Tis The Poaching Season

[Spexxvet]

Originally Posted by glatt

I used to spend a lot of time on a kayak building message board...

Ok, you're on a kayak, and you're building message boards? Wow! Can't you do that at home? You had me going, there. Eats, shoot, and leaves.

Every carnivore that PETA saves becomes a threat to prey animals. This is unconscionable! Kill predators before they kill helpless prey!

[BigV]

Originally Posted by glatt

I used to spend a lot of time on a kayak building message board. We didn't like it when people would visit our board and talk about how to buy plastic kayaks or try to talk about other stuff. The point of the board was to discuss how to best make kayaks.

Guillemot?

[glatt]

Originally Posted by BigV

Guillemot?

Yeah, that was the board I spent a lot of time at, but I built a CLC plywood kayak.

[vrai_rennx]

Last time I checked, peta was about animal rights. I'm all for animal rights... maybe not to their extreme, but I still am. I don't think makeup should be tested on animals, I'm against wearing fur, and I think hunting should be for sustenance only. I still eat meat, though, because I believe humans are biologically omnivores, and since I don't have the means to go out and hunt my own food, I have to rely on store-bought meat. So sue me. I wasn't off topic, I was just not a vegetarian. I wasn't off topic, I was just there for other aspects of animal rights besides veganism.

[glatt]

Originally Posted by vrai_rennx

I wasn't off topic, I was just not a vegetarian. I wasn't off topic, I was just there for other aspects of animal rights besides veganism.

I think if you look closely at PETA, they admit that they are against eating meat. They are just going for the "easier" targets now, like animal testing and wearing fur. If they conquer those issues, they may focus on meat later.

You weren't with their program, and they didn't want you. I'm not a fan of censorship, but I think they have a right to keep their forum focused on a limited area of discussion. I don't like PETA, by the way, so don't think I am defending them because I'm a supporter.

Welcome to the Cellar. By the way, you can talk about anything here without getting banned. (Within the limits of the rules you read when you signed up.)

If we eat meat, why not wear the fur, if you wear leather, why not the fur... makes no sense.

[glatt]

Originally Posted by rkzenrage

If we eat meat, why not wear the fur, if you wear leather, why not the fur... makes no sense.

I think the idea with fur is that the meat isn't eaten. The animal is raised and killed just for its fur. It's wasteful. Leather is different. The meat is used and so is the skin. That's a positive.

I'm opposed to wearing fur just because of the crass consumerism involved. It's the same reason I'm against Hummers. But I'm not going to ban either.

Originally Posted by glatt

I think the idea with fur is that the meat isn't eaten. The animal is raised and killed just for its fur. It's wasteful. Leather is different. The meat is used and so is the skin. That's a positive.

I'm opposed to wearing fur just because of the crass consumerism involved. It's the same reason I'm against Hummers. But I'm not going to ban either.

The meat is not eaten by humans, it is eaten.
My father's Hummer gets better mileage than his Ford F-150 did and my neighbors Bronco now does, as well as all classes of Explorer, the full sized Nissan truck and almost all other full-sized trucks and SUVs...The H1 has been phazed out and now there is only the H2 and 3.
What, exactly, is your problem with them?
PETA, is also against milk, eggs, honey and all similar forms of animal "enslavement".

[bluecuracao]

I'd never known, until recently, just how hard bees have to work to make honey--it does look kinda mean when someone goes in and swipes it right out from under them.

Oh well.

You should see what-all goes into a pair of jeans.

[glatt]

Originally Posted by rkzenrage

My father's Hummer gets better mileage than his Ford F-150 did and my neighbors Bronco now does, as well as all classes of Explorer, the full sized Nissan truck and almost all other full-sized trucks and SUVs...The H1 has been phazed out and now there is only the H2 and 3.
What, exactly, is your problem with them?

I thought I was pretty clear about that. "Crass consumerism."

All the vehicles you mention are ones I'm not fond of. They are all wasteful. Although the trucks do have a utilitarian purpose and I don't oppose them when they are used that way. Most people don't need SUVs. When virtually all of your driving is done on paved surfaces, why would you need an SUV? I'm not going to support a ban on any of those vehicles, but that doesn't mean I have to like them. They are dangerous to the other vehicles on the road because they have so much more mass, they block visibility, they use more oil than my car, and people buy them mostly for intangible reasons that relate to status and feelings, and have nothing to do with needs.

[xoxoxoBruce]

Now glatt, don't meddle in other people's sex lives.

Originally Posted by glatt

I thought I was pretty clear about that. "Crass consumerism."

All the vehicles you mention are ones I'm not fond of. They are all wasteful. Although the trucks do have a utilitarian purpose and I don't oppose them when they are used that way. Most people don't need SUVs. When virtually all of your driving is done on paved surfaces, why would you need an SUV? I'm not going to support a ban on any of those vehicles, but that doesn't mean I have to like them. They are dangerous to the other vehicles on the road because they have so much more mass, they block visibility, they use more oil than my car, and people buy them mostly for intangible reasons that relate to status and feelings, and have nothing to do with needs.

It is not up to you do decide that for people, now is it?
If someone is into buying and restoring antiques, going fishing on the weekends or camping, can you define "need" for the type of vehicle they should buy. In my father's case, our family is in the citrus industry. A puny little car does not quite cut it in sugar-sand, fit men our size, have a place for my wheelchair.
"Most people" means what when it comes to doing what about what when it comes to the vehicles you are talking about? Be specific, practical and realistic and perhaps people will listen.
Sounds to me, more often than not, "environmentalists" are about status... most hunters I know are more environmentally sound in practice than the hippies that use that term.

[xoxoxoBruce]

Originally Posted by rkzenrage

If we eat meat, why not wear the fur, if you wear leather, why not the fur... makes no sense.

PETA says no meat, no leather, no fur....no pets....simply naysayers.

Other, more rational, people don't eat meat but don't have a problem with leather, because they realize you eat meat and the leather is a byproduct.

The anti-fur thing, is because fur animals are usually raised for fur alone and not a byproduct of the food supply. They don't like the idea of raising an animal simply for it's hide, but I doubt the rest is wasted. It probably goes into dog food or fertilizer.

I have no problem will snuffing the minks...nasty beasties they are.

[Shawnee123]

I believe animals should be afforded some rights, too...well, er, uh, except for that first one in this thread:
http://www.cellar.org/showthread.php...770#post267770