Why "no kill" and 90% of what P.E.T.A says is bullshit

[NachtSorcier]

Originally Posted by Saya

So simply telling people that eating meat is wrong is terrorism in your book, which I do quite regularly, and I'm betting that if I were to raise my kids vegan you'd equate that to brain washing and terrorism as well.

You're still taking it personally. Perhaps "tell" was the wrong word to use, so I'll rephrase: To force gastronomic idealism onto another person would be a form of terrorism.

No, you can raise your kids any way you want to. I would not think well of it if you shunned them if they chose to eat meat once they were grown up, but as I keep trying to tell you, I do not besmirch your personal choices. I just want that same respect. That's all.

Originally Posted by Saya

In any case, its not my fault that your arguments are stupid and hypocritical, I have tried to show you were your logic is flawed but if you think that is condenscending and rude, then there's no hope for you at all to ever debate against anyone without calling them a bitch, terrorists and B.C.E Jews (what does that even mean?) and say we deserve to burn in hell, and you should stay the hell away from debates.

If you think my arguments are hypocritical, that's fine, but it still boils down to this: I respect your dietary choices and I would like for mine to be respected as well.

Again, I did not call you a terrorist.

The B.C.E. Jew thing was in reference to your saying that some meat is tainted and taking that as a reason not to ever eat it. As I'm sure you know, Jews don't eat pork or shellfish. The reason for that is because in the era when the Old Testament was written the pigs and shellfish had become contaminated and that law was enacted to prevent the Jews from becoming sick. My point there was that just because factory farms allow their meat to become contaminated, that is not a reason for me to not eat untainted meat from a local farm.

I don't know whether you know or not, I don't think it's common knowledge, but B.C.E. stands for Before Common Era, it's the non-religious equivalent of B.C.

At no point did I ever say that anybody should burn in hell. "Go to hell" is just a generic phrase which means the same thing as "Blow me" or "Piss off." I don't know where you keep getting the idea that I'm a religious fanatic because I'm not. I'm not a Christian of any kind; I'm a Pagan. As such, I don't even believe in hell. The fellow in my avatar is my patron god.

Originally Posted by Saya

And the same post in which you were so polite in saying having a good night, that was before you called me a bitch, so no you weren't polite beforehand, you were condescending from the get go with *comes in after eating a hamburger*.

I beg to differ. I had been polite until your rudeness came along. I really do appreciate it when others try to point out flaws in my arguments, but really, there's no reason at all to be rude about it. I understand that most people are dense and that we often have our defenses up, but I assure you, I am able to listen to other people's viewpoints even if they are being cordial and even if I don't agree.

I did think about the hamburger thing and I do understand how that could have come off as condescending. For that I do apologize, and also for calling you a bitch. That was wrong of me.

I hope you understand that I respect your lifestyle and that I'd like to get along with you even though we make different dietary choices.

[Saya]

Originally Posted by NachtSorcier

None of you people really understand anything I say. You just don't get it, so I give up. Vegans, or as I like to call them, obsessive cow pie sniffers, can go to hell, as can you self-righteous twits who say you eat meat but still want to argue on whether or not it's okay. You're just arguing to hear your own voice because you're a vain dickwad who's only interested in being thought of as uber-smartz.

So you say we just don't like the taste of meat and we should go to hell, as well as Jillian just because he still eats meat but likes to DEBATE that its wrong. You don't respect the view at all, you don't respect the lives of animals, so I don't think you deserve respect at all. But I can get along with you otherwise, just don't be surprised when you wander in a animal rights thread bragging about what you just ate and saying we're all wrong that we'd actually fucking debate with you.

[Pineapple_Juice]

Nacht, you fail. Just stop.

[NachtSorcier]

Originally Posted by Saya

So you say we just don't like the taste of meat and we should go to hell, as well as Jillian just because he still eats meat but likes to DEBATE that its wrong. You don't respect the view at all, you don't respect the lives of animals, so I don't think you deserve respect at all. But I can get along with you otherwise, just don't be surprised when you wander in a animal rights thread bragging about what you just ate and saying we're all wrong that we'd actually fucking debate with you.

