Naked performance with dead pig branded "sick"

[Mirorgate 0]

Yes the whole issue is a complex one. There is much disagreement with regards to the best methods to emply to educate the public to the hidden atrocities of the industries. My opinion has swayed throughout the course of my life. I used to see legislative practices as the most constructive- then I moved to the practices of the ALF- I saw so little changing in the law, I figured the only way to help animals when they need us- now- was to remove them from the abuse. Now Im a little calmer, and see all the aspects of the movement as useful. After all, it is the largest, most successful political movement of today.

Whatever methods the movement employs, they will always be criticsed. People dont want to know what goes on to provide them with food, clothing and luxuries- so they are going to fight it, so as not to have to acknowledge it.

PeTA does not 'fire bomb' anything. They are very careful not to associate with any illegal activity. They can not however control the actions of all of the people that support them. A fire bomb incident would be considered an act of the ALF- anonymous cells all over the world aiming to liberate animals and destroy the economic structure of abusive industies.

As for the euthanisia issue- many people feel that this is the kindest alternative. The world is truggling with a HUGE overpopulation problem of domestic cats and dogs. Too many people are mindless, and fail to spay or neuter their animals, and too many people want a cute little puppy bought from a breeder, rather than adopt 'used goods' from a shelter. There is NO WHERE for these animals to go. Not enough money to provide them with permanent sanctuary, and more and more beign bred every day. If you want to offer your scorn on anyone, it should be on breeders and irresponsible carers.

I have never tried to impose anything on you. No more than you are trying to do on me. Merely offer my side of the debate.

so... bolded to make sure I got this correct. destruction of private property is ok.. because the means justify end?

also.. PETA has yet to ... o what is the word.. CONDEM such acts.. sure they can say they dont condone.. cause in word they do not.. only in deed. and actions speak louder than words.

I'm all for ppl treating animals ethically and as humanely as possible. i dont have to offer scorn on the breeders... i can though on the ppl that do not take proper care of their pets. getting the spayed and neutered would be a nice step for them to take... but then.. PETA has issues with that doent they.

heres a quiz:

a lost dog is found in late autumn. famished, limping due to ingrown toenail, matted fur. obviously a stray.

to the ideals of PETA... is it more humane to take it in and give it a home, give medical attention to the paw, comb out the matted fur, feed it, and make sure it has a warm place to live during the coming snowy winter...

OR

leave it alone to be liberated and do what it would. possibly get hit by a car, possibly starve or shot as stray.

because I know what my answer is... and it doesnt agree with PETA's.

[danae 0]

If you were starving and the only choices you had were to kill and eat an animal or die, what would you do?

here we go, the classic scenario question. I have no issues with hunting for survival. Other omnivorous and carnivorous species do it, we are not exempt from that. It is the methods and industries of this society that I have problem with, and so do not support.

IF I were in that situation, I dont know however, I have never eaten meat, so it would likely make me very sick to do so. Secondly, I really dont think I would have it in my heart to kill anything.

Ah, but PETA does have an issue with hunting for survival, they sure do.

Not true. Do you see PeTA protesters targeting tribes in say, Africa, or people living in the depths of Alaska where crops can not be grown? No.

Edited August 18, 2006 by lauraxmarie

[Mirorgate 0]

Not true. Do you see PeTA protesters targeting tribes in say, Africa, or people living in the depths of Alaska where crops can not be grown? No.

and therein lies a little more of their hypocrisy. it doesnt get them in the newspapers. and in africa? do you really think PETA cares what happens in other places it wont get them into the papers?

[danae 0]

so... bolded to make sure I got this correct. destruction of private property is ok.. because the means justify end?

also.. PETA has yet to ... o what is the word.. CONDEM such acts.. sure they can say they dont condone.. cause in word they do not.. only in deed. and actions speak louder than words.

I'm all for ppl treating animals ethically and as humanely as possible. i dont have to offer scorn on the breeders... i can though on the ppl that do not take proper care of their pets. getting the spayed and neutered would be a nice step for them to take... but then.. PETA has issues with that doent they.

heres a quiz:

a lost dog is found in late autumn. famished, limping due to ingrown toenail, matted fur. obviously a stray.

to the ideals of PETA... is it more humane to take it in and give it a home, give medical attention to the paw, comb out the matted fur, feed it, and make sure it has a warm place to live during the coming snowy winter...

OR

leave it alone to be liberated and do what it would. possibly get hit by a car, possibly starve or shot as stray.

because I know what my answer is... and it doesnt agree with PETA's.

Actually PeTA spokespersons do often publically condemn such acts.

