Aces High Bulletin Board
General Forums => The O' Club => Topic started by: Furball on December 30, 2004, 11:59:18 AM
-
For all these "PETA SUCKS!!!" people.. this is their mission statement: -
People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals (PETA), with more than 800,000 members, is the largest animal rights organization in the world. Founded in 1980, PETA is dedicated to establishing and protecting the rights of all animals. PETA operates under the simple principle that animals are not ours to eat, wear, experiment on, or use for entertainment.
PETA focuses its attention on the four areas in which the largest numbers of animals suffer the most intensely for the longest periods of time: on factory farms, in laboratories, in the fur trade, and in the entertainment industry. We also work on a variety of other issues, including the cruel killing of beavers, birds and other "pests," and the abuse of backyard dogs.
PETA works through public education, cruelty investigations, research, animal rescue, legislation, special events, celebrity involvement, and protest campaigns.
The only issue i disagree with in that, is animals are ours to eat. It is a food chain after all. Apart from that it seems like quite a good organisation (apart from the odd 1 or 2 campaigns i have heard about) they sound similar to the RSPCA http://www.rspca.org.uk
Yes, some of their members are friggen stupid, but do they really deserve this treatment? or am i just un-educated about what they do?
-
Indeed.
While I do see some of the PETA folks going WAY over board at times I do believe in there charter.
Cruelty to animals of any kind is not only wrong but immoral as well.
There are humane ways to slaughter animals for consumption.
(this is where I disagree with PETA BTW)
I feel people should have the right to eat meat if they choose to.
And hunting is necessary to control populations of animals.
-
The idea is a good one,but many of them are extremists.
I remember reading a thread there where they talked about feeding their dogs vegetables only.
-
Originally posted by Sox62
The idea is a good one,but many of them are extremists.
I remember reading a thread there where they talked about feeding their dogs vegetables only.
LOL there poor dogs would not last too long i think.
-
Originally posted by wombatt
LOL there poor dogs would not last too long i think.
or the owners... imagine how bad a dogs fart would be if it was fed only cabbage and broccoli etc...
-
Originally posted by Sox62
The idea is a good one,but many of them are extremists.
In an organisation of 800,000 you are bound to get some extremists, but i bet the vast majority are decent. Sounds like the whole thing has been tainted by the actions of a few.
-
dogs can live without meat AFAIK- a pet cat will die though.
What i don't understand is why they associate eating meat with heart attacks. It seems to be the sandard line used against meat eaters is along the lines of "you wont be enjoying meat when you die of a heart attack". oops! forgot to say i meant the peta2 boards.
-
I respect their goal, but not their means. They have a history of funding Eco-Terrorism. For example, they've made donations to the North American Earth Liberation Front (ELF) in 2001, which shortly afterwards received a 4-count indictment for firebombing logging trucks. The ELF & it's sister group (ALF, which released 1,200 minks from an Iowa farm in 1 instance), are both considered domestic terror groups by the FBI. Then there's their members that think that dousing somebody's several thousand dollar coat in red paint is an acceptable form of protest. I don't know what the status is of their court case, but last I heard, the IRS was being asked to revoke their tax-exempt status, among other things, since they were funding domestic terror.
I've seen a "Stop firerbanding cows!" protest first hand. Didn't take part, walked by it while in D.C. on my way to McDonalds, but a legit protest is one thing...but blowing up / releasing people's property, economically damaging individuals just because "fur is murder!" ? I can't agree with those methods.
-
Humans are not herbivorous by nature. It is not natural for us to force ourselves to eat only fruits and/or vegetables all of the time and completely deprive ourselves of meat and eggs. We are omnivorous creatures, meaning that we are designed, by nature, to consume both plant AND animal material. This makes our diet versatile, enabling us to survive in the event that certain food sources become scarce. Omnivorism is one of the main reasons why we humans have become the most adaptive and successful living creatures on Earth.
-
Humans are
OMNIVORES....
We eat plants/animals/ YUCK fungi......
My problems with PETA are that they are very extremist and by looking at there web and the Street team stuff...they are...
Look....I love animals....I breed an endangered species of fish in my fish tanks because they are pretty...lol...and because I dont want them to die off....
I have kept marine invertebrate/fish tanks for the better part of 15 years...
I was a biology major in college at a, well lets say unusual major, at the USAF academy.....
I have 2 dogs that I have rescued.......
SOOOOOO.....
Look.....appreciating nature and animals (lets not forget plants)....I cant stand environmental killing/misuse. If people are smart and take care of their surroundings then we can all live in harmony....LOL....but seriously....the unethical killing (read what you will) of animals for pleasure is wrong....
The individuals that torture and maim animals and plants for a joke or a thrill disgust me. Plain and simple.
Not to say that beef/pork/chicken/turkey/tuna..etc arent some of my favorite foods...dont get me wrong.....I LOVE EM...but gathering them to feed my family is NOT WRONG!
Back up a second.....if a lion kills a wildebeast....is that wrong? Ask the PETA folks.....
If a shark eats a tuna......is that wrong?????...ask the PETA FOLKS....
If an individual hunts to feed his family....is that wrong?
HIGHLIGHT THAT ONE...the individual hunting to feed his family....I dare say that an Inuit hunting seals or Polar Bears or whales to feed his family is a WRONG thing.......
Just me but the extremism in the PETA area pisses me off.....
My 2.5 cents...and I have more....and dont get me started.....LOL
Regards
-
INDY.....
DONT GET ME STARTED WITH ELF.......
They are plain and simple small minded children who have no better things to do than vandalize/terrorize folks.....
Trust me I know on the ELF front.........personal experience with those tards.....
-
"If we really believe that animals have the same right to be free from pain and suffering at our hands, then, of course we’re going to be, as a movement, blowing things up and smashing windows … I think it’s a great way to bring about animal liberation … I think it would be great if all of the fast-food outlets, slaughterhouses, these laboratories, and the banks that fund them exploded tomorrow. I think it's perfectly appropriate for people to take bricks and toss them through the windows ... Hallelujah to the people who are willing to do it."
— Bruce Friedrich, PETA’s vegan campaign coordinator, at the “Animal Rights 2001” conference
-------------------------------------
"Even if animal tests produced a cure for AIDS, we’d be against it."
— PETA president and co-founder Ingrid Newkirk, in the September 1989 issue of Vogue
----------------------------------
"Our campaigns are always geared towards children and they always will be"
— PETA vice president Dan Matthews, on the Fox News Network (December 19, 2003)
---------------------------------
eskimo
-
I like what PETA is doing. But I don't agree with them on certain things. There protest are very stupid imo. If I had a $2000 dollar mink coat and someone threw paint on me. You bet I would be kicking someones a**. And no one really gives a damn at the end of the day except PETA and the person who got paint on them. They try to force the beleives upon others. Your damn cat/dog shouldn't eat just vegies. This is really bad for there health. This is considered cruelty by many vets. They act like we aren't supposed to eat meat. If this was so we wouldn't be able to digest it or let alone chew and tear meat. They claim we are unhealthy, where as they are the ones taking supplements just to get all nutrients etc. There arguments are invalid. Its one thing to claim eating meat is bad becuase how animals are killed to eat them. But its another thing claiming that we shouldn't becuase we aren't suppose to. But anyone who took 7th grade Life Science class knows by nature we are supposed to.
-
If you were 6 inches tall your cat would eat you..
enough said...
-
Jay Clark....
OMG HOW COULD YOU LET CAPTIVE ANIMALS EAT OTHERS!!!!!!!!
LOL
-
:D
-
The problem is MOST of them....at least MOST of their active members ARE extremests. Most hunters I know are in fact conservationist, they don't want the land that they use and hunt to be destroyed. The animals they kill they DO in fact use for food.
The main problem I have is that they ALLOW these extrememsts to be among their organization and applaud what they do.
EXAMPLE: Sitting outside a KFC and handing out buckets of blood and chicken parts to children along with a comic book talking about how momy and daddy are mosters cause they eat meat is WRONG any way you look at it.
I don't mind somone who is an activist for animal rights as far as cruelty goes but when you want to be a facist oppresive moron and mess with childrens heads you cross the line.
