Those Funny Folks at PETA Are at it Again

[mricytoast]

Yea... and lots of garbage picking. And then they'll show a picture of a beaver at a dam. And say that becuase of human advancement, this beaver has been forced to make his dam out of disposed plastics and garbage. And then flash forward to a dam made out of garbage.

And somehow they'd manage to give the image that flies eating African children is unethical... to the flies, that is. Somehow they'd portray some sort of idea of the "flies deserving better".

[Elspode]

I'm pretty sure PETA would be okay if we'd all just kill ourselves and let the buzzards feast on our rotting carcasses. Well, non-vegetarians, anyway.

[mricytoast]

Yes, it would be unethical if somehow we disrupted the food chain. Although the food chain is disrupted everyday by creatures not of the human species.

[mrnoodle]

I don't see anyone jumping to PETA's defense here -- not saying you animal rights ppl are cowards or anything.

Okay, I'll defend your position. I'll even try to win.
_______________________________________________

We are trying to make a point here. We find the use of animals to be equally degrading and cruel as the "use" of people without their consent. If you don't like the imagery we use, too damn bad.

Just because a cow can't verbalize its feelings doesn't mean it doesn't have any. Pain is pain, regardless. You're not claiming that the animals you slaughter don't feel pain, you're simply ignoring the fact because you don't want to change your lifestyle. A black man hanging from a tree bothers you, but a deer hanging there doesn't. Both were alive, both felt the pain of their passing.

It's pretty easy, actually. No living thing should have to suffer so that you can wear its skin or eat its meat. Humans possess the capability to save life and to avoid hurting others; forgive us, animal friends, for our failure to do so.

Abortion is okay, because that's feminist.

[Bullitt]

The way I see it, animals are living things that depend on consuming other living things for survival. The animal world is broken down into these categories: Animals that eat other animals are carnivores, omnivores eat other animals and plants, and herbivores eat just plant. Humans are animals, we are omnivores, that is how we are designed/evolved/whatever, nature is cruel and life survives off of death. However this is not to say that I agree with the inhumane ways of treating/killing animals to feed the population, but for some say that eating animals is wrong period, just seems absurd to me. I know its a lifestyle, and its just a personal choice, I just can't see the logic behind it.

Maybe I just like my hamburgers too much

[mrnoodle]

Technology, while it has resulted in the suffering of untold millions of living beings, has also freed us from the necessity to "consume other living things" to survive. We can use our position as the most advanced species on the planet to find ways of living that minimize our horrendous impact on the world around us. You say we are just another living creature, and I agree -- we're no more important than the birds or the fish. So, why do we continue to rape the planet as if we were the ONLY things here?

I'm not saying that the predator/prey relationship is wrong or unnatural. Certain leaders of my group have stated in the past that they would eventually like to see all predators find alternate ways of feeding themselves, but that's not immediately feasible.

What is immediately feasible is for each of us to make the decision that we are not going to contribute to the suffering of other animals for our own pleasure. You might like hamburgers, but Dahmer liked cutting off boy's heads. It's an exact parallel. Your addiction to meat and leather causes mass murder every day, and it's about time someone stopped it. As long as the government is run by special interest murder groups like the beef industry, it won't happen on a large scale. But it can happen on an individual level, and I reserve the right to point out your complicity in murder in whatever form I see fit.

[Bullitt]

Finding all predators other means of feeding themselves beside consuming other animals, would mean to completely alter our ecosystem and create a planet of over populated herbivores with no natural enemies to keep the population levels in balance. This kind of thing happens a fair amount here in Ohio, there are few natural predators for the deer around here, so the population explodes and alot of them end up starving to death, etc.

Like I said, my body was designed to live off a diet of meat AND plants, so I do not see what is wrong with that since that is how God intended me to be, or I evolved through nature. If PETA is so concerned with the well being of all animals and protecting their habitats, etc. why would they endorse the drastic change of animals' way of life? It makes no sense.

That being said, I do agree that the suffering of animals for our pleasure, or research (cosmetics, etc.) is outright wrong. Hunting in the form of Native Americans is fine, that's how they survived, but hunting for a 12 point buck just so you can mount its head on your wall is not right. Nor are the horrible conditions under which many farm animals live before slaughter. I think that if any drastic change needs to be made, it is to our current agriculture system which puts food supply first, animals' pain second. Not a change in our natural eating habits.

Don't try to change life, change how we affect it.

[wolf]

Noodle, I think the time has come to stop your little thought excercise. You're scaring me.

* note to self ... if ever in need of Devil's Advocate, call mrnoodle.

[mrnoodle]

You don't need a damn burger any more than you need the head of your conquest on your wall. Or the latest hairspray. Our desires are counterproductive to our survival, and that of fellow species.

You're not hunting for your own sustenance. You're blithely driving to the grocer's and buying the flesh of an animal that died under horrible circumstances. They keep killing, because you keep buying. On your way to the display of edible body parts reaped from the innocent, you probably passed 100 items that would've equally filled your belly without causing death. Well, not directly, anyway.

wolf -- don't worry, as soon as I close this window I'm going to get a burger. It's easy to argue from a completely emotional standpoint. Five uses of terms like "murder" and "innocent" to put the reader on the defensive, bolstered by one logical point (there are alternatives to meat), all based on the sacred cow of "good intentions". It's easy to be a lib. :P

[wolf]

phew.

And, incidentally, I want the head on my wall as well as the burger. Nice skin on the floor would work with my decor too.

[Griff]

I intend to have a lovely mountain lion skin on my floor soon.

[Bullitt]

I still just don't get why people think eating meat is wrong. It is how we are designed. Get over the fact that something has to suffer for any animal to live. It's part of life. I already said that I don't agree with the way livestock is treated, that needs to be changed no doubt. The problem is not what we eat, it is how we get it.
And even if the entire human race went vegan, animals would still get killed through pesticide runoff, combines harvesting grain, and extermination because of threat to crops.

[Happy Monkey]

I'm no vegetarian, but "It is how we are designed" doesn't hold much moral weight. There are any number of things in our animal nature that are looked down on in civilized society.

And it is possible to get by without eating meat.

But I don't want to.

[Bullitt]

The only real moral issue is how animals are treated on the farm. The moral issue of just killing something for food is rediculous. It's called the circle of life/food chain, get used to it cause that's its always been and always will be.

And of course it is possible to get by without eating meat, its healthier for people with high cholesterol problems for example. But to use the justification for veganism that it is morally wrong to eat another living thing just doesn't fly.

[Elspode]

It should also be pointed out (although I'm not exactly sure why) that virtually all of the cattle that we consume are conceived and raised specifically for that purpose. In other words, left to their own devices, there wouldn't be nearly as many cows in the world. The unchecked mountain lion population would see to that.