No PeTA certainly does not have issues with spaying and neutering!!!!!!! They have campaigns specifically encouraging people to do so. You really need to gets your facts straight.

And as for the 'quiz'.... are you suggesting an animal rights supporter (or PeTA as you prefer to refer to) would not take the dog in??? That is just craziness. I really do not know where your impressions come from. Or course they would take it in!!!!!!! Animal rights supporters are animal lovers, doing the most ehy can to help animals in need. End of story.

Not true. Do you see PeTA protesters targeting tribes in say, Africa, or people living in the depths of Alaska where crops can not be grown? No.

and therein lies a little more of their hypocrisy. it doesnt get them in the newspapers. and in africa? do you really think PETA cares what happens in other places it wont get them into the papers?

Oh my goodness. Do you not get the point? Im saying that they dont have issues with hunting for survival. So why would they protest it??

[Ban Hammer 13,352]

nope, im afraid I have issues with all breeders. Of course you will be on the defensive, he is your dad. The world does not need more dogs right now- like I said we are struggling with a huge overpopulation problem. Healthy animals euthanised by the thousands every day, yet people keep breeding more.

so who's really responsible for that? the breeder or the buyers who buy and dump them? no demand = no market = no breeders

[Lewis 0]

no.. my criticism was for the quote of yours i left. PETA is self serving. I do not care if someone is over weight or not.. thin or not. those are non-issues.. and if that is all you got out of the p&t video.. there were more things.. like the financial support of a person who fire bombs ppls livelyhoods. hardly anyone looks into what they support any more so it seems, wouldn't it? yes there are other animal support grps out there.. not all are as destructive.. nor go into schools trying to equate themselves with Ghandi and Jesus... nor do they go around giving buckets of entrails to kids outside of restaurants.

I do not like PETA because of their hypocrisy "we save ALL animals" then euthenise more than 2/3's? And as to the type II diabetic.. there is human insulin. more expensive, but it is there... so she decided to be cheap? what?

Sure there are new and upcoming ways to develope medicine as well. that is now.. then it was different.. so we have insulin, artificial hearts, etc because of it. should we just through that away? because a few fanatical ppl believe differently than mainstream thought?

you are vegan.. dont own any silk, leather products, fur, etc. fine for you and your way of wanting to live... please do not try to impose such things on me as PETA, ALF, et al are trying to do.

also.. I am on no bandwagon. I have my own mind and can do my own research and come to my own conclusions from the data before me.

PeTA does not 'fire bomb' anything. They are very careful not to associate with any illegal activity. They can not however control the actions of all of the people that support them. A fire bomb incident would be considered an act of the ALF- anonymous cells all over the world aiming to liberate animals and destroy the economic structure of abusive industies.

As for the euthanisia issue- many people feel that this is the kindest alternative. The world is truggling with a HUGE overpopulation problem of domestic cats and dogs. Too many people are mindless, and fail to spay or neuter their animals, and too many people want a cute little puppy bought from a breeder, rather than adopt 'used goods' from a shelter. There is NO WHERE for these animals to go. Not enough money to provide them with permanent sanctuary, and more and more beign bred every day. If you want to offer your scorn on anyone, it should be on breeders and irresponsible carers.

I have never tried to impose anything on you. No more than you are trying to do on me. Merely offer my side of the debate.

From the actual article:

"As Miss O'Reilly seems to depend on the shock of using a murdered pig as a prop, perhaps lacking the talent to make it as a proper artist, may we suggest she take up a day job instead to pay the bills," she said. "Cruelty is not entertainment."

http://today.reuters.com/news/articlenews....-ART-PIG-DC.XML

Interesting wording here, especially the use of the word murder and the slam on the "artist". Controversy is used by many people and groups (including PETA) in order to gain people's interest. No laws were broken here. I guess my breakfast was the result of a porkicide.....

Here's a definition of murder that I looked up:

mur·der ( P ) Pronunciation Key (mûrdr)

n.

The unlawful killing of one human by another, especially with premeditated malice.

http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/murder

Yes yes this issue has been raised on VJ before. The word 'murder' is a human word, given definition by a human. Words hold no 'truth' or any meaning in the laws of nature. All words are open to interpretation. Just becasue someone in an office decides what a word means does not mean that is definitive. My personal interpretation of the word is that it can be applied to the killing of a non-human animal as it can a human animal. This is because I do not hold a superiority complex. To me, a non-human life should be respected as much as a human life. Animals are my friends

If you were starving and the only choices you had were to kill and eat an animal or die, what would you do?

here we go, the classic scenario question. I have no issues with hunting for survival. Other omnivorous and carnivorous species do it, we are not exempt from that. It is the methods and industries of this society that I have problem with, and so do not support.