No not all their members are like this BUT these few are not denounced nor are their actions wich tells me that PETA supports these measures.
That's why I have a problem with PETA
-
Gunslinger,
What is wrong with handing out.....
: Sitting outside a KFC and handing out buckets of blood and chicken parts to children
Seriously.....that is a bit wrong....but you can eat them....just like you can eat worms, ants, cockroaches....etc
Im messing with you Gun.....
Take this for an example.....I am in the USAF.....I fly for a living and train others to make the USA safer and a better place to live.....about 2 months ago I organized a neighborhood cleanup/beautification......hmmmmm sounds good right?
My ECO NAZI neighbor was opposed because I drive an SUV.....
HMMMM.... I asked her what the problem was.....she said and I quote....."YOU DRIVE AN SUV, YOU DONT CARE ABOUT THE ENVIRONMENT".....
I said WTF.......?.....I keep dogs that are strayed....I breed endangerd species fish and plants in my fish tanks.....
OHHHH NO......the bottom line was I drove an SUV and I was in the USAF......
HUNNY....WTF.......What are you doing......
Her response......ready.....???????
"I am raising my children to respect nature"
OMG.....I clean the trails by my house......I make our neighborhood NICE for people who live here.....ETC
So what does she do...?????
Ok off my soap box......
ARGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGG
-
Originally posted by guttboy
Gunslinger,
What is wrong with handing out.....
: Sitting outside a KFC and handing out buckets of blood and chicken parts to children
Seriously.....that is a bit wrong....but you can eat them....just like you can eat worms, ants, cockroaches....etc
Im messing with you Gun.....
Take this for an example.....I am in the USAF.....I fly for a living and train others to make the USA safer and a better place to live.....about 2 months ago I organized a neighborhood cleanup/beautification......hmmmmm sounds good right?
My ECO NAZI neighbor was opposed because I drive an SUV.....
HMMMM.... I asked her what the problem was.....she said and I quote....."YOU DRIVE AN SUV, YOU DONT CARE ABOUT THE ENVIRONMENT".....
I said WTF.......?.....I keep dogs that are strayed....I breed endangerd species fish and plants in my fish tanks.....
OHHHH NO......the bottom line was I drove an SUV and I was in the USAF......
HUNNY....WTF.......What are you doing......
Her response......ready.....???????
"I am raising my children to respect nature"
OMG.....I clean the trails by my house......I make our neighborhood NICE for people who live here.....ETC
So what does she do...?????
Ok off my soap box......
ARGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGG
If she does not already belong to PETA, she is just the kind of wacko they are looking for.
eskimo
-
Originally posted by guttboy
INDY.....
Trust me I know on the ELF front.........personal experience with those tards.....
Elaborate, please.
-
OK,
I shoot them.
I eat them.
I ware them.
I pay for their habitat with my licenses fees, the tax from the ammo I buy, and the 5 billion forms I have to fill out. I have to find new game areas because there having a sit-in on animals habitat land (By the way, the animals don't come back there because the PETA goonies shooed them into local neighborhoods, now there is dear dodo and dog dodo in my yard) and I WILL NOT shoot them because this is America and they can dodo it.
JUST REMEMBER THIS!
When the ribs are on the barby and the grease is dripping in the fire, the flames can be seen for miles and the smell is better than s#x
Going home now to fire it up!
-
Originally posted by Muckmaw1
quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Originally posted by guttboy
INDY.....
Trust me I know on the ELF front.........personal experience with those tards.....
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Elaborate, please.
Yeah I wanna hear this one too :)
-
Originally posted by Phaser11
OK,
I shoot them.
I eat them.
I ware them.
I pay for their habitat with my licenses fees, the tax from the ammo I buy, and the 5 billion forms I have to fill out. I have to find new game areas because there having a sit-in on animals habitat land (By the way, the animals don't come back there because the PETA goonies shooed them into local neighborhoods, now there is dear dodo and dog dodo in my yard) and I WILL NOT shoot them because this is America and they can dodo it.
JUST REMEMBER THIS!
When the ribs are on the barby and the grease is dripping in the fire, the flames can be seen for miles and the smell is better than s#x
Going home now to fire it up!
I would wonder why PETA tards would want animals to starv to death rather be shot and eaten??? I read a story about a forrest that was absolutly barren from 6ft up to ground level because the deer there were no longer hunted. THe deer overpopulated and ATE everything except for the trees and other animals. This cause all the small critters to die off and now the trees are rotting out because there's nothing to cover the ground soil to protect it.
I wish I still had that link.....but besides that most outdoorsmen themselves are enironmentalist in most ways. They beleive in the preservation of land and nature.
-
Originally posted by Phaser11
OK,
I shoot them.
I eat them.
I ware them.
I pay for their habitat with my licenses fees, the tax from the ammo I buy, and the 5 billion forms I have to fill out. I have to find new game areas because there having a sit-in on animals habitat land (By the way, the animals don't come back there because the PETA goonies shooed them into local neighborhoods, now there is dear dodo and dog dodo in my yard) and I WILL NOT shoot them because this is America and they can dodo it.
JUST REMEMBER THIS!
When the ribs are on the barby and the grease is dripping in the fire, the flames can be seen for miles and the smell is better than s#x
Going home now to fire it up!
I would wonder why PETA tards would want animals to starv to death rather be shot and eaten??? I read a story about a forrest that was absolutly barren from 6ft up to ground level because the deer there were no longer hunted. THe deer overpopulated and ATE everything except for the trees and other animals. This cause all the small critters to die off and now the trees are rotting out because there's nothing to cover the ground soil to protect it.
I wish I still had that link.....but besides that most outdoorsmen themselves are enironmentalist in most ways. They beleive in the preservation of land and nature.
-
I pay for their habitat with my licenses fees, the tax from the ammo I buy, and the 5 billion forms I have to fill out.
ROFLMAO....
I'm sure the poor furry animals appreciate your donation.:aok
-
PETA’s mission statement sounds reasonable because they are very savy at marketing. The reality though is that the mission and the mission statement are two different things. For example, their founders are on record being opposed to people having pets. They are against any medical research involving animals because they feel that a mouse’s life is worth the same as a person’s. And so on.
Of course you can’t get 800,000 people to donate money in support of those ideas. So they promote their organization as an animal welfare organization, knowing that the vast majority of donors read their advertisements but don’t take the time to find out what they’re really trying to do.
Originally posted by Gunslinger
I would wonder why PETA tards would want animals to starv to death rather be shot and eaten???
Because like many people in society these days, they are so out of touch with the reality of the natural world that they think nature is like a Disney move. At night when people aren’t looking, the wolves get together with the deer and have little parties, sing songs, and drink hot cidar.
They’re not tards, just clueless.
-
Out of touch with reality, like suggesting wildlife exists because you buy a gun license and pay taxes on ammunition? That kind of out of touch with reality?
PETA simply exeplifies the old adage that "too much of a good thing is bad".
They go waaaaaay too far with their extreme views and actually cause more harm than good in many instances, but the "idea" of the movement is a good one.
-
Human brain development and evolution is directly linked to the consumation of proteins found specifically in meat.
I take comfort that in my beliefs of evolution, and that inferior human bloodlines will die off, specifically those commonly found to be the extreme wings of organisations such as PETA.
-
PETA is absolutely stupid. Now this is coming from a staunch leftist (note that I didn't say Democrat).
Animals are a part of the food chain. We're at the top of it. Animals eat other animals, and we eat the animals that eat those animals. We need meat for development (and the flavor, the FLAVOR!!!). We need meat to sustain ourselves.
I just cannot stand extremist animal rights people. Seriously, a rat's life isn't nearly as valuable as a person's, so we *should* be able to perform tests on them freely and frequently.
However, I wouldn't say the same for a dog or a cat. This is quite a complex issue, yes... But PETA makes things very difficult.
I say down with PETA.
-
What IS so bad about PETA?
Originally posted by the whole thread except Furball
...
sums up my thoughts
furby.. nothing against you, just not supporting peta, you were the one asking why they so bad.
-
Originally posted by Curval
I pay for their habitat with my licenses fees, the tax from the ammo I buy, and the 5 billion forms I have to fill out.