I apologize for my outburst. That was when my temper snapped and I should not have let it. I am sorry about that, I didn't mean it. Now, while I do respect other people's choices, I do not like it when my choices are tossed aside as invalid simply because they aren't agreed with. It isn't veganism I have a problem with, it's people who treat me like shit because I don't follow the same lifestyle as they do.

Do I think it's odd that someone who eats meat would turn around and argue that eating meat is wrong? Yes, because I don't understand how it works. Maybe Jillian and I are on the same wavelength - as I have said, I don't think it's right to treat animals and process meat the way factory farms do. Perhaps he can explain it to me.

I DO respect the view. That's what I'm trying to tell you. I don't share it but I respect it because it's your choice.

If you think I don't respect the lives of animals, that's fine, but I think it's unfair to say that I don't deserve respect because I choose to eat meat that was harvested in the most humane manner possible.

I have had friends who were vegetarians; some of them I got on well with and some of them, after choosing to become vegetarian, decided they couldn't be associated with me anymore because I chose to eat meat. I think that's a pretty shitty way to treat a friend.

Again, I have no problem with debates as long as they remain civil.

[NachtSorcier]

Originally Posted by Pineapple_Juice

Nacht, you fail. Just stop.

Don't tell me what to do. Thanks.

[Saya]

Originally Posted by NachtSorcier

I apologize for my outburst. That was when my temper snapped and I should not have let it. I am sorry about that, I didn't mean it. Now, while I do respect other people's choices, I do not like it when my choices are tossed aside as invalid simply because they aren't agreed with. It isn't veganism I have a problem with, it's people who treat me like shit because I don't follow the same lifestyle as they do.

Its not a lifestyle, its a moral imperative. Just like owning slaves is not a "lifestyle". Its not a tolerance issue, its the fact that you're totally fine with exploiting animals.

Do I think it's odd that someone who eats meat would turn around and argue that eating meat is wrong? Yes, because I don't understand how it works. Maybe Jillian and I are on the same wavelength - as I have said, I don't think it's right to treat animals and process meat the way factory farms do. Perhaps he can explain it to me.

It may seem odd to you but he seems to view meat eating as bad just as a smoker who knows smoking is bad, thats been pretty consistent with his whole arguments. He knows veganism is right but just hasn't gone vegan yet for reasons that are his own.

I DO respect the view. That's what I'm trying to tell you. I don't share it but I respect it because it's your choice.

If you think I don't respect the lives of animals, that's fine, but I think it's unfair to say that I don't deserve respect because I choose to eat meat that was harvested in the most humane manner possible.

See the last quote in my sig? Thats what it is. You respect somewhat that they suffer and would like to think that they are happy to die for you, their suffering matters but their lives do not. You are a welfarist, you're fine with exploitation and murder so long as you can put a happy face on it. How is that respectable?

I have had friends who were vegetarians; some of them I got on well with and some of them, after choosing to become vegetarian, decided they couldn't be associated with me anymore because I chose to eat meat. I think that's a pretty shitty way to treat a friend.

Pretty shitty indeed seeing as they are vegetarian and the egg and dairy industry is just as bad as the meat industry, dairy cows DO lose their babies, dairy farmers have no use for the male calves so they usually become veal, and the females may stay a while but otherwise become dairy cows themselves, a farmer can get a lot of money for dairy heifers. The mother will be slaughtered when her milk productivity drops. Egg chickens are often the most abused animals of all, their bodies have been bred to lay way more eggs than they can handle, they suffer a lot of health issues and die an early death because of all that lost calcium. For those that survive, they are killed after one or two years as their egg productivity drops. In hatcheries, the male chicks are useless and are often ground up alive or just thrown out into a bin where they all suffocate each other to death. So if vegetarians give you shit and refuse to associate with you, there you go, some material on how they're no saints themselves and continue to exploit animals and support their slaughter.

