PETA Targets Kids at Boston Nutcracker

[Loonman]

http://www.whdh.com/news/articles/local/A30839/

BOSTON -- The group People for the Ethnical Treatment of Animals or PETA is planning a new campaign targeting kids by distributing fliers depicting a mother stabbing a bloody rabbit.

The animal rights group plans to hand the fliers out to kids going to see The Nutcracker playing at The Wang Center in Boston.

------------------------------------------------------------------


Although I am ideologically opposed to PETA for several reasons, this is just plain wrong on many levels.

Protesting and chanting in front of businesses you do not agree with is a sacred American right that should be exercised whenever necessary.

However, resorting to "guerilla tactics" designed to traumitize small children with propoganda is despicable and highly questionable.

Most rational, thinking, people are outraged by animal cruelty, and will never willingly cause harm or cause an animal to come to harm.

Normally I could care less what PETA does, because it's confrontational, but not geared to cause harm to to others, physically and/or psychologically. PETA has stepped over the line with this one, though.

Why not protest in front of a furrier like they(PETA) always do? That harms nobody.

My guess is PETA is not making headway or gaining new ground recruiting adults, so they have to target children at an event that is a Boston classic.

Now they are on my turf. In my city. Now it's personal.

[sandnsea]

1. This is child abuse

I sure don't understand the way people's minds work. Intentionally inflict harm on children to get them to stop inflicting harm on animals. :crazy:

[Sugarbleus]

2. Oh brother!

I simply adore animals. I can barely stand to see fish in aquariums!!BUT PETA is sooooooooooooooooooo ridiculus. I cannot support them,I can't stand them. They've made some important issues come to the fore; but mostly they are a rabid, neo pagan bunch of zealots. I will never support them. I hate their stupid antics. Greenpeace and that kind are doing good work with the sea creatures and like that...PETA is sick.

[liberalmuse]

3. They do a little good...

but for the most part, they hurt the cause. Many schools here won't let kids wear 'Vegan' t-shirts because they say they are promoting terrorism. Ridiculous, but that's the impression PETA has given people. I'm vegan, but if someone handed that picture to my kid, I'd give them a piece of my mind, and not too kindly. This is just sick, and it should be stopped. How in the hell does PETA think throwing paint on the fur coats of old ladies and exposing children to the mutilation of bunnies going to make people sympathetic to animal rights?

[FlaGranny]

4. Those tactics do little more than elicit sympathy

for the old ladies and children victimized.

[Jen72]

5. My issue with this is

that children as young as eight are becoming insecure about their
looks and especially girls, start to worry about getting fat.
Eatting disorders are on the rinse among teens and younger, so bombarding with information about meat, dairy etc, gives them one more reason to mess around with their diets.

If a religious group did this, targetting children with leaflets, most people here would be disguised and outraged.

[truthspeaker]

6. that is seriously messed up

How do they know some of those kids aren't already vegans? Does the Nutcracker have some kind of meat-eating, animal-abusing subtext I'm not aware of? I guess the Rat King gets stabbed...

[DoNotRefill]

7. Bad facts make bad law.

It's illegal to distribute porno to children under the age of 18. This kind of distribution of violently graphic material to children helps people who would restrict free speech.

[Loonman]

8. This makes me so goddamn angry I might counter protest

I can hand out fliers, too.

But they will be photocopies of news stories about the dodgy stuff PETA does.

[curse10]

15. Yeah. You do that

:eyes:

[Name removed]

22. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[curse10]

77. I don't hate humans

I just also love animals. We are, for the most part, intelligent beings with big hearts. We should be capable of doing both. :eyes:

[DoNotRefill]

101. then why go for a program...

designed and aimed at very small children to terrify them?

If you don't think that flyer will give small kids (who it is deliberately aimed at) nightmares, you're sadly mistaken.

[curse10]

105. I don't believe in shielding people

from the truth. I became an animal activist at a young age after I learned what happened to animals on farms and in fur factories. If one child learns to grow up cruetly free, then it's worth it.

[DoNotRefill]

117. Yup.....fuck the law....

"if it prevents one abortion, then it's worth it."

You're using EXACTLY the same argument that the fuckwads who firebomb abortion clinics use.

[curse10]

118. it's not against the law to hand out pamphlets

and the difference is, this isn't violent.

[DoNotRefill]

120. It IS illegal....

to do something likely to cause an immediate breach of the peace, as this is. It's called "incitement to riot" in many places.

There's even a legal doctrine in many places stating that a person being given such materials is legally justified in attacking the person doing the prostheletizing.

Enjoy your cell.

[curse10]

124. I know the law

but this doesn't fall under it-- in fact, it's far from it. Abortion protesters put pictures of dead fetuses on their pamphlets, they don't get thrown in jail.

Last time I checked (at least in Massachusetts) I couldn't deck someone just because I didn't like what they said.

[DoNotRefill]

141. Yup....but abortion protesters....

aren't giving those pics to children in front of their parents, just as smut peddlers (GO smut peddlers!!!) aren't giving porno to childen, either.

You might check out Massachucett's law regarding "fighting words". They may or may not follow the doctrine. In case you're not familiar with the concept, some things are so morally reprehensible to society at large that a reasonable person would become so outraged by it that they are no longer legally responsible for their actions. This is why so few people get convicted for beating up Klansmen who are involved with public Klan marches. The free speech being exercised is so offensive that the law recognizes that the attack was provoked, and the person conducting the reprehensible speech bears the responsibility.

[curse10]

143. I am a law student

I am well aware of laws in massachusetts regarding fighting words :eyes:

And have ya been to Vegas? The smut peddlars give out hooker pamphlets to everyone, even kids.

[DoNotRefill]

144. Well isn't that special....

let me know when you graduate. Being a 1L in December isn't saying much about your knowledge of the law. ;)

BTW, how will your local State Bar take to a conviction for incitement to riot on your character and fitness evaluation?

[curse10]

158. I'm not going to be arrested

:eyes:

for christ's sake.

ART. XIX of the Constitution for the Commonwealth of Massuchestts. The people have a right, in an orderly and peaceable manner, to assemble to consult upon the common good; give instructions to their representatives, and to request of the legislative body, by the way of addresses, petitions, or remonstrances, redress of the wrongs done them, and of the grievances they suffer.

[DoNotRefill]

164. Uh huh....

So you're protesting at the legislature? Bet you still need a permit.... Got one? Also, "orderly and peaceable manner"...inciting a riot hardly qualifies under that now, does it.

BTW, during your first semester, did they cover U.S. v. Debs? Didn't think so. You also might want to check out the time, place, and manner restrictions on the First Amendment.

If you need some caselaw, I can provide it. Otherwise, thank you for playing. NEXT!

[curse10]

173. that's the standard language in mass law for all public gatherings

"Right of people to assemble peaceably"

:eyes:

And there is a time and place-- and the public street is a damn fucking good one.

I'm just not going to bother with people like you.


And you want case law?

Let's see Hill v. Colorado: the fact that messages conveyed by communications might be offensive to their recipients does not deprive them of constitutional protection. Right to free speech includes right to attempt to persuade others to change their views, and may not be curtailed simply because speaker's message may be offensive to his audience.

Bowe v. Secretary of the Commonwealth: "Individuals have right to organize into parties and even into "pressure groups", to advance causes and to print and circulate their views and advocate their cause in public assemblies and over the radio, and denial of use of money for such purposes improperly abridges freedom of speech, liberty of press, and right of peaceable assembly."

Proposed 1969 House Bill No. 5333, to be enacted as a § 1A of M.G.L.A. c. 269, providing that "Whoever urges ten or more persons to engage in tumultuous and violent conduct of a kind likely to create public alarm shall be guilty of inciting a riot" and imposing punishment, would be unconstitutional as vague and violative of freedom of speech guaranteed by the U.S.C.A.Const. Amends. 1 and 14 on grounds that the bill proscribes the advocacy of use of force to create mere "public alarm" which is not a constitutionally permissible standard; but rather, such efficacy must be directed towards inciting or producing "imminent" lawless action and be of a kind likely to incite or produce such action. Op.Atty.Gen., July 25, 1969, p. 34.


As much as I'd like to continue this argument, I do have better things to do. So this will be my last post.

[DoNotRefill]

174. Try....

Chaplinski v. New Hampshire, 315 U.S. 586 (1942). It states in part that "There are certain well-defined and narrowly limited classes of speech, the prevention and punishment of which have never been thought to raise any Constitutional problem. These include the lewd and obscene, the profane, the libelous, and the insulting or "fighting" words-those which by their very utterance inflict injury or tend to incite an immediate breach of the peace. Such utterances are no essential part of any expression of ideas, and are of such slight social value as a step to truth that any benefit that may be derived from them is clearly outweighed by the social interest in order and morality."

The pamphlet you propose to distribute is such that it inflicts injury in the form of destroying the mother-child bond, coupled with the extremely graphic nature of the piece and it's intended audience which causes it likely to promote an immediate breach of the peace. As such, it enjoys NO First Amendment protection.

Additionally, your protest will take place in the "public street", according to you. By this, I assume you mean the sidewalk, since the street is an inproper venue for a protest. Streets are for driving, don'tcha know, and as such, do not constitute a public forum. Additionally, your protest will be taking place at a venue which is in fact already having another function going on there at that time. As such, it's a clear conflict with the previously scheduled event.

[ronnykmarshall]

294. Vegas smut

"And have ya been to Vegas? The smut peddlars give out hooker pamphlets to everyone, even kids."

I've been to Vegas a lot and those pamplets are passed out at night. Makes you wonder why people have their kids out late at night on The Strip.

I love messing with those people passing out that crap. My boyfriend's favorite responce is "can't you see 'homo' on my forehead??".

[blondeatlast]

147. So, it's okay to distribute obscene materials to preschoolers?

That comic is way worse than anything I've seen on the adult channels.

