First off, I don't think that anyone here are disputing their right to free speech (even those at Ron's store; even as they most likely didn't want the flyers passed out on their private store property, altho' I am guessing at this point.)
Yet keep in mind that we too, have the same free speech rights in letting everyone here know what we think of their tactics, which by the way, haven't always been legal. And yet they (PETA) haven't apologized nor taken back ANY of their illegal activities, including those that has caused harm to people, and destruction to property.
They are the animal rights/vegen version of the KKK and Al-Qaida Lite. Ie., they sometimes use terrorist tactics.
A link for you to 'dialog' with them, ehh? Bet you 10 to one that if they have any reason to view you as part of the 'meat eating enemy' (especially if you let them know that you disagree with their tactics), they might target you with spam, viruses, ... or even worse. Sorry Charlie, but these people have gone beyond reasoning and rational discussion to push their views.
I'm sure you're right, Garth. Sending viruses and spam to people who eat meat, and oppose PETA would certainly win me over to vegetarianism, lol!
Seriously, (and remember, I am in agreement with you, I eat meat!) my wife, PETA volunteer and activist, and the people that are her fellow activists are compassionate, rational, and kind. And they know that I eat meat.
And my wife has not, nor been asked, to do anything illegal to further her beliefs in animal rights. We both know there are people in every organization who take things to extreme.
A link for you to 'dialog' with them, ehh? Bet you 10 to one that if they have any reason to view you as part of the 'meat eating enemy' (especially if you let them know that you disagree with their tactics), they might target you with spam, viruses, ... or even worse. Sorry Charlie, but these people have gone beyond reasoning and rational discussion to push their views.
I don't know which is more unlikely, Ron and Garth agreeing or Garth and I disagreeing!!! :o
Yeah Garth, they might target those who correspond, and Saddam had weapons of mass destruction ready to be used on us tomorrow, so we were told. First, I am not a member of PETA, I hunt and fish, always have, always will. I actually have no fondness for PETA at all, other than I like to see people passionate about SOMETHING. I figure that passion will translate at some point in their life to something I might agree with. Our politics and views change, but if we just don't give a shi-it, nothing we do will ever amount to beans. I dislike misinformation when it is posted from either side of an issue. Apparently I was incorrect on my initial assessment, but it was based on the internet postings at the time. A day makes a big difference.
The PETA site does now mention the handouts Ron referred to, and states that their policy is to not give them to children under 13, but rather to fathers directly, "so they will think about the message they giove their kids" I am sure there are some zealots of this gang who do not follow the stated goals and aims of the organization. Ummm, is that like another group we know of?
Anyway, thanks Drtydzn for your chiming in. I wanted to post that link to their e-mail also, but figured why bother. Apparently Garth missed the CONTACT US button. The site also has PETA's financial report available, so it is not quite like that "other" organization we know of.
For everyone's information if it isn't obvious, being vegatarian, or even vegan, does not necessarily emanate from one's views about animal welfare. It can simply relate to a preferance on food to eat, or an opinion on what is good nutrition for one's self. I know several, who follow both those diet choices, and PETA is not part of their lives.
Well, I have had some experience with a Vegan gal who is a teacher at the school that all my children went to in Haines, Alaska. She was a science teacher, but used her classroom as a "pulpit" to preach Veganism to the kids. When I found some of the material that she was foisting upon the kids in her underhanded manner (info that "hunters were murderers with a "fetish for slaughter"), I came un-glued. But instead of going off half cocked, I made a transcript of a tape that she had sent home with my son, and then did a "book report" on it, underlining the dishonesty and obvious political opinions which had no place in a science class. Then I made copies of the transcript, my "book report" on said transcript, and then mailed copies to every memeber of the Haines school board, including the principal and the school superintendant, and her, one Miss Patty Brown. I made sure to do the CC (carbon copy) thing at the bottom of each copy so that they all knew who had received a copy (especially Miss Patty Brown!), and lo and behold! It worked! She received a stern repremand for pushing her politics on the students at the TAX PAYERS EXPENSE, and a letter was put in her file that is there to this day.
