More PeTA (ick) hypocrisy

[Dee Dee Warren]

Vegan is murder (http://www.wesleyjsmith.com/blog/2008/06/if-meat-is-murder-so-is-vegan.html)

Jessica Simpson was spotted wearing a "Real Girls Eat Meat" shirt and PeTA opens its disgusting mouth

Alistair Currie, a spokesman for Peta, said: "Jessica Simpson might have a right to wear what she wants, but she doesn't have a right to eat what she wants--eating meat is about suffering and death.

Yeah? Well, so is going vegan. PETA won't tell you this, but I will: their vegan lifestyles also come at the expense of the deaths of countless animals. You see, mechanized plant farming for wheat, soy, and other vegan staples slaughters hundreds of millions of mice, rabbits, gophers, snakes, and other field animals. And then there is the chemical annihilation of rats and mice in silos and other grain and vegetable storage facilities. One study I found recounted how if all arable acreage in the USA were put to supporting veganism, 1.2 billion mice would be killed each year.

[xtreem5150ahm]

HaaZah :thumb:

[Spacefoetus]

burn!

[Hamster]

PETA is pretty good at making sure no one takes radical veganism seriously

[Littlejoe]

Do vegans really care about mice and rats??? Ugh! Surely not. :no:

LJ

[rogue06]

PETA: People Eating Tasty Animals :grin:

[Adrift]

Vegan is murder (http://www.wesleyjsmith.com/blog/2008/06/if-meat-is-murder-so-is-vegan.html)

Jessica Simpson was spotted wearing a "Real Girls Eat Meat" shirt and PeTA opens its disgusting mouth

Alistair Currie, a spokesman for Peta, said: "Jessica Simpson might have a right to wear what she wants, but she doesn't have a right to eat what she wants--eating meat is about suffering and death.

Yeah? Well, so is going vegan. PETA won't tell you this, but I will: their vegan lifestyles also come at the expense of the deaths of countless animals. You see, mechanized plant farming for wheat, soy, and other vegan staples slaughters hundreds of millions of mice, rabbits, gophers, snakes, and other field animals. And then there is the chemical annihilation of rats and mice in silos and other grain and vegetable storage facilities. One study I found recounted how if all arable acreage in the USA were put to supporting veganism, 1.2 billion mice would be killed each year.

I have a very low tolerance for pushy vegans and vegetarians (I've lived with a few, dated a few, even was one for a few months), especially PETA, but I just don't feel that this is one of the greater arguments against that sort of lifestyle or PETA in general. PETA says and does plenty of other stupid things that they can be faulted for... just my .02

[ApologiaPhoenix]

I find it more disturbing that they say she doesn't have a right to eat meat if she wants to.

[Adrift]

I find it more disturbing that they say she doesn't have a right to eat meat if she wants to.

me too

[rogue06]

I find it more disturbing that they say she doesn't have a right to eat meat if she wants to.

This goes to the heart of PETA’s philosophy that “a rat is a pig, is a dog, is a boy.” Here is an example:

“Six million Jews died in concentration camps, but six million broiler chickens will die this year in slaughter houses.” --Ingrid Newkirk, president and co-founder of PETA, in the Washington Post, 11/13/1983

In February of 2003 PETA began a campaign that showed the victims of the Nazi concentration camps as well as chickens in cages entitled “The Holocaust on Your Plate.” Defending the ad, PETA spokesperson Matt Prescott said, “Tragically, those who dismiss the abuse of animals on factory farms today sound hauntingly similar to those who dismissed the suffering of the Jews because they were ‘subhuman.’”

Uh, apparently Mr. Prescott doesn’t quite understand that chickens are subhuman. PETA’s VP Bruce Friedrich also sought to defend the campaign, “The point is that the mind-set that made the Holocaust possible is the same mind-set that makes possible the mass slaughter of animals for food.” It seems that Mr. Friedrich wasn’t aware that Hitler was a strict vegetarian who was an avid supporter of animal rights.

This view is nothing new though. Shortly after the terrorist attacks of 9/11 back in 2001 Karen Davis, President of United Poultry Concerns, wrote the following in an open letter to the vegetarian newsletter “Vegan Voice” dated December 20, 2001:

“I think it is speciesist to think that the September 11 attack on the World Trade Center was a greater tragedy than what millions of chickens endured that day and what they must endure every day because they can not defend themselves against the concerted human appetites arrayed against them… If, though the question is whether the World Trade Center attack was worse for its thousands of human victims than the sum total of misery and terror was for millions of chicken victims that day? I see only one nonspeciesist answer to the question.”