ROFLMAO....
I'm sure the poor furry animals appreciate your donation.:aok
"I'm so sick of this "ain't humanity great" bull***t. We're a virus in shoes, people. That's all we are." - Bill Hicks, comedian
-
Originally posted by wombatt
LOL there poor dogs would not last too long i think.
I dont think a dog could survive on a vegetable only diet. When choosing a commercial dogfood at least 2 of the first 5 ingredients *should* be a meat or meat byproduct. Dogs were meant to eat meat. Their digestive systems are designed for it. Making a dog eat veggies only is like making a cow eat meat only.
-
What is so bad about PETA? Let me count the ways......Well the main thing is they Terrorize very young children. Some as young as 4 or 5 with comic books depicting "Mommy slashing Bunny Rabbit with a demented look on her face. They are the demented ones. I hope some of their stunts backfire and they get their sorry prettythange$ sued into oblivion.
-
Originally posted by weaselsan
What is so bad about PETA? Let me count the ways......Well the main thing is they Terrorize very young children. Some as young as 4 or 5 with comic books depicting "Mommy slashing Bunny Rabbit with a demented look on her face. They are the demented ones. I hope some of their stunts backfire and they get their sorry prettythange$ sued into oblivion.
I think it was in miniapolis or something they got alot of bad press because of a Santa poster on a billboard.
They had some medial thing that said milk consumption leads to impidancey and a picture of sant with a caption saying "sorry kids, Santa isn't coming this year" or somthing to that end.
EDIT:
Here it is:
http://www.marketingvox.com/archives/2003/12/17/peta_santa_cant_come_this_year/
(http://www.marketingwonk.com/images/SantaBB-thumb.gif)
-
Out of touch with reality, like suggesting wildlife exists because you buy a gun license and pay taxes on ammunition? That kind of out of touch with reality?
Thats not out of touch with reality here in the USA. The funds for wildlife management come soley from licsence fees and taxes on guns, ammunition and gear. (Can include fishing liscenses and taxes on tackle as well)
I dont know of a single animal rights orginazation that spends even a single penny on habitat improvement projects or on land to set aside specifically so wildlife can exist.
Even though I havent hunted or fished in several years now I still buy a small game/fishing liscense every year just to help support the Colorado Division of Wildlife. How many animal rights activists can say the same thing?
-
I will donate (and do) donate to the SPCA way before I donate to another organization. I do donate to red cross, etc, but the bulk goes to SPCA.
Tapakeg
-
Originally posted by Furball
In an organisation of 800,000 you are bound to get some extremists, but i bet the vast majority are decent. Sounds like the whole thing has been tainted by the actions of a few.
That's how I see online sims. Just the numbers are different.
-
Originally posted by JB73
What IS so bad about PETA?
sums up my thoughts
furby.. nothing against you, just not supporting peta, you were the one asking why they so bad.
As i said, judging by their mission statement, it seems a noble cause. I only know a few of their campaigns, why i asked what is so bad about them to get the kind of abuse they get on this forum. An organisation that tries to stop the un-necessary abuse of animals is a good thing.
If you look at it from their perspective, they value an animal's life just as highly as a human being's... so violent protests is kind of justified because the treatment animal's receive... not saying i agree with it, just saying i can understand their perspective.
It seems that the organisation has a good intention, just goes completely about it the wrong way.
-
I think that all PETA member should be shot.
And promptly bbq'ed and eaten with potato salad, cole slaw, lots and lots of bbq sauce and beer.
That will teach them to fxck with us.
-
Originally posted by wombatt
LOL there poor dogs would not last too long i think.
dogs are not carnivores as most people believe, they are omnivores.
-
Furball I guess what irks me most about organizations like PETA is the fact that in the US at least they give nothing to actually help animals. Things like habitat improvement, buying parcels of land to set aside for wildlife to live on, planting food plots for wildlife etc. All of their funding goes towards things like fighting to stop experiments on animals.
Also according to PETA, killing animals for food is *needless slaughter of animals*.
-
The hell with PETA.
Cute little mission statement I'll agree but we already HAVE and organization to deal with animal cruelty.
The ASPCA.
Outside of that
I believe animals ARE ours to do with as we please.
Does this mean I support needlessly abusing them? No
I also dont feel any pity, or sympathy for any idiot that moves to he mountains then complains about the bear wandering into their house or the deer eating their gardens. Or the mountain lions eating their pets
And I dont see these reasons as reasons for a "hunt"
Sorry bub you decided to move to where the wildlife is.
Either learn to live with it or move back to the city where you belong
But when it comes right down to it.
I dont care how a calf is treated to produce tender veal.
So long as it is tender when it reaches my plate.
I dont care how an animal is slaughtered. Dead is dead.
To me it doesnt matter how they get that way be it if they slit their throat or hit em in the head with a hammer or forced to watch reruns of I Love Lucy.
So long as the meat ends up on my plate.
I dont care if hunters hunt. So long as what they are hunting is being used as food in particularly when there is an absence of the natural predators to keep the population in check for a natural balance.
I dont care if fishermen fish. I dont care what a worm or baitfish feels or what the fish being caught feels
I dont care how Minks or other animals are kept or treated to produce fur coats or leather jackets, shoes and boots.
Typically they are bred for that one reason and one reason alone. They are in essence a crop and should be treated as such
I dont care how many or what kind of animals are used in medical experiments. To me research that may save Human life is and always will be more important then that of any animal.
Bottom line is 99% of what PETA cares about and wants/expects me to care bout. I either dont care about or outright want regardless of the poor widdle animals.
But I think if PETA members would really like to help out they should volunteer for human medical experiments or to be subject of a hunt themselves.
Hell Might even make me want to take up hunting.
It has been said the addition of meat to our diets has been largely responsible for human brain size.
Of those from PETA or other vegans I've met.
Ive seen nothing of them that would lead me to any other conclusion that the link between meat in our diets and human brain size and intellect is anything other then 100% correct
-
I like to kick my dog.
I also like to kick my neighbor's dog.
-
Originally posted by Drunky
I think that all PETA member should be shot.
And promptly bbq'ed and eaten with potato salad, cole slaw, lots and lots of bbq sauce and beer.
That will teach them to fxck with us.
I think that all dweeb flight sim pilots shot down while flying online should be eaten!
Yeah! That’s it! And bbq'ed and eaten with potato salad, cole slaw, lots and lots of bbq sauce and beer during the AH Con. How bout it HT? Please!! I bet the Embassy Suites might have the bbq pits. Heck, it’s next to the Bass Pro Shop.
That will teach them newbies to fxck with us.
-
Anyone ever try to get oral pleasures from a PETA chick?
I tried to tell her it was tofu but she didn't believe me. :(
-
Originally posted by DREDIOCK
I believe animals ARE ours to do with as we please.
I dont care how a calf is treated to produce tender veal.
So long as it is tender when it reaches my plate.
I dont care how an animal is slaughtered.
So long as the meat ends up on my plate.
I dont care if fishermen fish. I dont care what a worm or baitfish feels or what the fish being caught feels
I dont care how Minks or other animals are kept or treated to produce fur coats or leather jackets, shoes and boots.
Typically they are bred for that one reason and one reason alone. They are in essence a crop and should be treated as such
I dont care how many animals are used in medical experiments.
Personally, I disagree with the above, and i think that is a pretty disgusting attitude.
-
Originally posted by Drunky
I like to kick my dog.
I also like to kick my neighbor's dog.
Drunky once told me about watching his neighbor's dog lick himself. He said; “Damn, wish I could do that!” I told Drunky that I was sure he could. But, he just might want to pet him first.
-
Originally posted by Furball
Personally, I disagree with the above, and i think that is a pretty disgusting attitude.
and personally as I mentioned before.
I dont care.
You dont like it. dont do it or dont support it.
Just dont tell me I cant
-
Originally posted by DREDIOCK
You dont like it. dont do it or dont support it.
Just dont tell me I cant
I don't and i didn't x 2.
Everyone is entitled to their own opinion, and your's just disgusts me.
-
Originally posted by Furball
I don't and i didn't x 2.