IF I were in that situation, I dont know however, I have never eaten meat, so it would likely make me very sick to do so. Secondly, I really dont think I would have it in my heart to kill anything.

Have you ever stepped on an ant? Swatted a fly? Did you use their bodies afterward for any purpose? They qualify as animals in my new "definition" of animals.

[garya505 2]

If you were starving and the only choices you had were to kill and eat an animal or die, what would you do?

here we go, the classic scenario question. I have no issues with hunting for survival. Other omnivorous and carnivorous species do it, we are not exempt from that. It is the methods and industries of this society that I have problem with, and so do not support.

IF I were in that situation, I dont know however, I have never eaten meat, so it would likely make me very sick to do so. Secondly, I really dont think I would have it in my heart to kill anything.

Ah, but PETA does have an issue with hunting for survival, they sure do.

Not true. Do you see PeTA protesters targeting tribes in say, Africa, or people living in the depths of Alaska where crops can not be grown? No.

Yes, true. It's in on their web site.

"PETA operates under the simple principle that animals are not ours to eat, wear, experiment on, or use for entertainment. "

They clearly state that animals are "not ours to eat".

[Mirorgate 0]

...snip...

sniped cause it was getting over blown.

oh I have my "facts" straight. pointed out to me more than once by many an "animal friend lover" person... trust me. personal experince carries great weight.

and I am glad to know that you chose the innocuous things to reply about... gloss over the firebombing of private facilities to further your own agenda. so the means justify the ends to you. glad to know that.

as as for my quiz... best dog I ever owned. had a nut try to tell me I hamstringed his growth progress for doing such a thing. funny how they worked for PETA (you will recall original post I made about talking with PETA rep in my first post... yes? same person)

but ah well... naked boobies in cage still = to tiger in cage i guess. damn stripper tigers these days

[Ban Hammer 13,352]

hey what's eating him? nothing he's at the top of the food chain!

hey mirror can we give the naked model in the cage $1's?

Edited August 18, 2006 by charlesandnessa

[Lewis 0]

From the actual article:

"As Miss O'Reilly seems to depend on the shock of using a murdered pig as a prop, perhaps lacking the talent to make it as a proper artist, may we suggest she take up a day job instead to pay the bills," she said. "Cruelty is not entertainment."

http://today.reuters.com/news/articlenews....-ART-PIG-DC.XML

Interesting wording here, especially the use of the word murder and the slam on the "artist". Controversy is used by many people and groups (including PETA) in order to gain people's interest. No laws were broken here. I guess my breakfast was the result of a porkicide.....

Here's a definition of murder that I looked up:

mur·der ( P ) Pronunciation Key (mûrdr)

n.

The unlawful killing of one human by another, especially with premeditated malice.

http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/murder

Yes yes this issue has been raised on VJ before. The word 'murder' is a human word, given definition by a human. Words hold no 'truth' or any meaning in the laws of nature. All words are open to interpretation. Just becasue someone in an office decides what a word means does not mean that is definitive. My personal interpretation of the word is that it can be applied to the killing of a non-human animal as it can a human animal. This is because I do not hold a superiority complex. To me, a non-human life should be respected as much as a human life. Animals are my friends

If all words are open to interpretation as you say, then what is the point of using words? I believe dictionaries can be considered a good reference source when you are dealing with people that twist words to serve their own purpose. As humans, we use words everyday to convey clear meaning. True, there are some grey areas but in my opinion murder is exactly what the dictionary says it is. That being said, it does not necessarily follow that because someone's attitude towards animals is different than someone else's they must have a superiority complex. The opposite could also be stated actually.

[Mirorgate 0]

hey what's eating him? nothing he's at the top of the food chain!

hey mirror can we give the naked model in the cage $1's?

she did nothing for me... but apparently.. they got their "message" across to all the guys trying to gander at her boobies. yep... Denver zoo attendance is up this year.

[danae 0]

Have you ever stepped on an ant? Swatted a fly? Did you use their bodies afterward for any purpose? They qualify as animals in my new "definition" of animals.

Stepped on an ant? not intentionally no. Swatted a fly? no I havent.

k, my pc keeps overheated and cutting out on me. so if my reponses are delayed you know why. No im not backing out- even though I stated I didnt want to get into a debate about this much earlier! Ive had it 1000 times- gets very tedious.

[incanada1234 0]

that sounds like typical artistic bullshit

I won't even bother reading the rest of the replies because this already wins hands down.

[garya505 2]

Ya, can we drop this PETA BS and get back to talking about the pros and cons of sex with pigs?

[w¡n9Nµ7 §£@¥€r 123]