I assure you none of us here are like that, I've dated omnivores and all my friends are omnivores, while I will fight them until I'm blue in the face when they do decide to pick on my veganism I still wouldn't shun them. Kindly keep your biases away from debates then.

Again, I have no problem with debates as long as they remain civil.

Since your outbursts were the worst I would advise again to stay away from debates here, we do tend not to be respectful when someone says something idiotic, no matter what the subject.

[Saya]

Ah, finally found it, wanted to post it to display how issues like feminism does overlap with animal rights ^_^ Its Friends Of Animals protesting a PeTA Lettuce Lady giving out veggie burgers for KFC. I think it sums up the thread too on how actual animal rights activists shun PeTA:

[Malice In Wonderland]

This is the most awesome picture I've seen on the subject.

[Anima_Severem]

Some vegans and animal rights people are crazy.

Does anyone remember the vegan couple who fed their baby soy milk and apple juice and he starved to death?
What gets me is why didn't the mother just breastfeed the kid?

[Saya]

Originally Posted by Anima_Severem

Some vegans and animal rights people are crazy.

Does anyone remember the vegan couple who fed their baby soy milk and apple juice and he starved to death?
What gets me is why didn't the mother just breastfeed the kid?

I really take offense when people brought that up, they were tried because they intentionally starved the baby to death, and tried to use veganism as an excuse. But normally, yes, human breast milk is vegan, and even if she didn't want to breastfeed there are soy baby formulas, half of my friends who have babies were recommended to use the soy milk as apparently it replicates human milk better than dairy (and they are omnivores).

By contrast, no one would say "Omnivore parents nearly kill children with diet" when they see this story:
http://www.news.com.au/story/0,27574...5-1248,00.html

And yet when the prosecutor said "they aren't vegans", "Vegans Murder Baby" is still the headline:
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/new...cle1768368.ece

But prosecutors convinced the jury that the couple intentionally neglected and underfed the child and then tried to use the lifestyle as a shield for their actions.

“The vegan diet is fine,” Chuck Boring, a prosecutor, told the jury. “These parents lied about what they fed him. He just was not fed enough.”

He added: “They’re not vegans. They’re baby-killers. Think about how long they had to listen to his screams and hollers.”

Thomas, the father, hung his head and almost collapsed when he and his wife were found guilty on May 2.

Ms Sanders told police that she fed the baby organic apple juice and soy milk, supplemented by breast milk. But the soy milk containers found in their flat clearly stated that soy milk is not to be used as a substitute for baby formula.

Like you don't feed babies the milk you have in your fridge, you don't feed babies soy milk we have in our fridge, they need a special formula.

There have been only two other cases that did get involuntary manslaughter sentences, but neglecting to feed your child properly has nothing to with animal rights, you're just a bad parent.

[korinna5555]

Originally Posted by Saya

By contrast, no one would say "Omnivore parents nearly kill children with diet" when they see this story:
http://www.news.com.au/story/0,27574...5-1248,00.html

That's because the point of that article is parents feeding their young children large amounts of fast/junk food.










Sayyyyaaaaaa.. I want to know if it's "wrong" for me to eat my neighbors eggs. His chickens are in a huge run, and are never shut up in a coop. Nor are they eaten after egg production has ceased. Would you have a problem with that?

[Saya]

Originally Posted by korinna5555

That's because the point of that article is parents feeding their young children large amounts of fast/junk food.

Exactly, where the other one focuses on the veganism aspect when really the baby just wasn't fed.

Sayyyyaaaaaa.. I want to know if it's "wrong" for me to eat my neighbors eggs. His chickens are in a huge run, and are never shut up in a coop. Nor are they eaten after egg production has ceased. Would you have a problem with that?