Everyone is entitled to their own opinion, and your's just disgusts me.
Yea.
Damn shame aint it.
You must be one disgusted dude though.
Be willing to bet the vast majority of people feel pretty much the same way I do.
Veal is still a pretty popular menu item.
Meat of all types still sells pretty well.
Fishing is still a pretty popular activity
Awful lot of people in fur coats, Leather boots jackets and shoes roaming around to think anyone particularly cares how they got there.
And other then the PETA lunatics I dont see any particular vast outrage from the masses over animals being used in experiments.
Yea, pretty safe bet most people feel the same way.
I just have the grapes to say it
-
Seriously!
I truly believe that all animals should be treated humanely and ethically.
Heck, there’s room for all the critters… right next to the smashed taters!
-
Originally posted by JB88
dogs are not carnivores as most people believe, they are omnivores.
You try and get my dog to eat a brussel sprout then :p
-
Originally posted by Scaevola
You try and get my dog to eat a brussel sprout then :p
My dog will eat turnips. He wasn’t too happy for the first two weeks or so.
-
Turnips? You sadistic bastard...
-
"im not a vegetarian because i love animals, i just hate vegetables."
-
Originally posted by Fruda
sadistic bastard...
Sorry, wrong "S" word. Please play again.
-
I watched my neighbor's boxers eat salad. I mean lettuce, tomato, carrots. Freaked me out.
I know that dogs also eat meat. I've watched my Brittany Spaniel eat backstrap from the deer we've shot while we were dressing it.
I think PETA girls are freaky. Kinda like the ugly girls that you are strangely attracted to. That and they like it in the pooper.
-
Originally posted by Drunky
Anyone ever try to get oral pleasures from a PETA chick?
I tried to tell her it was tofu but she didn't believe me. :(
frome singles the movie
he keeps moving until something comes out.
what?
what comes out?
spam.
-
PETA is dedicated to establishing and protecting the rights of all animals
LOL!
What rights do animals have? Do they have lawyers to ensure their "rights" are not violated. If animals have rights, why are they bought and sold as pets and consumed as food while the world turns a blind eye?
I'd like to hear exactly what rights animals have.
-
One of my father's favorite rhetorical wonderments is, "Would fishing be more popular or less popular if fish let out a blood curdling scream when you gutted them?"
I think he has yet to resolve the question.
-
^^ lol good one. :D
-
For me it comes down to these two things:
1) Don't try to force you ways on me.
2) Don't look down on me because I don't go along with your ways.
-
Originally posted by DREDIOCK
Yea.
Damn shame aint it.
You must be one disgusted dude though.
Be willing to bet the vast majority of people feel pretty much the same way I do.
Veal is still a pretty popular menu item.
Meat of all types still sells pretty well.
Fishing is still a pretty popular activity
Awful lot of people in fur coats, Leather boots jackets and shoes roaming around to think anyone particularly cares how they got there.
And other then the PETA lunatics I dont see any particular vast outrage from the masses over animals being used in experiments.
Yea, pretty safe bet most people feel the same way.
I just have the grapes to say it
You dont get it, do you? I deleted parts of your post to show the points i disagree with. I am not some tree humping PETA extremist. I eat meat, i wear leather shoes, jacked etc, used to go fishing with my dad.
THESE are the PARTS OF YOUR POST I DISAGREE WITH. I have highlighted them in red to make it a little easier for you
Originally posted by DREDIOCK
I believe animals ARE ours to do with as we please.
I dont care how a calf is treated to produce tender veal.
So long as it is tender when it reaches my plate.
I dont care how an animal is slaughtered.
So long as the meat ends up on my plate.
I dont care if fishermen fish. I dont care what a worm or baitfish feels or what the fish being caught feels
I dont care how Minks or other animals are kept or treated to produce fur coats or leather jackets, shoes and boots.
Typically they are bred for that one reason and one reason alone. They are in essence a crop and should be treated as such
I dont care how many animals are used in medical experiments.
So basically, you are saying you couldnt give a damn how an animal is treated? couldnt give a damn if it is kept cruelly for years just so you get a meal on your plate? couldnt give a damn how that animal is killed and if it suffered?
-
And thank you all for pointing out the bad things which PETA do, i had only really heard of the KFC incident. Had no idea they firebombed places etc.
-
"PETA is dedicated to establishing and protecting the rights of all animals. PETA operates under the simple principle that animals are not ours to eat, wear, experiment on, or use for entertainment. "
this is the reason I am against peta Animals have no rights save those we give them for how ever long we give. I think ethical people will respect any creature enough to dispatch it as humanely as possible and to not torture it needlessly.
branding or neutering or hobling or confining or using for research is not "needlessly".
If 10,000 animals have to suffer to find a cure for a disease one of my family members has then it is not "needless" suffering.
If a peta member throws a bucket of blood at me I will show them how much a creature can suffer.
lazs
-
Originally posted by Drunky
I watched my neighbor's boxers eat salad. I mean lettuce, tomato, carrots. Freaked me out.
My parent's Lhasa Apso's favorite food is carrots. The pugs like marshmallows. Go figure.
-
Originally posted by Furball
You dont get it, do you? I deleted parts of your post to show the points i disagree with. I am not some tree humping PETA extremist. I eat meat, i wear leather shoes, jacked etc, used to go fishing with my dad.
THESE are the PARTS OF YOUR POST I DISAGREE WITH. I have highlighted them in red to make it a little easier for you
So basically, you are saying you couldnt give a damn how an animal is treated? couldnt give a damn if it is kept cruelly for years just so you get a meal on your plate? couldnt give a damn how that animal is killed and if it suffered?
-
Originally posted by Furball
You dont get it, do you? I deleted parts of your post to show the points i disagree with. I am not some tree humping PETA extremist. I eat meat, i wear leather shoes, jacked etc, used to go fishing with my dad.
THESE are the PARTS OF YOUR POST I DISAGREE WITH. I have highlighted them in red to make it a little easier for you
So basically, you are saying you couldnt give a damn how an animal is treated? couldnt give a damn if it is kept cruelly for years just so you get a meal on your plate? couldnt give a damn how that animal is killed and if it suffered?
Yea , that about sizes it up.
Dont see how you can dissagree with me if do the same things.
-
Originally posted by DREDIOCK
Dont see how you can dissagree with me if do the same things.
There is a difference between swatting and killing a fly, or pulling the wings off of the same fly and slowly killing it with the sun's rays magnified thru a glass.
How you treat the animal makes a difference.
-
I'd still like someone to explain what rights animals have.
-
Ask Eagler to ask his wife...
(I'm workin' on something ground-breaking here, and we're talkin' huge ramifications)
-
Originally posted by NUKE
I'd still like someone to explain what rights animals have.
The same ones God gave all living creatures.
And he gave us reign over the animals that is true but there is no reason to be cruel.
-
Originally posted by wombatt
The same ones God gave all living creatures.
And he gave us reign over the animals that is true but there is no reason to be cruel.
yeah, but can you define what specific rights animals have? I wanna be an animal lawyer someday.
If a bear kills a human in the woods, do we prosecute the bear? I'm concerned.
-
If a bear kills a human in the woods... he just signed his own death certificate.
But... Pretend that God exists in every living creature. Your neighbour, that chatty ***** on the bus, your dog. It gets a little tough to make the big calls.
-
Originally posted by Nash
If a bear kills a human in the woods... he just signed his own death certificate.
does the bear have a right to a trial? Animals have rights afterall.
-
"Rights" are a construct of man.
They are abitrary.
The inalienable rights, such as life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness are words spoken in the English language, by man.
Doesn't really mean these things are tattood on our foreheads from birth. We made them up.
So you can't stick them on animals and say "See?"....
-
Nothing should happen to the bear.
The bear was simply being a bear.
The woods are his house.
His house his rules.
-
Nash animals do not have rights, do they?
-
Originally posted by wombatt
Nothing should happen to the bear.
The bear was simply being a bear.
The woods are his house.
His house his rules.
what if a human shot a bear? The human was just being a human. Earth is the home of humans. Our house, our rules.
-
Animals have lots of rights...
