PETA Recap/Summary
I'm offering this here as a service to Cellar members who were engaged in some semi-vigorous debate with a new member who claimed to be an employee of PETA. All statements are paraphrased and summarized to save time and space:
Garnet - Eating meat is bad, don't do it.
Most Everyone Else - We like meat, leave us alone.
That pretty well ought to get us back up to speed on this topic. :3eye:
I missed the debate. Oh well. Let me create a new category for me.
I love meat, and wish I could eat it, but I don't think (beef anyway) is all that safe right now, at least in the US.
I've stopped eating beef since the mad cow thing, and for purely selfish reasons, I'd like all of you to stop too. A huge boycott of beef will pressure them to make it safe again. Once it's safe, I'll fire up the grill. [homer] Mmmm hamburgers on the grill. [/homer]
I've stopped eating beef since the mad cow thing, and for purely selfish reasons, I'd like all of you to stop too. A huge boycott of beef will pressure them to make it safe again. Once it's safe, I'll fire up the grill. [homer] Mmmm hamburgers on the grill. [/homer]
I totally agree with you glatt, I don't think beef is safe to eat. Mad cow aside, the antobiotics, growth hormones, grain feeding, and need for irradiation because the meat has been covered in feces turns me right off. Hamburger gives me nightmares.
Damn I missed the drama.
As the cows on the Chick-fil-A billboard say:
"Eat mor chikin" ;)
http://www.chickfila.com/home.asp
Personally, if I had my way, I'd eat turkey everyday. Hell, I might just pick up some turkey today...enough to chow down on it for the rest of the week. :D
There's not a damn thing you can buy and eat that is risk free. You're better off doing the preparation yourself but that's not a complete safety guarantee. :(
You know, I'm always looking for new ways to horrify my neighbors. Slaughtering my own beef on the front lawn ought to do nicely.
Thanks, Bruce! :D
I totally agree with you glatt, I don't think beef is safe to eat. Mad cow aside, the antobiotics, growth hormones, grain feeding, and need for irradiation because the meat has been covered in feces turns me right off. Hamburger gives me nightmares.
I'm with you, jinx, on the antibiotics. Antibiotics should be for people only. We should stop this crazy bacterial strain improvement program that the meat industry is performing through overuse of antibiotics. By the time I'm an old man, I doubt any antibiotics will work on the monster germs we'll have by then.
Growth hormones don't really concern me that much, but mostly because I'm ignorant about the effects of eating growth hormone enhanced meat. How is it different than regular meat?
How is grain feeding bad? Never heard that one, but there's a lot I don't know.
The irradiation doesn't bug me much at all. There's some talk that it may destroy some of the nutrients in the meat, but so does cooking. Shit in the meat is a gross thought, but if you cook it enough, it isn't a health concern.
Mad cow disease freaks me right out, because you can't kill it by cooking it. Not even when you burn it to a crisp.
I'm offering this here as a service to Cellar members who were engaged in some semi-vigorous debate with a new member who claimed to be an employee of PETA. All statements are paraphrased and summarized to save time and space:
Garnet - Eating meat is bad, don't do it.
Most Everyone Else - We like meat, leave us alone.
Patrick,
I was disappointed by your post. Given the posts above, I wouldn't exactly say "most everyone else" is 100% OK with meat consumption. If you have doubts as to my "claim" of employment, I'd be happy to send you my name, work phone number and email address at work in a private message. Thanks.
You know, I'm always looking for new ways to horrify my neighbors. Slaughtering my own beef on the front lawn ought to do nicely.
Thanks, Bruce! :D
That's not enough, you have to raise it too. Get your kids involved in 4-H.
The alternative would be find a small local farm that eschews corporate practices. Then sneak out at night and russle one. ;)
Garnet,
My reasons for being concerned about beef are purely selfish ones. I don't want to get sick. I couldn't care less about the ethics of killing a cow and eating it.
Oh look, a new member! Welcome to the Cellar garnet. :D
Oh look, a new member! Welcome to the Cellar garnet. :D
Hey Bruce,
In case you didn't know, the system crashed last night. According to the administrator, all accounts created in the last week had to be re-set. Thanks for the friendly greeting--you have a WONDERFUL day, OK? :3eye:
Garnet,
My reasons for being concerned about beef are purely selfish ones. I don't want to get sick. I couldn't care less about the ethics of killing a cow and eating it.
All I said is that not everyone is 100% OK about eating meat. Did I mention any reasons why? No. Please go back and read my post.
Garnet - Eating meat is bad, don't do it.
Slang - Whatever........got any good pictures to add to the "dog pics" thread in the quality images forum?? That's the real question.
Slang - Whatever........got any good pictures to add to the "dog pics" thread in the quality images forum?? That's the real question.
No idea what you're talking about... :confused:
Git a pic ready and post it
here. We lost some good ones from the crash.
slang is a sick sick man
That depends on who you ask........and when. Break loose with a dog pic, slacker.
Git a pic ready and post it here. We lost some good ones from the crash.
So which one is your wife?
My wife is actually a sheep, she's out grazing at the moment. Maybe I can post an MP3 of her saying hello or something. Her typing isn't too good.
** waiting for PETA person to post dog pic **
** waiting for PETA person to post dog pic **
I don't have a picture of my dog available right now. I do have some that I can scan, and then post or send to you. That way, you, too, can admire just how adorable she is. She's a Chow/Golden retriever mix named "Chewy."
( slang looks left....then right....then leans in and whispers) Don't send them to me.......post them in the "dog pics" thread......like everyone else......ya goof. :3eye:
( slang looks left....then right....then leans in and whispers) Don't send them to me.......post them in the "dog pics" thread......like everyone else......ya goof. :3eye:
Oh Slangster,
I DID say "post." You crazy guy!
And here I posted the perfect answer to this eternal debate. This idea will also, applied properly, end war the world over and have the Israelis and Palestinians living together without resorting to violence all the time. Even the gangs in LA will turn over a new leaf. I swear, I had a divine inspiration Thursday night! It was a bit complicated though so I posted it as soon as I woke up. Unfortunately, I now forget some key elements. You know how it is with dreams. Sorry. Now we all have to continue on the way we are.
Brian
Thanks for clearing that up Brian. I'll just go back to sharpening my knives now.
Patrick,
I was disappointed by your post. Given the posts above, I wouldn't exactly say "most everyone else" is 100% OK with meat consumption. If you have doubts as to my "claim" of employment, I'd be happy to send you my name, work phone number and email address at work in a private message. Thanks.
While I can understand your disappointment, it was actually a joke, and I stand by my statement that 'most' people here are meat eaters.
As to your employment with PETA, well, it was just a claim on your part, but I did not have (nor am I now interested in) proof of that claim, and so I stand by my statement that the term 'claim' was technically accurate.
As to the "100%" figure, I believe that I did not use it, and again refer to my characterization of "most everyone else".
I will now return us to our regularly scheduled meat eating vs. non-meat eating debate, starting with a new thread which will contain a poll vis a vis the consumption of meat vs. the non-consumption of meat so that we will have a more accurate demographic upon which to base future gross generalizations. :biggrin:
How is grain feeding bad?
Because cattle are ruminants, they are supposed to eat grass in large quantities, not grains. Grains cause an acidosis in the rumen which can lead to ulcerations. Stomach ulcers and the resulting liver abcesses (from bacteria migration) are a major reason for therapeutic antibiotic use.
Grain feeding is also the reason why beef is bad for you. Grass fed beef has an omega 6:
3 ratio in the neighborhood of fish. Grain fed beef can have a ratio of 20:1 or higher and contain up to 50% saturated fats (less than 10% in grass fed).
Growth hormones?
And I just don't trust
Monsanto (rBGH rBST).
Interesting. I had no idea.
HAve you ever eaten grass fed beef? How's it compare in flavor?
Because cattle are ruminants, they are supposed to eat grass in large quantities, not grains. Grains cause an acidosis in the rumen which can lead to ulcerations. Stomach ulcers and the resulting liver abcesses (from bacteria migration) are a major reason for therapeutic antibiotic use.
Grain feeding is also the reason why beef is bad for you. Grass fed beef has an omega 6:3 ratio in the neighborhood of fish. Grain fed beef can have a ratio of 20:1 or higher and contain up to 50% saturated fats (less than 10% in grass fed).
Growth hormones?
And I just don't trust Monsanto (rBGH rBST).
Just to clarify, There's nothing wrong with supplementing their diet of hay or grass and silage with grain, especially in the winter. The problems develop from feeding them all grain and no roughage like they do in commercial feed lots.
I prefer locally raised beef because it's more tender and less greasy. :yum:
HAve you ever eaten grass fed beef? How's it compare in flavor?
Yes I have, my uncle actually raised one last year. It was ok... nothing to write home about, but it didn't strike me as 'different' either. The grain feeding is where the 'marbling' comes from, so it's leaner for sure.
. . . I don't have a picture of my dog available right now. . .
Um, forgive me for nit-picking, but by saying
"my dog" aren't you perpetuating the human-dominated, slave/master hegmony that PETA is supposed to be overthrowing? I can't imagine anyone who actually draws a paycheck from this organization making a casual slip like that.
I bet she puts on dark glasses and a hat and goes to Wendy's too.
Um, forgive me for nit-picking, but by saying "my dog" aren't you perpetuating the human-dominated, slave/master hegmony that PETA is supposed to be overthrowing? I can't imagine anyone who actually draws a paycheck from this organization making a casual slip like that.
In case you're really interested (which I just have the feeling you're not--your trying pick a fight and flame this thread) I am my dog's "guardian," not owner. I could also say something like "Jane Doe is my friend." Does that imply that I own Jane Doe, too?
Stupid argument. Please give me another
reasonable suggestion as to how to construct the sentence I used without using the word "my."
I bet she puts on dark glasses and a hat and goes to Wendy's too.
I have left the PETA threads alone since the crash, as it was apparent my comments were not welcome. Why are you guys still trying to pick fights with me about this?
Garnet, it has become apparent that you aren't noticing the difference between a fighting post and a joking post. I would estimate that at least 50% of the posts on the Cellar are meant to be humorous in one way or another. Not all of them will have smiley faces next to them, since dry wit and deadpan humor is a specialty around here. Seriously, just learn to laugh at yourself (and everyone else) and it'll be fine.
Dont take it to heart Garnet. This is one of those subjects that tends to lead to heated conversations. The Palestinian issue is another which tends to end up heated likewise the subject of capital punishment. I dont know why this subject gets people all het up. perhaps because animals play such an important role in many people's lives, either in terms of their food ( and therefore their overall lifestyle) or their pets which they may feel protective of their right to own.
I found your arguments interesting. I dont necessarily agree with everything you say but it made for an interesting read anyway *smiles*
Garnet, it has become apparent that you aren't noticing the difference between a fighting post and a joking post. I would estimate that at least 50% of the posts on the Cellar are meant to be humorous in one way or another. Not all of them will have smiley faces next to them, since dry wit and deadpan humor is a specialty around here. Seriously, just learn to laugh at yourself (and everyone else) and it'll be fine.
Sorry, but when it's the same people saying the same things over and over it's not funny anymore. And 99 44/100's post above wasn't exactly light-hearted. I've tried to make upbeat posts on other threads, and someone always pipes in with a vicious remark about vegetarians or a picture of a dead animal. Thanks for trying, I really appreciate it. But I just don't find that to be very funny.
Sorry, but when it's the same people saying the same things over and over it's not funny anymore. And 99 44/100's post above wasn't exactly light-hearted. I've tried to make upbeat posts on other threads, and someone always pipes in with a vicious remark about vegetarians or a picture of a dead animal. Thanks for trying, I really appreciate it. But I just don't find that to be very funny.
It's only been a couple of days. Stick around long enough to learn everyone else's hot buttons, and then you can push right back. :)
[I]
It's only been a couple of days. Stick around long enough to learn everyone else's hot buttons, and then you can push right back. :)
Much appreciated...thanks! :biggrin:
Sorry, but when it's the same people saying the same things over and over it's not funny anymore. And 99 44/100's post above wasn't exactly light-hearted. I've tried to make upbeat posts on other threads, and someone always pipes in with a vicious remark about vegetarians or a picture of a dead animal. Thanks for trying, I really appreciate it. But I just don't find that to be very funny.
Have you considered that your relentless pushing of vegetarian/PETAn propaganda to an admittedly high percentage of dedicated meat eaters might have something to do with that?
The dead animal pictures were here before you got here. They will be here long after you leave.
Do not make the mistake of inflating your own importance to the board. We know from experience that there are people who at one point seemed to define the character of The Cellar. We very quickly found out that the place survives with or without them.
It's not all about you.
If you think we are saying the same things over and over, perhaps you need to start reading and posting to threads on different topics. Oh, and don't hijack existing threads to suit your agenda, either. You'll just continue to frustrate yourself.
Have you considered that your relentless pushing of vegetarian/PETAn propaganda to an admittedly high percentage of dedicated meat eaters might have something to do with that?
Please go back and read my post. I fully admit that I did not get off to a good start with this board, and that is my doing. Like I said in my last post, I have completely avoided anything PETA related since the crash. I even declined voting in Patrick's poll. Perhaps you should check my recent posts before opening your big mouth. Why don't you pick another victim?
If you think we are saying the same things over and over, perhaps you need to start reading and posting to threads on different topics.[/quote Oh, and don't hijack existing threads to suit your agenda, either. You'll just continue to frustrate yourself.
Uhhh, you might want to go back and read this thread from the beginning. It was hijacked by
YOU and
99 44/100. The only thing I ever mentioned in this thread was my dog--YOU GUYS are the ones that brought my previous posts about PETA into it. Go back and read it, and then you can apologize to me.
Do not make the mistake of inflating your own importance to the board. We know from experience that there are people who at one point seemed to define the character of The Cellar. We very quickly found out that the place survives with or without them. It's not all about you.
Hmmm, you've go over 5,000 posts. Maybe YOU are placing too much importance on
this board? How many hours a day (and over how many YEARS) do you spend finding ways to bicker with other people instead of doing something constructive? Don't you have anything better to do with your time?
Don't you have anything better to do with your time?
