I really hate PETA... Another low for this group. - Page 5 - Mothering Forums

Forum Jump: 
Reply
 
Thread Tools
#121 of 202 Old 12-12-2003, 01:00 AM
 
Erin Pavlina's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: Las Vegas, NV
Posts: 1,854
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
I agree that PETA should post more ads and billboards showcasing animal cruelty. I'll bet some people would be horrified to see that while they are driving home. The problem they often encounter, though, is their inability to get those types of ads on the billboards due to censorship of their material.

PETA has a lot of videos and literature showcasing the horrors of the slaughter industry, but few people would willingly pick it up and look at it. Perhaps this is their way of at least getting people to talk about it.

Like I said before, most people have heard of PETA but far fewer have heard of Farm Sanctuary, Last Chance for Animals, EarthSave, and the like.
Erin Pavlina is offline  
#122 of 202 Old 12-12-2003, 10:38 AM
 
AnnMarie's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: New Hampshire
Posts: 3,059
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally posted by Devrock

As I said before, it's possible to be "not nice" and "in your face" about factory farming without declaring female body parts ugly,
I didn't see that one. What was it?
AnnMarie is offline  
#123 of 202 Old 12-12-2003, 10:47 AM
 
candiland's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Waiting for Calgon to take me away.
Posts: 4,057
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Sorry, but there's always going to be a group of these people or those people or the other people who get offended by something someone has to say. It's a fact of life.
I totally dug the "Got Beer?" campaign. It really is the truth; milk is not good for us. At all. Would they have made national news with some dinkity little article about how milk is bad for you: Nope, they would have been totally ignored. If they do *not* go out on a limb and do some more extreme things to garner national attention, they would never get any attention at all. Period.
candiland is offline  
#124 of 202 Old 12-12-2003, 10:55 AM
 
Ruth's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: A big city in a big state
Posts: 453
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
I am a vegetarian, and I know very little about about PETA.

However, their "extremist" tactics work I guess. Why else would there be some much discussion everywhere about their billboards?

Even if you disagree with PETA's cause, at least you have given it some thought. Most people go on eating dead beings without EVER thinking about the pain they are causing, the families they are destroying, or the uselessness of it all.
Ruth is offline  
#125 of 202 Old 12-12-2003, 10:55 AM
 
merpk's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Posts: 14,887
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Have always found PETA's ads featuring animals to be very effective, arresting, and downright intense.

Once they start doing ads with people is when they start getting into trouble. And actually once people get into their equation at all, they get lost in their shallowness/offensiveness quagmire ...

As an example, the letter PETA wrote to Yasser Arafat protesting the use of a donkey as a "suicide bomber." No comment made of the young people who are sent as suicide bombers, not even to mention a comment made of the young and old people who are the victims of the suicide bombers ... just a request stop using animals.

Not that people-killing is their issue, I do understand that, but an acknowledgment under the circumstances would have shown a depth of morality that might sway more minds. And that is, after all, the point of their advertisements.
merpk is offline  
#126 of 202 Old 12-12-2003, 11:35 AM
 
pumpkinhead's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: The Great North
Posts: 4,448
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Destinye,

Quote:
I do believe we were given dominion over animals but it us up to us to choose how we treat them wisely,. They are sentient beings though, aware of pain, terror, other animals distress, and even grieve for one another, to list but a few, Animals in nature and captivity can also be genuinely altruistic too. The more time I have spent with animals the more sentient I think they are though. Yes I agree maybe not sentient in not the same way as humans, but in their own way, and they deserve to be treated with dignity, and there are many ways that the situations of animals in many places could be radically improved. I wish I knew how to achieve that. Sadly we have interfered so much in nature, and the environment,and eliminated so many species already, it would be a wonderful thing if we could do something to reverse and change that.
Well said, and I *mostly* agree with you. We humans, in our infinite and great wisdom (these words are meant to be DRIPPING with sarcasm here ) have done much to screw up nature in the name of bettering our lives. We perserve some species at the expense of others. We've introduced species into areas where they have taken over and threatened the indigenious wildlife (i.e. the introduction of rabbits, mice, cats, goats etc to Australia). So then these animals take over and the popultion explodes as they have no natural predators. So then what do we do? Do we allow these populations to be 'culled' or do we let them stamp out the other speices whose niche they are exploiting? How would PETA go about righting this situation ethically?