I mean, there are hunting/fishing licences, right?
Those are their rights.
But those are the rights we gave them.
The word "rights" itself does not confer any special status on anything other than the meaning we humans give to that word.
You seem to be too invested in the word "rights". Just because we humans made that word up and pasted it on certain things really doesn't necesarily mean we have it right.
-
Originally posted by Nash
Animals have lots of rights...
I mean, there are hunting/fishing licences, right?
Those are their rights.
But those are the rights we gave them.
The word "rights" itself does not confer any special status on anything other than the meaning we humans give to that word.
You seem to be too invested in the word "rights". Just because we humans made that word up and pasted it on certain things really doesn't necesarily mean we have it right.
fishing and hunting liceces? LOL! Are you saying that licensing the killing of animals somehow demonstrates rights of animals?
Animals have no rights and never will.
-
well okay...
Take a few minutes and think up your defenition of "rights"....
-
Meet me in CheckSix chat. I wanna talk nasty.
-
Originally posted by Nash
well okay...
Take a few minutes and think up your defenition of "rights"....
Nash, I know what you are trying to say about the concept of "rights"
Animals cannot have rights.
-
I don't know what this word "rights" means...
Explain these "rights" that you speak of.
-
Originally posted by Nash
Animals have lots of rights...
I mean, there are hunting/fishing licences, right?
Those are their rights.
But those are the rights we gave them.
The word "rights" itself does not confer any special status on anything other than the meaning we humans give to that word.
You seem to be too invested in the word "rights". Just because we humans made that word up and pasted it on certain things really doesn't necesarily mean we have it right.
why don't you explain your definition of rights first.
-
If animals have rights, can anyone define them for me? Can animals be owned, traded, slaughtered, hunted, breeded, experimented on, harvested, trained, caged, etc?
If animals have rights, I would like them defined. Anyone?
-
I had real veal for lunch 2 days ago.
I was thinking about PETA with every bite.
whoopee that **** was good...
-
Nuke, what I am saying is that "rights" are made up by us. I don't know if we have the right answer. Aint gonna stop me from eating steak, but I don't know if we have the right answer.
When it comes to the rights of animals, I pay my fishing liscence... that's about it.
Other than that, I have no friggen clue. We could so easily be screwing this up... and it would only take the most arrogant not to at least accept that.
-
Nash, you and I both know that animals have no rights.
-
That aint true.
I know that humans made up the idea of rights, and that those rights are man-made laws that say this is that, and that is this.
Are those rights that we created fo real? Are they right? Do they apply to animals?
Who decides that the rights we made up were the right ones?
By now, you cannot possibibly be missing where I'm coming from. Either we move on past this a little, or I gotta give up.
-
Originally posted by NUKE
what if a human shot a bear? The human was just being a human. Earth is the home of humans. Our house, our rules.
That would be fine if he was hunting the bear during season or he killed the bear to protect his life.
Oh and earth is not just OUR home in case you have not noticed we are surrounded by other creatures that we SHARE the planet with.
-
Originally posted by wombatt
That would be fine if he was hunting the bear during season or he killed the bear to protect his life.
\
Why doesn't the bear play by your same rules?
-
Originally posted by Nash
That aint true.
I know that humans made up the idea of rights, and that those rights are man-made laws that say this is that, and that is this.
Are those rights that we created fo real? Are they right? Do they apply to animals?
Who decides that the rights we made up were the right ones?
By now, you cannot possibibly be missing where I'm coming from. Either we move on past this a little, or I gotta give up.
Nash, animals are have no rights recognised by humans.....I guess that's all I can say to you. Tell me I'm wrong.
-
Originally posted by NUKE
\
Why doesn't the bear play by your same rules?
Oh I dont know maybe because he's a bear?
-
Originally posted by NUKE
Nash, animals are have no rights recognised by humans.....I guess that's all I can say to you. Tell me I'm wrong.
And neither did blacks or women until we admitted how wrong we where being.
-
Originally posted by wombatt
Oh I dont know maybe because he's a bear?
and we are humans and play by our own rules. Your analogy was dumb.
-
Seriosly, can ANYONE tell me what rights animals have? Should be easy.
-
Originally posted by NUKE
and we are humans and play by our own rules. Your analogy was dumb.
Not really .
you cant expect an animal to adhere to the rules of a higher species that he neither knows or understands.
So as the smarter of the two species we have the burden to understand both and to take the precautions to avoid being inured or killed by an animal that is just doing what it is genetically
encoded to do.
-
wombatt, explain what rights animals have. It should be easy for you.
-
Nuke... I screwed it up too...
There is a little chat button on the top where the search and alla those buttons are.
Shazaaam! You'll be talking to us retards in no time.
-
I dont have to explain it to you.
It is very simple.
God put all creatures on this planet.
Maybe you should ask him.
LOL hey no kidding dont you think that as the super uber beings of this planet we have an obligation to think before we act?
That is one of the major differences between use and the animals
we have the power of reason.
Look I eat meat from time to time just not alot.
As a Jew I dont eat pork.
But I dont feel I have any right to prevent anyone from eating anything they want.
I am saying that the slaughter houses should be held to the highest of standards and the cattle should be killed as humanely as possible.
And I think that if a person is cruel to say for example a dog or cat that they should face punishment .
When people stop looking at there pets as property and start
looking at them as living breathing beings that have feelings then the better off we all will be.
And maybe we might start being kinder to one another.
-
wombatt = a moron.
Hey Nash, clue me in on the chat thing.......I wanna be in
-
NUKE = mental midget.
-
Originally posted by wombatt
NUKE = mental midget.
I'm not as gifted in animal law as your are.
-
I wanna be an animal lawyer...I hear it's that latest craze.
-
Originally posted by NUKE
I'm not as gifted in animal law as your are.
No you just refuse to have an open mind therefore it will be very hard for you to ever learn anything .
You dont have to agree with me at all but to be open to posibilty that there may be another truth but your own is a good trait to have.
-
Originally posted by NUKE
I wanna be an animal lawyer...I hear it's that latest craze.
I think at best you should only shoot for Dog catcher.
-
Originally posted by wombatt
No you just refuse to have an open mind therefore it will be very hard for you to ever learn anything .
I have an open mind. Please tell me what rights animals have.
-
I win.
-
Nuke - just go back to the BBS post you made before, and look at the buttons in the upper right. You'll see "chat". Hit that.
-
Originally posted by Nash
Nuke - just go back to the BBS post you made before, and look at the buttons in the upper right. You'll see "chat". Hit that.
sorry....I'm dumb Nash. Can you give me a another clue or a link?
-
You know when you just made that post to the checksix post that Airhead made? Go back there, and then look upper right.
Uhm... mebbe its a registration thing? Did you register? Mebbe that's it.
Get there quick... it's a huge fricken New Years online internet party. People are going ape5hit. It's wild and I think I hear the police.
-
Originally posted by NUKE
wombatt, explain what rights animals have. It should be easy for you.
if they have no rights, how come there are so many damn laws about when and how we can kill em?
-
Originally posted by Holden McGroin
There is a difference between swatting and killing a fly, or pulling the wings off of the same fly and slowly killing it with the sun's rays magnified thru a glass.
How you treat the animal makes a difference.
Silly analogy
BTW I dont care if people tear off the wings of flies and/or slowly kill them with a magnifying glass either. or ants or beetles or bees,wasps hornets, hellgrammites, or those other nasty little bugs with pincers on their butts.
And who among us hasnt captured a fly re enacted the final scene from the original " The fly movie" by dropping it in a spiders web and started saying "hellp meee hellp meeee pleaaase helllp meee"
They are bugs. torture em all you want for all I care.
As for animals, to sit and for no reason torture them just for fun.
thats wrong.
But if your going to be doing something thats going to make the meat more tender and taste better and are doing it specifically for that reason.
Have at it.
And like I said in my post above.
Arent a whole lot of people NOT eating meat or buying shoes or coats make from animals.
Isnt any big secret how these animals are treated.
Now if you were to tell me doing these things made the meat more expencive I might object
-
Originally posted by DREDIOCK
Silly analogy
They are bugs. torture em all you want for all I care.
As for animals, ...