*grabs the folding chair, popcorn, flak jacket, and flame resistant suit*
.......... Perhaps you should check my recent posts before opening your big mouth. .......
[thinks to self] Hoooo-leeeee-shit batman.....we're gonna see Wolf activate the intellectual baseball bat here [/thinks to self]
(Unfolds a chair next to Troubleshooter and sits down)
I would like to pipe in and reiterate that wolf is a big sloshy bint.
She's a four hairs from "soggy tart" status.
Your political convictions are your own, garnet. Although I hate PETA and most of it's methods, I sort of hope you joined because you believe in the more broad ideal of animal rights, rather than the practice of dressing up as a cow and getting dragged off by security.
Penn and Teller have a great show called "Bullshit" which did a lot to colour my views of the PETA.
But animal rights, and vegetarianism, are definitely noble causes, and most people here are just trying to rub your willies and raise your dander.
But you don't seem like a huge cantankerous bitch, so you're fine in my books.
[thinks to self] Hoooo-leeeee-shit batman.....we're gonna see Wolf activate the intellectual baseball bat here [/thinks to self]
Uhhh, yeah, I'm really scared of that "intellectual" baseball bat alright. I'm just shakin' like a leaf....
But you don't seem like a huge cantankerous bitch, so you're fine in my books.
Awwwww.....You know, that is the NICEST thing anyone on this forum has ever said to me. CB, you're OK in my book too! :3eye:
.....But animal rights, and vegetarianism, are definitely noble causes....
Stopping the abuse of animals? Sure. Giving them a social security card and Consitutional rights? ....Well, no.
Vegetariianism? Sure, if that's your deal, good for you. If you want to eliminate or reduce your own meat consumption, that's fine with me. If you want to join groups like PETA, I have no objection. Who am I to judge?
Hunting game animals and eating meat is still legal and popular though. And if that is disturbing to the extremist animal rights people, they should just go and have a vegetarian beer and relax. Try changing the culture incrementally instead pushing so hard for an agenda that the majority of people don't support.
And I don't think garnet is a cantankerous bitch. She might enjoy the cellar a bit more if she'd lighten up and just laugh at some of the humor here though. There are a wide variety of opinions and backgrounds here. Almost all have some pretty silly ideas, in one way or another.
Uhhh, yeah, I'm really scared of that "intellectual" baseball bat alright. I'm just shakin' like a leaf....
See, this is a good example. You arent supposed to be scared. This is the fucking internet for Christ's sake. Until and unless you show up at someone's front doorstep.....how might you really be intimidating? I would guess that no one truly could.
You are just as defensive as I was when I first came here.
What do I know though.
See, this is a good example. You arent supposed to be scared. This is the fucking internet for Christ's sake. Until and unless you show up at someone's front doorstep.....how might you really be intimidating? I would guess that no one truly could.
Slang, sweatheart--
I was being SARCASTIC saying I was scared. You know, facetious? Joking around? I thought that was pretty clear, but I guess not. Trust me, I don't get scared real easily, especially not of some hot-headed anonymous dumb ass on the internet.
........ hot-headed anonymous dumb ass on the internet........
I can remember when Radar was a "sweet talker" like you. He finally fit into the groove and we all think he's a good guy now. I look forward to seeing you find your own groove here in the future.
And Wolf is a dumb ass just like I am NYC liberal.
Can someone give me a hand here?
*struggling to pull bleachers over so we can all sit and watch the scrap*
Garnet i don't know or really care what your deal is. like it has been pointed out this is the internet so take it all with a grain of salt. but before insulting people like you seem prone to do, you might want to spend a little bit of time and see maybe why someone has X amount of posts. how long did it take them to accumulate them? while you are thinking about that you may want to notice that there aren't hundreds of people posting on here every day. there are a few dozen folks that post regularly and have developed the internet version of respect for each other over the course of many discussions. each person here has a personality that the rest of us have come to know. you may want to read into a few other threads and realize that, in fact, many of these people know each other on a face to face basis and have friendships with each other that don't require typing.
so if you bother to acknowledge these facts it would be pretty easy to see why we all jumped on your shit. you show up on day one and start posting (that is a good thing, btw, welcome to the cellar) things that got somebody's craw that day. your posts were a little confrontational and this place is just full of confrontational people. so those who know eachother pretty much chewed you up and spit you out.
don't take it to heart though. hell, my first day here someone (i think it was LJ) took plenty of jabs at me. ( i still think he was just looking for an excuse ot increase his postcount). just relax and see what the cellar is all about. you may like it here. just be aware that we like to eat dead animals and pet living ones.
m'kay?
Sure seems like a few of you are just hackin' on her beliefs and attributing it to "humour" though.
And I'm totally against hunting where you don't eat the animal, and you use a high-powered rifle from your chair up in a tree, or some such.
If the animal doesn't have a sporting chance, it ain't hunting.
Although fishing is fine by me, as well as hunting with a bow and arrow ;-)
Have you ever tried to fire a rifle from a tree while freezing your ass off...trying to sip some coffee? Believe me, they have a sporting chance.
Don't kill for the hell of it though. We agree on that one. There are some of those dumbasses here that "hunt for heads" but we've managed to reduce their numbers.
garnet's going to be just fine in the cellar. she just came in and ruffled a few feathers before the system crashed.
i didn't see anyone personally insulting her the way she insulted wolf though.
A lot of good members start that way.
Ok, maybe just a few.
The deadline for out of state doe tags is this Thursday.
If you want to freeze your ass off in rural Pennsylvania while in a tree drinking coffee in hopes to shoot Bambi.....better get it in the mail!
( I couldn't control myself )
To me, personal insults are what make the internet a truly amazing place.
Ass.
there are a few dozen folks that post regularly and have developed the internet version of respect for each other over the course of many discussions.
I really like that phrase. Like it's not real respect, but it's INTERNET respect. Word. :)
Dumb ass....or wiseass....or asshole.....or asshead....or asshat? Your comment seems a bit incomplete.
...Asswipe? ...Assmunch? ...Asscookie?
but before insulting people like you seem prone to do....
Thank you for your opinion.
Hasn't everybody been saying that name-calling is part of the game here and it's all in fun? So I just "insulted" your friend Wolf, and you're pissed about it. Try saying that instead of accusing me of being "prone" to insulting everyone. Go back and read my posts and quote where exactly I insult anyone. I believe I was called a "Fucking Asshole" on my first day of posting here--how come you didn't complain about that? You can't have it both ways.
I think a valid argument here is that animal right's activists are by and large enormously more attractive than hunters.
I think a valid argument here is that animal right's activists are by and large enormously more attractive than hunters.
That's a good point. Makes me want to see pictures in everyone's profiles. C'mon everyone, what are you waiting for?
Handsome devil, aint I?
That's an enormous hummingbird!
Damn it Slang, get away from the pole. How many times do we have to tell you, that is *not* the one that Ginger Lynn used on her road tour.
And this isn't just any Internet community, with "Internet" grade respect for the members. This is, for some of us, a damn sight closer to an Internet family, and the respect is of the same variety as any other respect. Translation? It is *earned* through effort, time and insight.
Oh...and hazing.
I think a valid argument here is that animal right's activists are by and large enormously more attractive than hunters.
Actually, there's quite a lot of young, very good-looking women at PETA...I was actually surpprised by that when I first started working here. I can count on one hand the number of people here that are overweight. The guys aren't as good-looking, at least I don't think, which is unfortunate.
Actually, there's quite a lot of young, very good-looking women at PETA...I was actually surpprised by that when I first started working here. I can count on one hand the number of people here that are overweight. The guys aren't as good-looking, at least I don't think, which is unfortunate.
NOW we are getting somewhere--tell us more about the guys.
Any 80 year olds that can pole-vault?
Brianna has standards, after all.
:biggrin: :biggrin: :biggrin:
NOW we are getting somewhere--tell us more about the guys.
It's not that the guys are bad looking or anything, there's just not that many that are really hot. Maybe they're just not my type. There are some really beautiful women here--model material even.
Just out of curiosity garnet, and you may hate me for this, but how many PETA members are white, female, and middle-class?
Any 80 year olds that can pole-vault?
Brianna has standards, after all.
:biggrin: :biggrin: :biggrin:
Hey, can YOU pole-vault??? Now, more about the dudes. Do you know for a FACT that vegetarians taste better?? :D
Yep, and I also know for a fact that CELERY in specific makes someone taste better, as my girlfriend has informed me repeatedly.
NothingButNet wrote a beautiful Haiku about celery that was lost in the crash...but, I digress.
SO. You can pole-vault? And you like celery? :biggrin:
I high-jump. Poles are for cheaters.
Just out of curiosity garnet, and you may hate me for this, but how many PETA members are white, female, and middle-class?
That's a legitimate question. I don't have demographics on our membership (I believe there's 800,000 active members) but just to guess, I would say there are more female members than male. Yes, there are a majority of white middle-class people, but we also have a number of members who are of Indian descent (not Native American). I'm sure Hindu beliefs and values have a lot to do with that.
How many times do we have to tell you, that is *not* the one that Ginger Lynn used on her road tour.
The humiliation of that mistake is too much to bear. :D
Thank you for your opinion.
Hasn't everybody been saying that name-calling is part of the game here and it's all in fun? So I just "insulted" your friend Wolf, and you're pissed about it. Try saying that instead of accusing me of being "prone" to insulting everyone. Go back and read my posts and quote where exactly I insult anyone. I believe I was called a "Fucking Asshole" on my first day of posting here--how come you didn't complain about that? You can't have it both ways.
no i'm not pissed. i was actually trying to point out a few things to you that make your entrance a little smoother, fuckwit. (that was just good clean humor there - no animosity intended)
and my "prone to insulting" comment was based on my own experience. your vegetarian diet may have resulted in some memory loss here, because you seem to have forgotten that your first day here i am the first one that tangled with you when you pulled your head out of your ass (also good spirited fun) just long enough to blather on about the rightousness of renaming a mountain and freeway after one dead soldier simply because she was native american.
"fucking asshole" - don't remember that one, so i couldn't have compained about it. but stick around for awhile and i think you will see that no matter how spirited a discussion gets i try not to let things get personal. we are here for an exchange of ideas and hopefully some witty banter. if we wanted abuse and disrespect we would walk away from the keyboard and talk to the people surrounding us.
as far as my comment about "internet version of respect" - i don't mean to belittle the respect we show each other. i think those that are respectful of one another in this environment are to be commended. in real life we have to be PC and say things with a smile. here we can let loose with vitriolic attacks with no consequence - so those that treat other cellarites with respect are, to quote Keanu Reeves - "most excellent". and yes, i agree this is sort of a family.
Uhhh, you might want to go back and read this thread from the beginning. It was hijacked by YOU and 99 44/100. The only thing I ever mentioned in this thread was my dog--YOU GUYS are the ones that brought PETA into it. Go back and read it, and then you can apologize to me.
Hijack? HIJACK?! How can one hijack a thread called "PETA Recap/Summary" with a comment about PETA? (Of course, comments about grammar and word usage are never attempted hijacks.) FWIW, I missed the earlier shitfest* prior to the crash, and I don't have any preconceived notions about you or your posts. Regarding the whole "Animal Rights" debate, I found
Brigliadore's comment on another thread to be concise, well written and thought-provoking. Please don't take it all so personally, or you'll spoil the fun.
*I'll give 10:1 odds that the person who called you a 'fucking asshole' was Sycamore. He does that. Get over it.
She's a four hairs from "soggy tart" status.
Hahahaha. Lovely
It's clear that sarcasm is difficult to convey over the internet. Even I know that, and my only contribution to the Cellar that survived the crash is a limerick about xoxoxoBruce. Perhaps this "internet" should be replaced by a massive network of letters, with small polaroids attached to indicate emotion. Sure, it would piss off the postal service, but they always love a challenge.
and my "prone to insulting" comment was based on my own experience. your vegetarian diet may have resulted in some memory loss here, because you seem to have forgotten that your first day here i am the first one that tangled with you when you pulled your head out of your ass (also good spirited fun) just long enough to blather on about the rightousness of renaming a mountain and freeway after one dead soldier simply because she was native american.
Easy there, chief. Don't bust a gut. Let's see, if I remember correctly, my VERY FIRST post was a reply to you about renaming Squaw Peak. I politely disagreed with your ethno-centric, borderline racist statements. You then proceeded to rant and rave about how Lori Pestewa sucked and was deserving of nothing because she didn't die
in combat. Please, if you can recall that far back, tell what EXACT words I used that caused you so much
anguish. Did I swear at you? NO. Did I call you stupid? NO. Did I call you fuckwit? NO. I disagreed with you, and you obviously are so closed-minded that you couldn't handle the fact that someone would dare do such a thing (of course, I mean no offense by that, just like you mean no offense by calling me fuckwit). Gosh, I'm sorry that I hurt your feelings so bad--I wouldn't have ever responded to you in the first place if I knew you were such a WUSS (and of course, the word wuss is also being used in "good-spirited fun").
but stick around for awhile and i think you will see that no matter how spirited a discussion gets i try not to let things get personal. we are here for an exchange of ideas and hopefully some witty banter. if we wanted abuse and disrespect we would walk away from the keyboard and talk to the people surrounding us....
Funny, when you guys insult, swear at, mock and generally abuse strangers, it's "witty banter." When ever I say
anything, it's a personal, life-changing emotional scar. A bit of a double standard there, no?
FWIW, I missed the earlier shitfest* prior to the crash, and I don't have any preconceived notions about you or your posts.
You didn't have preconceived notions about my posts? Really? You knew nothing about the posts before the crash, and yet you let loose with the following little diatribe:
Um, forgive me for nit-picking, but by saying "my dog" aren't you perpetuating the human-dominated, slave/master hegmony that PETA is supposed to be overthrowing? I can't imagine anyone who actually draws a paycheck from this organization making a casual slip like that.
Perhaps, looking back on it, do you find a post like that to be a little
shitty based on the fact that I'd never had any contact with you before?
Regarding the whole "Animal Rights" debate, I found Brigliadore's comment on another thread to be concise, well written and thought-provoking.
Well, that's just swell. Good for you. I think it's lovely you found a happy little post that you liked.