[absolutezero]

268. they're handing children pictures of mutilated animals

something that will scar them for life...

if they want to hand out flyers that say fur is murder, or save a cow don't eat meat i have absolutely no problem but THIS IS SICK.

If i hand a kid pictures of an aborted fetus and scream about that issue i'd be arrested, if i hand a kid close up shots of genital warts and scream about abstinence i'd be arrested....but i can hand out a picture of a woman killing a bunny and preach about animal rights to small children?

It's well within their rights to voice their opinions, but it is not their right to scare people into believing them, leave that to the bushistas

[Name removed]

259. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[SOS]

181. Have you considered

anger management therapy?

[Sterling]

185. No shit

I thought I would find something PETA did that was offensive here but I have only discovered how irrational and tolerent of animal cruelty some DUers are.

[DoNotRefill]

195. Did you look at the flyer?

How inoffensive is giving that to a 4 year old????

I'm NOT tolerant of animal cruelty, just as I'm intolerant of child abuse, be it physical or psychological like in this case.

[Jen72]

261. Sorry but the welfare of human children should come first.

Delibrately giving them more things to worry about in this world, in the name of "freedom of expression" is just wrong.
Children are suffering more and more from stress, are developing eatting disorders at a younger age. Using scare tactics on children is
totally irresponsible.

[DoNotRefill]

9. For those who want to see the flyer...

it's at http://www.furisdead.com/mommykills300.pdf

I'm waiting for the first arrests.....

[midnight armadillo]

12. this is SO OUT OF LINE

This is outright cruelty to the children. I'm against cruelty in the treatment of animals, whether they're raised for fur, meat, or whatever. PETA's tactics make the cause of animal rights a laughingstock and turn off the people they should be recruiting to support the end of things like factory farms.

Someone hands one of these to my kid(s) and I think I'll go berserk. Fortunately my son is too young to be reaching and grasping yet. :-)

[blondeatlast]

149. You said it so well.

Find me a powerful, legitimate anti-cruelty group and I will support them with money and time.

PETA gets nothing but my disgust.

[curse10]

14. So it's okay to arrest people for protesting something you don't like?

christ.

[TLM]

20. No it is OK to arrest people for harassing children...

And if someone runs up and tells a kid that his mommy is a murderer... that asshole should spend the next six months in a fucking 6 by 8 cell.

[curse10]

84. sweeet

can't wait to be in that 6 by 8 cell!

[blondeatlast]

151. I have a duty to protect my son at all costs.

And if you came within arm's reach of him for any reason, I'd do everything in my power to see that you would see justice. I can't say much for those around me--people tend to get really antsy when children are threatened.

[Myra]

156. There ought to be limits to freedom, eh?

Sounds familiar.

[Selwynn]

225. YES. And there already are. For instance, I can't murder you...

..without suffering the consequences. And aren't we glad other peoples freedoms are limited in that way? Of course freedom is and should be "limited." You are not allowed to rape me, I am not allowed to beat you senseless with a club. These things may happen, but there are fair and proper laws against them, and hopefully those who break them will receive proper justice.

[Loonman]

24. Not protesting, harassement

There's a difference.

[curse10]

80. that's a fine line you are drawing

and a slippery slope you create. I could be "harassing" bush next time I protest.

[blondeatlast]

153. If you get that close to the target of your protest, that's harassment.

[curse10]

163. pamphleting has been going on for centuries

:eyes:

then I guess I can file suit against the bible thumpers on every street corner passing out their bullshit? no, I can't. It's not harrassment.

[blondeatlast]

172. PETA is going directly to the pre-schoolers, dear.

You get within arm's length of my child, I'm calling it harassment.
Find the prosecutor who would disagree with me.

The law is on the children's side, in the end.

[DoNotRefill]

32. That's like saying....

"so it's OK to arrest people for selling pornography to kids?"

Both are infringements on the First Amendment. I'd have NO trouble with this if they were only handing the fliers out to people over the age of 18. They aren't. They're targeting children. And the First Amendment has never been absolute. Damaging speech has ALWAYS been abridged. That's why fraud and perjury are illegal. Some speech is criminal. This may well have crossed that line.

[curse10]

78. what's damaging about the truth?

eom

[DoNotRefill]

103. It's a LIE.

Parents who wear fur generally don't go around killing housepets with big combat knives and looks of malevolent glee on their faces to make fur coats. And I've NEVER seen (and yes, I can identify fur by touching it) a dog or cat-hair jacket. "Mommy" is NOT going to kill fluffy and make mittens out of her.

The flyer is a LIE.

[curse10]

111. If you don't think cats and dogs aren't used for fur coats

you are living in a dream world. They often aren't sold here in the states because Americans have issue with using cats and dogs as food and fur (never mind your own animals eat ground up dog if you feed them Iams.)

And the pamplet, from what I see, is about rabbits, foxes, and raccoons, the most common fur coat material.

[DoNotRefill]

119. Then why hide the family pets from Mommy....

as the pamphlet suggests?

It's filled with LIES.

[curse10]

122. never mind

why bother

[DoNotRefill]

130. Bottom of page 2:

"until then, keep your doggie and kitty friends away from Mommy-She's an animal killer!"


Nope, they don't use the word "hide"....but the sentiment is there.

[Mis-an-thrope1111]

221. HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

"until then, keep your doggie and kitty friends away from Mommy-She's an animal killer!"


oh this is fun

what a hilarious pamphlet, I can't wait to get mine

[DoNotRefill]

235. Coming from a person with this on your website:

"I've been having this re-occurring dream for a long time now...
In it all the animals of the world begin attacking and killing people.
The animals aren't motivated by hatred though. That is a force which only moves humans.
No. They do this in the complete and total innocence of nature.
with the only motivation they know. Survival. It's like the sudden response of some kind of global immune system.
In this dream the earth realizes the disease from which she is suffering. Diagnoses the cause. Humanity. And acts to cure herself of the cancer-like ailment.
I know it's just a silly dream....
But I still wish it would come true."


http://www.mis-an-thrope.com/uncomics/scene2/actisceneii.html

Did you write this? Are those your words? If so, that casts an interesting light on your beliefs...Hoping that humanity is exterminated isn't a very healthy thought now, is it....

I also enjoyed your logo. How kind of you to rework a Nazi symbol. Very "special".

[Mis-an-thrope1111]

237. ohhhh

thanks for the visit!

and you even took the time to transcribe that whole passage

I'm flattered

re-worked? how exactly was it re-worked?

as far as whether or not its a healthy thought, that depends on whose health we're talking about =)

gee you don't think the name MISANTHROPE gives me way do you?

you're a sharp tack indeed

well it's good to see I have a new fan!

keep reading the story is about to get interesting (sort of)

I really am flattered you took the time to look through all 5 or 6 pages on my site *blush* maybe you humans aren't so bad after all.


what am I supposed to be ashamed of my own work?

go on, admit it... you love it!


edit: by the way posting that image is a little thing called bandwidth theft... I'll over look it this time, but for future reference a link to images which you do not host is acceptable, but posting the image I am hosting bleeds my bandwidth and is in fact a crime. Thanks again!

[Name removed]

265. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Name removed]

277. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[DoNotRefill]

287. I'm not a fan nor your friend....

people like you worry me. Not much, but a little bit.

[Name removed]

298. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Sterling]

180. think a lot of people have no idea what we do to animals.

It surprises me we don't have PETA coomiting real acts of terror. You think alerting people to the cruel treatment of animals is starting a riot? And you accuse PETA of being over the top? Get a grip. Good luck in prison after you rely on "fighting words" to save your ass form jail after you decide you have the right to assault a protester because the "started a riot" whatever.

I am not even a member of PETA and this disgusts me.

[DoNotRefill]

193. We do.

PETA is the "cover" organization for ALF, which is classified as the most dangerous domestic terrorist organization in the US by the FBI. They supply ALF with emotional and financial support, and allow ALF to recruit from their membership. They also release ALF's "press releases".

As I've said before, I have no problem with PETA protesting whatever, as long as they do it in a legal, responsible manner. terrorizing children isn't legal or responsible.

[curse10]

85. of course speech is limited

but why should children be protected from the fact that the coat their mother is wearing shed so much blood? Is that the precedent we want to set? Want to not have your child receive a pamphlet? then fucking don't wear the fur of dead animals on your back. Simple as that.

And fraud and perjury are illegal because they are lies. In fact, the only litigated speech that is based on truth is public disclosure of private facts. And that private fact has to be morbid and sensational.

[DoNotRefill]

107. And THAT's why it's terrorism....

"Want to not have your child receive a pamphlet? then fucking don't wear the fur of dead animals on your back. Simple as that."

It's a matter of PETA THREATENING people to change their behavior.

If I came up to you and said "Want to not have your kids receive a pamphlet alleging you are personally responsible for and took part in ethnic cleansing? Then give me $500." it would be just as illegal. You're pushing a fucking EXTORTION scheme.

What danger does a fur-wearing person pose to their pets? How many mommies anally electrocute the animals used to make the fur coat they're wearing? The flyer is RIFE with LIES.

[curse10]

114. The fact that they don't do it themselves doesn't make it right

they are just paying for someone to do the dirty work for them-- much like a hitman. The person that pays for the killing still gets the first degree murder rap.

[DoNotRefill]

123. that's not what the pamphlet says....

it says "Mommy kills animals" and "hide your pets".

And terrorizing small children isn't right. Ever hear of "two wrongs don't make a right"?

[NashVegas]

189. How Is This Different from Say, Child Molesting?

To shove this crap on kids in the attempt to fulfill your social agenda isn't so very different from a sex offender trying to get his rocks off.

You're both exploiting a child's inquisitive nature. You don't give a damn about the kids.

[curse10]

206. LMAO

pamphleteering equals child molestation????????


wow.

[NashVegas]

264. I'll Ask Again

How is this not expoiting an 8 year old for the purpose of your own gratification?

