I swear, if I were to make this stuff up, you wouldn't believe me - fortunately I don't have to; PETA does all this stuff for real and without any provocation. Gotta love 'em, they keep giving us stuff to write about.
Who is one of the truly oddest, weirdest people to inhabit our world? If you guessed Dennis Rodman, give yourself a cupie doll. He had kinda fallen out of sight until I saw him in a super bowl commerical and now he's joining with PETA (link). A whacked out person representing and supporting a whacked out organization.
But PETA doesn't stop there, no on the heels of the Rodman connection, who went by the nickname of 'The Worm', PETA has now issued a statement that placing a worm on a hook causes pain to the worm. Most scientists dispute the claim, saying that the 'brain' of a worm is too small for the critter to feel pain - but science never stood in the path of PETA.
A while back, PETA had already claimed that fish feel pain when hooked - um, no - sorry dunder heads, they don't. Fish use their mouths for dang near everything that they do (they don't have anything else that they can use). Their mouths are tough, tough, tough and they don't feel pain when hooked. They aren't too keen on being hauled out of the water, but by that point in time either they are at their end (as in dinner) or folks unhook them and release them.
When PETA (People Expounding The Absurd) teamed up with Rev. Sharpton, that should have told us all we needed to know; if we didn't already know. But no, PETA just keeps making a fool out of itself.
Questions for PETA - when a dog has 'worms' and we give it medicine to take care of the 'worms' aren't we harming the worms? Don't they 'feel pain' as they die? However, if we don't kill them, they will kill the dog, won't he feel pain as he dies? Vegetables are alive, how do you know that pulling them from the ground or picking them from their vines, that they aren't feeling pain? I'd suggest eating dirt, except that micro-organisms live in dirt, PETA would want us to sterilize the dirt because the micro-organism will feel pain, but if we eat it, won't the micro-organisms feel pain when they hit our stomach acid? The very air we breath includes, spores, molds, viruses, micro-organisms, should we stop breathing because the intake of many/most of these air borne 'things' often causes them to die - don't they feel pain when they die? Doesn't anything alive fight to stay alive? Up to an including being sucked out of the air and metabolized?
The worst news was the realization that someone commented on a previous post (inviting liberals to move to Canada) that hunting is fairly popular in Canada so even that 'progressive' country would be/is unfriendly to a PETA kind of person. Bottom line, I have no use for PETA or it's agenda - great example of how to make a fool out of yourself.
Comments? Opinions? Something you would like to BBQ?
More Later
Monday, February 07, 2005
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
35 comments:
They use Rodman because he manages to attract attention. You noticed him and wrote about it didn't you? And how do you know how odd he is? Seems to me like he's just someone who goes to extremes to get the spotlight on him.
I think you're kind of missing PETA's point. Check out meetyourmeat.com. Or iamscruelty.com. Those are PETA's primary concerns. Watching those videos might not make you stop eating meat, but I guarantee it will make you think twice about where your food is coming from. I still eat meat, but that's mostly out of convenience. Even PETA thinks eating meat isn't all that bad; it's how the animals are treated. Factory Farms aren't nice, and unfortunately, their the backbone of our economy in a sense. Think about how the consumer industry would be affected if dairy farms suddenly vanished. Cows make a lot of people a lot of money. Fast food would be eliminated without ground beef and cheese. Grocery stores would take a huge dip in revenue without beef and dairy products to sell.
And I think vegetables are being exploited in the same way.
They are the backbone, rather.
You are a piece of shit.
You might try learning about the organization you bash before you start posting this swill.
You have proven yourself to be nothing more than an ignorant and closed-minded prick.
I hope mad cow disease is God's plan to thin the population of "ArchAngels".
If PETA's efforts to publicize the inhumane and unlawful manner in which many slaughterhouses are run fail to induce change in that industry, I only ask that you and any like-minded folk order your next burger rare
--for me.
