, and because the only lasting reason I see for it is "it tastes good." Which is fine, but realize that you're killing things in order for your tongue to be happy and I think that's sick.

Edit: Should have read the whole article. I believe YOU meant sapient.

The word sentient is often confused with the word sapient (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sapience), which can connote knowledge (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Knowledge), consciousness (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Consciousness) or apperception (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Apperception). The root of the confusion is that the word conscious has a number of different usages in the English language (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/English_language). The two words can be distinguished by looking at their Latin (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Latin) roots (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Root_%28linguistics%29): sentire, "to feel"; and sapere, "to know." Thus, sentience is a subjective experience, while sapience is a somewhat more objective cognitive ability. Cows certainly feel, but do they know?

EuropIan
6th April 09, 02:39 PM
No, I don't eat hamburgers because I can live without them, because (through whatever reason) it is a healthier lifestyle, and because the only lasting reason I see for it is "it tastes good." Which is fine, but realize that you're killing things in order for your tongue to be happy and I think that's sick.

Animals are sick.

TheLordHumungus
6th April 09, 03:01 PM
You've gotta love how they're willing to exploit women in order to stop the exploitation of animals.

Ajamil
6th April 09, 03:26 PM
Animals are sick.

They eat their own shit, don't wear clothes, and kill their step-children, you gonna start doing that too? Or are you cherry-picking similarities as an excuse?

Human or otherwise, other people's behavior does not affect what I think is my proper reaction to what the world gives me.

Kiko
6th April 09, 04:22 PM
What is really especially funny though is that PETA does not support keeping pets, so those poor "i like kitties and doggies" people are considered devils by PETA.

Oh, and PETA is full of hypocrits and liars.

I'm sure they're very happy to take contributions from the 'i like kitties and doggies' crowd, though, right? All that media-whoring costs money!

Doritosaurus Chex
6th April 09, 07:01 PM
You've gotta love how they're willing to exploit women in order to stop the exploitation of animals.

They're just people. To PETA, that's okay.

Harpy
6th April 09, 08:29 PM
I definitely think PETA has a place. I absolutely LOVE the paint/blood-throwing, seriously.

Animals have no voice. Animal welfare and animal rights groups are a key means to create more awareness, compassion and thoughtfulness in an increasingly emotionally distant population.

You'll do realise the countless atrocities that are being committed to animals even as we speak right? To counter that we do need a group as crazy as PETA to swing the balance. Yes, there is hypocrisy in abundance but the exact same can be said for those who have little ethics when it comes to using animals for their own gain/pleasure/fashion. I find it pathetic that people bring up things like 'vegetables have feelings to' and 'why don't you suppor cockroach rights' and try to argue inane points which shows an absolute lack of understanding for the core ideas that animal rights groups stand for.

You may hate them at times but they bring the issue of animal welfare and rights to your mind. I find anytime I see something they do I reestablish and reaffirm my small commitment to try and cause as little harm to the environment as possible, find time to donate supplies/money to local shelters etc.

The moderate groups are the ones that get the most work done, PETA gets attention for the cause, regardless of the cost. The individuals who choose to take such actions know that they will have to reap the consequences but they are willing to do so and truly believe in their cause.

Transcendent Sunships - I have more empathy for animals than humans.

Doritosaurus Chex
6th April 09, 10:16 PM
I think PETA hurts the animal rights movement more than it supports it. PETA may get my attention, but it costs animal rights my support. It's hard for me to take animal rights seriously when they run campaigns like changing the name fish to sea kittens.

If the idiocy didn't turn me off, then the poor taste ads they run makes me want to punt the next puppy I see. Do you really think you can win the hearts and minds of supporters by releasing a press release about pets being left orphaned after 9/11? Or when they picketed outside a hospital in my city telling people that animal ownership was the cause of SARS.

Lily, even if you empathize with animals more than humans, can do agree with this statement: “I don't believe that people have the right to life,” Newkirk has said. “That’s a supremacist perversion. A rat is a pig is a dog is a boy.”

It's funny how they compare themselves to MLK and Gandhi, but when did those guys ever support terrorists?

http://www.toplessrobot.com/467px-CobraCommander-150-703331.jpg

Virus
6th April 09, 11:04 PM
Michael Specter asked whether she (Newkirk) would be opposed to experiments on five thousand rats, or even chimpanzees, if it was needed to cure AIDS. She replied: "Would you be opposed to experiments on your daughter if you knew it would save fifty million people?"