*I'll give 10:1 odds that the person who called you a 'fucking asshole' was Sycamore. He does that. Get over it.
You lose. It was Bruce. I guess there's so many people on this forum calling eachother "fucking assholes" that it's hard to keep track. Such a happy little "family." Oh, and don't worry, sweetie, I'm over it. It's not quite that easy to hurt my feelings.
I politely disagreed with your ethno-centric, borderline racist statements. You then proceeded to rant and rave about how Lori Pestewa sucked and was deserving of nothing because she didn't die in combat. Please, if you can recall that far back, tell what EXACT words I used that caused you so much anguish.
hmm, i like the selective memory and overactive imagination. because the posts were lost, i don't have the ability to quote them so it is safe for you to say that i said piestewa sucked and deserved nothing. you really should run for office you would excel in the world of BS. i never said she sucked. i pointed out that there were 4 AZ residents who died the same month in the war and the governor chose to have her bulldogs go after the commission to rename a mountain and a freeway after lori piestewa ( a native american woman) to the exclusion of Az's other war dead - not because of any action she took other than deploying with her unit, but simply because she was a native american woman. in the process the governor did not follow state guidelines or the wishes of the residents. this the governor has admitted to.
exactly how is the recitation of fact racist? thanks for playing the card though, i appreciate seeing your debating skills at their best.
Gosh, I'm sorry that I hurt your feelings so bad--I wouldn't have ever responded to you in the first place if I knew you were such a WUSS (and of course, the word wuss is also being used in "good-spirited fun").
thanks for the concern, but don't worry about my feelings. it isn't possible for someone i don't give two shits about to hurt my feelings over the internet.
Edit: damn garnet - you are one tightly wound individual. you really should relax and treat yourself to something special tonight... i think a nice filet would do you some good. i good piece of meat never hurt anyone.
you really should run for office
Gosh, do ya think so? Maybe I'll start looking into it now since you've given me such a nice compliment.
thanks for the concern, but don't worry about my feelings. it isn't possible for someone i don't give two shits about to hurt my feelings over the internet.
Ditto for me, baby! There's a first--we actually agree on something!
May I suggest--? :grouphug: Peace be with everyone?
I tried to distract you all with sex, but, nooooooooo
yeah, or we could just yell at each other.
[SIZE=1]i dunno, i thought the letters would've been kinda cool[/SIZE]
Edit: damn garnet - you are one tightly wound individual. you really should relax and treat yourself to something special tonight... i think a nice filet would do you some good. i good piece of meat never hurt anyone.
So, you actually made the effort to go back and edit your originial post for
that?
Call me crazy, but I'm guessing you're trying to bait me with that. It doesn't work anymore, sweetie. I've heard it all a million times, and I'm sure I'll hear it a million more.
<marquee>[SIZE=6]So then he said...blah blah blah........and then she said....blah-blah blah blah.......so then he said yeah but...blah blah blah.....so then she said.....yeah right, blah blah blah.....[/SIZE]</marquee>
:zzz:
Don't be judgmental, you damn fool idiot. ;)
You lose. It was Bruce. I guess there's so many people on this forum calling eachother "fucking assholes" that it's hard to keep track. Such a happy little "family." Oh, and don't worry, sweetie, I'm over it. It's not quite that easy to hurt my feelings.
That is not true. What I said was the people that run PETA (the leadership that make policy, plan campaigns and spend the money) are fucking assholes. In the same post I said that the soldiers in the trenches, doing what your link described you do there in VA, are doing a wonderful service to the pet community. :p
So............
What'd you all have for dinner tonight??
What!? That could fall on either side of the debate here.
Just trying to get this going in a slighty different direction.
99, I am so offended! "Fucking idiot" is my trademark, not "fucking asshole."
Ep, when I get out to St. Louis, I'm going to make sure I get out to KC too...and the first thing I'm going to do when I see you is kick your ass for restarting this shit.
Relax, people.
Hey, I was performing a community service by making sure a fair and balanced summary of the lost messages was presented in case anyone else was interested in the topic.
If you're going to kick my ass, you'd better bring a big stick and a sack lunch, because it is going to take you all day. Oh, and bring a couple of lawn chairs and a twelve pack too...we're both going to need to rest our chubby meat-eating asses between rounds. Grab some of your new CD's too, you seem to pick up some pretty cool music.
I'll BBQ a big pork tenderloin during the battle royale, and then we'll go inside and play with synthesizers while my wife bandages our wounds and tells us what fucking assholes we are. :D
dude - i grilled some porkchops for dinner tonight that were just killer. they had been marinating in Allegro for 48 hours and they just melted in the mouth. for an easy, lazy dinner - that was unbeatable.
And Wolf is a dumb ass just like I am NYC liberal.
That is easily one of the funniest analogies that I have read in quite some time.
Hmmm, you've go over 5,000 posts. Maybe YOU are placing too much importance on this board? How many hours a day (and over how many YEARS) do you spend finding ways to bicker with other people instead of doing something constructive? Don't you have anything better to do with your time?
I engage in occasional constructive bickering.
I enjoy many crafts and hobbies.
I have been participating on The Cellar since about (actual date is lost in the mists of history, but coincides with moving into current apartment) 1994, or maybe 1993. Being here is not about post count.
If the Intellectual Baseball Bat™ is to be brought out, it will only be because it needs a bit of shining and oiling to ready it for actual usage at some later date.
Garnet--Wolf is a very sweet woman. Lighten up a little, OK? I couldn't get you off topic even to talk sex! What's with that? :angel:
Garnet--Wolf is a very sweet woman. Lighten up a little, OK? I couldn't get you off topic even to talk sex! What's with that? :angel:
Hey Brianna,
Thanks for tryin', but I wouldn't want to get busted for hi-jacking another thread. But feel free to try again anytime! :blush:
Well, Garnet, hijacking happens. :)
I've been guilty of it--like, nearly every time I post something.
Let everyone get to know you as a person and not an agenda and I am pretty sure things will settle down. Surely there is more to you than PETA, right?
It's a tradition, thread hijacking. Feel free. Now post some pics of those hot PETA chicks.
Well, Garnet, hijacking happens. :)
I've been guilty of it--like, nearly every time I post something.
Let everyone get to know you as a person and not an agenda and I am pretty sure things will settle down. Surely there is more to you than PETA, right?
Thanks Brianna! You're pretty cool in my book. thanks for the encouragement. :beer:
:blush: thanks, Garnet! I am flattered that you think so.
Hang in---and if you post some pics of hot PETA chicks you might find a whole lotta converts at your door!
Boy, leave town for a couple of days, and you miss all the fun. Garnet, you seem to be holding you own nicely. Lots of time new members can really get under the flame throwers. I certainly did, but decided to stick around and irritate everybody just for the hell of it. I've had great fun playing devil's advocate and have gotten a pretty tough internet skin (Mine is that new sparkly glow in the dark fish net style - you might look around e-bay for some latest fashions in that area).
As for eating meat, I think that's a matter of personal choice. I eat meat and as a Buddhist, I feel rather guilty about it. I do not believe in taking the life of other living beings, so what am I doing chowing down on bacon and steaks? Being a hypocrite, that's what. I was a vegetarian for several years, but then I lost a whole bunch of weight and became anemic (NOT due to being vegetarian, it was a health condition I'd acquired), so the Doc's told me to start eating meat again. At this point, I now weigh TOO much and am seriously considering going back to being vegetarian again for both health and ethical reasons. Meat is a nasty habit to kick, though - as bad as smoking or any other addiction.
Well, this topic has officially used too many cuss words, so my net nanny won't show me Page 7 anymore...
Well, this topic has officially used too many cuss words, so my net nanny won't show me Page 7 anymore...
Hah - that is too F'ing funny!
At this point, I now weigh TOO much and am seriously considering going back to being vegetarian again for both health and ethical reasons. Meat is a nasty habit to kick, though - as bad as smoking or any other addiction.
Well, hey, let me know if you're looking for any specific info if you decide to make the change back. I know all kinds of nifty sites with tips and stuff. I have a wealth of vegetarian propaganda at my findertips... :)
oh, Girl, I am soooo proud of you! You're gonna make it after all!
Well, hey, let me know if you're looking for any specific info if you decide to make the change back. I know all kinds of nifty sites with tips and stuff. I have a wealth of vegetarian propaganda at my findertips... :)
Sure, PM me with your vegetarian "propaganda." I know I'll be happier with myself if I quit the stuff again! ;)
Sure, PM me with your vegetarian "propaganda." I know I'll be happier with myself if I quit the stuff again! ;)
Why would you go back to grazing if you had to give it up for health reasons?
Has your metabolism shifted?
Why would you go back to grazing if you had to give it up for health reasons?
Has your metabolism shifted?
Well, yeah, I think it has. For me, its easier to loose weight if I eliminate things like red meat, butter and cheese from my diet. That's just my personal body chemistry. Maybe everyone else is different. To each his own. If someone is content with a meat-eating diet, I'm not going to have a cow over it. ;)
....I have a wealth of vegetarian propaganda at my findertips...
[confused] Is that.......could it be.......what the....HUMOR!?[/confused]
11) If PETA does launch a “plant rights” campaign, will it include weeds? If so, does that mean that your members will have to quit smoking weed?
15) Would you be offended if I mowed my lawn? I love this one.... :lol:
16) Do PETA members eat animal crackers?
From the article Wolf listed.
11) If PETA does launch a “plant rights” campaign, will it include weeds? If so, does that mean that your members will have to quit smoking weed?
15) Would you be offended if I mowed my lawn? I love this one.... :lol:
16) Do PETA members eat animal crackers?
From the article Wolf listed.
Heather did a fine job addressing the first two, as for animal crackers I believe we've got some in the vending machine! :)
Hey thanks for recapping there. That wasn't what I was looking for but it was nice. No cutting sarcasm, no harsh language......very matter of fact. I like it.
Looks like you lucked out on the weed thing. :biggrin:
From the questionnaire and answer in wolf's links:
Question:
6) Regarding a vegetarian diet, do you believe that humans are naturally vegetarians even though many human biological traits point toward a varied diet? For example, our teeth structure, enzyme make-up, enlarged brain (which is not really needed for grazing), and muscle ratio.
Answer:
6) “John” should brush up on human anatomy. Human bodies are better suited for a vegetarian diet than a meat-based one. Carnivorous animals have claws, a short digestive tract, and long, curved fangs. In contrast, humans have flat, flexible nails, a long digestive tract, flat molars, and two tiny canine teeth that are better suited for biting into fruits than tearing through tough hides.
It seems Heather Moore needs to brush up too, so she can see past where her mindset let's her. She's basically correct with what she's saying, but she's coming to the wrong conclusions. It's true the human has tracts that allow him to partially digest and process vegetable matter. The human's molars are pretty flat and better suited to grinding than shearing. And compared to carnivores, the canines are pretty tiny and don't grip well. However, the fact remains that:
1) the human stomach and its workings can process fleshy matter more efficiently on the whole than vegetable matter, which at best gets partially processed,
2) the human canine is tiny, but they aren't made for biting fruit, that's what the human incisors are for, human canines are there to help maintain a grip when pulling, be it pulling meat of a bone or pulling that chunk of apple off the core,
3) while the human animal alone is not very well suited for bringing down an animal, the brain that comes standard with the model is capable for out-thinking potential prey instead of outrunning/overpowering it, if our ancestors had solely relied on being about to sneak up on and jump onto, say, a healthy deer and try and bite its throat out or wrestle it to the ground, we frankly wouldn't be here,
4) the PETA mentality appears to totally forget that there are creatures known as omnivores, that possess traits of both carnivores AND herbivores, meaning they can and should eat some of BOTH types of foods to maintain the body,
5) the human animal is an opportunistic eater by nature, if there is a substance available that the human knows he can eat without getting sick, he'll eat it, be it that interesting tuber he found growing nearby or that whale he and his tribe harpooned and brought back to shore,
Yes, humans have mechanics and history for planteating and humans have mechanics and history for flesheating. It's rather silly to deny one in favor of the other for ideological reasons. And I wonder where she gets off saying that having meat in your diet at all makes it 'meat-based'. That would mean the diet is mostly meat with a vegetable here or there. Yet, to follow a vegetarian diet, there should be no meat period, right? My diet, for example, consists of about 80% grainbased stuff (pasta, breads, rice, et al) and 20% meat. My diet is hardly based on meat but I would still be met with the same scrutiny for that 20%. Correct me if I'm wrong, but it seems a PETA diehard's concept of meatbased means any diet with more than 0% meat in it. If it doesn't, where are the standards set? Why so aribitrary? Easier to shout at people passing by, I guess.
Regarding the questionairre answers though, I really would like to hear the Heather's PETA brand answer for #14, if she could get off her high (well-treated, oat-and-apple-fed, loved-like-a-brother) horse long enough to answer it.
*cracks open a beer and sits back down on bleachers*
The question I've yet to see answered ... I don't remember whether I heard this here or elsewhere ...
Vegetarians, and particularly vegans go on and on about not harming animals, not using animals, etc ... yet how do they justify farming and food production methods that result in the deaths of lotsa little critters, like slower and more stupid fieldmice (Rats of NIMH, anyone?), squirrels, etc. that get gnashed and run over by the combine at harvest time?
I had posed that same question but it was lost in The Crash. Farmers create habitats and ecosystems with their fields, prime homes for critters, where they build nests and burrows, and most small critters are year-round baby producers so at any given time there could be hundreds/thousands of families in, say, a field of wheat. If they're there come harvest day, there could be lots of little ghosts rising behind the reaping machine.
I knew I heard that argument somewhere ...
yet how do they justify farming and food production methods that result in the deaths of lotsa little critters,
I don't think they do justify it, anymore than they would justify killing a squirrel that runs in front of their vehicle and can't be avoided. Falls under the "unfortunately, shit happens" category. I don't think PETA members should be expected to levitate harmlessly above the earth and slowly starve to death just because they take an ethical position against intentional killing/injuring of animals.
I also don't think they should spout off about the human health aspect of eating animals when clearly their agenda is about ethics. It seems almost unethical to me...
I don't think PETA members should be expected to levitate harmlessly above the earth and slowly starve to death just because they take an ethical position against intentional killing/injuring of animals.