Funny about all that too, because about a year ago, I saw her in a Haines bar, and we talked about our adversarial relationship over beer. It was amicable, but she held her ground on her beliefs, and I held my ground that "she was allowed to believe whatever she wants to believe, but don't push it on mine or anyone elses kids while being paid with federal and state tax dollars". She said that she would do whatever it takes to help change the mindset of the Children, and I told her that while my kids were in her school, she would always have me to deal with!
And, we agreed to disagree. The good news is that I, as well as a few other parents were able to shut her down while our kids were there. but, she is still there and no doubt pushing her beliefs...
P.S.
The "tape" that she played for the kids and then sent home with them was a segment from a book by none other than "Tom Bodet" the Motel 6 spokesman. You know...."We'll leave the light on for ya....."
He is from Homer, Alaska, and he wrote some book called "The Garage on Clear Shot". And in the book is a chapter called "Two Young Bucks In The Woods With Nothing To Do". And this chapter basically portrays a young boy who is trained by his "grease eating father and uncle" to go forth and slaughter deer" with, amazingly a "weapon of mass destruction". This incident occurred before 9/11/2001 by the way. It is very well written, and very easily can capture the heart of a child whoreads it and then feels bad because the young boy in the book, in the end of the chapter, shoots and kills a young buck.....And the young buck who falls dead to the ground hits his head at the same time as the stunned young human boy's head hits the ground because he has passed out because of the traumatic grief he experienced by murdering the deer....Two Young Bucks In The Woods, With Nothing To Do...."
And so...fuggem. Get after 'em and stay after 'em and don't let up, because they won't...
Oh, sorry Psalmie. I wasn't thinking. But the bears up here really love bacon grease. Maybe because bears are related to pigs?
I don't care how or what people eat and I understand about the notion of people thinking they're being compassionate by not eating meat or wearing fur or leather. Each individual has to find their own way in this world. I even understand about "factory farms" and why people would oppose that sort of thing.
However, I think these comic books go way over the line. They obviously have a far deeper and much more sinister agenda than just being kind to animals.
Go look at those pictures again. How many men fish and clean their fish wearing a business suit? How many clean their fish with such an expression of anger and hate? What's the message being given to kids?
Now, look at the woman. She's stabbing violently at the poor hapless bunny with an expression of psychotic glee. Does your vegan wife have such an expression when she's chopping a carrot? What message is this sending to kids?
I hunt and fish and have killed a lot of animals over the years. I clean them and have NEVER done so with such "extreme prejudice" as portrayed in the illustrations. I've certainly never worn a suit. I've always taught my boys to NEVER kill what they can't use, eat what they kill and not to be cruel about it. We've had a lot of good fun tracking in the snow, sleeping outside, sometimes in the snow, warming by a campfire, etc. etc.
I also raise some livestock and kill and clean it for food.
Hunting is a healthy activity and we who hunt generally have a LOT more respect for animals and our fellow man than the people who publish such crap.
Given, I didn't see the Contact Us button (altho' I did look over the site for any Contact Us info. Evidently I missed it). However I didn't 'miss' reading about documented incidences re: PETA committing (sometimes illegal) acts of property damage or even causing hurt to come to people, in order to protect animals and the supposed rights thereof. THOSE 'weapons of mass destruction' are for real.
Now maybe there are many PETA members who don't believe in activities like that, and they disavow them. Good for them. But even with the portraying "Daddy is a Murderer" because he fishes? And how many animals eat fish, and yet are not regarded as murderers? And before you answer with the "but animals aren't moral creatures like us humans" argument, read my rebuttal about that, and why that argument is flawed.
PETA, as an organization, even with the positive actions you describe, still has quite a ways to go before I would ever take them seriously, and I consider myself on the same side as many moderate liberals re: the environment and the treatment of animals. But there is a rational way of dealing with the animal cruelty situation, and then there is the irrational (read stupid) way, and I for one view PETA as largely in the latter camp, due to a lot of what they do as an organization.
I stand by what I say.