[Name removed]

222. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Pontus]

319. What if some radical anti-homosexual...

targeted gay mothers at a certain daycare and gave the children a pamplet called "Here's what mommie does with her girlfriend" and it was full of graphic sexual content? I consider what PETA is doing on that par!

[TLM]

18. I'm waiting to see one of these jerks get knocked on their ass...

by some angry parent.

Think there is a court on earth that would convict a pissed off parent for that? I don't.

[Kolesar]

25. Henceforth resulting in what? More publicity for PETA

PETA really knows how to leverage their publicity budget.

[Cicero]

198. "I'm waiting for the first arrests....."

If I had a child, and some PETA nut handed something like this to him/her, I would probably be the one being arrested, for knocking their teeth down their throat...

I'm sorry, I'm not normally a violent guy, but this kind of thing infuriates me. :mad: :nuke:

Later,

[eileen_d]

10. Hoo boy...

If this is true, I'm going to turn into one of those jokers who says PETA should stand for "People Eating Tasty Animals." I was traumatized as a child by watching the *cartoon* version of Watership Down; a flyer like that would have really fucked with my head.

[DoNotRefill]

30. Don't take my word for it....

go to the PETA site. Http://www.peta.org they have a link to the cartoon. That's where I found it. They seem PROUD of it.

[Clark Can WIN]

11. If somebody handed that to my kid

They would be eating teeth in NO TIME.

Consequences be dammed.

[Name removed]

13. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Loonman]

19. The other one was locked

Duh.

[TLM]

23. Sorry I do not "get over" child abuse.

And that's what these PETA folks are doing.


These are the folks who give the left a bad name... these are the reason people in the middle think that people on the left are authoritarian assholes.

[SOS]

26. Meanwhile...

Anheuser-Busch and Smirnoff target their addictive poison to high-school kids. They spend hundreds of millions annually. They market to kids with sweet alco-pops to build brand loyalty among children. Their products will eventually kill, cripple and destroy the lives of millions of them, many in wrecked cars before they even have a chance to graduate from high school.
So who's abusing children? Do evil corporations which kill kids by the thousands get you mad or just PETA people with brochures?
And why can't a responsible adult simply take the brochure and throw it away? Problem solved.
For those of you who would like more info on kids killed, in part, by corporate liquor advertising targeted at kids:
http://madd.org/stats/0,1056,1114,00.html

edit to fix link

[DoNotRefill]

33. Sorry....it's not a "one or the other" scenario.....

and targeting children with this kind of sickness is morally reprehensible.

[Hippo_Tron]

109. Ummm...

I drank moderately in high school and promise you that my decission to do so had ABSOLUTELY nothing to do with TV commercials, most of which are extremely stupid.

[SOS]

186. The Death Merchants

will be sorry to hear that. They spent $1 billion a year on advertising and they have the market research to prove that it does work. Here's a fact to add to our child abuse file:

"Underage youth were exposed to more TV, magazine, and radio ads for beer and distilled spirit than adults in 2001."

[curse10]

75. this is not child abuse

beating your child is abuse.

refusing to feed them is abuse.

locking them up in closets is abuse.

educating children about the horrors of the furrier business? not abuse.

[DoNotRefill]

110. Not even close to true.

It's illegal to psychologically abuse a child, even if you call it "education". That's why it's illegal to sell XXX films to kids, even if packaged as "educational" material.

You've posted in other places in this thread that the reason behind this is to prevent parents from wearing fur by threating them with exposing their kids to this crap. That's terrorism, plain and simple.

[Sterling]

183. I agree these people are cry babies.

Truth is tough to swallow sometimes. The cruelty we treat animals with is one of those hard truths. I hope someone is kind enough to teach that to your children one day so they can help to change that hard truth. It seems many on this thread refuse to take that responsibility on themselves. I am glad PETA is there to make up the slack.

[DoNotRefill]

204. So when Reverend Phelps....

goes around giving 4 year olds pictures of aborted fetuses and telling them their mommies support abortion and want to kill them, you'll not have a problem with it?

[NashVegas]

190. Exploiting a Child for Your Own Gratification Is Abuse

And won't you feel good about yourself after?

"I did my good deed today."

Right.

[alphafemale]

108. PETA used to be decent...but I think they may be All COINTELPRO now.

Tactics like these turn people against all liberal causes.

I'd even suspect someone defending them.

Inflicting emotional trama on children is NEVER okay or acceptable.

What next are they going to throw blood at kids who are drinking milk?

These actions are very suspect.

[DoNotRefill]

31. Come now....

could it be that you're ASHAMED of what they're doing with YOUR money?

[curse10]

76. no, I live in Boston

and I'll be there with bells on, thanks.

[DoNotRefill]

113. Take bail money....

eom

[curse10]

115. sure

:eyes:

[Sterling]

184. Sounds like you will need the $

If you actually had the guts to show up and back up your threats tough guy.

[DoNotRefill]

201. My threats?

Please quote where I've posted a threat.

[Kolesar]

16. I love that flier

I wish I could think of publicity gimmicks that good to advance the causes I am working on.

As for PETA's tactic of handing that flier to children--I agree that the tactic is problematic but it just does not bother me that much.

(I am printing out a copy of that for my wall)

[OhioStateProgressive]

17. i support PETA's actions

and many extreme leftists do as well

[Loonman]

21. So would card carrying fascists

Yep.

[OhioStateProgressive]

28. nice attack post

yep

[rman]

38. the Far Right typically deplores anyone concerned with the environment..

..or animal rights.

I'd say it's highly unlikely that the likes of Ashcroft, Rove, etc would support any animal rights actions.

[DoNotRefill]

40. Define...

"animal rights actions". If you're talking ALF, it's CLEARLY terrorism.

[Hippo_Tron]

100. Well if it weren't for animal rights groups then Rove and Ashcroft...

Wouldn't have any rights.

[DoNotRefill]

35. Yup....."extreme" being the operative word....

There's NO difference between PETA and Operation Rescue. PETA has apparently been copying from OR's playbook. With "friends" like this, who needs enemies?

[blondeatlast]

155. Abso-effing-lutely. Defend that, PETA friends.

[Sterling]

187. You don't have to be a leftist

To think animal cruelty is wrong.

[DoNotRefill]

202. And you don't have to be a right-winger....

to think PETA's latest stunt is hare-brained, ill-conceived, and counter-productive....

[SiobhanClancy]

27. Wrong time,wrong place,wrong target

I can't imagine why they're doing this. I support PETA handing out flyers in front of Filene's or someplace else that sells fur. How sad that they are targeting children...at the Nutcracker no less! A great memory of the LAST year for the Nutcracker at the Wang:(

[Renew Deal]

29. This is all I have to say about PETA

[Loonman]

45. I have to post PETA threads

To expose these liars and bastards every chance I get.

[DoNotRefill]

47. I'll expose one...

http://www.fbi.gov/mostwant/alert/sandiego.htm

[Kolesar]

49. Isn't that the agency that keeps unconstitutional records on noncriminals?

Like peace march organizers?
It is like J. Edgar Hoover never died.

[Loonman]

53. ALF terrorists are not non-criminals

They are criminals.

[DoNotRefill]

55. Ah, yes....

those evil FBIers...Imagine the nerve of those people, putting out a wanted poster for a guy just because there are warrants out for his arrest....

<snicker>

[Renew Deal]

154. It's just a joke

I was having fun with irony.

[Kolesar]

34. Now I have "Dance of the Sugarplum Fairies" running through my head

Does anybody else?....Happy Holidays, everybody!

[rman]

36. isn't instilling environmental awareness the most horrible thing?

that's a rhetorical question

Could Loonman explain

- how this is "guerilla tactics"? guerilla makes me think of guns, civil war and such. how do PETA's actions equate to this?
- how is this "designed to traumatize children"?
- how people can fail to make the connection between wearing fur and killing animals purely for luxury?

[DoNotRefill]

39. Pretty simple....

there's no difference between giving kids pictures of mutilated animals and telling them their mommy killed animals, and giving the kids of mothers who have had abortions pictures of mutilated fetuses, and telling them their mommy killed their sibling, and may kill them too.

PETA has deliberately become the Operation Rescue of the left, to the point that they copy the real Operation Rescue's tactics.

PETA's goal is to coerce people into not wearing fur by the systematic terrorization of people who wear fur. They've crossed the line from "free speech" into terrorist activities, no matter how much they claim that ALF isn't a part of them.

[Kolesar]

42. We are not talking about ALF here, so your terrorism label does not apply

[DoNotRefill]

43. PETA claims they're not affiliated with ALF....

yet they're the ones who release the ALF press statements and provide lawyers for apprehended ALF members. PETA is the "legal" front organization of the illegal ALF.

Terrorism is defined as the systematic use of terror to coerce people. PETA directly practices terrorism in at least two forms: First, their "actions" of throwing paint (a generally caustic substance, and the act itself constitutes a criminal assault and battery in all 50 states) on people wearing fur in an effort to stop people from wearing fur, and secondly with this flyer, trying to coerce parents from wearing fur by terrorizing their children.

[Loonman]

44. No, but they support ALF in words, deeds and probably $$$

They're criminals.

[DoNotRefill]

46. There's no doubt about the money....

Rodney Coronado and David Wilson are prime examples. IIRC, Wilson was an intern at PETA (and an ALF spokesperson). Also, in 2000, PETA gave $1500 directly to ELF.

[Kolesar]

48. dictionary.com says "terrorism involves force or violence"

Paint or flyers is hardly in that realm.

http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=terrorism

I think there is a strong moral arguement backing PETA's positions. Animals need not suffer horribly as they do to meet our needs for clothing or food. If I were active in PETA, I would probably not lead the extreme activism that they do. However, if I looked further into their issues, I might find evidence that would make me become a radical animal rights activist myself. My only reaction to the horrors of modern food production so far has been to become a vegetarian.

I just cannot look at those animal rights websites for too long. They carry images as horrifying to me as those images that made me oppose and act against the Iraq war.