First off, Carrie, that wasn't nice, disagreeing is one thing, wishing curses upon someone and calling them names not only doesn't accomplish anything, it usually turns them off to your side of the issue.
Dub (and Carrie) -
My posting wasn't what Dub claims is PETA's 'goal'. My posting was pointing out how ridiculous many of PETA's claims are. A worm and a fish feeling pain - er, no and not really. I agree with you Dub that many of this land's slaughter houses need some reform, however I also realize the economics of such actions. To be honest, I'd much rather raise my own cow, pig and chickens for my own family. But my neighbors (being an urbanite/suburbanite) aren't too keen on the idea; not to mention the public authorities.
I would disagree with Dub that "Even PETA thinks eating meat isn't all that bad..." I sincerely believe that they would be MUCH happier if everyone were not just vegi, but true vegans. In fact I heard last night (after I wrote this post) the Mercedes Benz, in an attempt to appease PETA, will offer it's cars without leather interiors (an option). I'm just not thinking that they will get a lot of takers, but I could be mistaken. Personally, given the choice between leather and cloth - it's not a contest.
BTW - Carrie, I have no problem eating meat and using stuff like leather, because in the Bible we were given stewardship over the earth. God did not command us to 'treat the animals as your equal'.
Michael:
I don't plan on talking about PETA. You mentioned G-mail or something on my blog. I am totally ignorant of what this means, so you can appreciate why I'm a little hesitant to hand out my e-mail. I get so much spam as it is. Could you give me an idea, (in 1,000 characters or less, according to my HaloScan account) about what you're referring to?
PETA, like most current extremist organizations, started with a noble goal - treat animals better. I have no problem with -that-, I do however have a problem with misleading, extremist POVs and people doing violent (or just plain stupid) things in defense of those POVs.
I also have a problem with people wishing Mad Cow on a fellow human, but Carrie might not appreciate the subtleties of socialized communication.
/TJ
Hmm, when we lived across the river in the WA vancouver, we had a great dairy that offered home delivery, until they were forced out of business by federal regulations. We were sad, so sad.
Small business is pushed out of the picture by the overwhelming demands placed by the feds, leaving only the huge mega producers who are the primary culprits in the poor treatment of their stock. I would like to see a return to smaller local food producers (who re accountable to the local community) and at every opportunity buy locally grown and produced items. It's my pet peeeve (no pun).
I don't believe that any use of animal commercially is bad but would prefer to have said animals treated as humanely as possible, simply because it is the right thing to do, our stewardship should extend to the comfort of our wards. Even beating a pack animal was frowned upon, remember Baalam and the donkey? Not only did the donkey get to respond but God gave him language in order to point out to Baalam that his a** was about to get kicked by an angel.
I think PETA's methods leave a lot to be desired. Accosting kids outside a McD's and frightening them with pictures of unhappy meals and so on ought to be treated the same way they treat abortion protesters, at least 20 feet back and no contact unless the customer wants it.
I read an article not too long ago about local harrassment of businees that sell, oh damn, the name eludes me now, that fatted goose liver, not pate, the other one, anyway, these guys are targeting restaraunts that serve the dish and plastering signs on their windows, with gross pictures until the owner "decides" to stop using the product, usually after their business gets shut down. These people employ other tricks like making several reservations, until there is no more room, then not showing up, leaving the business owner to turn away actual customers only to find out they have no business. It's extortion, plain and simple. Foie Gras, that's the stuff.
Now, I don't personally want to eat foie gras, it sounds gross but to tell someone they can't because I don't seems wrong. It seems, I don't know, kind of taliban. And to the girl that commented that MTA should die of mad cow disease, wow, you are really an angry person, that's as bad as the people who say AIDs is a curse from God to kill the homosexuals. Do you really want to be counted among them, do you really applaud their approach? Can't you find a more well though out response to communicate your point of view?
LOL @ "People Expounding The Absurd".....I love it.
Hmmm...Interesting. You see, I was neither attempting to be nice or make any friends here. And quite frankly, I don't think any of you were either.