Jains do, kinda. I think they are on the wacky side too, but they do go a lot further in terms of "living their beliefs" than anyone from PETA ever would, IMHO.
I don't think PETA members should be expected to levitate harmlessly above the earth and slowly starve to death
Speak for yourself.
Don't all PETA members have to maintain a hand-planted and organically grown garden in order to support their moral dietary habits? Aren't mass-production food corporations inherently evil, too?
I heard the only meat they're allowed to eat is HUMAN BABY FLESH
I heard the only meat they're allowed to eat is HUMAN BABY FLESH
Jeez, CB, getting a bit nasty, are we? It's a sad fact of life that pretty much everything we do to survive is going to have either a real or a percieved deadly effect on some other organism or third world nation - take your pick. I suppose in an ecologically correct world, man would never have gone beyond the hunter-gatherer phase. You'd eat the occasional woolly mamouth that you and/or your nearest and dearest had brought down yourselves and you'd take the moral responsibility for it (a lot of "primitive" peoples thank the animals whose lives they take in order to survive themselves). What we've got instead is life as cells in a cancer tumour upon the earth in the 21st century. All you have to do is take a deep breath of polluted air or catch a few rays under the hole in the ozone layer to realize that this is true. We in the US chow down on an ungodly amount of the world's resources and energy, and most of us never stop to think twice about it. Somehow we believe that technology will get us out of this mess that technology has put us into. Good luck on that one, everybody. Agribusiness in the form of meat production is one of the better ways we are busily depleting this planet's resources. Never mind what it does to the environment in the form of pesticides and chemical fertilizers; it is also an extremely wasteful way of sustaining life. Dine at the top of the food chain off of meat, and you're living on a pretty exclusive mountain peak whose base is quickly crumbling. Man is not excempt from extinction. We are still no different than any other species in that regard. I take a sort of comfort in this realization,
And you're telling <i>me</i> I'm getting nasty?
You just called me a tumor cell!
And I was joking!
And you're telling <i>me</i> I'm getting nasty?
You just called me a tumor cell!
And I was joking!
Yeah, I guess you're right. Every now and then cynicism (or reality - take your pick) gets the better of me. Sorry 'bout that.
She's basically correct with what she's saying, but she's coming to the wrong conclusions.
She's coming to the "wrong conclusions" simply because she happens to
disagree with you. Her argument is factually accurate--you even admit that. She just has a different opinion than you do. All the meat eaters on this forum are so quick to say "don't force your opinions on us." Hey, it goes both ways.
watch it garnet - get everyone all wound up and they may hunt you down and eat you.
The question I've yet to see answered ... I don't remember whether I heard this here or elsewhere ...
Vegetarians, and particularly vegans go on and on about not harming animals, not using animals, etc ... yet how do they justify farming and food production methods that result in the deaths of lotsa little critters, like slower and more stupid fieldmice (Rats of NIMH, anyone?), squirrels, etc. that get gnashed and run over by the combine at harvest time?
You're right, some animals are injured or killed through farming. There's absolutely no way around that. But there is a way around brutally slaughtering millions of animals everday--by choosing not to eat them. If a boat is sinking, and you know you can't save everybody, should you give up and let everyone die? NO, you do as much as you can to help.
Let the vegetarian insults begin!
watch it garnet - get everyone all wound up and they may hunt you down and eat you.
Bring it on, baby! :)
pictures first please... some of us are pretty picky about what we eat. you understand, i'm sure.
garnet--be careful what you say around lookout---I've said it before and I'll say it again---He's a horny devil :doit: which I happen to find very intriguing! :blush:
Don't all PETA members have to maintain a hand-planted and organically grown garden in order to support their moral dietary habits? Aren't mass-production food corporations inherently evil, too?
Nope. You don't even have to be vegetarian to work at PETA (although no animal products are allowed on the premises). They want you to do what you can to help. It's great if you can live a totally vegan lifestyle, and they encourage it. If you can give up eating meat but not wearing leather, they view it as being better than nothing. It's not an all-or-nothing argument.
brianna - i'm shocked and appalled that you would think that i implying anything of a sexual nature... ok, maybe a little aroused to. :blush:
pictures first please... some of us are pretty picky about what we eat. you understand, i'm sure.
You know, I had a bad feeling about that one.... :blush:
Nope. You don't even have to be vegetarian to work at PETA (although no animal products are allowed on the premises). They want you to do what you can to help. It's great if you can live a totally vegan lifestyle, and they encourage it. If you can give up eating meat but not wearing leather, they view it as being better than nothing. It's not an all-or-nothing argument.
how about leather coats?
with a hat?
made from a cat?
maybe gloves?
lined with feathers of doves?
how about leather coats?
with a hat?
made from a cat?
maybe gloves?
lined with feathers of doves?
zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz :zzz:
might as well go right to the inspiration. Mr Burns (to the tune of Be Our Guest)
See My Vest
Burns: Some men hunt for sport,
Others hunt for food,
The only thing I'm hunting for,
Is an outfit that looks good...
See my vest, see my vest,
Made from real gorilla chest,
Feel this sweater, there's no better,
Than authentic Irish setter.
See this hat, 'twas my cat,
My evening wear - vampire bat,
These white slippers are albino
African endangered rhino.
Grizzly bear underwear,
Turtles' necks, I've got my share,
Beret of poodle, on my noodle
It shall rest,
Try my red robin suit,
It comes one breast or two,
See my vest, see my vest,
See my vest.
Like my loafers? Former gophers -
It was that or skin my chauffeurs,
But a greyhound fur tuxedo
Would be best,
So let's prepare these dogs,
Mrs. Potts: Kill two for matching clogs,
Burns: See my vest, see my vest,
Oh please, won't you see my vest.
Lookout--that is one of my very favorite episodes! Matt is a genius!
You're still a horny devil, though.
I heard the only meat they're allowed to eat is HUMAN BABY FLESH
RETARDED HUMAN BABY FLESH.
She's coming to the "wrong conclusions" simply because she happens to disagree with you. Her argument is factually accurate--you even admit that. She just has a different opinion than you do. All the meat eaters on this forum are so quick to say "don't force your opinions on us." Hey, it goes both ways.
It most certainly does, boo. And yes her argument is factually accruate, but it is also incomplete. My opinion is different from her opinion, yes, no argument about that. However, the facts she gave are still only part of the whole picture. Opponents of PETA do the same thing...they point out all of the 'meat-eater' evidence in the human body without acknowledging the capability and need for veggies too. Yes...it does go both ways.
I have left the PETA threads alone since the crash, as it was apparent my comments were not welcome. Why are you guys still trying to pick fights with me about this?
I purposely didn't post to the PETA threads as well. Didn't notice this thread till today. Holy shit I missed a lot. So I wasn't going to push this since the threads had been lost but since the topic is once again open I am going to ask.
Garnet, you said you would post proof that PETA doesn't do all the bad things the sites claim and you said you would send proof of all the other good stuff they do. I am still interested in it if you would kindly post it.
Also you said you would PM me the names and phone numbers of some well known animal experts who I could contact to prove or disprove my opinion on Leopards killing for sport. Never got that PM from you so please send it to me.
Garnet, you said you would post proof that PETA doesn't do all the bad things the sites claim and you said you would send proof of all the other good stuff they do. I am still interested in it if you would kindly post it. .
To be perfectly honest, I am really sick of this subject and I'm sure everyone else is, too. It was pretty clear to me that NO ONE agreed with what I had to say. Why should we continue to re-hash it? It would be arguing for the sake of arguing, and I personally think that's pretty silly. I could post 500 links to good things that PETA has done, but it's not going to "convince" anyone who already hates them that they are OK.
Also you said you would PM me the names and phone numbers of some well known animal experts who I could contact to prove or disprove my opinion on Leopards killing for sport. Never got that PM from you so please send it to me.
I'm not going to PM you anything. I don't know who you are, and I am not giving you private phone numbers of my friends and colleagues. If that makes me a liar, then go forth and spew some more venom. I don't give a shit. In case you haven't noticed, I've got pretty thick skin.
Wait a second. I politely ask you to please prove me wrong and suddenly your pulling an attitude with me. What the hell is that all about? Your certainly not going to change my mind about PETA if you don't give me any reason to change it. In the PETA thread I said in all seriousness that I was willing to look at any proof you had, that the things the websites claimed were false. I am willing to change my opinion of the organization but not because one person tells me to. I have seen first hand the bad side of PETA, so I asked you nicely to show me the good side. I haven't "spewed" any venom at you, I haven't called you any names, so I don't think I deserve the response you just gave me.
If you don't want to give me the names of some people who are experts on Leopards thats fine by me. Its no skin off my nose, I'll just continue to assume the nature programs are correct and go about my life.
Fine. You all think THIS is better? And this was done by the being with all the ethics, morality, intelligence, etc. Where is THAT animal's philosophical argument in this thread? SOMEONE needs to stand up for those with no voice. I never thought much about PETA one way or the other, but is THIS what the rest of you are in favor of?
Don't mistake a general disagreement with the PETA's tactics or philosophies as the approval of what happened to that lion. It's not all one side or the other. I would personally like 10 minutes in an empty room with whoever did that(guaranteed they wouldn't come out in the same shape they went in once I'm done), but at the same time I don't feel at all guilty about eating meat, for example.
THIS what the rest of you are in favor of?
yes mari - i favor slaughtering beautiful animals for no reason. i think it is best if we kill them and don't use any of their parts for our betterment. i think taking a picture and posting it on the net is justification enough for killing them.
c'mon Mari - you know that isn't how anyone here really feels. there is a huge difference between killing an animal for cruel pleasure and killing an animal for food. i don't think you will find any cellarite (even the most carniverous) who finds this abhorrent behavior acceptable.
I know, Cyber (and Lookout). I guess I just got sort of ticked at how everyone's seemed down on Garnet. She seems as reasonable as anyone else around here, more than some - myself included.
Were you here when she first registered? Before the Cellar lost a week's worth of posts?
It's PETA's mentality I have a problem with, not Garnet as a person. I guess it seems that way because she's a PETA-er.
...like ya just don't cay-yer!
(I'm really sorry.)
I know, Cyber (and Lookout). I guess I just got sort of ticked at how everyone's seemed down on Garnet. She seems as reasonable as anyone else around here, more than some - myself included.
Not everyone is getting down on her. I genuinely want to hear the good that PETA does. I have asked her several times to change my mind on the organization and as of yet she hasn't posted any proof but one link. She better then anyone here is equipped to educate us on the good the organization does. Is it so unreasonable that I ask her to enlighten us?
Brig, garnet posted a link (Lost now?) to the southern VA PETA office. I think it's the one where she works. It described and showed(pictures) a lot of great work they do at a local level. Rescue, spay/neuter, free doghouses and a lot of other useful work. You would never guess it's the same organization that we see in the national media or the IotD. Garnet feels those things are a false image, ie lies. She sees local good things, we see international stupidity.
One of the things that immediately raises my hackles, and I don't think I'm alone here, is anyone or group starts telling me what to do. I don't care if it's good for me or not, don't preach. If you say that I'm wrong in my actions/beliefs, and only a fool would do/think that, you've lost any chance of convincing me.
Finally, any discussion of PETA heads off into the "to eat, or not to eat" minefield and whether leather seats in your car are a crime against nature. The good things PETA may do is overshadowed in that arena. :)
garnet has the right to believe anything she wants ( and do most anything she wants). i commend her desire to protect animals. i support PETA in Humane Society type situations, but i think they go overboard in the attempt to get the world to quit using animal products. those are my beliefs which i have the right to.
Were you here when she first registered? Before the Cellar lost a week's worth of posts?
No, I was out of town when she joined and when I got back the big crash had already happened.
the big crash had already happened.
does everyone realize that if we keep referring to the "big crash" that this event could take on mythological proportions to generations of future cellarites? now what kind of story can we create to go along with
The Big Crash ?
Terrorists! :worried:
Bruce! you got the memo, didn't you? we aren't allowed to discuss the terrorist connection with the BIG CRASH.
Memo to all Cellarites:
The mild disturbance that some radical elements have tagged "The Big Crash" was caused by a minor computer glitch. It had absolutely nothing to do with terrorist elements running rampant in our society. This was really a non-event. It never happened. Please resume your carefree lifestyle immediately.
Remember, there were no terrorists involved with The Big Crash, in fact, please forget that you received this notice.
Thank you,
TAA
The Appropriate Authorities
For Brigliadore:
Here are your links. I can get you more in case this isn't enought for you.
If I recall correctly, our only previous "interaction" consisted of 3 or 4 pages of bickering back and forth on the merits (or lack thereof) of PETA. It basically amounted to nothing--we didn't agree on anything. I'm not interested in a replay of that, nor, I believe, is anyone else.
I highly doubt that you or anyone on this site will change their opinion of PETA based on anything I say. Like I said--I'm not going to argue with you anymore about the semantics of a leopard's consciousness. You've got your opinions, I've got mine. It just appears to me that you came back to this thread for suspect reasons. It's funny, first I get attacked for posting ONLY to PETA threads, and now I'm getting ripped on for NOT posting to them. Make up your minds already.
The first link is the site Bruce referred to in his post:
http://home.hamptonroads.com/stories/story.cfm?story=73219&ran=244316
http://abclocal.go.com/wpvi/news/080604_an_dofreward.html
http://www.dailypress.com/news/local/virginia/dp-va--ringling-investig0813aug13,0,476279.story?coll=dp-headlines-virginia
http://www.zwire.com/site/news.cfm?newsid=12651727&BRD=1141&PAG=461&dept_id=163037&rfi=6
http://www.zwire.com/site/news.cfm?newsid=12528280&BRD=1973&PAG=461&dept_id=214849&rfi=6
http://money.cnn.com/2004/07/20/news/fortune500/kfc/index.htm
http://www.greeleytrib.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20040714/NEWS/107140058&rs=2
http://picayuneitem.com/articles/2004/06/13/news/01hogdog.txt
http://www.news-bulletin.com/news/41728-06-16-04.html
http://www.ksat.com/news/3380329/detail.html
http://www.mlive.com/news/jacitpat/index.ssf?/base/news-8/1085499386293840.xml
http://reviewappeal.midsouthnews.com/news.ez?viewStory=21859&Form.sess_id=1238363&Form.sess_key=1084820386
If you'd like to see undercover video of animal cruelty fimed by PETA go to this link:
http://www.petatv.com/inv.html
Be sure to check out the two videos of the pig farms. I'm sure you'll find them quite entertaining.