[DoNotRefill]

52. So sorry....under your definition....

throwing paint qualifies, just as throwing rocks would qualify. It's a forceful act, which is why it's considered an assault and battery under the law.

I got my definition from Webster's.

[Kolesar]

58. too much of a stretch...throwing paint to terrorism

What are they going to do? Sicken 50 and kill five subway occupants by throwing around some Sherwin-Williams A-100? It is just too much of a stretch to call these activists terrorists because they throw paint.

[DoNotRefill]

64. Ah. So....

If I start an organization dedicated to going around slapping PETA members, it wouldn't be a terrorist organization? After all, it wouldn't kill thousands...

The systematic illegal use of force to coerce a population (or subset of the population) is by definition terrorism. The fact that the force doesn't kill millions is not relevant. Throwing paint (or acid, for that matter) on people to coerce them to change their behavior is terrorism, plain and simple.

[Kolesar]

69. "Start an organization to slap PETA members", sorry, that is not terrorism

Hijacking airliners is terrorism. Kneecapping judges, poisoning water, sending in suicide bombers, that is terrorism.

The Organization to Slap PETA Members, or OSPETAM, might be guilty of violating civil rights or maybe RICO organized crime, or just plain assault charges, but not terrorism. Unless they have like a 5000 gallon can of Sherwin Williams A-100 that could drown a dozen people.

[DoNotRefill]

72. Ya know....

you REALLY ought to read the U.S.C. sometime...

[Kolesar]

73. and you are a law professor, I presume

[DoNotRefill]

74. Nope, just a J.D.....

eom

[Sterling]

188. I hope you don't make a practice of handing out legal advice.

You could get your clients into some serious trouble with some of your wacky ideas.

[DoNotRefill]

199. Which ones?

the ones about child abuse? The ones about PETA's ties to a terrorist organization as classified by the US Government PRE 9/11? The ones about PETA's support of a convicted arsonist?

[blondeatlast]

157. So, doesn't the same aplly to PETA?

The Organization to Slap PETA Members, or OSPETAM, might be guilty of violating civil rights or maybe RICO organized crime, or just plain assault charges, but not terrorism. Unless they have like a 5000 gallon can of Sherwin Williams A-100 that could drown a dozen people.

[Kolesar]

263. Go back and read posts 42, 48, and 58

It is really not that complicated. I cannot believe this lame subject got 263 posts. The world is burning down and we are worrying about patrons of the Nutcracker. Welcome to the Do-nothing Underground.

[maveric]

37. Peta is just as bad as the Pro-life, fundie whackos...

that hold signs and pass out flyers with aborted fetuses on them. Its terrorism folks!

[DoNotRefill]

41. It's interesting to note...

that most of the pro-life fundie whackos denounce things like firebombing clinics and killing reproductive service providers, while PETA sort-of denounces criminal acts committed by splinter groups like ALF, while issuing ALF "press releases".

Two sides of the same coin....

[PatGund]

50. To cite FARK

I suspect some parents may end up doing a little nut cracking of their own....

[DoNotRefill]

71. LOL! I LOVE FARKERS!!!!

PETA freak: "Animals died so you could wear that!"
6 year old child: "There weren't supposed to be any witnesses. Now I'll have to kill you too!"

PRICELESS!!!!! BWAHAHAHAHAAAAAAAA!!!!!!

[blondeatlast]

159. I should say so . . .

I don't care what the reaasoning is. If someone I don't know approaches my child, I'm protecting him.

That's my job.

I'm MOM!

[Loonman]

51. If I decide to counter protest with news article fliers about PETA

I'm not going to be afraid, shrink away, or be intimidated.


I know the location of most of the active "cells"' primary members and phone numbers, addresses, etc. in both Cambridge and Boston.

[Blue_Chill]

54. Truth is a bitch isn't it? We can't let our kids near it.

Is this material any more graphic then taking kids out and killing a animal on a hunting trip? No. So you can take the "it's too violent" defense and shove it.

Is this material not true? Does meat we feed our kids not get processed this way? You bet your ass this is the truth behind your burger.

Truth sucks but it is the truth. Face it people, you can get mad all you want but we as a society blind ourselves to the suffereing of animals on purpose and then get mad at those who remind us of it. You know damn well animals suffer horribly and needlessly everyday, so don't get mad at PETA, stop being a hypocrite and oppose it, or admit that you don't mind animal suffering and stop faking.

[Name removed]

56. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Blue_Chill]

57. I don't support this action by PETA

but the attacks I see posted here are crap, and so is most of the anti-PETA garbage. I think this is a dumb idea myself but it is the truth so if you have a problem with it be honest, don't pretend this is abuse, or that PETA is lying to kids.

[DoNotRefill]

60. Ah. They're not lying to kids. Really?

Then why should kids keep their pets away from their mommy if she wears fur?

[Blue_Chill]

79. Out of respect for there pets

I wouldn't let anyone wearing fur near my dog.

[Name removed]

62. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[DoNotRefill]

59. Did you read the flyer I linked to?

Are you saying that the lurid "cover art" is an accurate portrayal of fur wearers? Or are you saying that fur wearers pose a threat to the family pets, like the flyer states? The flyer is riddled with fucking LIES.

Animals suffer, and it sucks. That fact does NOT justify psychological child abuse OR direct acts of terrorism, which PETA seems to condone, to the point that they gave almost $50K to defend an ALF member who was convicted of arson.

[Kolesar]

63. "psychological child abuse OR acts of terrorism" gimme a fucking break

It's a cartoon, dude, not a weapon of mass destruction.

[DoNotRefill]

65. What's the purpose of it?

to scar a child's mind and destroy the relationship between a mother and child, because the mother wears fur.

At BEST, it's child abuse. At worst, it's terrorism. Oh, I'd also point out that it's conduct designed to cause an immediate breach of the peace, another criminal act.

[Blue_Chill]

81. To let kids know mommy supports animal abuse

And that is a fact if she wears fur.

[DoNotRefill]

142. Wrong. Curse said it best....

the purpose is to keep Mommy from wearing fur, by threatening to give such horrible materials to Mommy's children. It's designed to intimidate and threaten Mommy into changing her legal behavior. It's terrorism, plain and simple.

[Sterling]

194. Gulty conscience does not make terrorism.

Holding a mirror to your face is not an act of terror. Or at least not in most people's case that is.

[DoNotRefill]

219. If peta went up to people and held mirrors in front of their faces...

it wouldn't be terrorism. Deliberately terrorizing children with graphic, lie-laden propaganda in a systematic way to try and coerce their parents into changing their legal behavior is the DEFINITION of terrorism.

[Blue_Chill]

230. Actually it's perfectly true

Mommy does support animal torture if she wears fur. Truth is the ultimate defense and fur is cruelty. So it seems you advocate lying to to children so they don't find out the truth about mommy. Perhaps mommy should be honest.

[Sterling]

192. OMG I have found some common ground with Blue Chill!

Like I said earlier you don't have to be of the far left to be against animal cruelty, your post proves it. Nice to know this about you Blue.

[Blue_Chill]

232. Hey I'm not a bad guy!

:D

[SOS]

178. Scar the child's mind

and destroy the mother/child relationship? That must be one hell of a brochure. The mother/child bond is, in the real world, destroyed by a system that claims to care about kids, while forcing Mom to work, because real wages haven't gone up since 1973. The child's mind will be destroyed by the neon cesspool known as "American culture" soon enough. The marketers will get the job done. Might as well let the professionals do it right.

From 1985-1995, more than 9,000 children under 11 died of child abuse. In almost all cases it was the parent or step-parent who perpetrated the fatal abuse. That's 900 DEAD children a year. But a thread on a real topic, like abuse mortality, would sink like a stone here, since PETA-bashing wouldn't be relevant .

It is disappointing to see politically astute DUers fail to recognize the difference between a tactic and a strategy. The flyer is a tactic. Does anyone think this appeared in Murdochs papers first by accident? PETA knew to send the press releases to Murdochs right-wing rags first. Loonmans first thread was from Murdochs Boston Herald. The story is now in regular rotation on CNN thanks to Murdoch. The strategy, of which the flyer is merely the bait tactic, is to get mothers to leave their fur behind to avoid any unpleasantness with the PETA people. PETA has brilliantly succeeded in getting national attention to the fur issue. They have also succeeded into goading people to not wear fur to the theatre lest juniors mind be destroyed forever by the big bad animal rights leaflet distributors. The PETA-haters are ready to beat the teeth out of the leafleteers before one leaflet has even been passed out. It is probably safe to say that few, if any, leaflets will reach the hands of these delicate children. The PR job is already done. Now if only some of our candidates could manipulate the media with the same expertise and finesse that PETA has exhibited here.

[DoNotRefill]

182. At a cost....

of branding the animal rights movement as being totally insane whacked-out child abusers in the minds of most....

That kind of "victory" we can do without....

[Sterling]

197. You are part of the animal rights movement?

Ok if you say so.

[DoNotRefill]

208. I'm part of the movement that disagrees with PETA....

I don't work with groups that mass-euthanize animals like PETA does. I work with groups that run no-kill shelters, "catch, spay, and release" programs for feral housepets, and things like that. In other words, I'm in the fucking trenches, not in an Ivory Tower (built on wetlands) planning what I can do to copy Operation Rescue's technical manual to piss people off for the "Greater Glory of Ingrid".

[Blue_Chill]

231. You do nothing for fur animals, livestock, or lab animals

so you can't say you are in the trenches. You help pets who suffer the least. The trenches are the people who get a job at a lab just to expose the bastards, risking lawsuit to help animals that no one seems to care for. The trenches are the people how sneak video footage of slaughter houses and risk personal injury to expose truth.

What you do is ask people not to kill kittens. It's not bad and I support you 100% but you aren't on the front of the real fight.

[DoNotRefill]

234. Heh....

and PETA is? Tell us, how many animals will actually be saved by terrorizing children? Tell us, how many animals will PETA euthanize this year? Tell us, does one have to violate the law to be "in the trenches"? After all, that's EXACTLY what happens when you go "risking lawsuits"....you BROKE THE LAW.