Point in case, you are plain wrong about PETA's agenda.
PETA does not condemn people for eating meat the way you all condemn animal lovers. There ARE slaughterhouses meeting PETA's standards and being given due credit. PETA's concern is in the humane killing of animals, rather than the cheap, unsanitary way most of your meat ends up in the supermarket.
Yes, if you eat meat, you are already taking the risk of salmonella, E. coli, campylobacter, heart disease, strokes, high blood pressure, and cancer, as well as obesity. Now, you can add mad cow, chicken, or pig disease to the list. It's awareness folks. That's what PETA is offering you.
I see MTA was attempting some humor here. But the fact is animal cruelty just isn't very funny.
But I do think it's pretty funny that someone who calls themselves MadMom is accusing me of being an angry person. Um, pot...meet kettle.
I think it's amazing MTA has lived life as both worm and fish. I know you aren't taking science's word for it, dear.
SO...What is science's explanation of the Good Book you've quoted?? Yeah, they don't really believe the followers of a living Jesus wrote that "shtuff".
Of course you know what science has to say about evolution right?
Maybe you missed that one.
Let's just say they don't really buy that whole breath of life and rib replacement tidbit.
If you really want to debate, it's necessary to take a stance...
Science or Religion, Mikey, they just don't mix.
Gee Carrie, actually, my nome de blog is an inside joke, from my kids, they used to tease me and then run away screaming MADMOM MADMOM!It was a hoot.
You did respond with a lot of anger and name calling, not with reason and substance. You followup has slightly more substance.
Wow. That sounds rather dysfunctional.
I think it's funny that your concerned about my comments lacking reason and substance. The post I am originally commenting on is guilty of the same crime. Are dunder-head and fool not also names, genious?
I don't think you know what commercial use of animals entails.
IAMS, for instance, practices vivisection on purpose-bred dogs and cats.
Do you honestly believe that is OK?
It's unbelievable how many people are willing to ignore and justify what they don't want to acknowledge. The truth is not always pretty. If you honestly don't have a problem with your happy meal contents, then the truth about what accompanies that little toy shouldn't scare you.
I don't see how you can compare abortion to cheeseburgers; you didn't conceive the cow-- why do you choose it's fate?
I mean, are you even a republican?? I thought you people were ones standing outside the abortion clinics condemning all the sinning young girls in the first place!
Okay Carrie - Time to set you straight.
Regarding "...attempting to be nice or make any friends here. And quite frankly, I don't think any of you were either." This blog isn't necessarily set up to make friends, it is set up to bring up topics, usually recent ones and put out my view on it and ask for a discussion. A discussion doesn't not (usually) include swear words and curses on another person.
You say, "PETA's concern is in the humane killing of animals ..." yeah, sort of, but really, they just don't want any animal killed in any way, shape or form. You may have a different opinion but when they start opinning about worms on fishing hooks, you're argument loses much of it's punch.
You say, "I see MTA was attempting some humor here. But the fact is animal cruelty just isn't very funny." No, but talking about fish and worm pain IS funny, it shows that PETA has a few too many loons at it's top ranks.
You say, "I think it's amazing MTA has lived life as both worm and fish. I know you aren't taking science's word for it, dear." Actually "Dear", I was talking from a scientific point of view. Although you have difficulty finding the common ground between the two, I see a connection. I won't bother to go into it for two reasons, first - it's beyond this posting; second, I sincerely doubt that you would see/understand it.
You say, "Science or Religion, Mikey, they just don't mix." Actually they do, that is why thousands of scientists over history AND in this era are both Christian AND scientists. It might not work for you, but it does work for many of us.
You say, "Are dunder-head and fool not also names, genious?" I believe that last word was suppose to be genius - and dunder-head and fool are not even close to prick and and piece of shit.
