Dennis:

Ok, lets just leave it at "we agree"...

Then again I did start the thread, posted first, then you followed basically agreeing, etc. etc. etc.

Ok, I'll leave it at "we agree"

Ya, that was funny PETA = People Eating Tasty Animals ROFLMAO

 

PETA has a large building in downtown Norfolk, not far from where I live. Waterfront..... hmm... wouldn't building on the rivers edge endanger fish life according to their policies?

One of the local radio stations has an annual "**** off PETA" fishing tournament. They give the early comers a free trip on a boat and fish right outside PETAs building.


Personally I'm glad people like them are protected in their right to protest. Makes the idiots easier to pick out of the crowd!

 

LOL, that's something I would do. I'd probably do them one better and get somebody like Ruth's Chris Steakhouse to sponsor the tournament and I'd slap a huge banner on the sides of the boat.

I'd also give PETA equal time and let them feed (chum) the fish at the same time.

 

I think if you gave some of these people in PETA a real good juicy steak they would feel much better...

 

I believe this country was founded on some principles that allow people to have their own opinions, it is groups like PETA that should remind us to be glad that we live in this country... it is unfortunate that they do not realize how they they violate the principles by attempting to force their opinions upon the masses.

 

jryager:

Excellent post, with the point being its fine, as I too believe, to have an opinion. When someone starts forcing it on others by terroist tatics just shows that they don't believe in others having an opinion.

 

You hit that one right on the head.

Of course, sometimes I wonder if that sentiment applies to liberal views on this board...

 

Let's not confuse monkeys with mulberries. Everyone is entitled to an opinion, everyone is entitled to try to convince other people of their position. The complaint against PETA is that they interrupt public proceedings and throw blood on people. The problem isn't people attempting to force their opinion on others, we all do it, hell that's what I try to do here when I argue.

The problem is when one group gets in their head their idea is so "holy" or "right" that having any opposite opinion means that you don't have any rights, and should sit back and get blood thrown on you, or should have a bumper sticker placed on your car saying "I don't care about the air..."

The common complaint against extreme liberals (which PETA is a sub-group of), is that they follow this oxymoronic philosophy - believe what ever you want, but there are some beliefs that are just "right" so if you don't agree too bad. An example is marriage and benefit rights for homosexual domestic partners. If you don't agree with that, then you're labeled a hate-monger by liberals, devoid of any sort of common decency. Just because I have any opposing viewpoint? Bull*****....

What the irony of the whole situation is, as F. Buckley once said, liberals stole the term "liberal" from the conservatives (i.e. the conservatives are the real liberals). Liberal originally meant open and accepting of that diiffering positions exist. I may disagree with everything Dennis says, and may argue incessantly with him, but at the same time I would never suggest his opinion isn't as valid as mine, and MOST IMPORTANTLY, I would never suggest his beliefs somehow entitle me to take a moral highground and throw blood on him or put bumper stickers on his car...

 

Well looks like I am going to weigh in as the liberal here. Peta is an extreme group and I don't agree with their methods. However on the subject of animal testing there are many points. Quite a bit of it amounts to nothing but torture of the animal, all to see if this or that would be an irritant for our own arrogant/concieted use. Science has come a long way and can determine many things without animal testing. Have any of you seen any tapes of some of the testing that goes on? It is pretty brutal.
Can anyone truly say if my child was suffering from this or that that nothing would be unacceptable for the cure? I am fortunate that my children aren't in that situation. On the flip side I have to disagree that everything on this great planet is here for our own needs without any responsibilities attached. Mankind does some odd things in the name of humanity.
Now on to religion hahahha

Edited for spelling

 

Funny how the liberal response never can be straight forward, "Yeah, they are kind of wrong, but what about this, and this, and this, and they have some good points here...."

It's always got "yeah, but..."

How about a liberal come forward and say, "PETA is in the wrong, no one should be entitled to throw ANYTHING on anybody or disrupt places of business and shows...."

No elaboration, no rambling, just straight forward wrong is wrong...

 

Sorry to ramble for ya
Peta is wrong
Animal testing for cosmetic reasons is wrong
Killing animals for a fur coat to wear to a party and show off how wealthy you are is wrong.
Killing animals for an imagined potion so you can get it up is wrong
Hows that

I'm not a liberal or a conservative, I can support views from both sides. It's great to be an American and have that freedom.

 

Rugby3:

I can agree with some of the things you say, like animal testing for no good reason, however as far as:

"Can anyone truly say if my child was suffering from this or that that nothing would be unacceptable for the cure?"

I can say YES, as far as animal testing goes, and if it is for a cure for humans then NOTHING is unacceptable.

 

01 Sport
On a different note, ya looking forward to winter? I drive through Farmington everday to get to work. I think we are going to have winter like we did two yrs ago. I put some pics up in my gallery of the white stuff.

Fun conversation, odd how my views on your post on prisons and then the opposite on testing on animals. As horrible as it sounds I think that there are checks & balances for humans on this planet as there are for the rest of the inhabitants.

 

Rugby3:

I respect your stand against animal testing. I guess I look at it like if there were a human baby in front of me who may possible die because of a diease and an animal could be sacraficed which could possible lead to this baby living then I would have a choice to make and the human comes first and foremost.

On the side, how far away from Farmington do you live? Where do you work as far as city?

I work in Dover.

 

I don't think you're getting it. It's not a liberal or conservative argument that's going on here and nothing's wrong with only agreeing with parts of something.

What most of us are talking about is the fact that PETA actually breaks the law to get their point across. I happen to agree with some, maybe just a small part, of what PETA stands for.

For instance, I am not against all animal testing. Hell, I participated in animal testing myself. I've pithed more than my fair share of animals in my pursuit of an education. I am, however, against testing where an animal suffers or where a researcher duplicates testing already done by others. Even when pithing, we did it as quickly and painlessly as humanly possible. Nobody wanted to see any animals suffer.

In many cases, live animal testing is decreasing. Lots of things can be tested by observing lab grown tissue, for instance.

I am, however, against the senseless killing of animals. We don't need to cover ourselves with the pelts of animals that are raised in captivity just for that purpose. I do, on the other hand, wear leather products which are hopefully made from animals that were used for food and said animals were humanely handled.

As far as I can see from the posts, we are all in agreement that we do not support PETA's methods. In fact, I believe their methods actually hurts their cause.

I should hope that 100% of us would be against causing or allowing the suffering of animals. It sickens me when I hear of "people" reveling about suffering animals.