Davis went on to say that, “For 35 million chickens in the United States alone, every single night is a terrorist attack,” and, “It is possible to argue using (Peter Singer’s) utilitarian calculations, that the deaths of thousands of people [in the World Trade Center] whose trivial consumer satisfactions included the imposition of fundamental misery and death on hundreds of thousands of chickens reduced the amount of pain and suffering in the world.”

[Adrift]

Yeah, if I recall correctly, Davis is also the one who famously answered the question "if you were on a sinking ship and you could save one life, a child or a puppy, who would you save?" with "depends on who's closest."

[Crow]

What PETA either doesn't realize or rationalizes away is that there is no way to farm without causing animal death or destruction.

The moment you put a field into production, the war begins. The plow uproots burrows, destroys nests, and kills whatever can't get out of it's path. That is whether you're farming on a commercial scale or doing it the old way with a mule and a hand plow.

Once the seed goes into the ground, the war escalates. Millions of other creatures like to eat the same things that we do. Insects, deer, the fox, the oppossum, the racoon, and the birds are all looking for a share in the crop. Fencing is woefully inadequate to fend off the onslaught. Many animals die so that the crops can be reared to maturity.

Harvesting destroys animals right and left. Then once the crop is harvested, you have to secure it. As the quote mentioned, rats and mice want their share. Others do as well.

If someone wants to not eat meat, that is their choice and fine for them. I can think of many good reasons they might have for that--their own personal ethics, their desire for economy, health benefits, beliefs regarding proper land usage, etc.

But it's kinda hypocritical to pretend that using plant products doesn't come at the expense of animals. Every living creature competes with other living creatures. We aren't unique in that aspect. We compete for our dwellings with the house fly, the spider, the rat, the flea, and the cockroach among others. Parasites compete with mankind for the resources his body possesses and mankind fights back with deadly force.

If someone believes that he causes less harm by killing the smaller less cute and obvious living creature by being a vegan, that is his choice. If he wants to encourage others to follow his lead, that is his choice and his right.

If he believes himself to not be contributing to death, he's naive. The human eats grain at the expense of the rat and the pigeon and many others. The human eats vegetables to the detriment of other animals who were dispossessed to have the fields to grow them or killed by cultivation and harvest. The vehicles which transport our food leave tons of roadkill in their wakes.

We live our lives by the loss of other lives. If meat is murder, vegetable foods are born of murder, and no one can be found innocent.

[Augustine2004]

Hmmm . . . I wonder how tasty rats and mice are? If you slather on plenty of ketchup or BBQ sauce, maybe they'd go down OK.

[Spacefoetus]

Why are animals given special consideration over vegetables? They are alove too! They DIE so us greedy humans can survive! At least when we cook animals they are dead...sometimes we cook LIVE potatoe!

If animals are to be treated like humans, then so too should plants.

[Augustine2004]

Hey, isn't there a contradiction there? If we stop others eating on the grounds that they should not be inhumane, aren't WE being inhumane? Oh, the humanity. The humanity.

[Littlejoe]

I wonder if PETA is also against wolves, coyotes and bears that eat great amounts of meat, from cute little fawns to mice, birds etc. Let me guess... :ponder: ...no probably not. :hehe:

LJ

[Adrift]

I wonder if PETA is also against wolves, coyotes and bears that eat great amounts of meat, from cute little fawns to mice, birds etc. Let me guess... :ponder: ...no probably not. :hehe:

LJ

The vegan/vegetarian response to this is usually that we now have the means and the physical structure not to eat other animals... therefore we shouldn't.

See, how I see it, I don't really care if people don't want to eat animals because they're cute or something. I think its silly, but whatever... there's worse things you can be hung up about.

My big issue is when people start compromising their faith on this sort of stuff. I had a good friend who decided he didn't want to be a Christian anymore because he couldn't conceive of a good Jesus who would eat meat and wouldn't sit under a pastor who did so as well. He blamed me for his apostasy when I pointed out to him that Jesus ate meat in his resurrected body. We patched up our relationship later, but I still don't know where he is spiritually and it amazes me how people can seem to lose their senses over this sort of stuff.

[ApologiaPhoenix]

I wonder if PETA is also against wolves, coyotes and bears that eat great amounts of meat, from cute little fawns to mice, birds etc. Let me guess... :ponder: ...no probably not. :hehe:

LJ

Obviously, because they're speciesists! Bad PETA!

[rogue06]

Why are animals given special consideration over vegetables? They are alove too! They DIE so us greedy humans can survive! At least when we cook animals they are dead...sometimes we cook LIVE potatoe!

If animals are to be treated like humans, then so too should plants.

You’re almost there. But reality is once more absurd than satire.