If you don't want to give me the names of some people who are experts on Leopards thats fine by me. Its no skin off my nose, I'll just continue to assume the nature programs are correct and go about my life.
You go do that. I just think it's entertaining that your entire "education" on this subject comes from watching TV--you know, those intellectual "nature programs" that you are so fond of (and you never did name which particular "nature program" you found to be such a wealth of indisputable information). You requested some "enlightenment" from me on this subject--may I suggest you TURN OFF THE TV for 5 minutes and pick up a book, take a class, or go to the library? You should really try it sometime.
You go do that. I just think it's entertaining that your entire "education" on this subject comes from watching TV--you know, those intellectual "nature programs" that you are so fond of (and you never did name which particular "nature program" you found to be such a wealth of indisputable information). You requested some "enlightenment" from me on this subject--may I suggest you TURN OFF THE TV for 5 minutes and pick up a book, take a class, or go to the library? You should really try it sometime.
Was that nasty a post really necessary? If I recall (but of course the post isn't there any more to prove this) I did list specific programs, Nova, National Geographic, a big cats program on Animal Planet, plus several magazine articles and a few other programs. When one program or magazine says it I take it with a grain of salt but when several mention it I tend to think they aren't blowing smoke up my ass. I do "Turn off the TV", in fact its off quite a bit. I frequent the library at least once a week, I do take classes, and I subscribe to magazines like Smithsonian and National Geographic. I have taken a number of classes on Animal Science and the like in both High School and College. As well as being a volunteer at the LA Zoo for a few years in High school (which is where I initially learned about the Leopard thing by the way). Before you post nasty things back to people don't assume you know anything about their life. Reading a few posts I made doesn't make you an expert on my life.
Was that nasty a post really necessary?
You chose to reopen this discussion, after already knowing what a bitch I am. I suspect you were looking for a fight to start with, or you wouldn't have reopened this thread. Sorry, that's what you get for pushing the issue
As well as being a volunteer at the LA Zoo for a few years in High school (which is where I initially learned about the Leopard thing by the way).
Hey, this is the first I've heard of the whole zoo experience. You stated already that you got your information on leopards from "nature programs":
If you don't want to give me the names of some people who are experts on Leopards thats fine by me. Its no skin off my nose, I'll just continue to assume the nature programs are correct and go about my life.
You wouldn't be contradicting yourself, would you?
Before you post nasty things back to people don't assume you know anything about their life. Reading a few posts I made doesn't make you an expert on my life.
What else am I supposed to go on, other than your posts? Like I said before, I don't know who you are, and I don't care. And by the way, "you're welcome" for all the links that I posted for you...
If I recall correctly, our only previous "interaction" consisted of 3 or 4 pages of bickering back and forth on the merits (or lack thereof) of PETA. It basically amounted to nothing--we didn't agree on anything. I'm not interested in a replay of that, nor, I believe, is anyone else.
Now I see where you are coming from. My interpretation of the PETA thread was a different one and thats where I was coming from. I thought we had a few heated posts back and forth and then we both calmed down and it was all over. I expressed a desire to educate my self on something I didn't know enough about (PETA) and you offered to help there. When I posted to this thread it was for that reason alone. Believe me I don't want to go around and around arguing any more either. As I said earlier I have only ever had negative experiences with people who claim to represent PETA (and if you would like the details so you know where I am coming from on the matter I am happy to PM them to you). I like to think I am a fairly open minded person and after I realized I was having a knee jerk reaction to the fact you work for PETA I thought it best to ask you to enlighten me on the good the organization does. I have looked up PETA on the internet and the majority of the sites are about bad stuff. Its most likely that bad news travels faster then good. So I was asking you for the good stuff because you seem to be in a good position to supply them.
I highly doubt that you or anyone on this site will change their opinion of PETA based on anything I say.
but I think I deserve a chance to change my mind. I am expressing a desire to correct some misgivings about the organization, all I am asking is you help me with that.
It just appears to me that you came back to this thread for suspect reasons. It's funny, first I get attacked for posting ONLY to PETA threads, and now I'm getting ripped on for NOT posting to them. Make up your minds already.
It was not my intent to come into this thread to attack you or anything of that sort. For the record I would like it noted that I never once attacked you for not posting in other threads. I am well aware that others did, but I did not. And I did not rip on you for not posting in this one. Since the subject had been reopened and I still had a desire to learn about PETA I asked that you please supply the links you had previously said you would.
I have read thought about half the links you posted. I wish I could say I was shocked at the things people do to animals, but I worked for a Humane Society for quite a while and helped with the cruelty investigations on occasion so I have seen what some of these so called humans can do to animals.
You chose to reopen this discussion, after already knowing what a bitch I am. I suspect you were looking for a fight to start with, or you wouldn't have reopened this thread. Sorry, that's what you get for pushing the issue
This came in while I was typing the above message. Never once have I said you were a Bitch, never once have I implied it. I have stated my motives above and if you still feel I was looking for a fight then I cant change that.
*rings the bell* BONG!!!! End of Round Four.
Garnet, Brig...both of you back in your corners. Get some water. Wipe yourselves off, clean up a bit.
I'm sure I speak for most here when I say there isn't any intention of ringing the bell for Round Five.
[SIZE=5]LET'S MOVE ON!!![/SIZE]
[SIZE=5]LET'S MOVE ON!!![/SIZE]
Your right. I was simply trying to inform her that I wasn't trying to start another fight, but it was turning into one either way. So fine, its done, its over. Moving on.
hey is there any interest in starting another PETA thread?
*ducks and runs* :D
http://picayuneitem.com/articles/2004/06/13/news/01hogdog.txt
This is a question for Garnet, I just read the above link and have never heard of this before. Is this something that is becoming a large problem? Is it common in all states or just the South? I think cock and dog fights are bad, but those hog-dog rodeos just about take the cake for me. Just curious if thats a localized thing or a national thing I just haven't heard of yet.
i'm hosting one this weekend if you want to stop by.
i love hot dogs.
oh - i just reread your post. i am officially against "hog-dog rodeos". please continue about your business.
This is a question for Garnet, I just read the above link and have never heard of this before. Is this something that is becoming a large problem? Is it common in all states or just the South? I think cock and dog fights are bad, but those hog-dog rodeos just about take the cake for me. Just curious if thats a localized thing or a national thing I just haven't heard of yet.
Yeah, it's actually becoming really big, especially in a few of the southern states. I think we're working on a few of these cases now. It's hard to crack down on these because there isn't a lot of sympathy for pigs out there. I can't imagine why anyone why anyone would pay to see something like this--I've seen the videos, and it's really horrendous. :mad:
http://www.petatv.com/inv.html
Be sure to check out the two videos of the pig farms. I'm sure you'll find them quite entertaining.
Entertaining? No. Thats just fucked up what those people did. I wonder how they would like being hit repeatedly with a metal pipe. Do you know if those guys got prosecuted, or just lost their jobs? Loosing their job is getting off too easy if you ask me.
Entertaining? No. Thats just fucked up what those people did. I wonder how they would like being hit repeatedly with a metal pipe. Do you know if those guys got prosecuted, or just lost their jobs? Loosing their job is getting off too easy if you ask me.
I know the guys at Belcross Farms were convicted of felonies--I believe one of the first felony convictions for cruelty to farm animals in their state. They didn't get off easy, but in my opinion should have gotten longer sentences than what they did (it was maybe a year in jail--I can't remember). And I hope you know I was being sarcastic by using the word "entertaining"--there's some really awful stuff in those videos. I really feel sorry for the person who had to film it all--it was a PETA employee who went undercover. I could never have handled that. :(
I really feel sorry for the person who had to film it all--it was a PETA employee who went undercover. I could never have handled that. :(
I was thinking that while watching the footage, how could any decent human stand by and let that shit happen. I guess they have to let it play out to get the maximum amount of evidence to prosecute those guys, but still. I don't think I would have been able to stand there and not say something to those guys.
I was thinking that while watching the footage, how could any decent human stand by and let that shit happen. I guess they have to let it play out to get the maximum amount of evidence to prosecute those guys, but still. I don't think I would have been able to stand there and not say something to those guys.
You have to be careful. There are plenty of places where saying something will get you a bit more than prosecution...
...if you actually make it to court.
Part of the problem is the lack of oversight. Most of the situations occur because the people in positions to stop this sort of thing are a part of the problem.
It's called the "Good Ole Boy Network" and it is still strong in rural areas.
You were saying ...
The website you link to is from the Center for Consumer Freedom, a smear group that not only targets PETA but MADD (Mothers Against Drunk Drivers) and other organizations. They are funded by big tobacco, the meat industry and alcohol companies. They are currently working on having the DUI limit RAISED in order to protect drunk drivers (based, of course, on the fact that they receive money from all the booze pushers).
If you want to see a counterpoint and learn about the sleazeballs behind ConsumerFreedom.com, go to ConsumerDeception.com. You'll find the quotes there from Mr. Berman to be quite interesting...
You were saying ...
And just out of curiosity--did you happen to look at any of the links I posted about PETA from national newspapers? I personally don't care that you hate PETA--I just think it's interesting how certain people ignore everything positive they've done and instead treat a sham website like ConsumerFreedom.com like it's the word of God.
I could start posting articles about folks releasing diseased animals into the wild, or causing ecological destruction by freeing minks and sables as happened within the last year or so ... or burning SUVs ... but that wouldn't have any more impact on you and your beliefs than your articles regarding factory farming would on me.
I just watched the PETA pig video that garnet linked. Oh, god...the people who do those things are sick, sick, sick. If they can do that to a pig they could do it to a person. WHY beat an animal? The men on that video enjoyed torturing those pigs. I'm not going to look at that stuff again. It's too disturbing.
I'm not going to look at that stuff again. It's too disturbing.
Just so long as you don't forget it or ignore it.
I could start posting articles about folks releasing diseased animals into the wild, or causing ecological destruction by freeing minks and sables as happened within the last year or so ... or burning SUVs ... but that wouldn't have any more impact on you and your beliefs than your articles regarding factory farming would on me.
That's nice, but what does freeing minks or burning SUVs have to do with PETA? If you took the time to educate yourself, you would see that these actions were claimed by the ALF and the ELF. I don't support either of those groups because they are violent. PETA is not the ALF nor the ELF. You should stick to the topic of the thread.
I just watched the PETA pig video that garnet linked. Oh, god...the people who do those things are sick, sick, sick. If they can do that to a pig they could do it to a person. WHY beat an animal? The men on that video enjoyed torturing those pigs. I'm not going to look at that stuff again. It's too disturbing.
Sorry Brianna. Those videos are disgusting, but they are also very powerful. After seeing those videos I knew I couldn't continue to support an industry that finds behavior like that acceptable. I'm not telling everyone to become vegetarian, but I hope it'll make you more aware. Watch it and make your own decision.
That's nice, but what does freeing minks or burning SUVs have to do with PETA? If you took the time to educate yourself, you would see that these actions were claimed by the ALF and the ELF. I don't support either of those groups because they are violent. PETA is not the ALF nor the ELF. You should stick to the topic of the thread.
You personally may not support them, but PETA funds them. Or are you denying that too?
I watched the pig video too, and I admit it was disturbing. I eat pork regularly, and I don't like to see the pigs being treated that way.
I'm glad PETA was there to film it, and I'm glad the animal abusers were punished.
I wonder how frequently this happens? I have the impression PETA would exaggerate about the frequency of these problems. The video was clearly edited for length. I assume PETA removed all the footage of those workers treating the pigs the way they should, and only focused on the shocking images. One image in particular, the worker shooting the bolt into the pig's head behind the ear, was shocking to watch, but I think it didn't show abuse. It showed incompetence. The worker didn't intentionally torture the animal. The worker later tried to put the animal out of its misery, but it was thrashing around too much. As soon as the pig calmed down a little, a properly lined up shot put it out of its misery. The workers who held the other pigs down with their feet while lining the bolt up for a clean shot were also criticized. I'm sure the pig didn't like being stepped on. But a clean shot that instantly killed the pig was the result. Much better than the thrashing around in the other segment.
The worker slamming the runts down on the floor to kill them, the other one who was beating the pigs, and sick pigs left to die were all inexcusable in my opinion. Those workers are sociopathic. I would keep my eye on them if I were the local cops.
I have a difficult time believing that most pigs are treated this way in the industry as a whole. It's financially in the best interests of the industry to take care of its pigs up until the day they are slaughtered. If a pig is a runt or is sick, it should be slaughtered in a humane way, not beaten or abandoned.
You personally may not support them, but PETA funds them. Or are you denying that too?
Yup. The only money PETA has ever provided to the ALF or ELF was $1,500 to help pay for the defense of an ALF activist in a civil disobedience case. The individual in the case eventually had the charges dropped due to lack of evidence. There may be ALF supporters among PETA's membership rolls, but PETA cannot control the actions of all of it's 800,000 members. The $1,500 was legally accounted for in financial statements, all of which are public record.
The FBI and IRS are constantly on PETA's case--one investigation after another (because of PETA's tax-empt status). If they haven't found anything in 20 years, they either suck at their jobs or PETA is not guilty of anything.
You missed out on the $70K+ that was given to the guy who firebombed the University of MI animal labs.
You missed out on the $70K+ that was given to the guy who firebombed the University of MI animal labs.
Please provide a link for that----oh, let me guess, your link is from the CCF or activistcash.com (also funded by the CCF)
Where's the money going that's not listed in the Annual Report?
Here's a couple places.I have the impression PETA would exaggerate about the frequency of these problems.
Why? have you spent any time on these types of factory farms? Or is it because you already have a negative opinion of PETA?
The video was clearly edited for length.
Probably because there's literally HUNDREDS of hours of video tape
I assume PETA removed all the footage of those workers treating the pigs the way they should, and only focused on the shocking images.