There are a few problems with that. Where does he get the chickens from? If he gets them from a hatchery, by buying these chickens he supports the breeding of chickens and contributes to the deaths of unwanted male chicks. Secondly, chickens have been bred to lay more eggs than they can really handle and lose a lot of nutrients by doing so, on farm sanctuaries chickens are encouraged to eat their own eggs (which they do on their own anyway once they figure out that they are tasty) to recover these lost nutrients. These eggs are the chicken's. Thirdly, its still using the animal for one's own means and objectifies the hen not as an individual sentient being but as a means of egg production. It shows they aren't keeping the chickens solely because they want to give rescue chickens a second chance at life, but want to keep them just so they can use their byproducts. Kinda like just getting a dog so that when she menstruates you can go around with a cup catching her blood and drink it.

[Solumina]

What if they were to take say half of the eggs produced and the rest of the eggs were left for the chickens?

Also to say that the chickens are being kept purely for egg production isn't really correct, the chickens could very well be kept because the person is fond of chickens and they use the eggs simply because they are a delicious, free food source.

[Saya]

Originally Posted by Solumina

What if they were to take say half of the eggs produced and the rest of the eggs were left for the chickens?

Also to say that the chickens are being kept purely for egg production isn't really correct, the chickens could very well be kept because the person is fond of chickens and they use the eggs simply because they are a delicious, free food source.

And what happens when egg production levels off and the chicken wants to keep and eat the few eggs that it is laying? A few people I know who keep hens have to outwit the hen to get the egg before the chicken eats it. I'd disagree about the deliciousness, and I'm sure menstrual blood is a great source of iron, but I'd have a thing or two to say to someone following a dog around with a cup or digging tampons out of a garbage bin. And not really a free food source since keeping hens does cost money, it would be cheaper to grow a garden.

[Solumina]

I'm saying that they would have the chickens whether or not they produced eggs, the eggs are just kind of a bonus. Plenty of people that I know who have chickens have no problem harvesting eggs without "outwitting" the chickens and they leave some for the chickens, they don't have the sort of chickens who have been bred to lay ridiculous amounts of eggs (I forget the different breeds that my friends have but apparently they are more healthy and make better companions than those that produce excessive amounts of eggs), I really don't know what kind of difference that makes but I thought I would add that in.

[Saya]

Originally Posted by Solumina

I'm saying that they would have the chickens whether or not they produced eggs, the eggs are just kind of a bonus. Plenty of people that I know who have chickens have no problem harvesting eggs without "outwitting" the chickens and they leave some for the chickens, they don't have the sort of chickens who have been bred to lay ridiculous amounts of eggs (I forget the different breeds that my friends have but apparently they are more healthy and make better companions than those that produce excessive amounts of eggs), I really don't know what kind of difference that makes but I thought I would add that in.

Even if they're nice to these chickens, that still poses a problem. Why should we breed these "better companion" chickens when there are so many battery egg chickens that are in dire need of a home? How is that different from paying a dog breeder to get his dogs to mate and give you a puppy because you like that breed, while there are millions of dogs that need homes, many as victims of puppy mills? Many won't adopt from shelters because they might have psychological issues, much like battery hens are prone to. Its still objectifying and breeding particular kinds of animals so we can get some sort of use out of them, whether companionship or eggs.

[Solumina]

They aren't specialty breeds, they are quite widely available (just not really found on large scale farms as they aren't as productive) and I don't know a single person who has gotten their chickens from breeders, the flocks have either been in the family for generations or they took in chickens from someone who either had too many or was no longer going to be able to take proper care of them.

[Saya]

Then why aren't they being responsible pet owners by getting their chickens spayed or neutered?

[Solumina]

Because they want to continue to have chickens in the future and so they want the chickens to be able to produce enough chicks to sustain the population, as I said many of these flocks have been in the family for generations.

[Saya]

They are not heirlooms to be inherited by the next generation, they are chickens, living sentient domesticated beings, and considering chickens typically aren't protected by animal welfare laws, are the most populated of all farm animals, and pretty much the most abused of all the domesticated animals, why keep a single line of chickens out of some sense of property and inheritance and not take in chickens who badly need them?