According to Michael McCloskey, who remarked either before becoming or serving as the chairman of the Sierra Club: “Trees and rocks have rights to their own freedom”

IIRC this was around the same time Earth First! charter member Christopher Manes asserted that humans must recognize the “civil rights” of “tree people” and “rock people.” IOW, humans “oppress” rocks when we use them to construct roads or buildings.

[Augustine2004]

Earth, is this place taken?

[Spacefoetus]

I'm pretty concerned about all that oxygen being forced into involunatry respiration as well.

[Raphael]

You mean that PETA really advocates the senseless slaughter of millions of plants each year?

Now that Switzerland has had an ethics panel decide that the arbitrary killing of fauna is morally wrong (http://www.albertmohler.com/blog_read.php?id=1143) perhaps we can move forward and get people like PETA to realise the horror of the destruction that they cause in living their life style.

Granted we humans will be reduced to having the live on air, but we need to think of the plants!!!!!

Now then, where is that sheep on a spit? I'm hungry.

[xtreem5150ahm]

Thanks for the thread to read while i had my supper.... bbq spare ribs..... yum yum.

rats... my fingers are greasy.. i have to clean my keyboard now.

[Amazing Rando]

Something I posted over in another thread (http://www.theologyweb.com/campus/showthread.php?t=112517):

But at the same time, I have a feeling God didn't intend that the modern mechanized factory-farming complexes, with their excessive waste and unwarrented animal cruelty, would arise. As much as I hate to admit it (and I'm a carnivore, mind you!), the PETA folks have a good point in that, for example, chickens should not be forced to live their entire short lives in cages not even big enough for them to stretch their wings in. God most certainly permitted the use of animals for food, clothing, medicine, etc., but at the same time, I don't believe that the present conditions of the lives of many animals is God-honoring.

I think what God had in mind was more something along the lines of the ecological stewardship of the Native Americans, who would make sure that they used every possible part of the deer they killed. While not on the level of human life, the lives of animals were still important enough that they didn't just kill them for fun. They had enough reverence for the life of the animal they were taking to make sure that it was not wasted and that it did not suffer needlessly.

Many smaller-scale farmers are, to their credit, raising animals for food in free-range conditions and ensuring that they live healthy lives even while being prepared for our dinner plates. That's the kind of business we Christian meat-eaters ought to be supporting. Not only is it vastly more humane than the conventional factory-farms, but the meat produced is healthier (i.e. without the scads of artificial hormones pumped into the animals) and by most accounts, tastier as well!

[ChemMJW]

There's a reason the phrase is that a moderately undernourished person "needs to put some meat on those bones."

I've never heard somebody say than an undernourished person should "put some soy on those bones."


If someone decides not to eat or use animal products for any reason, they are certainly free to do as they please, but don't you dare try to guilt-trip me because I don't share your beliefs about my food.

[Hamster]

I agree that a lot of the "factory farming" is pretty bad. I'm not an expert at farming, and I realize that we need to keep meat inexpensive, but some of the stuff that goes on seems really contrary to God's good nature. And who wants to eat a chicken that has had it's beak sawn off and has spent its life rotting in a tiny cage?

[ChemMJW]

I agree that a lot of the "factory farming" is pretty bad. I'm not an expert at farming, and I realize that we need to keep meat inexpensive, but some of the stuff that goes on seems really contrary to God's good nature.

Hi Hamster,

I agree with you in the sense that it is certainly true that that animals are sometimes abused and treated horribly in general in the process of getting them from the field to the dinner table, but I would simply point out that it is only people like you and me (assuming you are from the United States or some other First World country) who have the luxury of worrying about this.

To answer your question from this point of view . . .

And who wants to eat a chicken that has had it's beak sawn off and has spent its life rotting in a tiny cage?
. . . I would submit that people starving in the Third World will in general not care in the slightest whether a chicken had "a bad life." It's there and it's food. End of story.

Speaking only for myself, I can only say that, if faced with the horror of watching my (human) family die a slow death by starvation, I would have no qualms about beating a food animal to death with my bare hands, if I were physically capable of doing so. I mean this seriously, not flippantly. Does this make me a bad person? Obviously, many PETA-types would argue that it does. I disagree.

I have no problem with raising animals for nothing other than the slaughter, followed by the dinner table. I do have a serious problem with purposeful mistreatment of animals during this process. The end itself is not unethical, but the means used to achieve it might be in certain situations.

Peace.

[gharfish]

In the relatively affluent countries I don't see good enough reasons not to give animals that are grown for consumption an environment, while that growth is underway, that is humane enough, then transported to slaughter houses 'when it's time' in a humane way, and then finally killed using a humane technique. This will increase our meat prices, but it is the right--properly merciful, thing to do.