You say, "I don't see how you can compare abortion to cheeseburgers ..." - the point is either you are pro-life or you are not. Why is it more important to you that we don't harm/save an animal, but you don't appear to find abortion an abomination. On the scale of life, I put human life ahead of animal life. If I'm a cop and I have the choice of sending a dog in to subdue a bad guy, or I myself can go in - and in both cases whoever goes in (dog or man) he will be greeted with a bullet; I choose the dog to go in first.
When it comes to testing of new drugs, treatments, etc. to cure a disease and I can either start the testing on animals or on humans - the animals get the nod from me. From what I've read from you, I'm guessing that either we can all continue to die from the ailment or we should 'experiment' on humans.
Sorry Carrie, from my point of view you've drank the kool-aid, you've driven off the edge of the cliff. You confuse and mix-match PETA facts to make them fit the argument that you wish to have, while ignoring the facts that show that PETA has gone overboard.
Thanks for the discussion, but yes, PETA is whack.
You accuse me of your own activities yet again.
It seems to me you are quite guilty of "confusing and mix-matching PETA facts to make them fit the argument that you wish to have, while ignoring the [real] facts". The fact about animal testing is it's not dog or man. Dog's reaction says nothing about man. This is pointless testing. Seriously, I think if you are that misinformed, you should read up on the topic. Email me if you are actually interested and I will gladly send you links.
talk.to.carrie@gmail.com.
Whether my insults compare to yours...GROW UP! I don't think dunder-head belongs in discussion any more than prick.
Go ahead and insinuate my lack of intelligence and try to discredit my sanity (er, whatever the kool-aid bit was about) but the truth is you are not looking for discussion here. This is where you come to try to "tell" everyone else where to stand.
Wahoo! Excellent points Mike!
It's almost like when I pointed out flaws in the Jehovah's Witness religion that contridicted my beliefs and I got loads of hate mail from them. I still do sometimes when they find my site via Google. I still did my research at least.
Carrie is advocating into disaster. Lose, lose. And to blatantly come off nice after lighting you up, I mean sheesh, what does she expect?
I'm off to hug some trees...
Steve
Wow. Such name calling. My virgin ears can't take it.
Now that I am past that bit of self-indulgent triteness, I shall continue. Carrie, it is my belief that MadMom was attempting NOT to compare abortion and animal products, but more to compare the acts of anti-abortion activists and the criteria they deal with to the acts of PETA activists.
It would appear that PETA thinks it is just peachy to throw red paint or fake blood on someone in a fur coat. If an anti-abortion activist threw fake blood or ANYTHING for that matter on a woman who has just had an abortion would, most likely, be arrested for (at the least) assault.
It was said earlier that "cows make a lot of people money." The same holds true for abortion doctors. The average D & C costs about $500 each, and they have multiple clinics and it takes about an hour each. Sounds like a lot of money to me. I am not commenting pro or con on this issue, simply pointing out a few things I noticed.
As far as what MTA was saying, I believe it had little to do with the humane treatment of animals, but you must admit, to say that a worm feels pain when you put it on a hook is a bit extreme.
For that matter, PETA has equated the catching of fish in schools with the Holocaust. Somehow, the mass extermination of a people because of their religious beliefs does not equal out to catching fish. If you don't believe that point, fine, but don't be suprised if a herd of folks kind of lose interest, or worse, question your intelligence because of it. (The 'your' is editorial rather than specific, since I don't know you.)
If you don't like the law, find a legal way to change it. If the current laws allow that kind of treatment, then change it. If you can't get a big enough quorum to change it, then deal with it, and continue to deliver your message in a responsible, legal, manner in the hopes of getting it changed eventually.
I disagree with shock tactics on both sides. Just as I would not have my daughter accosted outside of a McDonalds with the picture of slaughtering cows, I also don't want my same daughter accosted with pictures of a third trimester abortion. I find both of them patently offensive. Regardless of my belief on the matter.
I don't believe you can say that I have hurled out name calling... I certainly have not flamed you here. It is my belief that the whole purpose of the blog today was to point out an extremist view that, at least popularly, will be met with incredulity and amazement. So far, that has been proven out.