By your definition, people who blow up medical facilities are "in the trenches"...thanks, but NO FUCKING THANKS.

[Blue_Chill]

236. So you admit you do nothing for the animals I mentioned?

and PETA is?

Yes. They expose abusers and launch media campaigns forcing them to improve conditions and change policy.


Tell us, how many animals will actually be saved by terrorizing children?

More then the number of chinchillas and minks then your no kill shelter will save, unless of course someone happens to have one as a pet and decides they don't want it.


Tell us, how many animals will PETA euthanize this year?

Maybe a hell of a lot, I never claimed to support PETA 100%. Hell I don't give money to anyone without being specific about exactly what it is to be used for.


Tell us, does one have to violate the law to be "in the trenches"?

No but you can't ignore the largest part of the problem either.


After all, that's EXACTLY what happens when you go "risking lawsuits"....you BROKE THE LAW.

So then no one should expose the abusers? You perhaps think that it's a better tactic to sit back and allow them to self regulate? Interesting approach considering how many have already been caught braking animal welfare laws. But you don't care enough to stop THEM from breaking the law, as long as they aren't PETA it's cool with you?


By your definition, people who blow up medical facilities are "in the trenches"...thanks, but NO FUCKING THANKS.

I think the terrorists that do what you described above deserve to be thrown in prison. I do not support violence.

[DoNotRefill]

266. I do as much as you do....

Tell us, have YOU ever engaged in a PETA action that broke the law? If not, then you have no grounds to criticize me. Ever hear of the slogan "think globally, act locally"? I'm not in a big factory-farm or slaughterhouse area. There's not a chinchilla or mink or cattle or lab-rat population around for me to save. So, I do what I can, in the area that I live.

I'm curious. Are minks and chinchillas actually worth MORE to an animal rights activist than more mundane creatures like feral or unwanted housepets? I keep animals from being slaughtered. PETA slaughters animals. When was the last time YOU rescued an animal? It's been less than 10 days for me.

As for "exposing the abusers", I OPPOSE BREAKING THE LAW, REGARDLESS OF WHO IS DOING IT. I also refuse to support terrorists by donating to their parent organization. By putting money into PETA's coffers, you ARE supporting terrorism. Even if you direct the money to one specific program, it frees up other donations to go to the ALF legal defense fund or straight into ALF's bank account, like the donation PETA made to ALF "to support their programs". Correct me if I'm wrong, but isn't ALF's "program" composed almost entirely of committing acts of violence against persons and property?

[theoceansnerves]

61. "now it's personal"

ooh you're a tough guy aren't you?
i'm so sick of the anti-peta sentiment riddled throughout this site.

[Loonman]

66. Goddamn right

Ever wonder why PETA people never harass burly bikers wearing leather?

Because they're pussies who target women and children.

[nhtfopo]

86. Exactly. They target old people and kids

I wish I lived in Boston so I could get tickets to this show. I wouldn't even stay for the show, just show up nice and early wearing all fur. Fur pants, fur shoes, fur underwear, fur hat, and fur boxing gloves.

[curse10]

89. and the beef industry doesn't

look at this website

http://www.cool-2b-real.com/

made for girls. who runs it? that's right, the beef industry.

[nhtfopo]

332. I think the beef industry targets 18-35 yr old males.

Not many little girls buy beef. And I haven't seen the beef industry out telling kids that their vegetarian parents are evil lately.

[curse10]

87. because fur is the essence of animal cruelty

it's easy to spot and very easy to see why it's so unnecessary.

Spending 20,000 bucks on a coat made of animals? It's disgusting on so many levels.

Justify the need for fur coats. I'd like to see ya try.

[Loonman]

90. There is no reason for fur coats, concurrently, there is no...

...reason to harass small children.

[curse10]

91. well, when they stop wearing the fur coats

I'll agree with you.

And everytime I go out I see children wearing fur coats in boston. It's not just their mommies anymore.

[Mis-an-thrope1111]

121. how exactly...

is dressing up in a mascot outfit and passing out leaflets "harrassment"?

[curse10]

127. it's not

he likes to call it an incitement of riot-- legaleze for "starting shit"

[Sterling]

203. What is worse is that he thinks this stupid defense

Will save him from assault charges after he attacks a protester.
:eyes:

[DoNotRefill]

216. Now, now....

a defense attorney would be remiss to not consider such a defense if the situation warranted it, wouldn't s/he?

[Mis-an-thrope1111]

226. no

Physically assaulting someone for handing out cartoon pamphlets to underage people is not a legal response. Its aggravated assault.

Calling this pornography is completely retarded

[DoNotRefill]

126. Hmmmm...rabbit....

is often eaten. They also make fur coats out of rabbit fur. Once they kill the animal for food, are they supposed to throw the rest away?

[curse10]

128. the method is different

you have one factory for food, another for fur

[DoNotRefill]

177. so food factories just throw away the fur?

Sounds pretty inefficient to me.

I suppose all leather comes from "leather cows", which are different than "meat cows", which are different than "dairy cows"?

[blondeatlast]

165. I don't. I don't support wearing fur one little bit.

I just despise PETA's tactics.

PETA isn't a political organization, they are brand, marketed as a brand. Kind of like Nike. I think they have even taken lessons from McDonald's.

[DoNotRefill]

175. Coming from somebody who claims that she wants to be "uber-rich"....

I find your dislike of buying luxury items like fur coats somewhat at loggerheads with your stated goal in life...

:evilgrin:

[curse10]

191. come off it

:eyes:

it's über-rich. You can't forget the umlates.

[DoNotRefill]

214. Sorry...

I don't do Umlauts...

[VRSCAman]

88. LOL

I can picture a couple of PETA feaks coming up my brother and me after a ride trying to throw paint on our leathers. LOL

[blondeatlast]

166. God, forgive me for saying this . . .

But how I wish they would . . .

Bless me father, for I have sinned, Oh Lord, how I have sinned.

Still . . .

[Sterling]

205. Why would you wish for that?

Is your life really that dull?

[blondeatlast]

211. Nope.

[SOS]

276. So it is your position

that the McDonalds Corporation, the fur industry, Kentucky Fried Chicken, the foie gras torturers, the Beef Council, major fashion houses and Ringling Brothers Circus are owned and operated by women and children?

On the topic of leather:

1. Leather is the waste byproduct of the Big Mac industry. Hardly the place to focus your primary energies to reduce animal suffering. By the time it's "leather" the cow has already been strung up by one leg and had it's throat slit.

2. Leather is a legitimate safety issue for bikers. If a quality replacement were available, PETA would be there urging bikers to consider the new product. You can bet on it.

[blondeatlast]

162. Get used to it--there's a lot. And I'm part of it.

PETA are sick fucks. My dad was diagnosed with colon cancer about the same time they pulled that crap about Giuliani. My dad didn't survive.

For me, it IS personal.

[Sterling]

200. I am sick of the threats of violence.

And I really am a tough guy, lol.

[Liberal Veteran]

67. Time and a place for everything. This is not one of them.

I'm sorry, but I cannot agree with terrorizing children to make a political statement, particularly given the venue in which the plan is to distribute these fliers.

Spoil a child's holiday and quality time with a parent simply to make a political statement? That's just contemptable.

[Mis-an-thrope1111]

68. Terra Terra Terra

People dressed up as furry mascots handing out cartoon fliers is funny, not terrorism.


If you think this little flier is so evil you'd better lock your child in a closet because they see a WHOLE lot worse everyday. How many brutal murders do you think your child has witnessed on TV?

or re-inacted in video games?

seriously

I just love the title of it too

"YOUR MOMMY KILLS ANIMALS!"

LOL

you think kids today are so easily traumatized?

the kids will all think the artwork is cool, besides the rod and todd flanders types... come on these kids are raised on Grand Theft Auto the death rampage cop-killing prostitute beat down game


and you think a little cartoon picture is going to traumatize them?

I don't know what's funnier, the flier or the reactions it gets from you people.

This is the most entertainment I've had all week

[Kolesar]

70. Ok, guys and gals, time to call Congress about 9/11 Commission

Call your rep and tell them you heard that the head of the 9/11 investigation commission said that 9/11 could and should have been prevented. Tell them that you are "outraged".

Good day! Peace and love. We shall overcome.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=102&topic_id=274706&mesg_id=274706

[blondeatlast]

168. The fliers are going to PRE-SCHOOLERS,

not 12 year olds. Guess you don't have kids--there's a HUGE difference.

[Mis-an-thrope1111]

228. yeah the difference is...

preschoolers can't READ!

Now as a parent, if you cannot keep your pre-schooler from receiving material you find objectionable while he or she is in your own company, then you may need to work on those parenting skills a bit more.

Perhaps keeping your 4 year old a little closer to you when you go see the show in your nice fur coat would be a good start

[Forkboy]

82. Can't be any more damaging than seeing the Nutcracker is

[Bush is a chimp]

83. Sick

There are better ways to get your message out.

[Sir_Shrek]

92. PETA continues...

...to marginalize itself.

[MadHound]

93. Just for you People Eating Tasty Animanls out there

Let me remind you of a couple of things that PETA has done for you lately.

The first is that through their protests and direct action that some of you mislabel as terrorism:eyes:, McDonalds sat down and agreed with PETA NOT to procure their animal products from factory farms. For us carnivores out there, this means that you don't have to worry as much about factory farm diseases, such as Mad Cow. Also there is the extra added benefit that the meat tastes better. In addition this helps out the family farmer, and puts a speed bump in the path of factory farms that are destroying our country.

Second, they've also reached this a similar deal with KFC. Free range, disease resistant, tastier chicken nuggets.

So you may bitch and moan about their tactics, but at least be honest with yourself and admit that their actions are having a positive impact both for our society and YOU.