B)
Johnny,
Interesting situation about the vegen teacher, particularly since she (as far as I am concerned) is also violating the principle of separation of church and state in what she's doing, because she is utilizing tax dollars to propagate her beliefs, just as much as if she were an evangelizing Christian doing the same in preaching Jesus in the classroom.
I lost the links to prove it, however PETA is related to Greenpeace and neither one's prime directive is stewardship of the planet, or ecological soundness.
Krys- related how??????? a fascinating bit of innuendo
and what WOULD be their prime directive???? We may disagree with their interpretation of what constitutes stewardship, salvation, or ethics, but I think most of their adherents indeed fancy themselves to be primarily concerned with these goals. It would be intersting to hear what you think their "prime directives" are in fact.
Given, I didn't see the Contact Us button (altho' I did look over the site for any Contact Us info. Evidently I missed it). However I didn't 'miss' reading about documented incidences re: PETA committing (sometimes illegal) acts of property damage or even causing hurt to come to people, in order to protect animals and the supposed rights thereof. THOSE 'weapons of mass destruction' are for real.
They are for real???? Are you confusing ALF and ELF with PETA? (gawd, why am I even spending time researching an organization I have never received mail from?, let alone ever considered donating to? :( ) Can you cite some of these acts resulting in injuries? PETA's main offense seems to be having made donations to defense funds for defendants connected to ALF. I do not find them named in criminal complaints with those incidents however. Perhaps I am not entering the right search terms. The complaint has been that PETA does not disavow the activities of these groups, but not that they have performed these illegal acts resulting in injuries.
The association I made with Saddam's WMDs was in relation to your charge that a virus would be sent to those who email PETA with a disagreeing view. You've got enough firewalls and antivirus stuff, why not try it?
and by the way, I would never argue "but animals aren't moral creatures like us humans" I consider that flawed on two counts. :lol:
I believe that kids should have an exposure to a bunch of different ideas, including whacked out ones like PETA. But those ideas need to have a fair exposure from all sides, not just getting bombarded from one side.
My daughter has seen the propaganda from the left. She has also seen the propaganda from the right. And, where I've been able, she's seen the facts. When it comes to the 'animal rights' crowd, I've gone out and shown her damage to trees from deer that have overpopulated our area and I've even been able to show her where the deer have gotten sick from malnourishment. Consequently, although she's expressed no interest in hunting, she understands it's necessary. From seeing both sides, my daughter is more pro-life than I am. However, we don't agree on the Iraq war (she thinks it was good to get rid of Saddam but thinks that we should leave...I'm working on her on that issue).
The advantage here is that she is able, at the tender age of 12, to recognize BS when she sees it out of one of her teachers (fortunately, she has the common sense to keep her mouth shut in that class, as well). For example, her science teacher is a tree-hugger and does not allow the kids to do dissections for biology. Although the teacher has persuaded a couple of kids in her class to agree with her, my daughter is the one who came up with the "tree hugger" name for this teacher! Likewise, when she watches television, she is able to spot flakiness in the programs from 30 yards and decries some of the crap before I even have a chance to point it out.
The point is that if kids are exposed to a variety of points of view and are taught the discipline to examine those points of view, they will be able to develop their own minds and will be able to think for themselves, rather than be subject to pedagogical brainwashing throughout their school careers. With all the extraneous influences on kids today, they need to be armed, more than ever, with the ability to critically think: the ability to examine an issue, get the facts, analyze those facts, and draw their own conclusions on an issue. If they are trained up to do that, there is no need to fear idiotic comic books put out by groups like PETA, NARAL, the KKK, or other extremists. But don't count on the schools to do that; really important education like that has to come from the home.
What other organization will neuter your p u s s y cat for free and also have Pamela Anderson with a couple more center fold models march nearly nude with signs on pointing to theirs saying "if you must eat meat then eat this"
My daughter has seen the propaganda from the left. She has also seen the propaganda from the right.
First of all, we know what the propaganda from the Left is, as the "comics" posted here illustrate. But just out of curiosity, what propaganda from the Right specifically concerning meat eating do you refer to?
First of all, we know what the propaganda from the Left is, as the "comics" posted here illustrate. But just out of curiosity, what propaganda from the Right specifically concerning meat eating do you refer to?