Do you think these same guys hit pigs with metal rods, slam their heads on the floor and torture them, and then the next day they're sweet and gentle to them? If they do, I'm guessing they've got pretty severe mood swing disorders.
There's a tendency for any cause to focus on the worst of the worst. It gets the point across, sometimes ad nauseum. News and informative media regardless of origin tends to do that. When the priest sexual abuse scandal broke, all you heard about were priests who abused kids or had a long history of abuse and were still in the priesthood in contact with kids, you heard about the bishops who ignored the kids and families of victims, etc etc...during that time, you rarely heard any news about a priest doing anything good for anyone. For that time catholic priest = horny bastard with a 'special' liking for children.
Advocates for eliminating the pit bull are the same way...all you hear about are the few dogs who have attacked people and usually it's attacks that end in severe dismemberment or disfiguration or death that you hear about. You never hear about the sweet natured pit bull who's never gone after or attacked anyone except for the would-be theif she heard outside trying to break into a downstairs window (true story).
No, they're not the only source of this information, but you won't accept any of them, since PETA is the source of all that is pure and good, so why am I actually bothering?
As to your link--everybody's always hassling PETA about their tax-exempt status. The IRS was here a couple weeks ago meeting with the Presoident of PETA. How come PETA has been able to keep the tax-exempt status for the last 20 years? Because no matter how hard they dig, they come up with NOTHING.
Does it bother you that the Center for Consumer Freedom is the ONLY website you can find making allegations about PETA's "involvement" with the ALF? If it were true, I'm guessing a few other places would have gotten wind of it now and posted it on the web. Nobody has any FACTS, so the CCF takes the sleazy way and posts inaccuracies and lies instead.
Where's the money going that's not listed in the Annual Report? Here's a couple places.
Again, activistcash.com is funded by the CCF. You know, the same group backed by big tobacco, the meat industry and liquor peddlers.
Again, activistcash.com is funded by the CCF. You know, the same group backed by big tobacco, the meat industry and liquor peddlers.
At least I'll have a good dinner, a fine brandy, and a nice, satisfying smoke for afters.
At least I'll have a good dinner, a fine brandy, and a nice, satisfying smoke for afters.
Don't call me when you keel over from obesity, lung cancer and heart disease.
Have fun!
Actually my original source was Peterson's Hunting Magazine, but that thought that would just send you over the edge.
Don't worry, sweetheat. Nothing you could possible say would send me over the edge. Don't flatter yourself.
And you're using
hunting magazines as sources? Nice! All the sources I used were newspapers, wire services and tv stations. How come you can't come up with anything from sources like those? Makes one wonder....
Probably because there's literally HUNDREDS of hours of video tape.
That's my point exactly. You take hundreds of hours of videotape, and cherry pick the few scenes that make your point. PETA is trying to sway public opinion here by tugging the debate towards the extreme. For the most part, pig farmers/factory workers treat the animals in a detached, matter-of-fact, and possibly somewhat rough way. They don't beat the crap out of the animals. That would waste money. Nobody wants to buy bruised meat with infected sores, etc.
I'm not saying these conditions are happy ones for the animals, just that the blatent abuse isn't anywhere near as common as that video would like us to believe. It's propaganda.
I'm not saying these conditions are happy ones for the animals, just that the blatent abuse isn't anywhere near as common as that video would like us to believe. It's propaganda.
Again, how do you know that it's "propaganda"? I know people who've worked on these types of farms and say it's very common for the animals to be abused. These are low-paid workers, and they simply don't care if the meat ends up "bruised." That's not their problem. If this video had been made by a local news station rather than PETA, would you also say it's propaganda? Are you basing your conclusions on WHO made the video, rather than the CONTENT of the video?
If this video had been made by a local news station rather than PETA, would you also say it's propaganda? Are you basing your conclusions on WHO made the video, rather than the CONTENT of the video?
Yes. I would trust local news over PETA to present a less biased report on the conditions in a slaughterhouse or factory farm.
You admitted yourself that hundreds of hours were edited to come up with a couple of minutes of footage. If there were more damning scenes in the raw footage, I am certain that PETA would have used them. You have to admit that as well. PETA was not attempting to make an unbiased documentary. PETA was attempting to make a film that shocks and horrifies people and makes them think eating meat is bad. That's called propaganda.
*WHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO*
that is the sound of this thread approaching a brick wall at 120mph.
Yes. I would trust local news over PETA to present a less biased report on the conditions in a slaughterhouse or factory farm.
You admitted yourself that hundreds of hours were edited to come up with a couple of minutes of footage. If there were more damning scenes in the raw footage, I am certain that PETA would have used them. You have to admit that as well. PETA was not attempting to make an unbiased documentary. PETA was attempting to make a film that shocks and horrifies people and makes them think eating meat is bad. That's called propaganda.
Is a "little" cruelty OK, just as long as it's not 100 hours worth of cruelty? So in other words, you're condoning the activity on that video tape. I could make the same argument about the Rodney King tape. That, too was just a few minutes of videotape, and we know not all cops behave like that. Because they showed it on the news, is the news media guilty of spreading propaganda about the LAPD?
And do you really think anyone is going to sit in front of their computer and watch hours of this type of video? Would you? The attention span of the average American is about 30 seconds--so of course they used the most horrifying parts of the tape.
You dislike PETA (and that's fine--you are entitled to your opinion) so you therefore assume everything they do is tainted somehow and intentionally full of malice. And PETA didn't "make a film"--I don't see any actors, directors or stuntmen anywhere. They shot video tape of an actual event--an illegal event--while it was taking place.
Is a "little" cruelty OK, just as long as it's not 100 hours worth of cruelty? So in other words, you're condoning the activity on that video tape. I could make the same argument about the Rodney King tape. That, too was just a few minutes of videotape, and we know not all cops behave like that. Because they showed it on the news, is the news media guilty of spreading propaganda about the LAPD?
You dislike PETA (and that's fine--you are entitled to your opinion) so you therefore assume everything they do is tainted somehow and intentionally full of malice.
No, a little cruelty is not OK. I posted earlier today that I'm glad PETA was there to film the cruelty, and I'm glad those responsible were punished. But PETA took it one step further. They implied that this is the normal, approved way of doing business in the meat industry. They urged the viewer to give up meat to stop the cruelty. That is misleading.
The abuser in these videos was not following normal company policy while doing these things. He would probably be disciplined if a supervisor saw him intentionally damaging the product by beating the pigs. That would be like a line worker at GM smashing the windshields as the cars rolled down the line. A company would never go for that.
He would probably be disciplined if a supervisor saw him intentionally damaging the product by beating the pigs.
I'm not going to beat this to death (no pun intended) but one of the guys in the video WAS a supervisor. In the recent undercover KFC video, supervisors were involved as well--fact 8 hourly employees and 3 SUPERVISORS were fired because of the videotape. If the supervisors are participating, who are you going to report it to? Like I said--you can believe whatever you want. These people don't care. They work low-paying jobs in horrible conditions. They don't care if the pigs get bruised--it doesn't affect their paycheck. Abuse on factory farms is very prevalent from my experience, and from talking to people who've worked there. But hey, you can believe whatever you want. It's a free country, and you can eat ham for every meal if you want. That's your decision.
He would probably be disciplined if a supervisor saw him intentionally damaging the product by beating the pigs. That would be like a line worker at GM smashing the windshields as the cars rolled down the line. A company would never go for that.
Meat isn't glass. Abusing an animal before killing it has negligable effect on the product, especially if it's destined for some sort of processed meat.
Then those 3 supervisors were obviously bad supervisors. The fact that they were fired shows that the company thought so too. I don't know anything about this incident, just what was in the video, and what you are telling me.
But I do know this: It's all about money. Maybe the company can make more money by hiring bad employees for low wages and then just writing off the meat they ruin. But I doubt it. I imagine the management of the company doesn't want the pigs to be beaten. It's thier source of revenue. Maybe this company is having management/supervisory problems.
I admit that nobody there cares about the animals. They just care about the money.
I could make the same argument about the Rodney King tape.
You may want to pick a slightly less contentious analog...
You may want to pick a slightly less contentious analog...
Why?
I'm just using it to make the point that both the PETA video and the Rodney King video were only a few minutes long and both were edited for length. They both showed actual crimes taking place. I'm not making any comment about Rodney King or what is on that video.
. These are low-paid workers, and they simply don't care if the meat ends up "bruised." That's not their problem.
besides being low-paid workers they seem to be sociopaths in the making. I don't understand the wisdom of allowing an hourly worker to waste time/money by beating a sow for an hour. The people who would do something like that--beat an animal for an hour--are seriously depraved individuals. I wouldn't want to sit next to any of those winners.
The man who sodomized the pig with a stick--OK, how sick is he?? :mad:
Why?
I'm just using it to make the point that both the PETA video and the Rodney King video were only a few minutes long and both were edited for length. They both showed actual crimes taking place. I'm not making any comment about Rodney King or what is on that video.
I was only mentioning contentiousness, not inerrancy.
The funny thing about the RK video is what got left out, everything before the clips you saw on television. Also the whole video is cool until one ignorent monkey broke procedure and kicked the guy in the head.
Also the whole video is cool until one ignorent monkey broke procedure and kicked the guy in the head.
"Cool"? I'm not exactly sure what's so "cool" about that video... :confused:
"Cool"? I'm not exactly sure what's so "cool" about that video... :confused:
Not cool, as in let's do it again, but cool in that it passed procedural guidelines and did not violate his rights...
...until the dumbass with the bright idea to kick RK in the head did so.
...until the dumbass with the bright idea to kick RK in the head did so.
Wasn't there a little more than a kick in the head involved? I remember billy clubs, fists and whole helluva lot of kicks in the head. And parts of the video may be "procedurally correct" but the person making that call isn't the guy being taken down by six pissed off, armed cops.
Wasn't there a little more than a kick in the head involved? I remember billy clubs, fists and whole helluva lot of kicks in the head. And parts of the video may be "procedurally correct" but the person making that call isn't the guy being taken down by six pissed off, armed cops.
True enough, but it was a legal takedown until he was successfully restrained. After that any contact should be only to move him. Any abuse after that should be prosecuted soundly.
And you're using hunting magazines as sources? Nice! All the sources I used were newspapers, wire services and tv stations. How come you can't come up with anything from sources like those? Makes one wonder....
Makes one wonder what? Wire services, newspapers and TV stations aren't necessarily good sources.
BIG SNIP-- Those workers are sociopathic. I would keep my eye on them if I were the local cops. ---BIG SNIP
Sociopathic? Well, they are professional killers. ;)
disclaimer- No I don't approve of their behavior. Yes they should be prosecuted.
Wasn't there a little more than a kick in the head involved? I remember billy clubs, fists and whole helluva lot of kicks in the head. And parts of the video may be "procedurally correct" but the person making that call isn't the guy being taken down by six pissed off, armed cops.
Yes, eventually there was more than a kick in the head involved. However, if you have seen the WHOLE video, then you also see what Rodney King did that required the police to take him down.
The Video
After a vehicle chase.
Some additional context.
There is MUCH more to that tape that the few seconds that were shown over and over and over again on the news.
There is MUCH more to that tape that the few seconds that were shown over and over and over again on the news.
Cuz that's all the public on the whole is interested in. Also it makes for a great story "Black Man Beaten Near Senseless By White Cops". If I remember, there wasn't a whole lot of WHY in the coverage of the story. Just lots of WHO, WHAT, WHEN and WHERE. The standard news broadcast fills a 30 minute slot, half of which is taken by weather, sports, special interest (local pet adoptions, kid wins spelling bee, just LOOK at that sunset, Diane! Indeed it's lovely out there this evening...). In the 10 or so minutes left, after commercials take a chunk of time out, they need to squeeze in what the network feels is noteworthy news for the day and cover local, national and international as needed. That doesn't leave a whole lot of time to go in depth. And even many of the special shows stations have that are supposed to go in depth, they only give more who, what, where and when detail and maybe more, carefully-selected footage, not much why.
Yes, eventually there was more than a kick in the head involved. However, if you have seen the WHOLE video, then you also see what Rodney King did that required the police to take him down.
If you want to discuss the Rodney King case, perhaps you should start a new thread...
Makes one wonder what? Wire services, newspapers and TV stations aren't necessarily good sources.
But dontcha think they're maybe just a bit more credible than websites run by lobbyists for the meat industry and hunting magazines?
What is, in your opinion, a completely credible source? Fox News?
Don't call me when you keel over from obesity, lung cancer and heart disease.
Have fun!
Hmm...explain then those who have smoked, ate meat and wasn't in the best shape possible and have lived long, happy lives. Or...better yet explain those who have done all the things they were "supposed" to do regarding health, and are dead now.
Hmm...explain then those who have smoked, ate meat and wasn't in the best shape possible and have lived long, happy lives. Or...better yet explain those who have done all the things they were "supposed" to do regarding health, and are dead now.
Because I'm not a scientist or a doctor, I can't explain those things. We all know that smoking and eating a high-fat diet are bad for you health. Do you deny that? Sure there are people who lived long lives despite their poor habits (including my grandmother). But the VAST majority of scientific evidence proves that these lifestyle choices are bad for you and will shorten you life. In many cases, they will also destroy your
quality of life. My gradmother lived into her eighties even though she smoked and and had a poor diet. She was also completely miserable and was bedridden with emphysema for the last decade of her life. Hey, you can smoke and drink and eat meat all you want--it's your decision, and you might live a long life. You are putting yourself at risk, though.
Because I'm not a scientist or a doctor, I can't explain those things. We all know that smoking and eating a high-fat diet are bad for you health. Do you deny that?
Ummmmmmmmmmmmmm..no. Never said that, so why ask? :confused:
Sure there are people who lived long lives despite their poor habits (including my grandmother). But the VAST majority of scientific evidence proves that these lifestyle choices are bad for you and will shorten you life. In many cases, they will also destroy your quality of life. My gradmother lived into her eighties even though she smoked and and had a poor diet. She was also completely miserable and was bedridden with emphysema for the last decade of her life. Hey, you can smoke and drink and eat meat all you want--it's your decision, and you might live a long life. You are putting yourself at risk, though.
Just saying there is really no need to preach to the choir. Everyone has choices to make and they certainly don't need someone "at their necks" to warn them about the dangers of the choices they make.