As far as animals feeling pain, stress and having emotions, ITA. As I said before, I don't believe they are sentient in the same way that humans are sentient. They do not look at a field and ask themselves how many condo would fit on it. They don't have stock portfolios. They are driven by instinct but, in being so driven, they can be altrustic and kind and loving. Like my Mama said, "Even ugly naked mole rats still love their babies" . You gotta respect that.

That said, I think what PETA is doing is the equivalent of 'trying to remove a fly from you friend's head with a hatchet'.

Mama to Thing 1 and Thing 2.
pumpkinhead is offline  
#127 of 202 Old 12-12-2003, 11:38 AM
 
pumpkinhead's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: The Great North
Posts: 4,448
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
merpk

Quote:
As an example, the letter PETA wrote to Yasser Arafat protesting the use of a donkey as a "suicide bomber." No comment made of the young people who are sent as suicide bombers, not even to mention a comment made of the young and old people who are the victims of the suicide bombers ... just a request stop using animals.
I'm right with you there, especially when they're so quick to compare animals and people with regard to fur and the Holocaust.

Mama to Thing 1 and Thing 2.
pumpkinhead is offline  
#128 of 202 Old 12-12-2003, 12:56 PM
 
Erin Pavlina's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: Las Vegas, NV
Posts: 1,854
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
So PETA wrote a letter about the donkey and not the humans. How many letters do you think were written on behalf of the human suicide bomber where no mention was made of the poor donkey's life?

PETA cares about humans and animals. They choose to give their voice to the animals where so few others do. Don't fault them for that.
Erin Pavlina is offline  
#129 of 202 Old 12-12-2003, 01:24 PM
 
Sustainer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: upstate NY
Posts: 10,709
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally posted by Erin Pavlina
I agree that PETA should post more ads and billboards showcasing animal cruelty. I'll bet some people would be horrified to see that while they are driving home. The problem they often encounter, though, is their inability to get those types of ads on the billboards due to censorship of their material.

PETA has a lot of videos and literature showcasing the horrors of the slaughter industry, but few people would willingly pick it up and look at it.
The ads don't have to be graphic to be effective.

Quote:
Originally posted by Erin Pavlina
Perhaps this is their way of at least getting people to talk about it.
It's the animal rights activists who came in here to defend PETA who got us talking about animal rights. The PETA sign itself just got us talking about Santa and little kids.

Quote:
Originally posted by AnnMarie
I didn't see that one. What was it?
They did an ad that said that a woman's pubic hair is unattractive.

Quote:
Originally posted by candiland
Sorry, but there's always going to be a group of these people or those people or the other people who get offended by something someone has to say.
It's a fact of life.
I'm aware that there are always a few people who are so sensitive that anything could offend them, but you don't have to be sensitive to be offended by PETA's ads. They go out of their way to be offensive. PETA has admitted this.

Quote:
Originally posted by candiland
I totally dug the "Got Beer?" campaign. It really is the truth; milk is not good for us. At all.
Unfortunately, beer isn't that great for you either, and this country already has a huge problem with people drinking too much beer and then getting into cars and killing people.


Quote:
Originally posted by candiland
Would they have made national news with some dinkity little article about how milk is bad for you Nope, they would have been totally ignored.
Unfortunately, the news stories, and the conversations most people had about the news stories, weren't about milk. They were about beer. And how PETA shouldn't be encouraging beer consumption. And what the effect is going to be on college kids, etc. etc. etc.

It doesn't have to be some dinky little article. It can be a big bilboard. But it can be about MILK. They don't have to bring other issues into it that are controversial and have nothing to do with their cause. Big national debates about beer and pubic hair and Santa do not help their cause, you know?

Quote:
Originally posted by Ruth
However, their "extremist" tactics work I guess. Why else would there be some much discussion everywhere about their billboards?
I don't think these particular tactics work. They initiate a discussion of the billboard itself, but not about animal rights. Other animal rights activists have to come along and try to turn the discussion around to animal rights.