Bugs are animals. They certainly ain't vegetable or mineral...
The point is that how one treats an animal makes a differance.
White veal is raised to be anemic, while red veal has a better iron rich diet. Both are young beef, but production of the white veal meat requires that the animal be treated in a manner that is not altogether altruistic.
Red veal tastes just as good and the market force that requires the white coloration is more fashion and ignorance than reality.
When we use fashion to decide how we treat resources we end up destroying the beaver, sea otter, etc. I believe we should think more deeply than Paris Hilton in our choices.
-
Originally posted by Nash
You know when you just made that post to the checksix post that Airhead made? Go back there, and then look upper right.
Uhm... mebbe its a registration thing? Did you register? Mebbe that's it.
Get there quick... it's a huge fricken New Years online internet party. People are going ape5hit. It's wild and I think I hear the police.
If he is logged on, it will appear as an option on the top menu. If he isnt signed on/logged on, its not displayed.
-
Originally posted by wombatt
And neither did blacks or women until we admitted how wrong we where being.
Does this mean the bear on the bus doesn't have to give up his seat to me?
I think what Nuke is saying is that animals only have the rights that WE decide to give them.I don't think you'll see animals at a protest holding signs up for their right to vote.
-
both humans and animals have the same rights in one sense... it is the rights we give them. The difference is that animals are no capable of voicing or understanding any rights we give em. The rights we give them have no meaning to them.
Peta has a right to advocate less cruelty to animals... there is precidence... the torturing of animals for no reason has allways been taboo... lately... we have gotten pets and given them "rights" these pets do not understand or care about these rights but.... everyonme here would be outraged by a person mutilating his black labs for instance for the fun of it. We have no problem sending that same dog into a situation thjat is life threatening tho.
veal can be made a number of ways and it depends on the outrage or not of humans how it is made or not made. animals are used for research to save humans or just to test makep or the toxicity of a product... some of this testing is very cruel. If it helps humans then it is worth it.
The real issue here is.... Are animals and humans equal? Should they both be held to the same rights? Of course not. The rights humans have given each other are far beyond any animal understanding or ability to comply... they will continue to eat and kill and torture each other and us.
So.... we give them a lower set of "rights" based on what is best for us. preserving them is best for us... eating and wearing them is best for us. research using them is best for us. unnecessary cruelty to them is not really needed. It is distasteful for many of us so.... not torturing animals is really a part of human rights... the right to not be subjected to such behavior.
lazs
-
Well said Laz.
My whole point: when groups like PETA or people like wombat say they support "animal rights", they are talking out their arse.
I'd like to know of even one specific right an animal has. Maybe a list of rights would be helpful.
Sure, mutilating your pet dog is illegal, but that's a human law to control human behavior and has nothing to do with violating the dog's "rights".
So again Wombat, I'd like you to list just one right an animal has.
-
Originally posted by Holden McGroin
Bugs are animals. They certainly ain't vegetable or mineral...
The point is that how one treats an animal makes a differance.
White veal is raised to be anemic, while red veal has a better iron rich diet. Both are young beef, but production of the white veal meat requires that the animal be treated in a manner that is not altogether altruistic.
Red veal tastes just as good and the market force that requires the white coloration is more fashion and ignorance than reality.
When we use fashion to decide how we treat resources we end up destroying the beaver, sea otter, etc. I believe we should think more deeply than Paris Hilton in our choices.
Difference here is the calf used to make Veal is bred intentionally and specifically for that purpose. so what real difference does it make how they are treated? They are bred specifically to be killed and used for food. In the end dead is dead. Doesnt matter how they die the end result is the same. Dead
Havent seen to many beaver and otter farms
Beaver and otter are taken out of the wild.
-
>>For example, their founders are on record being opposed to people having pets. They are against any medical research involving animals because they feel that a mouse’s life is worth the same as a person’s. And so on.
Of course you can’t get 800,000 people to donate money in support of those ideas. So they promote their organization as an animal welfare organization, knowing that the vast majority of donors read their advertisements but don’t take the time to find out what they’re really trying to do.
<<
Bingo. I think most are for the humane treatment of animals.
ASPCA still fills the need as far as I can see. PETA has a bizarre notion of nature. Raw, unfettered nature is cruel. The only thiing attempting to show kindness to animals on this planet, is man.
-
Originally posted by DREDIOCK
In the end dead is dead. Doesnt matter how they die the end result is the same. Dead
So... when you die, would you rather die quickly and without pain. Or suffer excruciating pain and suffering without the ability to do anything about it?
End result is the same, right?
-
Originally posted by DREDIOCK
Difference here is the calf used to make Veal is bred intentionally and specifically for that purpose. so what real difference does it make how they are treated?
Beavers are taken from the wild.
You seem to advocate brutality and torture of domestic animals that you would not advocate for creatures in the wild. I hope that my observation is mistaken.
Fighting roosters are 'bred intentionally and specifically for that purpose.'
Because of the brutality, rooster fighting has been outlawed in 48 states.
Dog fighting is banned, even though dogs are bred for that purpose.
Apparently it does matter how we treat our fellow creatures.
-
Originally posted by NUKE
Well said Laz.
My whole point: when groups like PETA or people like wombat say they support "animal rights", they are talking out their arse.
I'd like to know of even one specific right an animal has. Maybe a list of rights would be helpful.
Sure, mutilating your pet dog is illegal, but that's a human law to control human behavior and has nothing to do with violating the dog's "rights".
So again Wombat, I'd like you to list just one right an animal has.
You're comprehension needs work Nuke.
Read my post nowhere did I say that animals are over humans.
I am simply saying that we are the gardiens of the animals and being as we are the smarter of the species we have an obligation
to do the humane thing.
I am not saying that we should stop slaughtering cattle for consumption and clothing.
I am saying that the death process should be done as humane as possible.
And I am not saying that hunting should be outlawed.
I myself enjoy hunting it serves a much needed service in controlling the population of deer for example.
As far as animal rights go I will use this example.
Say you buy a dog.
That dog has a right to be feed cared for and sheltered and to able to live out his or her life without the threat of abuse.
I personally do not believe in hitting a dog ever.
I have tried this and all it does is make an angry and mean dog.
I have two dogs and they are treated just like if they where my children.
They get the finest vet care the best food and all the toys they can tear up.
And in return I am sure they would give there life to protect me or my wife.
That kind of loyalty is very rare in our species.
I can break it down Nuke.
I simply believe that there is no reason to ever be cruel to any mammal
-
Originally posted by Holden McGroin
You seem to advocate brutality and torture of domestic animals that you would not advocate for creatures in the wild. I hope that my observation is mistaken.
Fighting roosters are 'bred intentionally and specifically for that purpose.'
Because of the brutality, rooster fighting has been outlawed in 48 states.
Dog fighting is banned, even though dogs are bred for that purpose.
Apparently it does matter how we treat our fellow creatures.
No, Im not saying its ok to abuse your family pet.
That is what I consider to be a domestic animal.
But I AM saying the treament of animals that are being specifically bred to die is irrelevent to me. in short. I dont care.
they are being bred, to die. be it for food or fur or literally the skin off their backs.
They are a crop. nothing more ,nothing less
-
okay, see ya at the kok fights.
-
Originally posted by DREDIOCK
But I AM saying the treament of animals that are being specifically bred to die is irrelevent to me. in short. I dont care.
they are being bred, to die. be it for food or fur or literally the skin off their backs.
They are a crop. nothing more ,nothing less
And who decides what is "bred to die?"
You do know that in some countries they eat dog!
And in other countrys cows are sacred.
So who is it that decides what is or is not a crop animal as you call it?
I will answer one of my own questions if I may LOL.
I would guess it all comes down to what culture you are from.
For example If you're from Korea ol "rover" might just be dinner.
Invite a Hindu out for a hamburger and you might get a strange look.
I guess I might have some American Indian in me or something
but I feel some sort of reverence to all of God's creatures wether they are sitting on my couch with me or on my dinner plate I take neither for granted.
-
Originally posted by Holden McGroin
okay, see ya at the kok fights.
Cool!:aok
-
Originally posted by wombatt
And who decides what is "bred to die?"