And labeling them as terrorists smacks over something the Bushies and other rightwingers might do. Don't fall for that trap. Today its PETA who are terrorists, tomorrow its Democrats. Besides, whatever happened to the first amendment? Is it just conviently forgotten when you disagree with what is being said?

[curse10]

94. thanks madhound

great post.

Not to mention that PETA has worked with numerous cosmetics companies fashion companies over the years-- and most have committed to stop testing on animals and using fur-- including major names like Calvin Klein, Revlon, L'Oreal, Avon, and Victoria's Secret.

[MadHound]

104. You're welcome

And go out there and have fun at the theatre. Guerilla protests are wonderful socialogical and psychological testing grounds, and an excellent way to open peoples eyes and minds. I think PETA is a needed force in our society, its helps in pushing the pendulum a little further back to the left.

[DoNotRefill]

129. Great....

"Guerilla protests are wonderful socialogical and psychological testing grounds"

Sounds like you're ADMITTING that you're testing psychological warfare on children. How special.

[MadHound]

134. LOL, I was wondering who was going to pick that up!

And you are the big winner! Let me put this in simplified terms for you then, it is called people watching. Have you ever done any guerilla protests? You get many strange, interesting and wonderful reactions to what you're doing. It is a way to pass the time, and maybe learn a little about your fellow human.

Another example, I've worn mismatched socks for years and decades now. What started out as sheer laundry laziness turned into a deliberate act in order to get a laugh from what people do upon seeing my socks. I've had people laugh, scream, and shake their heads. I call it the walking Rorschack test.

Congrats, the rug was just pulled out from under you;)

[DoNotRefill]

146. I recall a case like that a while ago in Texas or LA....

a Japanese exchange student went to this house and tried to scare the occupants. He got shot for his trouble.

Apparently you like dangerous "sports". PETA folks apparently don't, which is why they terrorize small children and women, instead of protesting and attacking bikers for wearing leather. Cowardice at it's finest....

[Name removed]

209. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Name removed]

210. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Mis-an-thrope1111]

290. brothers in sockness

I wore deliberately mismatched socks for years, for the same reason.

Now laziness has goten the better of me and most of my socks match... but you have reminded me of my past, and now I feel a renewed vigor to get some weird socks and mismatch them again!

and goofy hats!

I love wearing goofy hats!

same reason, and everybody notices those

[Hippo_Tron]

102. Well if we could get a decent president in the white house...

Then the FDA might be doing all of those things anyway. But I guess PETA serves some purpose as long as chimpy is there.

[radical_dem]

95. Idiots like PETA are giving the Dems a bad name

The great untapped political resource in america is the moderate majority.

They will vote for what ever party looks the least scary, if we want the moderate (and majority) vote we're going to have to start acting like it and disassociate ourself's from these wackos.

[MadHound]

98. Ooo, and associate yourself with Kerry, Edwards, Lieberman and Gebhart

The spineless wonders? At least people like PETA stand up and fight for their ideals. It seems like all the Dems can do is the spineless two step rollover.

I don't know about you, but I would rather be associated with a fighter in the realm of politics than a spineless wonder.
And I've got a clue for you, the reason there are people either dropping out of politics or going Green is because the Dems aren't standing up and fighting. Perhaps they should take a lesson from PETA.

[Hippo_Tron]

136. Ummm I would LOVE to debate this...

But I'd rather point out that it is WAY off topic.

[DoNotRefill]

148. Yup...like Rodney Coronado....

He "stood up for his ideals"....Tell us, is he out of jail yet after being convicted of arson?

[Mis-an-thrope1111]

116. very radical post

radical dem?

hardly

maybe you should change your handle to moderate dem

[Breezy du Nord]

96. Well, I know I frequently see people stabbing rabbits

You'd think they could come up with a better way of doing this...

[Hippo_Tron]

97. God I wish I could be a little kid again...

And go up to these people and say, what makes you think my mommy even wears a fur coat you fucktards.

[Mis-an-thrope1111]

112. please read before posting

whereas many children do use language such as "fucktard" I hardly think it makes you look like an innocent outraged parent.

As to why these "fucktards", as you so eloquently put it, would think that your mommy wears a fur coat is that they plan to hand out the leaflets to children whose parents are currently wearing fur.

but no, one has to just shoot his mouth off and feign outrage, doesn't one?

is this the freeper forum? did I get lost in cyberspace?

Now how they can tell the fake furs from the real ones I don't know...


but this ridiculous 'outrage' over a humurous leaflet is pathetic, even if entertaining.

[Hippo_Tron]

135. Ummm My mother...

Seriously wears fake fur thank-you.

[Mis-an-thrope1111]

229. No offense...

but thats very tacky.

If it were me I would have to go all 'fashion police' on mom

[Name removed]

305. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[blondeatlast]

169. Repeat: ther is a HUGE difference between a 3 year old and a 12 year old.

They plan on targeting pre-schoolers.

You are clearly not a parent.

[Mis-an-thrope1111]

233. you are correct

I am clearly not a parent

and if I was my opinion would not change at all


no PLEASE show me where they say they only want to give these pamphlets to PRE-SCHOOLERS...

now I will repeat: PRE-SCHOOLERS HAVE VERY LIMITED READING SKILLS!

and I will repeat again: if a parent can't keep something from a 4 year old when they are walking together, that parent has serious issues in child-rearing.

when I was four I would have LOVED a flier like that, and I still do.

I have a RIGHT to let my hypothetical 4 year old see that flier if I so choose, and you have NO RIGHT to deprive me or my hypothetical 4 year old of said flier.

Now when they officially ban the truth, yo umay have a case

Hiding the dismembered corpses of tortured animals is different from hiding the bodies of troops killed in Iraq how, exactly?

[rumguy]

99. I Hate Peta

What a waste of time and resources. There are legitimate issues they could take up, and they waste all their time on stupid lame ass stunts like this....what a joke!

[blondeatlast]

170. Exactly--there are much more effective tactics.

They are the political equivalent of high school art fags (no offense to my gay sistren and brathren, the term is purely rhetorical). They think they are cooler than cool, yet even the nerds (my group) found them contemptible.

[bushedout]

322. At least THEY are trying to do something!

What are YOU doing?

[bushedout]

324. I saw a post

From Az Joe about you.

[Mis-an-thrope1111]

106. I Love PETA

They just went up a lot in my estimation


What a wonderful campaign!


Really good artwork on the leaflet too

[Name removed]

125. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Liberal Veteran]

131. Would PETA support Phelps targeting children of GLBT?

If you can support targeting children to tell them their parent is a bad person for wearing fur, leather or what have you, as a valid expression and protest, then it follows that if Phelps were to target the children of GLBT people and tell the children their parents are evil and going to hell with some particularly vivid pamphlets then you would be okay with that.

Letting zealotry cloud your basic humanity is not a good thing in either case in my mind.

[Mis-an-thrope1111]

132. I would want that leaflet too

"YOUR MOMMY LICKS CARPET!"

oh oh oh protect the children the children

bleah

[Liberal Veteran]

133. Why target children at all?

How about we let children be children and not try to rob them of innocence by preying on their inexperience in life?

It's just contemptible to even attempt it.

[Hippo_Tron]

137. I went to their website...

Glad I didn't see that shit as a child or I would've been traumatized for life.

[SOS]

285. The scene in "Bambi"

where the hunter guns down Bambi's mother was much worse.
That vile movie traumatized generations of children. The Yearling, which I was forced to read in grammar school was also much worse. Yet I am not "traumatized for life". The effect that this violent garbage had on me was to solidify my early childhood empathy for the animals who suffered at the hands of vicious humans.

Of course the damage done to kids by "Bambi" is not an issue, since the Disney Corporation makes a ton of money on that piece of sh!t.

[Mis-an-thrope1111]

292. exactly

for that matter how about goldilocks, or hansel and gretel?

Old Yeller?

I don't see anyone getting all pissed off about Bambi

These are the BAN EVERYTHING crowd though, so I wouldn't be a bit surprised

its people like this that get classic literature like mark twain banned from schools

sickening

[Hippo_Tron]

304. Bambi never scared me as a child...

Although if I had seen that flash movie called "meatrix" on PETA's website I would've been traumatized.

[Mis-an-thrope1111]

308. so its all about you

the truth comes out

[The Stranger]

138. God, the original post and most of this thread is sickening.

"Victimizing children" by showing them what someone else does? Children see far worse on nightly television, and characterizing this as victimization is imbecilic and pathetic.

With friends like these progressives, who needs Republicans. Truly sickening.

[RebelOne]

139. I agee

[curse10]

140. I personally

have enjoyed the advocation of violence against PETA members. It's nothing unusual for this board. Some causes are okay, others aren't. I'm the local PETA nut, so I get a lot of crap. :-)

[DoNotRefill]

150. Oh please.

You, as a law student, should understand the difference between the stating of a "doctrine of legal justification" and "advocation of violence".

I have no problem with the animal rights movement. I have a HUGE problem with the animal rights movement targeting children and using tactics copied from Operation Rescue.

[curse10]

161. "These fuckers deserve a beating."

isn't an advocation of violence?

[DoNotRefill]

176. I must have missed that...

Please tell me what post # contained the statement "These fuckers deserve a beating." I can't seem to find that quote.

I'd be lying if I said I've never protested something where I thought the most likely result was being beaten by an angry crowd. That in fact has happened to me. I knew it going in, and it was a personal decision. I EARNED that beating.

I hope you're not beaten, just arrested or possibly sued for intentional infliction of emotional distress, so you can use your future "uber-richness" to pay for the required therapy of some poor child that you've traumatized. If you are beaten, enjoy it. You'll have earned it, while disgusting many of the non-fur wearing people who see it.