-Alice, SAHM to dd (2001) and ds (2004) each of whom was a homebirth.jpg, who each self-weaned at 4.5 years bfolderchild.gif, who both fambedsingle2.gif'd, who were bothcd.gif, and both: novaxnocirc.gif.   Also, gd.gif, and goorganic.jpg!

Sustainer is offline  
#130 of 202 Old 12-12-2003, 01:53 PM
 
Peppermint's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: work-in-progress
Posts: 5,658
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally posted by Devrock

It doesn't have to be some dinky little article. It can be a big bilboard. But it can be about MILK. They don't have to bring other issues into it that are controversial and have nothing to do with their cause. Big national debates about beer and pubic hair and Santa do not help their cause, you know?

I don't think these particular tactics work. They initiate a discussion of the billboard itself, but not about animal rights. Other animal rights activists have to come along and try to turn the discussion around to animal rights.
This is the point a few of us have been trying to make this whole thread- if they put up billboards which actually inform (like if they put up a billboard that says- "milk causes impotence") people might learn something more- esp. if they put up a link to info. about that.
IMNSHO-*most* people who did not know about the dangers of milk- have not learned anything from this ad- I also venture to guess that more people were focused on the Santa issue, and PETA's advertising techniques, than were focused on milk causing impotence, but I am sure all those who avidly support PETA already, don't want to hear that what they are doing is likely not working.

PETA can continue on with these ads, I'm not going to lose any sleep over it, but I am also going to choose not to support them financially until they start using their money to educate more than to "get attention" which many of us have pointed out does not always lead to education, as they hope it will.

IMO people are also more likely to listen to what a group has to say, and believe in their claims, if they do not find the message offensive in other areas. It has been said before- go ahead- offend people who eat meat, wear leather, etc.- but- offend women? Jews? Mothers riding in the car with their children?

They have a point to make and IMO, they are missing more people than they are hitting with these type of ads. Does that matter?

:Patty :fireman Catholic, intactalactivist, co-sleeping, GDing, HSing, no-vax Mama to .........................:..........hale:
Peppermint is offline  
#131 of 202 Old 12-12-2003, 03:00 PM
 
pumpkinhead's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: The Great North
Posts: 4,448
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Just a note,

I think adds can be extreme and still be effective. For example, has anyone every seen that 'Give Blood' add that has a picture of a teeny babe all hooked up to wires and tubes and stuff? It's a black and white photo. The caption simply reads 'Give Blood'. No gore, nothing offensive, just plain, BLUNT and simple. It made me think.

There are all sorts of adds that get their point accross w/o being obscene or offensive. Heck, one good example is the whole 'Got Milk?' campain. Perhaps PETA should take another page out of that book. Maybe instead of 'Got Beer?', 'Got Brain?'then use it! or something . THe possibilities are ENDLESS!

Mama to Thing 1 and Thing 2.
pumpkinhead is offline  
#132 of 202 Old 12-12-2003, 03:35 PM
 
AmandasMom's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: Nashville
Posts: 1,821
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Actually they do. "Got Sick Kids", "Got Zits" , "Got Heart Disease", and a few others in addition to "Got Beer". Can all be found at http://www.milksucks.com .
AmandasMom is offline  
#133 of 202 Old 12-12-2003, 03:50 PM
 
Erin Pavlina's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: Las Vegas, NV
Posts: 1,854
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Jess, you said:

I am also going to choose not to support them financially until they start using their money to educate.

They spend millions of dollars on education. You simply haven't been the recipient of any of it. It's out there, it just doesn't get press like their other ads. Go to the PETA site and look at their financials and you'll see what they spend their money on.
Erin Pavlina is offline  
#134 of 202 Old 12-12-2003, 04:50 PM
 