You don't or can't contest the fact that the statement was said, in re. the "worm" issue. An interesting editorial piece can be found here:
http://espn.go.com/outdoors/fishing/news/2001/0928/1256491.html
As long as PETA touts an extremist view in a loudly colorful way, one certain to gain the ire of the general public, it will draw negative attention to themselves. Only PETA, and conversely PETA members can change that. I would only suggest that it may be prudent to pick your battles a bit more wisely.
Just my humble .02
Steve, since you stirred the topic, I must ask; Why would you point out "flaws" in someone else's beliefs that contradict your own? And if it's not ok for people to call you on it, why were you calling them out?
I've said my piece and I stand by it.
To drive-by-answer a few of Doc's rants:
Throwing paint or blood on any unwilling person for any reason at all is assault.
I don't really think it matters whether my beliefs are interesting to you or the herd.
These are NOT legal activities, and anyone familiar with legal action knows you have to be active and work hard to be heard.
It's not as easy as "change it".
I think you have all fixated on one thing a PETA rep. ever said and using as an excuse to discount every effort the organization has made.
And lastly, you found it a good enough battle to write a book on.
Carry:
It wood behoove u two take a spelling lessen!
Unfortunately you are commenting blindly and haven't even been to my site.
I mean, talk about flaws, you start a comment to Michael by calling him a "piece of shit". How heartless and stupid is that? Well, if it isn't either of those, it is ubsurdly pathetic.
Steve
PS It was not long ago that Mr. Rodman was in a Carl's Jr commercial eating a big, juicy burger (containing 100% beef) and now he is advocating for PETA? What the hell is that? Did the cow that made that beef just diem naturally? Before it was ground up?
Steve - it was probably roadkill (ugh, forget I said that).
Oh Carrie, you can't even see the flaws in your posts, it's truly amazing.
Let's count your errors -
You said, "The fact about animal testing is it's not dog or man. Dog's reaction says nothing about man. This is pointless testing." Read my comment again, the dog reference was regarding a dog's life in a hazardous situation versus a man's life. As for animal testing, I didn't say which animals, but for the record usually mice and pigs are used and the results are usually extrapolated.
You say, "Whether my insults compare to yours ..." Okay, you go up to a hells angel and call him a dunderhead and see what he does (nothing, he probably won't know what you said). Now call him a prick and then phone me from the hospital.
As for the "confusing and mix-matching PETA facts to make them fit the argument that you wish to have, while ignoring the [real] facts" - again you miss the point. If PETA was merely trying to improve the conditions in slaughterhouses, then they would be a good organization working towards a good cause. Instead they add inane statements like the ones that they make regarding fish and worms. When you have argued for PETA you have ignored those 'points' only stressing the slaughterhouse side of things. You don't seem to realize that the 'worm/fish' type statements is what marginalized PETA in the eyes of most everyone else.
In the end, allow me to thank you for making this an interesting discussion.
So, what was misspelled? Besides "diem", and that is on your part, jackass.
Spelling lesson? That would be ubsurdly pathetic. I could just diem.
I find it amusing how some people like to try to feel intelligent on the Internet. Some of you folks take yourselves a bit too seriously. Your thoughts and lack thereof are just as important and unimportant as the next guy's. Lighten up. Piece of shit isn't the worst statement in the world. It sets the mood of the post, doesn't it? If it works, why knock it? Gotta write down that you're a bit thin skinned for next time.
I'm betting a Hell's Angel would throw you a beating for any form of disrespect. At least you wouldn't have to repeat prick to him before the whooping.
Uh "piece" for one... wanna have a go at another...?
I don't know what reactions to expect of Hell's Angels, but I can see that ArchAngels just bitch and cry about it :P
Please do. If you weren't so retarded, you might notice that is the correct spelling of the word.
Moving on...
You said, "I've said my piece and I stand by it."