Also, gluttonous meat consumption is kind o' wrong, IMO ! It is happening--yes, even sort of celebrated in some 'circles.'

[Dee Dee Warren]

I agree that a lot of the "factory farming" is pretty bad. I'm not an expert at farming, and I realize that we need to keep meat inexpensive, but some of the stuff that goes on seems really contrary to God's good nature. And who wants to eat a chicken that has had it's beak sawn off and has spent its life rotting in a tiny cage?

Then that is where the reforms and efforts need to be spent. One person can make a big difference with this. Our local chain of stores here wouldn't carry free-range eggs, but I petitioned them for a few months, now they all have them, and that is what I buy. They are more expensive, but those are what I buy.

I would pay more for meat that had higher standards for the treatment of the animals.

Hey if anyone had read Oryx and Krake, we can always try Chikennobs

[Gideon Brown]

Gerbils and Trout both taste pretty good. :yummy:

(I think that's why they're both extinct around here...)

[Dee Dee Warren]

I have a very low tolerance for pushy vegans and vegetarians (I've lived with a few, dated a few, even was one for a few months), especially PETA, but I just don't feel that this is one of the greater arguments against that sort of lifestyle or PETA in general. PETA says and does plenty of other stupid things that they can be faulted for... just my .02

And that stuff has been posted here as well. I despise PETA. (though there is one situation they were in that I think they were right in, and that was a battle for the domain name peta.org which was previously used by the people eating tasty animals site - and I love that site - but I think their argument that this was their branding made sense, and I have always thought that trying to use someone's branding in some contexts is not ethical). The use of the same acronym I think is legitimate satire. Using nearly the same web address, I don't think is, if it was done on purpose, and of course it was.

Anyways, I do think this is a good argument to show their hypocrisy. They are self-hating humans.

[Adrift]

And that stuff has been posted here as well. I despise PETA. (though there is one situation they were in that I think they were right in, and that was a battle for the domain name peta.org which was previously used by the people eating tasty animals site - and I love that site - but I think their argument that this was their branding made sense, and I have always thought that trying to use someone's branding in some contexts is not ethical). The use of the same acronym I think is legitimate satire. Using nearly the same web address, I don't think is, if it was done on purpose, and of course it was.

Anyways, I do think this is a good argument to show their hypocrisy. They are self-hating humans.

understood.

[candlesandfish]

I'm not a vegetarian because I love animals, it's because I hate vegetables!
- Woody Allen

[faithymom]

This goes to the heart of PETA’s philosophy that “a rat is a pig, is a dog, is a boy.” Here is an example:

“Six million Jews died in concentration camps, but six million broiler chickens will die this year in slaughter houses.” --Ingrid Newkirk, president and co-founder of PETA, in the Washington Post, 11/13/1983

In February of 2003 PETA began a campaign that showed the victims of the Nazi concentration camps as well as chickens in cages entitled “The Holocaust on Your Plate.” Defending the ad, PETA spokesperson Matt Prescott said, “Tragically, those who dismiss the abuse of animals on factory farms today sound hauntingly similar to those who dismissed the suffering of the Jews because they were ‘subhuman.’”

Uh, apparently Mr. Prescott doesn’t quite understand that chickens are subhuman. PETA’s VP Bruce Friedrich also sought to defend the campaign, “The point is that the mind-set that made the Holocaust possible is the same mind-set that makes possible the mass slaughter of animals for food.” It seems that Mr. Friedrich wasn’t aware that Hitler was a strict vegetarian who was an avid supporter of animal rights.


I don't want to take this thread totally off-topic, but what really shows the hypocrisy of this 'radical veganism' is how many people who take that stance have ZERO problems with abortion-on-demand!
So it's inhumane to kill animals for food, but it's perfectly fine to kill actual humans?
:huh: I don't understand how that logic works.

[candlesandfish]

I don't want to take this thread totally off-topic, but what really shows the hypocrisy of this 'radical veganism' is how many people who take that stance have ZERO problems with abortion-on-demand!
So it's inhumane to kill animals for food, but it's perfectly fine to kill actual humans?
:huh: I don't understand how that logic works.

Actually, a number of them take it one step further and not only do they not have a problem with it, they encourage it because it's limiting the 'oppressive human population".

Lord, have mercy.