Sir Lingo,
prop·a·gan·da ( P ) Pronunciation Key (prp-gnd)
n.
The systematic propagation of a doctrine or cause or of information reflecting the views and interests of those advocating such a doctrine or cause.
Material disseminated by the advocates or opponents of a doctrine or cause: wartime propaganda.
In other words, she has seen material that both advocates and opposes meat eating. If one assumes that the anti-meat eating lobby is the left, the pro-meat eating lobby must be the right.
But, specifically, I was referring to magazines like Sports Afield, Outdoor Life, Field and Stream, etc. Yes, I know they don't specifically refer to eating animal protein, but they do make reference to the harvesting and processing of that form of protein.
However, I think these comic books go way over the line. They obviously have a far deeper and much more sinister agenda than just being kind to animals.
Yes they do. I don't hunt now, but did as a kid with my dad and brother. We were after small game (rabbits and quail), so we carried shotguns.
Turned the beagles loose, they rousted out the game, we shot. Clean and quick. Nothing at all like what these *&^%$ are promoting. :)
Even giving the flyers to the dad to pass on to their kids (if they saw fit), crosses the line., imo.
We've got a big Cabela's here in Minney-soda, down near the Iowa border ,
and inside they have a big "mountain" with all sorts of stuffed animals, shot for display purposes only.
I would draw the line there. Meat for the table is cool. Trophy kills are not.
If PETA folks could agree with me on this, I might think better of them. But they won't, so I can't.
Apparently I stand corrected in that PETA themselves don't (so far anyway) commit the illegal activities. They do however, not only not disavow the illegal activities of ELF and other like groups, they help to fund them as well.
Recommended Posts
GarthP2000
DrtyDzn,
First off, I don't think that anyone here are disputing their right to free speech (even those at Ron's store; even as they most likely didn't want the flyers passed out on their private store property, altho' I am guessing at this point.)
Yet keep in mind that we too, have the same free speech rights in letting everyone here know what we think of their tactics, which by the way, haven't always been legal. And yet they (PETA) haven't apologized nor taken back ANY of their illegal activities, including those that has caused harm to people, and destruction to property.
They are the animal rights/vegen version of the KKK and Al-Qaida Lite. Ie., they sometimes use terrorist tactics.
A link for you to 'dialog' with them, ehh? Bet you 10 to one that if they have any reason to view you as part of the 'meat eating enemy' (especially if you let them know that you disagree with their tactics), they might target you with spam, viruses, ... or even worse. Sorry Charlie, but these people have gone beyond reasoning and rational discussion to push their views.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
DrtyDzn
I'm sure you're right, Garth. Sending viruses and spam to people who eat meat, and oppose PETA would certainly win me over to vegetarianism, lol!
Seriously, (and remember, I am in agreement with you, I eat meat!) my wife, PETA volunteer and activist, and the people that are her fellow activists are compassionate, rational, and kind. And they know that I eat meat.
And my wife has not, nor been asked, to do anything illegal to further her beliefs in animal rights. We both know there are people in every organization who take things to extreme.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
HAPe4me
I don't know which is more unlikely, Ron and Garth agreeing or Garth and I disagreeing!!! :o
Yeah Garth, they might target those who correspond, and Saddam had weapons of mass destruction ready to be used on us tomorrow, so we were told. First, I am not a member of PETA, I hunt and fish, always have, always will. I actually have no fondness for PETA at all, other than I like to see people passionate about SOMETHING. I figure that passion will translate at some point in their life to something I might agree with. Our politics and views change, but if we just don't give a shi-it, nothing we do will ever amount to beans. I dislike misinformation when it is posted from either side of an issue. Apparently I was incorrect on my initial assessment, but it was based on the internet postings at the time. A day makes a big difference.
The PETA site does now mention the handouts Ron referred to, and states that their policy is to not give them to children under 13, but rather to fathers directly, "so they will think about the message they giove their kids" I am sure there are some zealots of this gang who do not follow the stated goals and aims of the organization. Ummm, is that like another group we know of?