She's retarded.

Harpy
7th April 09, 12:07 AM
Just out of curiosity Virus. What would be your answer to the question Newkirk posed (if you had a daughter)?

TheLordHumungus
7th April 09, 01:15 AM
Transcendent Sunships - I have more empathy for animals than humans.

But as a woman, do you feel it necessary to exploit your gender by constantly portraying you all as sexual objects in order to try and raise awareness for animal rights? Couldn't they perhaps choose other methods to get their message out?

Lebell
7th April 09, 04:39 AM
This is just stupid.
Look at yourself.

Why do I eat meat?
Because i like it, because i can.
' Yeah but what if you had to kill the animals yourself? Would you eat meat then?'
Been there, done that.

Discussions about hippy vegetarian stuff is for rich kids with too much time on their hands.

Besides, with the current developments on the globe meat production will go down because of emissions and the enormous amounts of foodmaterials it costs to maintain the numbers of meat that are being produced.
In time the meat industries get extra environomental taxes because of their poluting emissions and meat prices will go up significantly.

Economical measures will prove to be way more effective then PETA.

I will miss their naked chicks campaigns though.

Ajamil
7th April 09, 10:28 AM
This is just stupid.
Look at yourself.

Why do I eat meat?
Because i like it, because i can.
' Yeah but what if you had to kill the animals yourself? Would you eat meat then?'
Been there, done that.
I have killed and eaten my own food - mostly fish and elk, but I've seen goats slaughtered too. I have zero beef (heh, pun not intended) with people that raise and slaughter their own sources of meat. I don't like it, but it's miles ahead of people raised to think meat comes from the grocery store. They know what happens to the animals, they aren't squeamish about blood and death while chowing on leg of lamb.


Discussions about hippy vegetarian stuff is for rich kids with too much time on their hands.
Discussion, sure, but meat is still considered a luxury for most third world countries. Rice and beans are the majority diet for humanity.


Besides, with the current developments on the globe meat production will go down because of emissions and the enormous amounts of foodmaterials it costs to maintain the numbers of meat that are being produced.
In time the meat industries get extra environomental taxes because of their poluting emissions and meat prices will go up significantly.

Economical measures will prove to be way more effective then PETA.

I will miss their naked chicks campaigns though.

If only their lobbyists' hands weren't so deep in the pockets (or is that the fly?) of the politicians. The meat industry is one of the worst ecologically in terms of energy and resources (like fresh water) needed to produce and the amount of polluting materials that we end up with.

Lebell
7th April 09, 12:58 PM
Arjuna, i guess you have indian roots.
I lived there for a while and you're right about the rice and beans.
But it will change as more and more can afford meat products.

Every friday we used to go to a popular chicken uhm...take away, all kinds of chicken snacks, and even the poorer people could already afford some.

If vegetaria food would be of the same quality as over in India i'd turn veggie in no time.
(lived in Punjab, nuff said right? ;-)

Ajamil
7th April 09, 02:11 PM
Arjuna, i guess you have indian roots.
I lived there for a while and you're right about the rice and beans.
But it will change as more and more can afford meat products.

Every friday we used to go to a popular chicken uhm...take away, all kinds of chicken snacks, and even the poorer people could already afford some.

If vegetaria food would be of the same quality as over in India i'd turn veggie in no time.
(lived in Punjab, nuff said right? ;-)
Lily did the same thing recently, no I'm Norwegian by descent. I'm just a different style of born-again whose toned down quite a bit. I think my UU upbringing blocked me from going Christian, so I went Hare Krishna instead. And I agree - great example is happening now in Japan. Another great example is the fact that McDonalds is doing just fine in India - they just have a lot more chicken items and I think some lamb/goat ones.

I've seen the items posted arguing about meats directly affecting the evolutionary brain development of humans, and I don't try to dispute it - we will always have a craving for meat.

Kiko
7th April 09, 02:37 PM
I'd ask my daughter to make up her own mind about the experiment, but that's a lovely hypothetical for making people feel guilty.

If you want to HELP a situation, roll up your sleeves and do something constructive. Shelters and local SPCA type organizations do this. PETA is not helpful, they're destructive and they admit they'll do anything to get their 'message' out.