Wills and trusts? Big firm???? Ewwwwwwwwwwwww........ ;)

[curse10]

196. post 125

and there's nothing wrong with a big firm-- many of my friends work in big firms-- it doesn't make us any less human, despite popular opinion. And I like estate planning and probate. I think it's interesting. Nyah. :P

[SOS]

207. Post # 125

n/t

[Name removed]

213. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[DoNotRefill]

218. Please quote anyplace where I have threatened anybody.

In fact, if you read my posts, you'll see that I OPPOSE threatening people, which is why I'm so against this (and other) "actions" by PETA. You'll NOT find me out causing psychological trauma to children or throwing paint on people....

BTW, did you also alert on yourelf for violating the "personal attack" rules in calling me a coward repeatedly? I'm just curious.... ;-)

[arewethereyet]

145. being based in a port city they get terrific drugs at PETA HQ

and apparantly donations are up and they've so totally ripped they can't see straight.

idiots

[Imajika]

152. I detest PETA

And since I was trying to decide what to eat for dinner anyway, I think I will make it a big, thick juicy steak.

PETA accomplishes absolutely nothing for animal rights, infact they do the opposite. They piss off so many average people that whenever anyone hears "animal rights activisits" they think PETA and are immediately turned off.

If one of these PETA morons handed my child this obnoxious literature it would be hard for me to restrain myself from smacking said "activist" upside the head. Hell, even if I were arrested I think it would be worth it.

Now where is the number for Outbacks curbside pickup?

Imajika

[curse10]

160. cute

and so clever! :eyes:

[Sterling]

215. I have a feeling with or without PETA

you could give a rats ass about animal rights.

[curse10]

167. it's pointless to argue

with people on this board about PETA. Next time I'll just ignore this inflammatory bullshit.

Go on. Keep wearing your furs. Eat that animal.

Stay blind to the cruelty that occurs to millions of animals in this country every year. Ignorance really is bliss.

[blondeatlast]

171. I don't eat meat, I don't wear fur, I detest PETA.

I did, however, live for years on beef and pork derived insulin. I suppose you begrudge me that, yes?!

Let's see you take that one on.

[Selwynn]

227. Either/Or fallacies of the world, UNITE!

PETA is a terrible representative of positive ethical values.

I may agree that the right of a woman to make decisions about her own body in the case of abortion should be protected by the state. That doesn't mean I have to support an organization that goes out and murders pro-lifers, or harasses the children of pro-lifers, or takes up an fundamentally extremist approach to conveying a message.

[George_Bonanza]

179. Ignoring the differences between awareness and scare tactics

Is an obvious overlook. I wouldn't think too highly of someone's taste if they wore fur. There's synthetic lookalikes available anyway. Why get the real thing when you can get something just as good, with no creature being skinned for it? Most of us are in that camp.

However, PETA is just being pure bullshit when it foregoes the more arduous task of having to actually reason with rational adults and debating, and instead opts for a simple scare'em-into-our-side! targeting of young children at a non-animal-cruelty event. Telling kids that fur is harmful to animal welfare is one thing. Defaming their own mothers in front of them as butchers is another. I guess the intelligent way is less fun than the lowbrow way. If they were to send flyers to the families' homes, saying how there are perfectly viable alternatives to fur, then that's a good awareness program. However, waiting to ambush a bunch of families at what is supposed to be a fun and joyous event and attempting to turn children against their mothers by giving them visual punches instead of rational facts and data is not what an intelligent organization does.

PETA lost me when they equated the deaths of Jews with the deaths of chickens, and when they posted billboards denouncing giving meat to kids as child abuse.

[KFC]

212. PETA is irrelevant

Their idea of a "big victory" is getting Burger King to offer a veggie burger. Monumental.

Just a clubby bunch that likes to pull stunts. Kind of like the Jackass crew, just not all that funny. Fraternity types shocking people for fun.

You just can't take people who think eating meat is a moral issue seriously.

[alwynsw]

217. Irrelevant except at the times they encourage ALF, its minions,and it's

copycats to sabotage medical research labs. I'll not even mention the economic disasters caused by their followers in other areas.

[KFC]

220. Agreed

Peta is considered a bunch of clowns, but if they incite violence they rise to the status of criminal clowns.

[Selwynn]

223. PETA is not a respectable organization

What would be really interesting to me is to know of there were other organizations out there fighting for the "ethical treatment of animals" that didn't take such a polarizing and extremist point of view and approach.

I believe responsible and humane treatment of animals is important, and I don't believe eating meat is a necessary contradiction. To me a lot of it has to do with our attitudes. Does this consumeristic assembly line society really "respect" the animals it consumes? I'd have to say no. However, do I have any problem with a what I understand to be a more traditionally Native American approach to hunting and animals - deep reverance and respect, not taking anything for granted, seeking equalibrium with other life, not domination? Not in the slightest.

[incapsulated]

224. They give us animal lovers a bad name

I haven't read all the comments, but I can imagine...

I saw their latest stunt on CNN. It's got to be an all-time low. I've been into animal rights for most of my life. PETA has not only lost any respect I ever had for them, they are dragging the cause down with them and it infuriates me. We do not need this kind of publicity. I swear, I'm starting to believe they have been infiltrated by the beef industry, their tactics are so outrageous, it almost seems as if they are trying to discredit animal rights.

:grr:

[Charlls]

238. I Dont see ANYTHING wrong with that campaign

I would have LOVED as a child to been able to question my fathers ethics

I Hate how fathers lie to childs with BS; childs are better served by allowing them sooner to perceive that the moral world is complex and its not always safe to assume its ok how it is

Thats a paradigm designed to educate childs as future consumers that accept the bullshit we accept

[Selwynn]

241. Question: do you have kids?

The Magic 8 Ball says: outlook does not look promising.

[FDRrocks]

239. Does Mommy kill animals? Most likely.

Do animals have nerves? Yes. Do they feel pain? Yes. I can see problems with the tactics. PETA isn't extreme folks. It's trying to get out the message that the animals you eat, the animals you house (pets) and the animals we are... are no different.

Not different at all. I am not a part of PETA, but could be if I wanted. Imagine if you were using tactics like this, and facing a world of people who slaughter animals just like you for food, because it 'tastes good'. Would you think yourself extreme? Which side is extreme? PETA or the meat companies?

[Liberal Veteran]

240. Here's another idea: Let's also tell the kids there is no Santa Claus!

And we can also hand them a pamphlet telling them where babies really come from.

You know, there are lots of things we can do to get a message across, but ruining a child's holiday so you can have your 2 second political indoctrination is perhaps the most ill-advised and pathetic thing I can think of.

We are only children for so long in lives. What is wrong with letting them BE children for a little while. Stripping innocence away from some child to make a political statement just not how we should do things.

Tactics like this, regardless of their intention are mean-spirited and hurtful.

[FDRrocks]

243. So bullshit is a part of childhood?

Baseless crap needs to be indoctrinated? Being a child is being innocenvr. It's not eating other things amd believing in falsehoods (such as a stork). It is being young and learning.

Like I stated, I disagree with the tactics. But I will not have my child believing in fictional characters or fucked up ideals like eating other animals and spectres feeding money under thier pillows or delivering gifts under thier dead pine trees.

I disagree with the tactics, as I stated.

[Selwynn]

245. Very glad to have been raised on santa clause

Santa Clause in my household was a very happy part of my childhood. When I got a little older, there was no trauma in maturing into the understanding that santa clause was not "real"

If you don't want to take that particular route with your kids, that's perfectly fine. But there's nothing wrong with others who value the tradition of santa stories and make believe. I think life would be a better place if I had enough kid in me to still look for santa's sleigh on Christmas eve - I'm awfull glad I get to have those memories from my childhood.

So - back off a little bit on the moral high ground waxing eloquent about other peoples "fucked up ideals."

[FDRrocks]

246. I'm tallking about reality...

and having a caring attitude all the time. It doesn't tkae a fat man in red to evoke genrousity from me. It will not, as far as I have say, with my children. Thier beliefs should based in reality. Not in the fictional.

[Selwynn]

252. So am I.

And the reality is, the traditions of santa clause and reigndeer and elfs and other kinds of Christmas mythology were a gorgeous part of my growing up. They are a goregous part of many peoples growing up, but they certainly don't have to be a part of yours or your kids if you don't want. Just don't act as though because you decide something for youself, therefore everyone else should too. You need to dial down the condecension to about "5" and give other people the room to appreciate fantasy, mythology or good ol make believe in their own ways, or not at all.

There's nothing wrong with a little make believe - in fact we adults could probably do with a little more imagination in our lives anyway. I you choose not to embrace myth, fairy tales, stories, make believe or fantasy with your children, you go for it.

[FDRrocks]

254. Listen straight.

My ideas were ridiculed by the original poster of this particular hanging thread. Of course I am going ot respond to this. Santa Clause does not make a youth. You decided to get involved in this particular conversation.

[Selwynn]

256. It doesn't break a youth either.

You brought up santa claus, not me. If you have a problem with this particular tradition, or any other, then you are of course free to refrain from participating in it, or encouraging it. However, there's a lot of us grown ups who cherish our holiday memories of santa, and were in no way tramatized when we mautred and understood that there was no santa, save by the fact that there's something pretty great about being a child that you don't take with you when you grow up.

Anyway, you brought it up, not me.

[Liberal Veteran]

260. Well, actually, I brought up the Santa thing....as an object lesson.

The point was that if we were going to bash kids with the "truth" (and I use that loosely because I think "keep you kittens and puppies away from evil fur wearing mommy and daddy" is stretching the boundaries of truth), then where does it end?

We can have an entire gauntlet of causes which can bombard children on their way into a play with:

We can have the anti-Santa people telling children that mommy and daddy are liars and Santa doesn't exist.

We can have the Phelps telling kids that if mommy and daddy do naughty things with other adults they aren't married to or have the wrong genetalia they will die and burn in hell for all eternity.

Hell, might as well hit all the kids with pictures of animals being tortured in cosmetic testing.

We can have the atheists telling kids that mommy and daddy will die someday and turn into worm food.

As for me, I am going to err on letting the parents do their own raising of a child and not take it upon myself to rob a child of those oh so short years or joy and innocence where the world is a happy place filled with wonders and sometimes a little fantasy.