Anyway, thanks Drtydzn for your chiming in. I wanted to post that link to their e-mail also, but figured why bother. Apparently Garth missed the CONTACT US button. The site also has PETA's financial report available, so it is not quite like that "other" organization we know of.
For everyone's information if it isn't obvious, being vegatarian, or even vegan, does not necessarily emanate from one's views about animal welfare. It can simply relate to a preferance on food to eat, or an opinion on what is good nutrition for one's self. I know several, who follow both those diet choices, and PETA is not part of their lives.
~HAP
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Psalm 71 one
I read, Garth's post and laughed. . .
Then I read Jonny's post and saw. . . gulp "bacon grease"
um, er I think mebbe I should leave. . .
then I read about the creatures next to the mashed taters-- and the roast piggy, um, I think I'll just back outa this thread and won't be back!! LOL!
Link to comment
Share on other sites
J0nny Ling0
Well, I have had some experience with a Vegan gal who is a teacher at the school that all my children went to in Haines, Alaska. She was a science teacher, but used her classroom as a "pulpit" to preach Veganism to the kids. When I found some of the material that she was foisting upon the kids in her underhanded manner (info that "hunters were murderers with a "fetish for slaughter"), I came un-glued. But instead of going off half cocked, I made a transcript of a tape that she had sent home with my son, and then did a "book report" on it, underlining the dishonesty and obvious political opinions which had no place in a science class. Then I made copies of the transcript, my "book report" on said transcript, and then mailed copies to every memeber of the Haines school board, including the principal and the school superintendant, and her, one Miss Patty Brown. I made sure to do the CC (carbon copy) thing at the bottom of each copy so that they all knew who had received a copy (especially Miss Patty Brown!), and lo and behold! It worked! She received a stern repremand for pushing her politics on the students at the TAX PAYERS EXPENSE, and a letter was put in her file that is there to this day.
Funny about all that too, because about a year ago, I saw her in a Haines bar, and we talked about our adversarial relationship over beer. It was amicable, but she held her ground on her beliefs, and I held my ground that "she was allowed to believe whatever she wants to believe, but don't push it on mine or anyone elses kids while being paid with federal and state tax dollars". She said that she would do whatever it takes to help change the mindset of the Children, and I told her that while my kids were in her school, she would always have me to deal with!
And, we agreed to disagree. The good news is that I, as well as a few other parents were able to shut her down while our kids were there. but, she is still there and no doubt pushing her beliefs...
P.S.
The "tape" that she played for the kids and then sent home with them was a segment from a book by none other than "Tom Bodet" the Motel 6 spokesman. You know...."We'll leave the light on for ya....."
He is from Homer, Alaska, and he wrote some book called "The Garage on Clear Shot". And in the book is a chapter called "Two Young Bucks In The Woods With Nothing To Do". And this chapter basically portrays a young boy who is trained by his "grease eating father and uncle" to go forth and slaughter deer" with, amazingly a "weapon of mass destruction". This incident occurred before 9/11/2001 by the way. It is very well written, and very easily can capture the heart of a child whoreads it and then feels bad because the young boy in the book, in the end of the chapter, shoots and kills a young buck.....And the young buck who falls dead to the ground hits his head at the same time as the stunned young human boy's head hits the ground because he has passed out because of the traumatic grief he experienced by murdering the deer....Two Young Bucks In The Woods, With Nothing To Do...."
And so...fuggem. Get after 'em and stay after 'em and don't let up, because they won't...
Oh, sorry Psalmie. I wasn't thinking. But the bears up here really love bacon grease. Maybe because bears are related to pigs?
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Ron G.
Drtydzn,
I don't care how or what people eat and I understand about the notion of people thinking they're being compassionate by not eating meat or wearing fur or leather. Each individual has to find their own way in this world. I even understand about "factory farms" and why people would oppose that sort of thing.
However, I think these comic books go way over the line. They obviously have a far deeper and much more sinister agenda than just being kind to animals.
Go look at those pictures again. How many men fish and clean their fish wearing a business suit? How many clean their fish with such an expression of anger and hate? What's the message being given to kids?