You do know that in some countries they eat dog!
And in other countrys cows are sacred.
So who is it that decides what is or is not a crop animal as you call it?
I will answer one of my own questions if I may LOL.
I would guess it all comes down to what culture you are from.
For example If you're from Korea ol "rover" might just be dinner.
Invite a Hindu out for a hamburger and you might get a strange look.
BINGO!
We have a winner
Give that man a cigar!
-
For once tweetie is making sense.. ASPCA is all we need. We don't even need that if you are not offended by scumbags torturing animals.
lazs
-
Originally posted by TweetyBird
[B
ASPCA still fills the need as far as I can see. PETA has a bizarre notion of nature. Raw, unfettered nature is cruel. The only thiing attempting to show kindness to animals on this planet, is man. [/B]
Exactly
-
my dog broke his leg in half last week. my best bud of nine years. he never complained, just looked at me and said "fix it". he had to wait 2 days for surgery but never complained ... he still managed to tripod around to go to the bathroom...all the while his leg was hanging broken. (though we splinted it as best we could)
hes been far more loyal, compassionate and understanding than any person that ive ever known. he is brave. unconniving. he is honest. but best of all he is not prone to some feign sense of intellectual superiority based on an irredeemable ignorant swamp philosophy.
i call him my friend and my equal and i would personally remove the idiot box from the shoulders of anyone who ever layed a finger on him or insulted him in my presence. if he didnt do you first.
my dogs name is pablo.
and he is better than you.
-
Originally posted by JB88
my dog broke his leg in half last week. my best bud of nine years. he never complained, just looked at me and said "fix it". he had to wait 2 days for surgery but never complained ... he still managed to tripod around to go to the bathroom...all the while his leg was hanging broken. (though we splinted it as best we could)
hes been far more loyal, compassionate and understanding than any person that ive ever known. he is brave. unconniving. he is honest. but best of all he is not prone to some feign sense of intellectual superiority based on an irredeemable ignorant swamp philosophy.
i call him my friend and my equal and i would personally remove the idiot box from the shoulders of anyone who ever layed a finger on him or insulted him in my presence. if he didnt do you first.
my dogs name is pablo.
and he is better than you.
/\ What he said.
One of our dog's blew out her ACL the TPL surgery cost us 2k but she is worth it.
-
Re: you know who you are
quote:Originally posted by JB88
my dog broke his leg in half last week. my best bud of nine years. he never complained, just looked at me and said "fix it". he had to wait 2 days for surgery but never complained ... he still managed to tripod around to go to the bathroom...all the while his leg was hanging broken. (though we splinted it as best we could)
hes been far more loyal, compassionate and understanding than any person that ive ever known. he is brave. unconniving. he is honest. but best of all he is not prone to some feign sense of intellectual superiority based on an irredeemable ignorant swamp philosophy.
i call him my friend and my equal and i would personally remove the idiot box from the shoulders of anyone who ever layed a finger on him or insulted him in my presence. if he didnt do you first.
my dogs name is pablo.
and he is better than you.
Originally posted by wombatt
/\ What he said.
One of our dog's blew out her ACL the TPL surgery cost us 2k but she is worth it.
Family pets are one thing.
Animals bred for foor are entirely different.
I have a great dog.
Actually I've had several great dogs.
Also have 3 cats 2 turtles several tropical fish.
At one point we had a duck an iguana an african gray parrot.
TRhey were and are pets.
Pets are a wonderful thing to have and I wouldnt harm any of them.
But I also dont have any intention on keeping them to eat either.
I love my dog. Thought Im not particularly a cat person they can be pretty cool too.
'And they are better then any of ya:cool:
-
i also have a dog named "wigglebutt"
german shepard.
hes better too.
-
wigglebutt george.
-
pets are great.
But anyone who thinks an animal has any legal rights is insane.
-
says "nuke".
-
Originally posted by JB88
says "nuke".
name one legal right any animal has.
I wanna represent specific animals in lawsuits and make big money...
-
The Animal Welfare Act (US 1966) requires that minimum standards of care and treatment be provided for certain animals bred for commercial sale, used in research, transported commercially, or exhibited to the public.
Individuals who operate facilities in these categories must provide their animals with adequate care and treatment in the areas of housing, handling, sanitation, nutrition, water, veterinary care, and protection from extreme weather and temperatures.
One can argue that the animals covered in the animal welfare act have the right to be treated to the minimum standards set forth in the act.
-
Originally posted by Holden McGroin
One can argue that the animals covered in the animal welfare act have the right to be treated to the minimum standards set forth in the act.
nothing to do with a right any animal has. That act is no different than any other fed regulation regarding any industry.
It's just a law for humans to follow.
No animal has legal rights. How many lawyer study animal rights law in hopes of representing animals in court?
-
Originally posted by NUKE
That act is no different than any other fed regulation regarding any industry.
EPA, OSHA, or SEC regulations exist in order to protect the rights of humans to live, work, and invest safely.
You could treat animals cruelly and still live, work, and invest safely. The AWA exists in order to provide minimum standards for animal welfare.
-
Originally posted by Holden McGroin
EPA, OSHA, or SEC regulations exist in order to protect the rights of humans to live, work, and invest safely.
You could treat animals cruelly and still live, work, and invest safely. The AWA exists in order to provide minimum standars for animal welfare.
you mistake laws protecting animals with animals rights.
Animals have no rights.
-
Originally posted by NUKE
you mistake laws protecting animals with animals rights.
Animals have no rights.
why bother protecting a living something if it doesnt have rights? as far as i can tell, most animals have more rights in america than terrorists...wether the rights are "official" or not does not matter.
-
Originally posted by vorticon
why bother protecting a living something if it doesnt have rights? as far as i can tell, most animals have more rights in america than terrorists...wether the rights are "official" or not does not matter.
We have laws protecting plants, forests, rocks and land.....do they have legal rights?
Animals have ZERO legal rights. I dare anyone to prove otherwise.
-
Semantics... If I neglect an animal, I pay a legal price. If I neglect my car, it is my business.
Both the car and the animal are property, but they are treated differently.
-
Originally posted by Holden McGroin
Semantics... If I neglect an animal, I pay a legal price. If I neglect my car, it is my business.
Both the car and the animal are property, but they are treated differently.
And none of that has anything to do with animals having any rights.
We have laws protecting trees, plants, cacti and land. Do they all have legal rights too?
-
I'm fighting for plant rights myself....I'm gonna be a rich plant lawyer someday.
-
So you tell me why if I neglect a car I do not get into trouble, I neglect a horse and I go to jail.
There is a difference, a legal difference, on how I neglect my property. Neither act of neglect effects anyone other than me, yet I pay a different price.
-
By the way, if you want to represent plants and animals, work for the Sierra Club. They do have a cadre of lawyers working on just that.
The northwest forests were virtually shut down because the spotted owl had a legal right to habitat. People who owned forest land lost their rights to harvest their own property. The rights had to go somewhere.
-
Originally posted by Holden McGroin
So you tell me why if I neglect a car I do not get into trouble, I neglect a horse and I go to jail.
There is a difference, a legal difference, on how I neglect my property. Neither act of neglect affects anyone other than me, yet I pay a different price.
Because neglecting a horse is against the law. Chopping down a cactus is against the law. Burning down a building is against the law.
Against the law does not equate to rights. Do cactus have rights simply because it's illegal to kill them? What cactcus rights have been violated?
Animals do not have rights and cannot be represented in court. How hard is that for people to understand?
-
ever heard of the ESA?
-
Face it....you have no point. Animals do not have legal rights. Why don't you list ONE right an animal has? It should be easy.
I'm waiting.
-
Originally posted by NUKE
Against the law does not equate to rights. Do cactus have rights simply because it's illegal to kill them? What cactcus rights have been violated?
the right to exist, and not be completly destroyed by some ******* for no reason whatsoever...
"Animals do not have rights and cannot be represented in court. How hard is that for people to understand?"
LOL...tell that to the people who keep using the courts to try and stop a certain mine where i used to live, despite the previous 10 or so studies finding that it makes no real impact...