AmandasMom's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: Nashville
Posts: 1,821
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Interesting to me that the president of PETA, Ingrid Newkirk, earned $28,500 during fiscal year ending July 31, 2002. That is a very low salary. I wonder how her salary compares to other charity or welfare organizations. How much does the president of the Red Cross make? Or the March of Dimes? Is there a website that says cause I can't find it. The only thing I could find is FOX News talking about how a CEO from teh Red Cross San Diego/Imperial County chapter in Southern California makes $309,000+ salary and benefits. I'm glad to see the majority of money given to PETA goes to work for PETA.
AmandasMom is offline  
#135 of 202 Old 12-12-2003, 04:55 PM
 
candiland's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Waiting for Calgon to take me away.
Posts: 4,057
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Unfortunately, the news stories, and the conversations most people had about the news stories, weren't about milk. They were about beer. And how PETA shouldn't be encouraging beer consumption. And what the effect is going to be on college kids, etc. etc. etc
Yup, it got everyone talking! My point exactly. And, come on, I had to laugh out loud at the thought of a silly message such as this one encouraging anyone to drink more beer than they already do: That's the silliest thing I've heard in a long time. "Ooooh, did you see the 'Got Beer' campaign? I think I'm going to start drinking..." Or, "I'm gonna drink MORE now!"
People who don't like PETA are gonna make a hullaballoo over anything that isn't totally PC and totally clean. Simple as that.
As for the Holocaust comparison...... who's sig line says something to the effect of "Holocausts happen when people are looked at as nothing more than animals?" The philosophy behind it - it has a famous quote, but again, I can't remember it exactly - is that the health of a society can be measured by how that society treats its animals. Something like humans being tortured and/or killed isn't really too much of a leap from the way we treat our animals. Look at our wars... we murder, maim and kill thousands of people on a regular basis........
candiland is offline  
#136 of 202 Old 12-12-2003, 05:02 PM
 
Sustainer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: upstate NY
Posts: 10,709
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally posted by candiland
Yup, it got everyone talking! My point exactly.
Talking about BEER, instead of talking about MILK -- that was MY point.

-Alice, SAHM to dd (2001) and ds (2004) each of whom was a homebirth.jpg, who each self-weaned at 4.5 years bfolderchild.gif, who both fambedsingle2.gif'd, who were bothcd.gif, and both: novaxnocirc.gif.   Also, gd.gif, and goorganic.jpg!

Sustainer is offline  
#137 of 202 Old 12-12-2003, 05:05 PM
 
candiland's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Waiting for Calgon to take me away.
Posts: 4,057
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
BUT IT STILL GOT PEOPLE TALKING ABOUT IT
candiland is offline  
#138 of 202 Old 12-12-2003, 05:07 PM
 
Sustainer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: upstate NY
Posts: 10,709
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally posted by candiland
BUT IT STILL GOT PEOPLE TALKING ABOUT IT
YEAH! ABOUT BEER!

-Alice, SAHM to dd (2001) and ds (2004) each of whom was a homebirth.jpg, who each self-weaned at 4.5 years bfolderchild.gif, who both fambedsingle2.gif'd, who were bothcd.gif, and both: novaxnocirc.gif.   Also, gd.gif, and goorganic.jpg!

Sustainer is offline  
#139 of 202 Old 12-12-2003, 05:10 PM
 
pumpkinhead's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: The Great North
Posts: 4,448
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
And, come on, I had to laugh out loud at the thought of a silly message such as this one encouraging anyone to drink more beer than they already do That's the silliest thing I've heard in a long time. "Ooooh, did you see the 'Got Beer' campaign? I think I'm going to start drinking..." Or, "I'm gonna drink MORE now!"


Yeah, and violent video games don't cause violent behaviour in kids? Same goes for violent T.V. and advertising campains? Give me a break! The power of the media is the power of suggestion.

Mama to Thing 1 and Thing 2.
pumpkinhead is offline  
#140 of 202 Old 12-12-2003, 05:21 PM
 
candiland's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Waiting for Calgon to take me away.
Posts: 4,057
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Yeah, and violent video games don't cause violent behaviour in kids? Same goes for violent T.V. and advertising campains?
Okaaaaayyyy..... compare a child who plays violent video games for four hours a day to some people who were exposed once or twice to a PETA campaign: If they were flashing "Got Beer" all over the television all of the time, I'd be like, chill out with it a bit. But if we were to get this extreme, maybe people shouldn't compare anything to anything because it might get misconstrued and make some kid somewhere do something stupid:LOL
candiland is offline  
#141 of 202 Old 12-13-2003, 08:39 PM
 
mamabeard's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: s'times sleep dep, s'times JOY!
Posts: 1,552
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
i don't understand why some keep saying we're not talking about the real issues, the treatment of animals. :

whether or not the ad/s converts 1% of those who see them to vegetarianism or 100%, the fact is, they do have some effect. i doubt the animals care if joe bilbo and his brother were offended. i'm guessing, [if cows/chickens etc. were psychic, not saying they aren't] they'd probably only care that mary gweeber had a revelation and called up the slaughterhouse to cancel her order.