Kiko
7th April 09, 03:30 PM
Oh, and

http://graphjam.files.wordpress.com/2009/02/song-chart-memes-environmental-coolness.jpg

Virus
7th April 09, 04:37 PM
Just out of curiosity Virus. What would be your answer to the question Newkirk posed (if you had a daughter)?

I don't have kids because they're bullshit but if I did I'd tell the little bitch to get on that operating table.

Doritosaurus Chex
7th April 09, 05:05 PM
I'd ask my daughter to make up her own mind about the experiment, but that's a lovely hypothetical for making people feel guilty.

If you want to HELP a situation, roll up your sleeves and do something constructive. Shelters and local SPCA type organizations do this. PETA is not helpful, they're destructive and they admit they'll do anything to get their 'message' out.

The thing with the experiment is that your daughter won't necessarily be getting the actual treatment. She could be getting a sugar pill as far as you know. Shows how much PETA knows about testing, but it's not like that's ever stopped them.

That hypothetical question is just a question dodge because they have used animal testing to their benefit. They have a vice president who is diabetic and dependent on insulin. When asked about it, VP Mary Beth Sweetland said something along the lines of: These animals made the sacrifice so that I could fight on their behalf.

Harpy
7th April 09, 09:06 PM
I don't have kids because they're bullshit but if I did I'd tell the little bitch to get on that operating table.

*chokes*

What?! I know you want to come across as a 'man of science' but I bet you would not be able to do such a thing.

What's bullshit about kids? You were one.

Ajamil
8th April 09, 12:10 AM
I don't have kids because they're bullshit but if I did I'd tell the little bitch to get on that operating table.
r-L3JMk7C1A
Medical experiments for the lot of `em!

WarPhalange
8th April 09, 01:43 AM
I don't have kids because they're bullshit but if I did I'd tell the little bitch to get on that operating table.

You've never played the Resident Evil remake for Game Cube, have you? Experimenting on your kids is a sure-fire way to fuck some serious shit up.

Virus
8th April 09, 05:53 AM
*chokes*

What?! I know you want to come across as a 'man of science' but I bet you would not be able to do such a thing.


While having kids is an alien thought to me, if I did, I wouldn't kill my daughter. It was a joke. But Newkirk's moral equivalence is likewise a joke, which is one of my gripes with PETA and the animal rights movement. (and to put my cards on the table, I'm t3h vegetarian.) They say things that aren't true. You can't have the current level of medical technology without animal testing unless large numbers of animal rights activists are willing to be injected with experimental drugs. They claim that results of animal tests aren't valid and they make claims about the nature of animal testing which are grossly inaccurate. Some of them have also vandalized labs ruining years of research and threatened scientific staff. We can't have it both ways, if we want the current level of medical technology we need to use animal models for research and testing until a viable replacement is found.


What's bullshit about kids? You were one.

Kids themselves aren't bullshit. This day and age, the advantages of breeding are entirely subjective but the disadvantages are very real and objective. Besides a temporary boost in social status, I can't think of a single objective measurable benefit that having children gives the individual. The sacrifices that have to be made are huge. Money = less. Time = less. Spontaneity = less. Stress = more. Playing Xbox360 = less.

Kiko
8th April 09, 02:36 PM
http://icanhascheezburger.files.wordpress.com/2009/03/funny-pictures-cat-does-not-like-vegetarian-food.jpg

socratic
9th April 09, 09:17 AM
1. PETA pickets animal shelters because of their euthanasia programs [even though PETA RUNS A EUTHANASIA PROGRAM]
2. PETA supports ecoterrorists. The "Firebomb the lab" type, not Tyler Durden.
3. PETA has chosen some of the most inconsequential elements of animal rights to take a stand against- I mean, seriously, you're promoting vegetarianism [as in not consuming animals born and raised to be eaten anyways, who are not a particularly finite resource] rather than say, preventing China from killing every single skerick of flora it has for retarded 'medicines'?
4. PETA's insanity draws negative attention towards the animal rights movement.
5. 'other Animals' =/= humans. Trying to afford the same rights of a human [free speech, freedom of education, freedom of religion...] to a creature unable to recognise these concepts is retarded.
6. Vegetarianism kills thousands upon thousands of Africans and Asians every fucking day. Plant-based diets are for people who can't afford meat, and it usually fucks them up in horrible malnutrition-induced ways. I'm yet to meet a vegetarian, who is female, who is not aenemic. I'd rather eat meat and have a healthier body than 'have better sex' as PETA claims [cough bullshit cough, good luck having good sex Mrs My Blood Has No Fucking Haemoglobin]

