Nah, Im not the type that gets angry. Besides I only throw knives at them to scare them away from my car. I have to date never hit one, but I have been pretty close. If I killed them then I wouldnt be able to do my daily practice now would I. If I just killed them there wouldnt be any more squirrels to practice on now would there.
Akuma said:
Not sure if you were joking here. If not, well I guess we disagree. I would shoot the last five endangered spotted owls in a heartbeat if it meant saving a human life. Sorry, human life trumps all animal life in my book.
PS- I HATE SQUIRRELS! See my squirrel pictures in the gallery. Well, not actually pictures of squirrels, but rather waht the cute RATS did to my expensive garbage cans! I have not actually shot one yet with a BB Gun, but I am getting close to doing it!
Then that is your opinion. Me, i value all life by how much it contributes to the world. One might look at it as scale. Humans in general do almost nothing to contribute to the world, in fact its more of the opposite, so naturally they weigh less.
Akuma said:
And what exactly does a rat, a pigeon, or a **** mouse contribute? You would really rather save a dog or a cats life than a human being? Wow. Whatever you do, don't go into the Public Safety field. :eusa_ange
A rat "cleans up" after other animals by eating things that normally would be left somewhere. They are also food for other animals and thus balance the ecosystem.
Pigeons help spread plantlife over greater distances, and thus ensure that the plants survive.
Since I have no clue as to what a **** mouse is, I cannot tell you its role in nature.
Depending on what that human has contrubited, the answer will differ. The probable answer however, is yes.
Pigeons help spread plantlife over greater distances, and thus ensure that the plants survive.
Since I have no clue as to what a **** mouse is, I cannot tell you its role in nature.
Depending on what that human has contrubited, the answer will differ. The probable answer however, is yes.
G
Guest
Guest
A titmouse is a bird!PETA fails to realize that animal experimentation ultimately benefits animals. My mother is a veterinarian, and basically the equipment and techniques she uses are the same ones used by human medicine 20 or 30 years ago. It seems to work like this:
1) a medical procedure is developed through animal testing
2) years of use on human patients reduce the cost of the associated technology (as well as troubleshooting and improving the technique)
3) the medical procedure is put to use on animals once the price of the procedure is within a pet owner's reach
If we were to, say, find a cure for cancer through animal experimentation, we would ultimately use this cure to treat cancer in animals, not just people.
1) a medical procedure is developed through animal testing
2) years of use on human patients reduce the cost of the associated technology (as well as troubleshooting and improving the technique)
3) the medical procedure is put to use on animals once the price of the procedure is within a pet owner's reach
If we were to, say, find a cure for cancer through animal experimentation, we would ultimately use this cure to treat cancer in animals, not just people.
G
Guest
Guest
Wow - never thought of it that way, smo. Good to have you around!
PETA is a dishonest, unethical organization that is incapable of engaging in rational discourse and deserves nothing but enmity. Here are some reasons I hate PETA:
1) "Government records show that PeTA provided at least $70,000 to convicted Animal Liberation Front arsonist Rodney Coronado and his family, who set fire to government-funded university research labs in several states." (National Animal Interest Alliance webpage)
2) "Even if animal tests produced a cure for AIDS, we'd be against it." PETA founder Ingrid Newkirk, Vogue (September 1, 1989)
3) "I wish we all would get up and go into the labs and take the animals out or burn them down." -Ingrid Newkirk, "National Animal Rights Convention" (June 27, 1997)
4) PETA has long claimed that Fen-Phen (the extremely unsafe diet drug) was an example of how animal testing doesn't prove a drug safe for humans.
"First, fen-phen was an off-label prescription that was never tested in animals. Of course for PETA and PCRM to understand this, they'd have to leave their fantasy worlds to actually develop an understanding of how drugs are tested and prescribed.
"Second, animal testing conducted prior to approval of both fenfluramine and phentermine revealed side effects that could cause the sorts of problems that the combinatory treatment was eventually linked to. Fenfluramine, for example, was only approved for use by patients for at most a few weeks, but doctors prescribed it to patients for months and years. Similarly, the FDA noted in approving phentermine that there was no safety data at all for its usage beyond 1 year." (from animalrights.net/articles)
5) PETA's claims about the World Wildlife Foundation's position on animal testing (they said that the WWF supported "any and all" animal testing) was an out and out lie. The WWF supports animal testing only where there are no other alternatives, where the test subjects are cared for (anesthetized, given good living accomodations, euthanized instead of left to die), and where it conforms with all laws and regulations.
6) PETA repeatedly compares animal mistreatment to the holocaust. Take a gander at www.masskilling.com. That's unacceptable.
7) PETA has claimed (despite scientific findings to the contrary) that a vegetarian diet would have prevented the outbreak of SARS. (www.peta.org/feat/sars)
PETA is so bad it attacks its own ideological allies. They cannot be trusted and should not be listened to. Reject PETA and take a stand for rational discourse, the value of human life, and respect for the law. More examples of bad PETA behavior on request.