to some of us, that's what matters. there are millions of billboards and commercials and people and toys i find offensive and annoying on a daily basis, each of which are opportunities to teach my child. but (when i used to eat meat), the realization that i was shovelling chunks of dead bodies into my mouth was incomparably more offensive and horrifying.

if you were an animal with a mother and/or children, i'm sure you'd give a damn too.
mamabeard is offline  
#142 of 202 Old 12-13-2003, 09:18 PM
 
alie's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Posts: 256
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
I havent had time to read all the posts, but I do believe that as one poster said in the beginning, that vegetables and plants are alive, just as animals and we humans are. I eat meat, organic and I say thank you. I eat vegetables and say thank you to the vegetables. We must eat food to survive, and this involves killing of some sort. You cant get away from it. So to think you are better or more knowing for just eating vegetables ( or meat for that matter) is not right in my opinion. NO personal attacks, just a way to change thinking here. Vegetables are alive, just as alive as animals. Trees are alive. So no one is better for eating or not eating meat. Just being aware of what you are doing; consciously taking a life. /mistreatment of animals is another matter. PETA is doing its best it seems to get attention and they do. Though annoying in their tactics ( funny to some), they are effective.
alie is offline  
#143 of 202 Old 12-13-2003, 11:22 PM
 
Sustainer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: upstate NY
Posts: 10,709
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally posted by mamabeard
i don't understand why some keep saying we're not talking about the real issues, the treatment of animals. :
We have talked about the treatment of animals, because people have brought it up; I'm just saying that that's not the conversation that the billboard initiated.

-Alice, SAHM to dd (2001) and ds (2004) each of whom was a homebirth.jpg, who each self-weaned at 4.5 years bfolderchild.gif, who both fambedsingle2.gif'd, who were bothcd.gif, and both: novaxnocirc.gif.   Also, gd.gif, and goorganic.jpg!

Sustainer is offline  
#144 of 202 Old 12-14-2003, 12:22 AM
 
Erin Pavlina's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: Las Vegas, NV
Posts: 1,854
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Alie, you said:

We must eat food to survive, and this involves killing of some sort. You cant get away from it.

The difference is that when you kill an animal you end it's life. When you harvest fruit, the tree lives on to bear more fruit. When you harvest a vine of its food, the vine lives on to bear again.

Also, just want to throw this in... we vegans don't just eat vegetables... we eat grains, legumes, nuts, seeds, fruit, and pulses as well..

Trees are alive... yes. We don't cut down the tree though to eat the apples. When the apples are ripe, they fall from the tree, they are gathered by animals, eaten, and the seeds are spread around to grow new trees. That's nature and how the tree survives.

But an animal... I mean, herding and caging an animal and plumping it up so there's a lot of meat when it's slaughtered... not at all natural.
Erin Pavlina is offline  
#145 of 202 Old 12-14-2003, 12:37 AM
 
Sustainer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: upstate NY
Posts: 10,709
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
It's true that you can eat an apple without killing the apple tree and you can eat a grape without killing the vine, but what about individual vegetables that grow in the ground, like carrots and potatoes? When you pull it up and eat it, you're killing a life form, right?

Also, couldn't harvesting apples and grapes be compared to taking milk from a cow and letting the cow live? As a vegan, you don't drink milk, right? Isn't it (at least partly) because you have an ethical problem with taking the milk away from the cow?

-Alice, SAHM to dd (2001) and ds (2004) each of whom was a homebirth.jpg, who each self-weaned at 4.5 years bfolderchild.gif, who both fambedsingle2.gif'd, who were bothcd.gif, and both: novaxnocirc.gif.   Also, gd.gif, and goorganic.jpg!