Now, look at the woman. She's stabbing violently at the poor hapless bunny with an expression of psychotic glee. Does your vegan wife have such an expression when she's chopping a carrot? What message is this sending to kids?
I hunt and fish and have killed a lot of animals over the years. I clean them and have NEVER done so with such "extreme prejudice" as portrayed in the illustrations. I've certainly never worn a suit. I've always taught my boys to NEVER kill what they can't use, eat what they kill and not to be cruel about it. We've had a lot of good fun tracking in the snow, sleeping outside, sometimes in the snow, warming by a campfire, etc. etc.
I also raise some livestock and kill and clean it for food.
Hunting is a healthy activity and we who hunt generally have a LOT more respect for animals and our fellow man than the people who publish such crap.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
GarthP2000
Hape4me,
Given, I didn't see the Contact Us button (altho' I did look over the site for any Contact Us info. Evidently I missed it). However I didn't 'miss' reading about documented incidences re: PETA committing (sometimes illegal) acts of property damage or even causing hurt to come to people, in order to protect animals and the supposed rights thereof. THOSE 'weapons of mass destruction' are for real.
Now maybe there are many PETA members who don't believe in activities like that, and they disavow them. Good for them. But even with the portraying "Daddy is a Murderer" because he fishes? And how many animals eat fish, and yet are not regarded as murderers? And before you answer with the "but animals aren't moral creatures like us humans" argument, read my rebuttal about that, and why that argument is flawed.
PETA, as an organization, even with the positive actions you describe, still has quite a ways to go before I would ever take them seriously, and I consider myself on the same side as many moderate liberals re: the environment and the treatment of animals. But there is a rational way of dealing with the animal cruelty situation, and then there is the irrational (read stupid) way, and I for one view PETA as largely in the latter camp, due to a lot of what they do as an organization.
I stand by what I say.
B)
Johnny,
Interesting situation about the vegen teacher, particularly since she (as far as I am concerned) is also violating the principle of separation of church and state in what she's doing, because she is utilizing tax dollars to propagate her beliefs, just as much as if she were an evangelizing Christian doing the same in preaching Jesus in the classroom.
Edited by GarthP2000Link to comment
Share on other sites
krys
I lost the links to prove it, however PETA is related to Greenpeace and neither one's prime directive is stewardship of the planet, or ecological soundness.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
HAPe4me
Krys- related how??????? a fascinating bit of innuendo
and what WOULD be their prime directive???? We may disagree with their interpretation of what constitutes stewardship, salvation, or ethics, but I think most of their adherents indeed fancy themselves to be primarily concerned with these goals. It would be intersting to hear what you think their "prime directives" are in fact.
~HAP
Edited by HAPe4meLink to comment
Share on other sites
HAPe4me
They are for real???? Are you confusing ALF and ELF with PETA? (gawd, why am I even spending time researching an organization I have never received mail from?, let alone ever considered donating to? :( ) Can you cite some of these acts resulting in injuries? PETA's main offense seems to be having made donations to defense funds for defendants connected to ALF. I do not find them named in criminal complaints with those incidents however. Perhaps I am not entering the right search terms. The complaint has been that PETA does not disavow the activities of these groups, but not that they have performed these illegal acts resulting in injuries.
The association I made with Saddam's WMDs was in relation to your charge that a virus would be sent to those who email PETA with a disagreeing view. You've got enough firewalls and antivirus stuff, why not try it?
and by the way, I would never argue "but animals aren't moral creatures like us humans" I consider that flawed on two counts. :lol:
~HAP
Link to comment
Share on other sites
markomalley
I believe that kids should have an exposure to a bunch of different ideas, including whacked out ones like PETA. But those ideas need to have a fair exposure from all sides, not just getting bombarded from one side.
My daughter has seen the propaganda from the left. She has also seen the propaganda from the right. And, where I've been able, she's seen the facts. When it comes to the 'animal rights' crowd, I've gone out and shown her damage to trees from deer that have overpopulated our area and I've even been able to show her where the deer have gotten sick from malnourishment. Consequently, although she's expressed no interest in hunting, she understands it's necessary. From seeing both sides, my daughter is more pro-life than I am. However, we don't agree on the Iraq war (she thinks it was good to get rid of Saddam but thinks that we should leave...I'm working on her on that issue).