Just saying there is really no need to preach to the choir. Everyone has choices to make and they certainly don't need someone "at their necks" to warn them about the dangers of the choices they make.
I'm not "preaching" to anyone. I personally could care less how you live your life, and I don't waste my time telling people what to do.
You asked me a question in your post about health, and I answered it with my opinion. If you don't want me to give you an honest answer, perhaps you shouldn't be asking.
Because I'm not a scientist or a doctor, I can't explain those things. .... Hey, you can smoke and drink and eat meat all you want--it's your decision, and you might live a long life. You are putting yourself at risk, though.
Please don't equate smoking with drinking and eating meat without using the appropriate qualifiers. We've been thru this already haven't we?
You are putting yourself at risk, though.
You put yourself at risk for cancer merely by going out into the sunlight, and breathing the air, inside and outside. Everything carries risks, everything. Might as well enjoy your choices while you can. If you don't enjoy your choices, then make changes.
I'm not "preaching" to anyone.
Well, IMO, when one is constantly reinterating the "dangers" of certain things, it tends to come off a bit "preachy" sometimes. Just pointing that out.
I'm not "preaching" to anyone. I personally could care less how you live your life, and I don't waste my time telling people what to do.
That's pretty much how you've spent your time since arriving, whether it's related to food, putting down a pet, or just about anything else.
'Nuff Said.
If you want to discuss the Rodney King case, perhaps you should start a new thread...
So thread drift/hijacking is okay when you do it, and not when someone condradicts your belief.
mmmmkay.
So thread drift/hijacking is okay when you do it, and not when someone condradicts your belief.
mmmmkay.
When did I hijack this thread? I used the Rodney King video as a an anlogy to make a point about a PETA video. You guys started analyzing the RK video for no particular reason. I think that would qualify as "thread hijacking."
That's pretty much how you've spent your time since arriving, whether it's related to food, putting down a pet, or just about anything else.
'Nuff Said.
Like I said, I don't give a shit how you live your life--that's your problem. This is a FORUM where people post their OPINIONS. That is what I've done, and if you don't like my posts,
perhaps you should not read them. That, too, is a CHOICE you can make. I obviously aggravate the hell out of you, and I've probably raised your already-too-high blood pressure. I will post as much as I feel like it--you don't intimidate me and never will.
'Nuff said.
Well, IMO, when one is constantly reinterating the "dangers" of certain things, it tends to come off a bit "preachy" sometimes. Just pointing that out.
YOU are the one who asked ME a question!!!!! see below:
"Hmm...explain then those who have smoked, ate meat and wasn't in the best shape possible and have lived long, happy lives. Or...better yet explain those who have done all the things they were "supposed" to do regarding health, and are dead now."
Why do you ask me a question if you don't want me to answer it? I gave you an answer that was my
opinion, so now I'm preaching? Maybe you shouldn't me ask anymore questions, and better yet, maybe you should join Wolf and stop reading my posts if I'm aggravating you so much with my "preaching."
YOU are the one who asked ME a question!!!!!
I gave you an answer that was my opinion, so now I'm preaching? Maybe you shouldn't me ask anymore questions, and better yet, maybe you should join Wolf and stop reading my posts if I'm aggravating you so much with my "preaching."
Whoa whoa whoa...slow your roll.
First of all, no need to shout and second of all, you can't dictate what people can and can not say (which was implied by you
demanding me to stop reading posts). Sounds like you are the one who is aggravated here, not I. I've been nothing but calm and otherwise polite while making my comments to you.
All I did was make an observation:
sometimes, when people constantly repeat things like warnings, etc., it just comes across as being preachy...that's all. *shrugs* No big deal.
"This is a FORUM where people post their OPINIONS"..." I will post as much as I feel like it"
Precisely. Good day.
All together now, ooooooommmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm. ;)
All I did was make an observation: sometimes, when people constantly repeat things like warnings, etc., it just comes across as being preachy...that's all. *shrugs* No big deal.
Hmmmm...can you say "passive-aggressive"?
Hmmmm...can you say "passive-aggressive"?
LMAO say what? Lordha'mercy, now stating an opinion is "passive/aggresive"...*shakes head*
Whatever you perceive..carry on.
*just not worth the stress...*
Whatever you perceive..carry on.
*just not worth the stress...*
Wait, I thought you weren't stressed! :confused: Just lovely...thanks for the nice chat.
Hmmmm...can you say "passive-aggressive"?
Hmmm...can you say, "fucking idiot?"
Hmmm...can you say, "fucking idiot?"
Well gosh, that' not very nice, now is it?
Aww, you came to wifie's rescue. Aint that sweet.
Hmmm...can you say, "fucking idiot?"
Heh...well I tried to be more diplomatic, but you know how I am. :D
No more stress...just easy peace and quiet (hint hint).
Lady Syc doesn't need my backing up...she can handle herself just fine. I just think you're a fucking idiot™.
Lady Syc doesn't need my backing up...she can handle herself just fine. I just think you're a fucking idiot™.
You know, I value your opinion
a lot, almost as much as I value Wolf's opinion. I'll try, in the future, to be less of a fucking idiot, OK? I really hope that meets with your approval.
But dontcha think they're maybe just a bit more credible than websites run by lobbyists for the meat industry and hunting magazines?
Not necessarily. The source could have its own agenda. Not to mention, look at the recent mea culpas from the New York Times and the Washington Post...the former apparently didn't do enough hard research, and the latter was apparently afraid to speak too loudly against the war inside the Beltway.
What is, in your opinion, a completely credible source? Fox News?
There is no completely credible source, IMO. Some are better than others...I tend to go with MSNBC, AP, BBC and Reuters. I also check out sites like Fox News and the Washington Times on occasion, b/c I think it's important to see things from multiple points-of-view.
There is no completely credible source, IMO. Some are better than others...I tend to go with MSNBC, AP, BBC and Reuters. I also check out sites like Fox News and the Washington Times on occasion, b/c I think it's important to see things from multiple points-of-view.
"Don't trust the media..think for yourselves." (on the back bumper of my car)
:D
You know, I value your opinion a lot, almost as much as I value Wolf's opinion. I'll try, in the future, to be less of a fucking idiot, OK? I really hope that meets with your approval.
We'll see...you may prove to be a valuable member of the community yet. After all, if Slang can become respectable, anyone can.
We'll see...you may prove to be a valuable member of the community yet. After all, if Slang can become respectable, anyone can.
Oh my God, he thinks I'm serious....
Oh my God, he thinks I'm serious....
No. You think he's serious.
We'll see...you may prove to be a valuable member of the community yet. After all, if Slang can become respectable, anyone can.
REALLY? Does this mean there's some small ray of hope even for me? ;)
Oh my God, he thinks I'm serious....
Yes...a serious fucking idiot™.
wow - i haven't been in this thread for awhile. it looks like garnet is making a lot of life long friends here. it must be her glowing personality and genuine tolerance - nay, dare i say acceptance of all her fellow cellarites?
no - really. seriously.
Yes...a serious fucking idiot™.
Aw, you're such a sweet talker, Syc.
Don't worry, I won't go away. I know how much you all love me. :love:
wow - i haven't been in this thread for awhile. it looks like garnet is making a lot of life long friends here. it must be her glowing personality and genuine tolerance - nay, dare i say acceptance of all her fellow cellarites?
no - really. seriously.
Thanks sweetie. Like I've said, the opinion of people like you, Sycamore and Wolf really mean a lot to me. I just want you to know how important your acceptance is to me.
Just out of curiosity, how does the Cellar get funding? Are there memberships of some sort, or is it funded as a non-profit? I'm curious, you see, because there is such a small group of people who post here on a regular basis. From my experience in the past few weeks, new people post once or twice and then disappear (I can't imagine why they would do that...). Almost everything else seems to be from people with thousands of posts. Do you guys do anything to encourage new members, or do you prefer to keep hearing from the same people over ...and over...and over ...and over...and over? If this is a business of some sort, isn't it bad for business that nobody seems to stick around except the same 15 people? :confused:
The Cellar is funded by a giant toad. :)
The Cellar is funded by a giant toad. :)
But you're welcome to buy a t-shirt garnet, if you want to do your part.
But you're welcome to buy a t-shirt garnet, if you want to do your part.
So it's funded solely by Undertoad? And I might just buy a couple t-shirts--one for myself, and one for my good pal Sycamore as a gift.
So it's funded solely by Undertoad?
No.
damn, i was just kidding. i haven't taken any potshots at you in awhile. in fact, if you dig back far enough you would realize that i had posted that i think you will fit in just fine here. but now i am realizing that you really are just a self impressed firebrand. i think you actually enjoy trolling for flamefests.
as far as the cellar being a business? i don't know - you would have to ask someone who matters around here. to the best of my knowledge UT provides this playground for us out of the kindness of his heart. (although if he did accept donations, many of us would gladly contribute).
if you stay or go, doesn't really matter in the grand scheme of things. having said that, i would encourage you to pull the stick out of your ass and realize that sometimes people just like to yank your chain. it isn't until you overreact and start lashing out that people really start digging in and taking cheap shots. the cellar has a lot of people that post. most people read a lot and post a little. some of us have jobs that allow us to keep an eye on it through out the day. from what i understand the cellar always slows down in the summer but picks up again in the fall. (something about getting cold and driving all those northerners inside :) )
as far as lumping me, sycamore, and wolf in together... well thanks. i couldn't really ask for much more here in the cellar... but if you stick around and relax a little, you will realize that the 3 of us have no more in common with eachother than we do with everyone else here, or even you for that matter. we are all just folks who drop in to bounce ideas (and sarcastic humor) off each other. sometimes we have great threads with thought provoking discourse... other times we have someone pick a fight and egg a flamewar on. it's all good.
so in conclusion - Step one - remove stick. Step two - enjoy yourself. Step three - understand that we are all equals here. well except for Jaguar (forgive for saying the name without genuflecting)
Welcome to the cellar garnet - care to start over - all of our slates come with really good erasers here.
Welcome to the cellar garnet - care to start over - all of our slates come with really good erasers here.
You know, lookout, we don't agree about much, but I'll give ya credit for never swearing at me.
as far as the cellar being a business? i don't know - you would have to ask someone who matters around here. to the best of my knowledge UT provides this playground for us out of the kindness of his heart. (although if he did accept donations, many of us would gladly contribute).
He used to have the donate via paypal thing at the bottom of the pages, but with the new system I don't see it now. I guess its something to ask Tony about and see if it got left off by accident, or if the new system doesn't support it, or if he's just not doing that anymore.
to the best of my knowledge UT provides this playground for us out of the kindness of his heart. (although if he did accept donations, many of us would gladly contribute).
Good point! There used to be a PayPal tip jar at the bottom of the front page but I don't see it now. Maybe it got lost in the upgrade or maybe in the terrorist^^^^^^^^^ big crash. UT, can you bring that back? Lookout123 wants to contribute, and maybe garnet will too. :)
Man, I gotta learn to type.
Good point! There used to be a PayPal tip jar at the bottom of the front page but I don't see it now. Maybe it got lost in the upgrade or maybe in the terrorist^^^^^^^^^ big crash. UT, can you bring that back? Lookout123 wants to contribute, and maybe garnet will too. :)
I just posted a thread in the user comments and suggestions asking UT to let us know what happened to the tip jar.
You know, lookout, we don't agree about much, but I'll give ya credit for never swearing at me.
ah bullshit - my dogs ears are bleeding due to the profanities i have unleashed at you. i just can't type fast enough to post them all
:D
Hey, Lookout! We all know that beneath that hardened exterior there beats a heart as black as coal! But I actually kind of like you in a wierd way. I like Garnet, too. And Lady Sycamore is way cool, so Syc must have SOMETHING going for him. Jag has that wonderful arrogance of youth going for him plus he's actually pretty damn sharp. And Wolf - well, Wolf is the finest pusher of my buttons that I've encountered on the net. So let's all have a group hug, put on our leather jackets and go have a big steak dinner in honor of LJ's memory. I hear UT is paying! :D
I hear UT is paying! :D
Now I'm kinda worried that UT isn't getting paid for being the boss around here! Surely the guy deserves at least six figures for putting up with this crap....
... your crap.
You might have a more enjoyable time if you find out that there are more than two threads here. Also more than two opinions.
To be fair, she has posted in several non PETA and non animal threads and she has started a few non PETA threads. True she seems to only get really passionate in the animal and PETA threads, but we all have our specific topics that draw us the most.
Oh, and UT isn't "the boss" as such. He's the guy with the machines in his basement.
Garnet HAS posted in other threads, but people seem to keep wanting to bait her on back to these two. I never got to see her original posts, so I don't what extremist things she may (or may not) have said, but based on the available evidence, I think we need to all give her a break for a change. And, let's face it, the guy who pays is always the boss. UT is pretty low key about it and EXTREMELY tolerant, but he can pull the plug any time he feels like it. Sounds like the guy in charge to me.
... your crap.
You might have a more enjoyable time if you find out that there are more than two threads here. Also more than two opinions.
Yeah, "my" crap. Every problem is my fault. You busted me.
Every problem is my fault.
Don't flatter yourself! :D
Don't flatter yourself! :D
Ha ha! :D
[QUOTE=marichiko]Garnet HAS posted in other threads, but people seem to keep wanting to bait her on back to these two. [QUOTE]
For the record, I did my garnet-baiting in the weight thread. Hey, I'm a carnivore, she's an herbivore, it's only natural.
Hey, I'm a carnivore, she's an herbivore, it's only natural.
Aren't herbivores bred to be prey anyway?
Hey, Lookout! We all know that beneath that hardened exterior there beats a heart as black as coal! But I actually kind of like you in a wierd way. I like Garnet, too. And Lady Sycamore is way cool, so Syc must have SOMETHING going for him.
But of course..he
certainly could not even be
seen with me if he didn't have it goin' on..LOL.
:D
At first I was saying to myself, "Not again..." but this is going to be an interesting read.
http://www.petakillsanimals.com/
Just FYI:
This website is sponsored and paid for by Center for Consumer Freedom (CCF), a front group for Philip Morris, Outback Steakhouse, KFC, logging interests, cattle ranchers, and almost every major liquor peddler.
Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington (CREW) has recently filed a complaint with the Internal Revenue Service alleging that CCF has violated its tax-exempt status by engaging in prohibited electioneering (asking people to vote against Dennis Kucinich, as if that was really necessary...); by funneling nearly $7 million, together with another front group, to the founder of the organization Richard Berman and to his for-profit business; and by engaging in activities with no charitable purpose. (
http://www.prospect.org/web/page.ww?section=root&name=ViewWeb&articleId=8984)
More infor on the CCF:
http://www.ConsumerDeception.com
http://www.CitizensForEthics.org/activities/campaign.php?view=3
Here is a list of the CCF's other "targets," both past and present:
Mothers Against Drunk Driving (MADD)
American Academy of Orthopedic Surgeons
The American Medical Association
The Arthritis Foundation
Former New York Mayor Rudy Giuliani
The Harvard School of Public Health
The Marin Institute for the Prevention of Alcohol and Other Drug Problems
The National Association of High School Principals
The National Safety Council
The U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC)
The U.S. Department of Transportation
why exactly would liquor companies give two shits about PETA? its not like all vegans are straightedge.
why exactly would liquor companies give two shits about PETA? its not like all vegans are straightedge.
Hi Lookie, how are ya? :D
Naw, the liquor companies don't care about PETA, but the cattle ranchers, KFC and Outback Steakhouse do. These guys give a nice donation to the CCF (fully tax-deductible, by the way), and the CCF "reciprocates" with a "PETA Kills Animals" billboard in Times Square. The liquor companies get their piece when the CCF bashes the AMA, MADD, etc.
Just FYI:
Are they wrong or lying? That's the important question.
Are the listed numbers in some way incorrect?
Did they or did they not finance at least two known domestic terrorists?
Were the quotes actually spoken as they were attributed?
Did they actually produce and distribute this comic book to children?
And the first mother-fucker that hands something like that to my child gets to play christmas tree, by the way.
That looks a lot like that rabbit I shot a few weeks ago.
Are they wrong or lying? That's the important question.
Are the listed numbers in some way incorrect?
Did they or did they not finance at least two known domestic terrorists?
Were the quotes actually spoken as they were attributed?
Did they actually produce and distribute this comic book to children?
And the first mother-fucker that hands something like that to my child gets to play christmas tree, by the way.
How did I know this was coming... :lol:
TS, why are you so threatened by PETA? You get SO angry when anyone brings up PETA, yet at the same time proceed to call them idiots. Why are a bunch of idiots such a threat to you? if you don't like PETA, ignore them. I don't like your heroes at the NRA, but idon't waste my time worrying about them. it's not worth getting so upset about.
And yes, the numbers, quotes and accusations made by the CCF are inaccurate, taken out of context and/or completely fabricated. But if you want to continue to believe them, that's fine, it's your choice. I have been to many anti-fur demonstrations where the brochure you're so upset about was used. They were never, ever handed to children--only people who looked to be at least 20 years old. We're they perhaps given to a 17-year old who looked 20? Perhaps, but I think a 17 year old will be able to get over it--just like you should.
Are they wrong or lying? That's the important question.
...
Did they actually produce and distribute this comic book to children?
Is the comic book wrong or lying? Or is it the presentation and insinuations in the comic book that offend you?
How did I know this was coming... :lol:
There's hope for you yet...
TS, why are you so threatened by PETA? You get SO angry when anyone brings up PETA, yet at the same time proceed to call them idiots. Why are a bunch of idiots such a threat to you? if you don't like PETA, ignore them.
I'm not threatened by them, at least not directly. But I am concerned about any form of extremism. And these ...people... are extremists.
I don't like your heroes at the NRA, but idon't waste my time worrying about them. it's not worth getting so upset about.
I'm not aware of the NRA advocating violence and destruction or an extreme change of life for every person on the planet, regardless of their wishes. I don't see the NRA trying to convince me that my child's life is equal to that of a dog, cat, or monkey.
For the record, I'm not a member and I think some of the people at the NRA are as wacky as the PETA people.
And yes, the numbers, quotes and accusations made by the CCF are inaccurate, taken out of context and/or completely fabricated.
Can you cite otherwise? There is video of Rodney Coronado giving a demonstration on a college campus, at PETA expense teaching people how to make an incendiary device. How out of context is that?
But if you want to continue to believe them, that's fine, it's your choice. I have been to many anti-fur demonstrations where the brochure you're so upset about was used. They were never, ever handed to children--only people who looked to be at least 20 years old. We're they perhaps given to a 17-year old who looked 20? Perhaps, but I think a 17 year old will be able to get over it--just like you should.
I made the christmas tree referrence conditional for a reason. I wouldn't just shoot someone for no reason.
And why would the market it to a children's level unless they expected for it to end up in a child's hands?
Is the comic book wrong or lying? Or is it the presentation and insinuations in the comic book that offend you?
The underlying facts of the comic are untrue. Someone else processes everything we see now. And yes I know that there have been legitimate cases of animal cruelty at those facilities.
The comic purports that your mother, think about that,
your mother is an evil moster who strips animals of their skin in an orgy of consumerism.
Now, I know for a fact that my mother does not in any way fold, spindle, or mutilate animals for her own ends.
So, yes, and yes.
I'm not threatened by them, at least not directly. But I am concerned about any form of extremism. And these ...people... are extremists.
Hmmm, I go to work everyday, pay my taxes, own a home, vote, have a clean police record, and I don't participate in anything violent. So that makes me extremist? Cool! I've never really thought of myself that way, but hey, whatever you say.
I'm not aware of the NRA advocating violence and destruction or an extreme change of life for every person on the planet, regardless of their wishes.
Nor does PETA advocate violence or destruction. If PETA is so violent, how come the FBI and IRS has not taken away our tax-exempt status? They keep a close eye on us to the point of harassment, but have never found anything. PETA has been around 25 years, so they've had a quarter-century to investigate. Are the FBI and IRS not doing their job? No wait, I know! The FBI, IRS and PETA are all secretly conspiring to take away everyone's right to eat a cheeseburger. Please.
I don't see the NRA trying to convince me that my child's life is equal to that of a dog, cat, or monkey. Can you cite otherwise? There is video of Rodney Coronado giving a demonstration on a college campus, at PETA expense teaching people how to make an incendiary device. How out of context is that?
I can cite anything you want. I'll be happy to do this for you if you want, and we can go back and forth about it for days. However I doubt that anyone else in the Cellar really cares. And since PETA finances terrorists, can I ask again how we get away with maintaining our tax-exempt status? Wouldn't the government and their many IRS audits of PETA have discovered this by now? Hmmm.
I made the christmas tree referrence conditional for a reason. I wouldn't just shoot someone for no reason.
I'm really glad to hear that you only gun down people when they hand out brochures or do other things you don't like. Very comforting.
And why would the market it to a children's level unless they expected for it to end up in a child's hands?
This is a leaflet that is made to look like a comic book. Do you think that every comic book is intended for children? No, lot of them are adult-oriented. I can't name any off hand because the genre doesn't interest me, but I'm sure there's people out there that can.
I'm not aware of the NRA advocating violence and destruction or an extreme change of life for every person on the planet, regardless of their wishes.
Just curious about the "extreme change of life" comment. I'm guessing that you're not referring to menopause, but vegetarianism? (sorry, couldn't help myself :lol: ). Anyway, how could PETA possibly force people to stop eating meat? They may advocate it ad nauseum, but they can't force anyone to do anything. The same can be said about the NRA--they may be annoying as hell, but they can't force me to go buy a gun if I don't want to. I guess my point is that there are bigger things to worry about in the world right now. In this case, if ya can't beat 'em, ignore 'em.
I somehow doubt the NRA would make it illegal to be without a gun, whereas PETA would make it a crime to own an animal for any reason, even aid animals.
I somehow doubt the NRA would condone or enjoine the burning of pacifists homes or businesses.
I somehow doubt that the NRA would collect your treasured weapons under the auspices of protecting them from abuse and neglect and then toss them into a shredder.
So no, I don't guess they can do much.
And I agree that there are many bigger issues in the world, but this one stikes at the heart of all of the issue, cognitive failure.
I somehow doubt the NRA would make it illegal to be without a gun, whereas PETA would make it a crime to own an animal for any reason, even aid animals.
No offense man, but that's not true. They actually have a pretty decent site about pets and stuff (
http://www.HelpingAnimals.com). I found it when I was looking for info about microchipping my cat. I've never heard that they're trying to pass laws to stop pet ownership and from what I've read most of the employees there have pets. I could be wrong, maybe garnet will know.
I somehow doubt that the NRA would collect your treasured weapons under the auspices of protecting them from abuse and neglect and then toss them into a shredder.
Are you really afraid that PETA will succeed in taking away your pets? They don't have the power, the public will never let it happen, and from what I understand it's never been part of their agenda.
I get your point with all this, but I think you're blowing things way out proportion and worrying about nothing. :worried:
I was especially amused by an episode of "Bullshit" wherein it was revealed the then head of PETA used insulin derived from animal research to stay alive. But naturally it was ok for her because the ever amorphous someone had to fight the fight.
This is a leaflet that is made to look like a comic book. Do you think that every comic book is intended for children? No, lot of them are adult-oriented. I can't name any off hand because the genre doesn't interest me, but I'm sure there's people out there that can.
True, Mad magazine comes to mind but there are a slew of porn "comic books" also. The PETA "comic book" raises hackles because at first glance it gives the appearance of being for kids. I've a feeling this was intentional to get peoples attention...you know, shock value.....an old and honorable(?) advertising gaff.
I was more interested in a link, from Wolf's link, about the agenda and methodology of the
Humane Society of the United States.
I must admit I hadn't done my homework on this organization and made assumptions that are apparently not true. I thought they were sponsoring animal shelters when they are not.
In 1980, HSUS officially began to change its focus from animal welfare to animal rights. A vote was taken at the national conference in San Francisco and it was formally resolved that the group would “pursue on all fronts … the clear articulation and establishment of the rights of all animals … within the full range of American life and culture.”
In Animal Rights and Human Obligations, the published proceedings of this conference, HSUS stated unequivocally that “there is no rational basis for maintaining a moral distinction between the treatment of humans and other animals.”
Hmmm....my bad. :o
snip~ I found it when I was looking for info about microchipping my cat. I've never heard that they're trying to pass laws to stop pet ownership and from what I've read most of the employees there have pets. I could be wrong, maybe garnet will know.
Are you really afraid that PETA will succeed in taking away your pets? They don't have the power, the public will never let it happen, and from what I understand it's never been part of their agenda.
I get your point with all this, but I think you're blowing things way out proportion and worrying about nothing. :worried:
If PETA and their allies get their way, you can keep the cat but you'll have to consult the cat's attorney before you do any microchipping or vet visits.
By the way, you can stick that flea bath in your ear, you...you...human. :p
there is no rational basis for maintaining a moral distinction between the treatment of humans and other animals
I'm perfectly willing to follow that, when one of my dogs reminds me of it personally.
If PETA and their allies get their way, you can keep the cat but you'll have to consult the cat's attorney before you do any microchipping or vet visits.
Not true, Bruce. Actually they ENCOURAGE you to get cats and dogs microchipped, and they also encourage vet visits, shots, etc.
http://www.helpinganimals.com/h-microchip.html[lit]The next time my cat barfs on the rug he's going straight to Gloversville.
http://www.albany.edu/history/glovers/
peta or not, The Bedwe'er was fleeced out of his woodchuck coat (so to speak) but I can see some warm orange mittens on his horizon.[/lit]
Quote:
there is no rational basis for maintaining a moral distinction between the treatment of humans and other animals
I'm perfectly willing to follow that, when one of my dogs reminds me of it personally.
UT - Thanks for the best answer that I have ever heard in this argument. I plan on using it.
the next person to respond will be a no-meat-eating loser. trust me.
but i bet they don't look too dikey.
You guessed it, Lookout! Nice going! :lol:
Of course Garnet doesn't give them much credence, but The Center for Consumer Freedom presented testimony to congress about PETA's (and other organizations') funding ties to ALF and ELF.
So what? These guys are lobbyists, and they present a lot of things to Congress. Does the fact that it was presented to Congress make it true?
BTW, PETA just got word that the IRS has completed their 20-month audit of our finances. This audit basically started because of the CCF's politically-motivated claims, which began a couple years ago. The IRS left no stone unturned in a nearly two-year-long investigation, and PETA has just received a "clean bill or health." Our tax-exempt status will remain intact, once again proving that the CCF is
lying.
Again, if PETA is a "terrorist" organization, why do we still have our tax-exempt status? Wouldn't the IRS and FBI have figured it out by now?
teeheehee :lol: i knew it! i've got a gift! i'm going to use my skills at seeing the future to help all mankind. for a small fee, of course - i am a capitalist pig, after all.
hi garnet - nice to see you back.
teeheehee :lol: i knew it! i've got a gift! i'm going to use my skills at seeing the future to help all mankind. for a small fee, of course - i am a capitalist pig, after all.
hi garnet - nice to see you back.
Lookout, you are definitely psychic...or maybe psycho, I'm not sure which!!! :biggrin: :rollanim:
Hi, Garnet! I hope you're back to stay. I've missed ya!
Not true, Bruce. Actually they ENCOURAGE you to get cats and dogs microchipped, and they also encourage vet visits, shots, etc.
http://www.helpinganimals.com/h-microchip.html
Are you saying PETA is
NOTin the forefront of the political movement to legally redefine “pets” as “companion animals,” and their “owners” as merely “guardians?
BTW, as "guardian" you'll be paying your cat's lawyer too. :lol:
Of course Garnet doesn't give them much credence, but The Center for Consumer Freedom presented testimony to congress about PETA's (and other organizations') funding ties to ALF and ELF.
I thought the funding came from Ingrid Newkirk and couldn't be proven to be PETA funds? :confused:
Collectively, ALF and ELF have committed more than one thousand criminal acts amounting to more than $110 million in damage from arson, vandalism, and other violent tactics. The FBI has called them "our highest domestic terrorism investigative priority." From Wolfs link.
Looks like we can end the war on terror right now...