[Heartablaze]

This thread reminds me of an Albert Mohler program about the plant-rights movement- something even more extreme than what PETA is for. It's pretty ridiculous. What can we eat, if not vegetables or animals?
http://www.albertmohler.com/radio_show.php?cdate=2008-05-19

[Number Six]

I don't want to take this thread totally off-topic, but what really shows the hypocrisy of this 'radical veganism' is how many people who take that stance have ZERO problems with abortion-on-demand!
So it's inhumane to kill animals for food, but it's perfectly fine to kill actual humans?
:huh: I don't understand how that logic works.

If you think that's crazy, check out some of Peter Singer's stuff. Apparently eating animals is wrong, but kill your newly born infant isn't.

[faithymom]

If you think that's crazy, check out some of Peter Singer's stuff. Apparently eating animals is wrong, but kill your newly born infant isn't.
I am well aware of Singer's twisted "ethics".
He is an idiot, IMO.

[Jedidiah]

I am well aware of Singer's twisted "ethics".
He is an idiot, IMO.

That is not idiocy, it is simply evil.

[Augustine2004]

That is not idiocy, it is simply evil.My response is off topic, way off. That interests me greatly. Is President Bush not really an idiot, but simply evil? How could we tell?

[Raphael]

My response is off topic, way off. That interests me greatly. Is President Bush not really an idiot, but simply evil? How could we tell?
Dude, leave the flipping politics out of it!

I know you're a bush hater, but seriously, you don't need to bring it up in every single thread

[Adrift]

Dude, leave the flipping politics out of it!

I know you're a bush hater, but seriously, you don't need to bring it up in every single thread

:lol:

I don't know why that reply was suddenly funny to me, but it was.

[Lepidopteryx]

The fact of the matter is that every living thing receives nourishment at the cost of another living thing's life.

Rabbit eats carrot - carrot dies.
Wolf eats rabbit - rabbit dies.

Cow eats grass - grass dies.
I eat steak - cow dies.

And one day I will die, and my body will become food for various scavenging insects and microbes, will decompose into the soil, and will then provide nourishment for plants, which will be eaten by animals, which will be eaten by other animals....it's one big circle - the ultimate recycling plan.

That said, I limit my meat, egg, and dairy purchases to local producers that I know treat their animals humanely. I won't eat meat, eggs, or dairy from animals that have been pumped full of synthetic hormones and prophylactic antibiotics, or kept in cages. I'll eat wild-caught fish and seafood, but not farm-raised.

[Jedidiah]

And one day I will die, and my body will become food for various scavenging insects and microbes, will decompose into the soil, and will then provide nourishment for plants, which will be eaten by animals, which will be eaten by other animals....it's one big circle - the ultimate recycling plan.

Here in Alaska the bears will shorten that cycle a little for you.

[Lepidopteryx]

Here in Alaska the bears will shorten that cycle a little for you.

I'm in South Louisana - roaming bears aren't generally a problem.

[gharfish]

I'm still looking good and feeling marvelous !

[Lepidopteryx]

I'm still looking good and feeling marvelous !


You look a little under-done to me. I like my cracklins a deep brown.

[Augustine2004]

Ghar, I don't want to hurt your feelings, but you look like you need a little more exercise. A walk in the morning . . .

[gharfish]

Let me rephrase that:

[Hamster]

I understand the pictures of them in crowded, filthy cages, but why the bleeding pictures?

[Augustine2004]

Ghar, I'm sorry if I offended you. I will unsubscribe now.

[gharfish]

Those aren't the bleeding pictures. I spared us of what came next in that photo series (to the cow and pig). The overall series is just about what happens before to the animals that we eat. "Why not cut back on meat consumption ?" might be my slogan here, if nothing else (with these photographs).
Forget PETA; let your conscience guide you.

I did put in a shot of the egg-laying chicken that you, Hamster, spoke of; the debeaking procedure. I tastefully left behind pics of any chickens being killed (for meat).

~PS: Augustine2004, you are tricky *again. You know that you did not offend me and so you are not apologizing now. Seriously; how in the blazes would my 'rephrasing' of my feelings and thoughts about that sarcastic ad campaign layout have been about your joke !?

[Raphael]

I suppose that PeTA would have some issue with this gentleman. King Goodwill Zwelethini, the currant Zulu King in traditional dress. and again, and a whole lot of zulu's with Zwelethini at a recent reed dance festival. (none of the clothing is "faux fur")

[xtreem5150ahm]

forklift cow2

[gharfish]

PETA again. Now ? :no:

OK; that stuff was too heavy.

A joke to brighten our days:

[gharfish]

so...save the mice / plant less ? :huh: Anyway; hypocrisy, spacey starlet chick. :tongue:

Seriously, now; some 'humor:' "Clucky the :chicken: " by snl's late great Phil Hartman::

http://www.nbc.com/Saturday_Night_Live/video/clips/cluckin-chicken/229063/


>