Sustainer is offline  
#146 of 202 Old 12-14-2003, 12:40 AM
 
Sustainer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: upstate NY
Posts: 10,709
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally posted by Erin Pavlina
But an animal... I mean, herding and caging an animal and plumping it up so there's a lot of meat when it's slaughtered... not at all natural.
Hunting is natural though, isn't it?

-Alice, SAHM to dd (2001) and ds (2004) each of whom was a homebirth.jpg, who each self-weaned at 4.5 years bfolderchild.gif, who both fambedsingle2.gif'd, who were bothcd.gif, and both: novaxnocirc.gif.   Also, gd.gif, and goorganic.jpg!

Sustainer is offline  
#147 of 202 Old 12-14-2003, 05:48 AM
 
merpk's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Posts: 14,887
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Amandasmom, agreed, that's a very good point about the low salary for the president of PETA. Very unusual indeed. Thanks for posting that.
merpk is offline  
#148 of 202 Old 12-14-2003, 11:32 AM
 
Erin Pavlina's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: Las Vegas, NV
Posts: 1,854
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Hunting is natural though, isn't it?

Well when a carnivore hunts its food, yeah, that's natural. But a gun in the woods? Not natural at all. We didn't have guns 10,000 years ago.

A human being could not kill anything with its bare hands. Before fire and spears we ate fruit and anything else standing still. We couldn't catch a deer or elk. We couldn't bite into it with our little teeth. We couldn't rip it apart with our bare hands. We couldn't cook it without fire. And we would become violently ill if we ate raw deer.

Also, couldn't harvesting apples and grapes be compared to taking milk from a cow and letting the cow live? As a vegan, you don't drink milk, right?

I wouldn't compare the two and here's why.
1. A cow only produces milk after she gives birth. Once her nursling is weaned, her milk should dry up. The cows living in today's agribusiness are injected with drugs to keep their milk flowing and are pumped every 10 minutes, automatically by a machine, not their nursling. They are forced to be pregnant so they will continually lactate.

2. An apple is going to fall off the tree when it's ripe. The tree is happy when this happens so the weight of the apples doesn't break its branches. It lives on to produce thousands of apples if left to its own devices.

3. A tree growing naturally in the orchard is not injected with drugs, forced to withstand harsh conditions, left to stand in its own waste, forced to eat disgusting things, and then slaughtered a mere 3-4 years after it's born when it should live 16-20 years.
Erin Pavlina is offline  
#149 of 202 Old 12-14-2003, 12:26 PM
 
Mona's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2003
Location: indiana
Posts: 2,411
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
From an ethical and philosophical standpoint, no one is REALLY comparing the way carrots are grown/killed to the way factory farm animals are "grown"/killed, are we?

:
Mona is offline  
#150 of 202 Old 12-14-2003, 12:59 PM
 
Sustainer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: upstate NY
Posts: 10,709
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
We're not saying that plants are mistreated the way that animals are mistreated (although when Erin said "trees are not forced to eat disgusting things," it reminded me of all the toxic pesticides and fertilizers and herbicides and fungicides etc. that are used on crops), we're just saying that animals aren't the only things that have to be killed in order to be eaten. The argument some people have been making is that 'no one has the right to take the life of another living thing.'

-Alice, SAHM to dd (2001) and ds (2004) each of whom was a homebirth.jpg, who each self-weaned at 4.5 years bfolderchild.gif, who both fambedsingle2.gif'd, who were bothcd.gif, and both: novaxnocirc.gif.   Also, gd.gif, and goorganic.jpg!

Sustainer is offline  
Reply

Quick Reply
Message:
Drag and Drop File Upload
Drag files here to attach!
Upload Progress: 0
Options

Register Now

In order to be able to post messages on the Mothering Forums forums, you must first register.
Please enter your desired user name, your email address and other required details in the form below.
User Name:
If you do not want to register, fill this field only and the name will be used as user name for your post.
Password
Please enter a password for your user account. Note that passwords are case-sensitive.
Password:
Confirm Password:
Email Address
Please enter a valid email address for yourself.
Email Address:

Log-in

Human Verification

In order to verify that you are a human and not a spam bot, please enter the answer into the following box below based on the instructions contained in the graphic.



User Tag List

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Show Printable Version
Email this Page Email this Page


Forum Jump: 

Posting Rules  
You may post new threads
You may post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are Off