Opinion:
Vegan food tastes like shit unless it's lathered in so many sauces and additives as to be hardly recognisable as plant-based. And I don't care what anyone says, spices are better used in meat curries to try and hide the shitty quality of your meat, than in vegetarian curries to try and hide the shittiness of your diet. Tofu is pointless to eat straight but a straight teak is delicious.

Doritosaurus Chex
9th April 09, 09:58 AM
And PETA's latest behaviour falls under socratic's points 3 & 4.


The PET SHOP BOYS have refused to change their name to the Rescue Shelter Boys to aid an animal rights group campaign aimed at discouraging people buying cats and dogs from pet stores.
PETA bosses wrote to Neil Tennant and Chris Lowe asking the British duo to consider joining their campaign to turn pet buyers to overcrowded animal shelters - and the West End Girls hitmakers were so taken with the idea, they posted the letter on their official website.
But a name change is out of the question.
Introducing the piece, a website editor writes, "(PETA) has written to Pet Shop Boys with a request they are unable to agree to but nonetheless think raises an issue worth thinking about."
But PETA Special Projects Manager, Yvonne Taylor, is far from upset by the response - she's thrilled to hear the duo has taken her letter seriously.
A spokesman says, "Neil Tennant, who posted this, showed that the Pet Shop Boys are just as smart as their lyrics and appreciate PETA's creative ways of bringing issues to the public."
In the letter, Taylor writes, "We have a request that may at first seem bizarre, but we hope that after considering the following facts, you will understand why we are asking this of you: will you please consider changing your name from the Pet Shop Boys to the Rescue Shelter Boys?
"Most dogs and cats sold in pet shops are sourced from profit-hungry breeders who may have bred them in cramped, filthy conditions. With an emphasis on quantity rather than quality, unmonitored genetic defects and personality disorders pass from one generation of puppies and kittens to the next. Many animals end up with abnormalities that result in both heartbreak and high veterinary bills for the unsuspecting people who buy them."

http://www.contactmusic.com/news.nsf/article/pet%20shop%20boys%20say%20no%20to%20name%20change_ 1100141

This among other stupidity is what hard earned donations pay for.

Ajamil
9th April 09, 02:10 PM
5. 'other Animals' =/= humans. Trying to afford the same rights of a human [free speech, freedom of education, freedom of religion...] to a creature unable to recognise these concepts is retarded.
6. Vegetarianism kills thousands upon thousands of Africans and Asians every fucking day. Plant-based diets are for people who can't afford meat, and it usually fucks them up in horrible malnutrition-induced ways. I'm yet to meet a vegetarian, who is female, who is not aenemic. I'd rather eat meat and have a healthier body than 'have better sex' as PETA claims [cough bullshit cough, good luck having good sex Mrs My Blood Has No Fucking Haemoglobin] These have nothing to do with PETA, and please show me the organizations trying to give free-speech, education, or religion to animals. Otherwise stop making strawmen.

Also, show me lack of meat - NOT lack of nutrition - is the cause of deaths in Africans and Asians. Second, go to any Ratha Yatra run by the Hare Krishnas and see multitudes of non-anemic, female vegetarians. Shall we compare the number of meat eaters who have bad health due to diet and the number of vegetarians? Do you really think meat-eaters will win?

http://www.independent.co.uk/life-style/health-and-wellbeing/health-news/red-alert-499305.html


As a counter to the evidence from the Mormons and Seventh-Day Adventists, it is worth noting that bowel-cancer rates have risen sharply among the Japanese as they have adopted a Western diet.
Last month's study was the largest ever conducted into the health effects of Europe's passion for meat. Called the European Prospective Investigation into Cancer and Nutrition (Epic), and funded by the UK Medical Research Council and Cancer Research UK among others, it involved 500,000 Europeans in 10 countries whose diets were monitored for five years. The results, published in the Journal of the National Cancer Institute, showed that those who ate two portions a day of red meat - beef, lamb, pork, veal and their processed varieties, ham and bacon - had a third higher risk of developing bowel cancer than those who ate one portion a week.
The second, smaller study published last week, by researchers at the University of East Anglia, followed the diets and lifestyles of 218 patients over two years and found a 40 per cent increased risk of Crohn's disease among meat-eaters.
Note: Read the article, I've cherry-picked it, and it's actually quite moderate and well written.