-
if you burned down my house you would get in trouble because you have violated MY rights.
if i burned my house down and didnt try get insurance money i wouldent get in trouble with the law because i have violated nobodies rights.
if you torture an animal or kill an endangered species you get in trouble, but why should you? you certainly havent violated any other humans rights, and you wouldent be getting into trouble unless you violated somethings rightsl, so it must be the animals rights. does that put animals on the same pedistal as humans? no, do they deserve all the same rights as humans? no, but they DO HAVE SOME RIGHTS.
-
Originally posted by NUKE
Face it....you have no point. Animals do not have legal rights. Why don't you list ONE right an animal has? It should be easy.
I'm waiting.
Apparently the Klamath and Lost river shortnose sucker have the right to exist. In a misguided order to protect that right,
On April 6, 2001, the Bureau of Reclamation announced that the Klamath Project would receive no water this year - the first time that water has been cut off. This action was in response to a U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS) biological opinion, which, under the Endangered Species Act, called for increased reservoir levels for the Shortnose and Lost River Sucker Fish.
The decision to take all water from farms, ranches and wildlife refuges was made despite several conflicting biological studies on the sucker fish, their population and the factors that affect them.
The impacts of this decision have been devastating to the communities in the Klamath River Basin. By cutting off the water supply, the FWS decision has desimated the Klamath Basin's economic base. It is estimated that the economic impact to the Klamath base will total $400 million including:
Bankruptcies and massive unemployment;
Perennial crops damaged beyond repair;
Decrease in property values; and
Loss of revenue for schools, fire departments, libraries, parks, churches and city and county governments.
There are also several environmental impacts:
Loss of Klamath Basin wildlife habitat;
Thousands of species denied water, food and shelter; and
185 miles of canal ecosystem and 516 miles of drainage canal ecosystem damaged.
Without the water that the Klamath Project provides, the community and the entire ecosystem of Klamath will wither.
Your sematic arguments are not worth a $400 million loss to the economy of the Klamath Basin.
-
Originally posted by Holden McGroin
Apparently the Klamath and Lost river shortnose sucker have the right to exist. In a misguided order to pretect that right,
Your sematic arguments are not worth a $400 million loss to the economy of the Klamath Basin.
Again, you are being ignorant. A law protecting an environment or an animal does not equate to rights.
It's against the law to kill a cactus where I live. Does that mean cacti have legal rights?
If you don't get it then I give up....you are too ignorant.
The only way you can convert me to your ignorant thinking would be if you could list ONE specific animal right.
I have asked and no one has been able to answer......even though it should be so easy.
-
Originally posted by NUKE
Again, you are being ignorant. A law protecting an environment or an animal does not equate to rights.
It's against the law to kill a cactus where I live. Does that mean cacti have legal rights?
If you don't get it then I give up....you are too ignorant.
The only way you can convert me to your ignorant thinking would be if you could list ONE specific animal right.
I have asked and no one has been able to answer......even though it should be so easy.
you have completly ignored my posts which answer your question, and support it. you have been throwing away what we have provided to support our claim offhandedly, providing no evidence or support for your claim.
-
Again, you are being ignorant. A law protecting an environment or an animal does not equate to rights.
Right: a: something to which one has a just claim: as a : the power or privilege to which one is justly entitled b (1) : the interest that one has in a piece of property -- often used in plural
The rights of the agricultural community of the the Klamath Basin to prosper were absolved in 2001 in favor of the legal opinion that the Klamath and Lost River Shortnose Sucker's "power or privilege to which one is justly entitled" were predominant.
-
Originally posted by NUKE
I have asked and no one has been able to answer......even though it should be so easy.
Look at it this way Nuke.
If you don't believe animals have rights so be it.
It is something that I and many other people do believe in.
I believe that I have NO right to kill anything man or beast purely for the heck of it or for the titillation factor.
The taking of a life from one of Gods creatures must not be done lightly.
If you hunt and you kill a deer for consumption dont be full of pride instead be humbled by the fact that you have taken a life.
Enjoy the bounty with your family waste as little as possible for that would be a sin.
These are some of my beliefs and only mine.
You must form your own as we all do in life.
Thats the cool thing about life you are always changing evolving into a more complete person.
Good luck to you Nuke you will find your path and when you do enjoy your trip.:)
-
I ask anyone to list one right any animal has. Any takers?
By the way, I love animals.
Here is a pic of my cat....she's old, I love her and would never harm her.
(http://img.villagephotos.com/p/2004-12/913818/cat.jpg)
-
Nice cat Nuke.
-
Originally posted by wombatt
Nice cat Nuke.
Thank you! I take good care of her....she's a great little animal.
-
I have one hairy like that.
She is a little kleptomaniac always stealing my stuff.
She has a stash in the master bedroom closet LOL.
-
Chloe the Klepto
(http://www.onpoi.net/ah/pics/users/481_1104730557_picture099.jpg)
-
(http://www.onpoi.net/ah/pics/users/481_1104730607_picture104.jpg)
-
Originally posted by NUKE
I ask anyone to list one right any animal has. Any takers?
Show me the list of rights you have. You can show me a law prohibiting congress from abridging your rights, but are the rights protected in the Bill of Rights the only ones you have? Is there a list of the rights you were born with?
Semantics aside Nuke, if animals in the wild do not have the right to exist, (protected by the ESA) or domestic animals a right to humane treatment, (protected by a myriad of anti cruelty laws) why are there laws protecting those rights?
-
Plain and simple !
It's called morality.
-
Originally posted by Holden McGroin
So you tell me why if I neglect a car I do not get into trouble, I neglect a horse and I go to jail.
There is a difference, a legal difference, on how I neglect my property. Neither act of neglect effects anyone other than me, yet I pay a different price.
there are all sorts of trouble you can get into as the result of neglecting your car. From emissions to bald tires.
Guess the car has rights after all
-
Originally posted by DREDIOCK
there are all sorts of trouble you can get into as the result of neglecting your car. From emissions to bald tires.
Guess the car has rights after all
I get into trouble by driving a neglected car, not by neglecting it. The trouble I get into is based on how it effects others.
A neglected car sitting in my garage will not cause authorities to come down on me. A negected animal in the same garage will.
Nice try.
-
Good typing for a guy treading water in Crater Lake
-
The laws preventing cruelty to animals are for the purpose of protecting HUMAN societies - not animal societies. Inflicting pain or cruelty without reason to an animal, is considered sadistic and a threat to HUMAN society. I'm sure most here would have no objections about swatting an anoying fly, but I'd be concerned if I found my son spending hours pulling the the wings and legs off of insects. It hints at a deviance. Sadistic cruelty to animals hints at a sociopathic tendancy, as it is not normal to gain pleasure by watching demonstrations of pain.
Laws against animal abuse are actually laws against HUMAN deviance.
And btw, I love animals also, but they have no rights under MAN'S law. Under God's law - who knows?
-
ok... so this is the second post ever by tweety that I agree whole heartedly with....
lazs
-
Originally posted by TweetyBird
The laws preventing cruelty to animals are for the purpose of protecting HUMAN societies - not animal societies. Inflicting pain or cruelty without reason to an animal, is considered sadistic and a threat to HUMAN society. I'm sure most here would have no objections about swatting an anoying fly, but I'd be concerned if I found my son spending hours pulling the the wings and legs off of insects. It hints at a deviance. Sadistic cruelty to animals hints at a sociopathic tendancy, as it is not normal to gain pleasure by watching demonstrations of pain.
Laws against animal abuse are actually laws against HUMAN deviance.
And btw, I love animals also, but they have no rights under MAN'S law. Under God's law - who knows?
Tweety I agree with you but in my case I also feel that animals
have the right to live just as we do.
Now in the course of nature they succumb to a stronger adversary then thats just the way it is.
That is to say let nature run its course.
-
Sorry guys so long for not posting....the ELF ( insert derrogatory term here ) are nothing but terrorists....plain and simple.....
Hmmm lets see.....how about when they went on their spraypaint rampage here in NM and CO by spraypainting SUV's....yeah thats good for the environment....
Or perhaps when they help impact my brother's job up in Vail when they decided to torch the chalet at the top....yeah that was really cool.....