Unfortunately the word you meant was "peace" which as a left wing, name calling nut case is a word I am so suprised you don't know because that is all you people know how to spout. Secondly, I take great offense to you calling someone I respect a peace, I mean piece of shit. Lastly, you don't have a family member or someone close that is retarded so you don't understand how hate filled calling someone you don't know a retard.
Go back to the beginning and look up the word "Ironic" and then the word "Sarcasm" and then read everything that was written in this post from beginning to the comments and to the end. And if you still feel the same way, look up the word "Ignorance".
PS Sorry Michael, I just felt like writing. :)
Sure thing, Steve. I'll humor you.
And I'll ask you to return the favor. Please copy the following URL and paste into your browser, see where it takes you.
http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=piece
I ask you to refer to example #6.
You may be surprised to see you are wrong again. I say what I mean.
You people? I bet you refer to a lot of folks as "you people". ;)
And how do you respect someone you know over the Internet? That's just about as ridiculous as loving someone over the Internet.
I don't really require a "drive-by" answer. I was simply pointing out that as an advocate of a group, in this case PETA, is it not your hope but to involve and educate the populus to help swing them to your point of view?
If this is NOT the case, then what is the point of protest? Protesting always has, and continues to be, a method of trying to educate and inform the "unwashed masses" in hopes of swaying their point of view to yours. This would then engender both emotional, volunteer, and hopefully fiscal support to further your cause.
If your hope is to simply inject a point of view in a manner so offensive as to cause the revulsion of the public you are trying to educate, then in fact you are performing an act of public "suicide" - meaning your cause will fail because of lack of support.
That was the point I was trying to make. I am then going to assume that PETA's actions where activists - or terrorists - or simple assaulters - pour fake blood or red paint on someone in a fur coat is against your personal beliefs, and I shall laud you for your good sense. If this is NOT the case, then please forgive my assumption.
I said it was simple to change things. And it is. I did NOT say it was easy. Because it isn't easy to swing people to your side of the "aisle". Present discussion is a perfect example of this. But there is no real brain power needed to perform the task - it is just long, tiring and very time consuming.
Oh and I do NOT have perfect spelling. Please overcome the urge to correct me. Thanks :)
Ok Carrie and Tickle...
I surrender because you are way cooler and smarter.
You rock,
Steve
Hey. You know what? I think I do rock. Thanks for pointing that out!
Yet another blogger succumbs to her wrath.
pwn3d.
ttfn.
Darn, a day-long posting fest that I missed!
As far as PETA goes, I remember comedian a looooong time ago once said something like, "If hooking a money up to a car battery is going to save my life, I have only one thing to say: 'The Black wire is the ground.'"
BBQ ! BBQ ! BBQ !
I thought PETA was People Eating Tasty Animals ? Huh.
I Blogrolled your site BTW. Good Blog !
I'm all against animal cruelty and what not but PETA and all they stand for are ridiculous.
They are an organization of hypocrites. PETA's primary concerns are profits! Thats all. They "euthanize" almost 80% of animals that are sent to them!
They make almost 14 million dollars a year and spend like 250,000 on donations to small animal clinics (each recieving somehting like 150$). The rest goes to their advertising campaign.
If PETA truly wanted to save animals it would devote more resources to it.
PETA also supports known terrorists such as the ALF (Animal Liberation Front) and condone their acts of Violence and sabotage. A member of ALF murdered someone and PETA paid for his legal fees. They called unibomber Timothy McVeigh a visionary for not including meat in his last meal. A FUCKING VISIONARY! The man blew up a building filled with children.
PETA compared the holocaust to the poultry industry. They should watch some WWII documentaries about the holocaust. Then compare that shit. Chickens aren't forced to dig their own graves.
Like i said at the beggining of this statement i have no interest in seeing animals suffer. However I believe we should care for our brothers and sisters before we care for a polar bear. If the roles were reversed a polar bear would help it's cub before it went off to help a seal. It would eat the seal, in point of fact. There are millions of people starving all around the world and these people are more concerned with saving the whales. How can we save animals if we are incapable of saving animals?
Post a Comment