The high-risk group were eating more than 160 grams of red meat a day - equivalent to two large beef burgers (80 grams each). The average Briton eats 93 grams of red meat a day according to British Meat, allowing it to claim that there was no reason for most people to change their habits. "If you eat meat you are not going to get cancer," a spokesman said.

The Food Standards Agency has asked its food safety advisers to examine the findings and consider what further research may be necessary. But the agency reiterated its advice that red meat had a place in a balanced and varied diet because it was a good source of iron, zinc, B vitamins and protein. It also pointed out that as we typically eat meat with vegetables and potatoes, we get the fibre that protects against bowel cancer. Maintaining levels of iron is a priority for women, who lose the mineral with each monthly period, and are at risk of anaemia.

HappyOldGuy
9th April 09, 02:50 PM
More PETA fun (http://pc.gamespy.com/pc/world-of-warcraft/970917p1.html).

tl;dr version. PETA is organizing protests in world of warcraft to protest the slaughter of virtual seals.

Zendetta
9th April 09, 03:22 PM
so you can kill virtual PETArds instead? Sounds like a win-win situation.

Ajamil
9th April 09, 11:42 PM
so you can kill virtual PETArds instead? Sounds like a win-win situation.
My friend Rama-Bhakti had the great idea once of getting everyone in PETA to watch the ritual slaughter of cows in Mecca after the hajj, then ship them off to Iraq with rifles.

Zendetta
10th April 09, 11:11 AM
I like the cut of his jib, but aren't Iraqis animals too?

er, I mean, don't Iraqis deserve dignity and have a right to live too?

Doritosaurus Chex
10th April 09, 12:48 PM
More PETA fun (http://pc.gamespy.com/pc/world-of-warcraft/970917p1.html).

tl;dr version. PETA is organizing protests in world of warcraft to protest the slaughter of virtual seals.

Lucky for Nintendo, PETA never found that hidden mini-game in A Link to the Past.

http://i61.photobucket.com/albums/h45/kdelapena/CT-Stalker_cockfight.gif

Cullion
10th April 09, 02:47 PM
I wouldn't exactly support something like that, since many of it's members are well meaning despite me disagreeing with them.


In what sense are PETA members 'well meaning'?

This is sentimentalism about a childish Disney-like conception of nature whipped up to cult-like extremes so that prosperous people can feel righteous. It's absurd.

Kiko
10th April 09, 04:35 PM
Lucky for Nintendo, PETA never found that hidden mini-game in A Link to the Past.

http://i61.photobucket.com/albums/h45/kdelapena/CT-Stalker_cockfight.gif

Or that secret level of Diablo?

http://diablo2.d2evil.org/img/q/cow05.jpg

Lebell
16th April 09, 09:52 AM
okay so its not good to test medicines on animals?

frankly, i dont give a shit.
if the monkeys evolved quicker and better then we did the tables were turned.
just look at planet of the apes...

dirty fuckin monkeys...

anyway,

why not test those medicines and procedures on inmates?
make em useful for a change.
it will also scare off would be criminals.
think of the posters!

you see this inmate staring at you, he's sitting strapped to a chair with his cranium opened and there's all kinds of stuff jammed into his open brain.
' remember kids, crime doenst pay!'

dont start about cruelty or human rights, animals cant reason, but the humans who showed not to care for human rights themselves, such as childrape or brutal murder should be treated accordingly to their behaviour.

behave like a pig get treated like a pig.

Ajamil
16th April 09, 10:53 AM
Just for that, Lebell, I'll touch your penis if I'm ever in Holland.

Shawarma
16th April 09, 11:01 AM
Or that secret level of Diablo?

http://diablo2.d2evil.org/img/q/cow05.jpg
Moo? Moo moo. Mooooo? Moo moo MOOO moo mooo MOO! MOOOOOOOO!

Kiko
16th April 09, 02:16 PM
My Tauren Shaman understood every word of that.


... and it coulda got you a slap in the face!