1) "Government records show that PeTA provided at least $70,000 to convicted Animal Liberation Front arsonist Rodney Coronado and his family, who set fire to government-funded university research labs in several states." (National Animal Interest Alliance webpage)
2) "Even if animal tests produced a cure for AIDS, we'd be against it." PETA founder Ingrid Newkirk, Vogue (September 1, 1989)
3) "I wish we all would get up and go into the labs and take the animals out or burn them down." -Ingrid Newkirk, "National Animal Rights Convention" (June 27, 1997)
4) PETA has long claimed that Fen-Phen (the extremely unsafe diet drug) was an example of how animal testing doesn't prove a drug safe for humans.
"First, fen-phen was an off-label prescription that was never tested in animals. Of course for PETA and PCRM to understand this, they'd have to leave their fantasy worlds to actually develop an understanding of how drugs are tested and prescribed.
"Second, animal testing conducted prior to approval of both fenfluramine and phentermine revealed side effects that could cause the sorts of problems that the combinatory treatment was eventually linked to. Fenfluramine, for example, was only approved for use by patients for at most a few weeks, but doctors prescribed it to patients for months and years. Similarly, the FDA noted in approving phentermine that there was no safety data at all for its usage beyond 1 year." (from animalrights.net/articles)
5) PETA's claims about the World Wildlife Foundation's position on animal testing (they said that the WWF supported "any and all" animal testing) was an out and out lie. The WWF supports animal testing only where there are no other alternatives, where the test subjects are cared for (anesthetized, given good living accomodations, euthanized instead of left to die), and where it conforms with all laws and regulations.
6) PETA repeatedly compares animal mistreatment to the holocaust. Take a gander at www.masskilling.com. That's unacceptable.
7) PETA has claimed (despite scientific findings to the contrary) that a vegetarian diet would have prevented the outbreak of SARS. (www.peta.org/feat/sars)
PETA is so bad it attacks its own ideological allies. They cannot be trusted and should not be listened to. Reject PETA and take a stand for rational discourse, the value of human life, and respect for the law. More examples of bad PETA behavior on request.
G
Guest
Guest
:eusa_clap Bravo, smo! When you tell someone that you're against PETA you're labeled right away as a monster. Not many people are aware of their political, business and marketing affiliations. They're not nice people. They are for the most part radically obsessive compulsive about what THEY think. They've gone too far. I love animals - I was late for work this morning because there was one of those furry caterpillars on my windshield. If I went too fast, his little back end would come up off of the glass and he looked as tho he'd fly away. Tell me I'm not sensitive to wildlife!!
- Messages
- 192
- Highlights
- 0
- Reaction score
- 0
- Points
- 102
jatkins said:
WE ARE ON A ROLL JATKINS! THAT'S TWO IN A ROW! :eusa_danc
Nicely said. :eusa_clap
G
Guest
Guest
WOW - I'm impressed (or should I be scared - :eusa_shif ). Angry, jatkins and I are in agreement - I think we have almost come full circle... I'm tearing up....
That's kind of you, thanks.Angry White Man said:
I don't know if I can express in words just exactly how much I hate PETA. Most of my friends are liberals, and most of them hate PETA, largely because it's organizations like these that give reasonable liberals a really bad name. I hate PETA because as a moderate, I have difficulty tolerating extremists, and have zero patience for liars and criminals (or those who support criminals).
G
Guest
Guest
Couldn't have said that better, myself, jatkins!! Bravo!!
See how we all get along eventually? I love this place...:eusa_clap
See how we all get along eventually? I love this place...:eusa_clap
I love meat. I like steak, turkey, sometimes chicken and I hate pork(by preference, no religious reason there). I do not however condone the unethical treatment of any living creature. I feel that animals were put here to feed us and provide other important resources within reason. Ya know I also feel that plants are just as alive as we are, so why does PETA not condemn the use of plants for consumption? I have a few vegans in my family, these are just a couple things we have at their house for holiday dinners; Tofurkey (tofu in the likeness of a turkey, should be outlawed for offensive taste), stuffed portabello mushrooms(I don't remember this mentioned as a staple at the table with the pilgrims) and anything else they can find that compares with the taste cardboard and sole of shoe. Personally I would prefer to have to eat pork, but this is what I am subjected to while visiting the vegan family members. It's an injustice to carnivors everywhere! Luckily this year it's in Austin so I have an excuse not to go.
I don't freak out on people who wear real fur, but I do not wear it just because I think it's wrong to wear something elses skin, you have your own dammit.
I don't freak out on people who wear real fur, but I do not wear it just because I think it's wrong to wear something elses skin, you have your own dammit.
As my posts so far on this thread should have made abundantly clear, I don't like PETA. Also, I am, like you, a meat-lover. I'm going to use this post to play devil's advocate, just to answer your questions about the arguments underpinning animal-rights politics.
The definition of "ethical" is what's at issue here. How does one determine the hierarchy of ethics?
Mustang Kitty Cat said:
The definition of "ethical" is what's at issue here. How does one determine the hierarchy of ethics?
PETA's ethical framework imputes a hierarchy of consciousness that suggests that since plants are incapable (to the degree that can be measured) of experiencing or anticipating pain, it is not unethical to eat them. Evidence indicates that plants are capable of reacting to negative stimuli, but without a central nervous system, they cannot be perceived to be "aware" of it. In this way PETA is very much like any number of other animal rights organizations.