The advantage here is that she is able, at the tender age of 12, to recognize BS when she sees it out of one of her teachers (fortunately, she has the common sense to keep her mouth shut in that class, as well). For example, her science teacher is a tree-hugger and does not allow the kids to do dissections for biology. Although the teacher has persuaded a couple of kids in her class to agree with her, my daughter is the one who came up with the "tree hugger" name for this teacher! Likewise, when she watches television, she is able to spot flakiness in the programs from 30 yards and decries some of the crap before I even have a chance to point it out.
The point is that if kids are exposed to a variety of points of view and are taught the discipline to examine those points of view, they will be able to develop their own minds and will be able to think for themselves, rather than be subject to pedagogical brainwashing throughout their school careers. With all the extraneous influences on kids today, they need to be armed, more than ever, with the ability to critically think: the ability to examine an issue, get the facts, analyze those facts, and draw their own conclusions on an issue. If they are trained up to do that, there is no need to fear idiotic comic books put out by groups like PETA, NARAL, the KKK, or other extremists. But don't count on the schools to do that; really important education like that has to come from the home.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
wingnut
What other organization will neuter your p u s s y cat for free and also have Pamela Anderson with a couple more center fold models march nearly nude with signs on pointing to theirs saying "if you must eat meat then eat this"
We owe them so much!
Link to comment
Share on other sites
J0nny Ling0
Mr. O'Malley,
You said;
First of all, we know what the propaganda from the Left is, as the "comics" posted here illustrate. But just out of curiosity, what propaganda from the Right specifically concerning meat eating do you refer to?
Link to comment
Share on other sites
markomalley
Sir Lingo,
prop·a·gan·da ( P ) Pronunciation Key (prp-gnd)
n.
In other words, she has seen material that both advocates and opposes meat eating. If one assumes that the anti-meat eating lobby is the left, the pro-meat eating lobby must be the right.
But, specifically, I was referring to magazines like Sports Afield, Outdoor Life, Field and Stream, etc. Yes, I know they don't specifically refer to eating animal protein, but they do make reference to the harvesting and processing of that form of protein.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
coolchef1248 @adelphia.net
i'l say it again
god put animals on earth for us to eat AND wear!
Link to comment
Share on other sites
dmiller
Yes they do. I don't hunt now, but did as a kid with my dad and brother. We were after small game (rabbits and quail), so we carried shotguns.
Turned the beagles loose, they rousted out the game, we shot. Clean and quick. Nothing at all like what these *&^%$ are promoting. :)
Even giving the flyers to the dad to pass on to their kids (if they saw fit), crosses the line., imo.
We've got a big Cabela's here in Minney-soda, down near the Iowa border
,
and inside they have a big "mountain" with all sorts of stuffed animals, shot for display purposes only.
I would draw the line there. Meat for the table is cool. Trophy kills are not.
If PETA folks could agree with me on this, I might think better of them. But they won't, so I can't.
David
Edited by dmillerLink to comment
Share on other sites
dmiller
Here's a pic of the *mountain* inside ---
Link to comment
Share on other sites
GarthP2000
Hape4me,
Apparently I stand corrected in that PETA themselves don't (so far anyway) commit the illegal activities. They do however, not only not disavow the illegal activities of ELF and other like groups, they help to fund them as well.
Source 1
Source 2
which, in my humble opinion, doesn't move them very far away from actually doing the activities themselves.
It's sorta like a Mafia godfather paying a hitman to murder someone, then saying "Hey! I didn't pull the trigger!"
... Oh wait, here is something illegal that a few of their members actually took part in:
Ooopsie!
Now it doesn't seem like much, but it is an ironic event considering PETA's rigid usage of avoidance of hurting animals, don't you think?
Link to comment
Share on other sites
dmiller
What an interesting *oopsie* article!!
:D :D :D
Show's the true intent, eh?? ;)
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.