[Solumina]

So you're saying that ripping out these animals reproductive organs is okay, even admirable, but eating their eggs is horribly wrong and disregards the animals' rights? The only reason why pets should be neutered is because most people cannot properly take care of the animal's young, if care of the young is not a problem then there is no reason to neuter the animal. I'm sorry but to me that is far more of a violation of an animal's rights than eating a chickens eggs or drinking a cows milk. For all your talk of animal rights I'm really shocked to see that you are against allowing an animal population to be allowed to thrive with minimal human interaction. Also to put it into perspective having an animal spayed or neutered causes more pain and suffering than a humane death, something that you have repeatedly stated is barbaric and unnecessary.

[Saya]

Originally Posted by Solumina

So you're saying that ripping out these animals reproductive organs is okay, even admirable, but eating their eggs is horribly wrong and disregards the animals' rights?

Since neutering would prevent the already overpopulated population from growing, is a common procedure and beneficial to the health of animals, and most farm sanctuaries neuter all their animals as once again, the population is way too much to handle. So yes, neutering them for their good is better than using them for our gain.

The only reason why pets should be neutered is because most people cannot properly take care of the animal's young, if care of the young is not a problem then there is no reason to neuter the animal.

Thats stupid, the reason why pets should be neutered are primarily for population control, three million animals die in shelters every year in the States alone, for every litter born it takes away from other animals who desperately need a home, and secondly for health reasons as it minimizes risks of diseases.

http://www.pawsperouspets.com/tips/spayneuter.shtml

I'm sorry but to me that is far more of a violation of an animal's rights than eating a chickens eggs or drinking a cows milk. For all your talk of animal rights I'm really shocked to see that you are against allowing an animal population to be allowed to thrive with minimal human interaction. Also to put it into perspective having an animal spayed or neutered causes more pain and suffering than a humane death, something that you have repeatedly stated is barbaric and unnecessary.

Slicing an animal's throat isn't comparable to surgery under anesthetic, in males especially its a pretty easy procedure with far less pain associated with it than having its throat slit, being beheaded, electrocuted, gassed or boiled alive. And yeah, I care more about individual animals who have seen horrors none of us will ever see finding a loving home and a second chance than I do about about a chicken being able to have chicks for your own comfort of knowing that you'll have chickens to pass down to your kids, assuming you're not killing her chicks yourself by refrigerating her eggs.

[Solumina]

It isn't as though it isn't a surgery with risk, especially if anesthesia is used and it does cause more pain than a HUMANE death, especially for the females, and there is no reason to force those animals to have such a procedure. Where I am from there really aren't any chickens in need of homes so unless you expect these people to search across the state or country to find chickens they aren't preventing any animals in need from being adopted (pretty much the only time that people adopt chickens back home is when the owner can no longer keep them and those do animals quickly find homes). Also if a chicken in need is sterilized then it can easily be added to these flocks, sure the flock would be a bit larger then normal but that chicken wouldn't be adding to the future population and the size of most of those flocks varies from year to year anyway.

Out of curiosity would you be all for mandatory sterilization of people until there are no longer children needing adoption? As vocal as I am about the need for these children to find homes I would never force someone to give up their ability to have a child of their own because there is someone somewhere else who needs a home.

By the way have you adopted a chicken? They are quite cheap to feed, much cheaper than cats, dogs, or even most common birds, and if you only have one then it can easily be kept indoors, with a little training they can even be taught to use a litter box.


Also, out of curiosity, do you eat honey? I have never heard you mention it, though I have heard you mention swatting gnats (at least I think it was gnats, maybe some other type of small insect) so I was wondering if your compassion extended to bees.

[PortraitOfSanity]

Saya's hypocrisy and self-righteousness continue to amuse me months into this thread.

[korinna5555]

Originally Posted by Saya

assuming you're not killing her chicks yourself by refrigerating her eggs

Eggs only turn into chicks if they're fertilized. I can't speak for everyone, but the people I know who have chickens only have hens.




Also, "neutering them for their good is better than using them for our gain"?!
FOR SERIOUS? You don't want to kill 'em, but you have no problem with ripping an entire organ system out? How much pain do you think they're in after that procedure, seeing as how vets can't give a cat or dog a Fentanyl patch?