[DoNotRefill]

270. So....we should let 4 year olds watch war movies....

and specials on serial killers and Faces of Death 1-7 and "hard R" and XXX movies, because they're based upon reality?

It's a parent's JOB to protect their children. There's a LOT of NASTY stuff out there that a child has NO business being exposed to until they are older. In fact, exposing them to all of "reality" may be criminal in some areas. It is here.

[Liberal Veteran]

248. Nicely said, Selwynn....

Nothing wrong with letting kids enjoy a bit of fantasy. Reality will come plowing along fast enough on it's own.

[DoNotRefill]

267. So...you wouldn't object to your 4 year old child receiving....

a cartoon from Operation Rescue, with graphic photographs of abortion residue, telling your child that Mommy had an abortion, is a baby killer, and that the child is next on Mommy's killing agenda?

[Terwilliger]

271. no, but the situations are different

abortion isn't performed so the mother's can wear the baby's skin

[DoNotRefill]

274. Different issues, same exact tactics....

Imagine....a far-left completely whacked out group like PETA copying the tactics of a far-right completely whacked out group like Operation Rescue...

Oh, and BTW, until recently, aborted fetuses DID have value and were used. Remember the Stem Cell research ban? Where did those stem cells come from? Hint: not animals, and not people...

[Terwilliger]

280. oh, you mean like Dems and Reps using the same political tactics?

I know...it's HORRIBLE.

BTW back: ok, we have aborted fetuses used for research, and we have murdered animals used for....acoutrements

OHHH yeah, very similar indeed

[DoNotRefill]

283. So...

"ok, we have aborted fetuses used for research, and we have murdered animals used for....acoutrements"

I take it then that you don't have a problem using animals for research? If it's good enough for human fetuses.... ;)

Terrorism is terrorism, regardless of which side is doing it.

[Terwilliger]

288. The US uses terrorism every day

why should its people be any different?

I don't have a problem using animals for research when they're used as a last result. Killing of thousands of animals checking to see how poisonous lipstick is when ingested is disgusting.

[DoNotRefill]

295. So....

it's OK by you to adopt the means of the oppressor? If that's the case, what's the difference between the two groups?

[Mis-an-thrope1111]

282. I wouldn't mind at all

it is people such as yourself that seem to think a piece of paper is just sooooooo traumatizing and hurtful


give me any piece of paper you like, doesn't hurt me at all

now someone has to come and say "you are obviously not a parent"

you know what I say to that?

parents like you warp your children more than you'll ever admit, and create a desire in them for those very things you forbid them.

choke on it

[Mis-an-thrope1111]

284. you make me to laugh

I know when I was 4 I thought Santa was the biggest crock of shit I'd ever heard.

Kids today are growing up ever faster

in fact I have never met a child who honestly believes in "Santa Claus"

they know where the presents come from... who wouldn't play along for some extra shwag?

give the tykes some credit

Personally I think intentionally deceiving one's children and making them believe in imaginary beings is morally reprehinsable... but then that's why I'm not a 'christian'.

Who are the truly sick ones here?

Santa Claus?

give it a rest

[Selwynn]

242. Let me think... yeah its still PETA

Do I think we should have a different relationship with the food we eat than we currently do? You bet. Do I believe eating an animal is bad? That depends, but I do believe that answer can certainly be be no. I think other cultures of past and present have had a very healthy and proper attitude about it.

And aside from that, the world is full of things that eat other things for food. It's just part of life. Your argument is based on how we're no different than other animals. Well, okay, quite a few of those other animals eat still other animals for food. We are no different. Oh wait, now you want to say that we are different, yes? :)

Either way, I respond better to honest, informed, respectful dialogue on a subject than I do to shock tactics.

[FDRrocks]

244. My deal is that humans typically claim they are different from animals...

You can live just as well by not causing suffering upon another animal... so why do you do it? That is the question I ask. It isn't neccesary, we are so evolved, so why the fuck do you do it.

[Selwynn]

247. Not really any of your business, is it? :)

Feel free to do your best to live in healthy relationship with nature in what ways you feel are best, and I will do the same.

[FDRrocks]

249. Yea, killing shitloads of animals is NOT my business.

Nice try, I'll stay on the same damned path, thank you.

In fact, I'll think I will go kill and eat some humans... doesn't matter.

[Selwynn]

253. Your killing animals is your buisness. Telling me how to live is not.

If you choose to go kill and eat humans, that is your choice too. We of course have laws in this land which will probably result in you facing some consequences for that choice - but still, its your choice and you must do what you feel is best, of course.

[FDRrocks]

255. Why'd you even respond to my post?

If you think that way? Tell me.

[Selwynn]

257. Why not?

[DoNotRefill]

273. Take Misanthrope with you....

:evilgrin:

[Mis-an-thrope1111]

296. I refuse

to eat humans

too many chemicals and preservatives in the meat... yuck

I prefer natural foods... a nice tender vegan might do :hi:

yum


now morally I can't see the difference between killing a human and killing an animal

I also can't see the difference between killing an animal and killing a plant.

Life is Life

this whole sanctity of life farce has never made any sense, just self-serving BS

Life feeds on Life feeds on Life feeds on Life

this is necessary

humans just think they are damn important

get over yourself

[DoNotRefill]

299. Cool!!!

"Life feeds on Life feeds on Life feeds on Life
this is necessary"

a Tool fan!

I suppose EVERYBODY has at least ONE redeeming feature! :)

BTW, does this sound familiar?

"Don't try to outweird me, man, I get stranger things than you in my breakfast cereal!"

[Mis-an-thrope1111]

300. uh oh

we may have found common ground on something...

yikes

you don't listen to skinny puppy too do you?

ever hear the song Testure?

I don't see why I am so interesting to you, unless you have a bit of morbid fascination in ya.



Some say the end is near.
Some say we'll see armageddon soon.
I certainly hope we will cuz
I sure could use a vacation from this

Silly shit, stupid shit...

uh oh - looks like maynard might have some of that homicidal ideation you're so worried about...


my advice to ya - lighten up d00d

[FDRrocks]

303. LOL Welcome to DU.

You are certainly humorous! :) :) :) :)

[Mis-an-thrope1111]

309. why thanks

though I don't know how long I'll last because I keep getting warnings from the moderators for saying things like "seek professional help"

I fear the mods may not be "fair and balanced" :scared:

haha

anyway thanks for the warm welcome

[DoNotRefill]

272. Isn't causing suffering part of nature?

Ever seen a cat torment a live mouse? How about a dog catching a rabbit? These aren't cruelty-free endeavors.

Are humans different from animals? That's debatable. Personally, I don't think so. If we are somehow different than other animals, what's the basis for it? Other animals communicate, have greater intellegence, live longer, use tools, have social structures, et cetera. We're all part of the same food chain.

[Mis-an-thrope1111]

301. exactly why...

do you have a buddha icon?

just curious because it doesn't seem to suit you well...



Time to bring it down again.
Don't just call me pessimist.
Try and read between the lines.

I can't imagine why you wouldn't
Welcome any change, my friend.

I wanna see it all come down.

[DoNotRefill]

302. Buddhism...

is a practical religion. It doesn't expect nor demand perfection. It recognizes that killing can be required, and that necessary killing doesn't disqualify one from the belief structure. That's why there are buddhist soldiers, policemen, and even butchers.


"The world is a wasteland
from Green Bay to Graceland
There's no one fit to lead the human race.
And you all know that we are
the throwbacks, the retards,
the ever-growing face of Human Waste."

[Mis-an-thrope1111]

310. oh is that what buddha said?

I didn't realize

I thought the first precept was "do not kill"

Aren't Buddhists supposed to seek to end the suffering of all life? isn't that the whole point? To remove suffering wherever possible?

just asking

[DoNotRefill]

313. try this on for size:

http://www.beyondthenet.net/thedway/soldier.htm

Maybe it'll answer your questions.


You might note that the "do not kill" guideline extends not just to people and animals, but to plants, too.

If Buddhism rejected all killing categorically, Buddhists would be left with a diet consisting entirely of rocks. That's not terribly good for fostering long life....

[Mis-an-thrope1111]

318. from your source

The Buddha said,

All tremble at violence, All fear death,
Comparing oneself with others
One Should neither kill nor cause others to Kill' (Dammapada)


pretty much sums it up I think

even if one has to kill it is buddhist to do so as humanely a spossible and to do everything possible to linit the suffering of all plants and animals...

doesn't reconcile very well with your idea that causing suffering is just a part of life so who cares...

the fact that one does cause sufferin gthrough one's own life should be recognized and the extent to which others are made to suffer through one's actions should be limited as much as possible according to the law of karma... don't you think?

[DoNotRefill]

321. Where did I say "who cares"?

What I said was that death was part of the natural order, and that humans aren't the only ones who an be cruel, giving two example from nature which don't involve humans.

And I'd thank you to keep your nose out of my religious beliefs...it's not your place to be judgmental of religions.

[Mis-an-thrope1111]

326. yes massa

put me in my place

and buddha said,"it is a great virtue to speak with indignant tones and feign outrage and disgust while attempting to rationalize one's position"

[DoNotRefill]

327. Nah...not my job to put you in your place....

I'll leave that to the professionals....

Cue "Bad boys" song...

:evilgrin:

[blondeatlast]

320. Alas, there was a time when I and many others could not.

I was dependent on beef and pork produced insulin for my entire childhood and beyond.

[Liberal Veteran]

250. Evil nasty spiders keep their food tied up and paralyzed alive until eaten

...nature is so evil!!!!

[FDRrocks]

251. Are you a spider?

Cause you seem no different.

[Liberal Veteran]

258. No sweetie, I'm a just a person who grew up on a farm.

And never had any misconceptions about where my food came from. I also understood that we ate certain animals, while others we used the by-products of (like eggs) in addition to eating, and others were pets like our cats and dogs that we grew up with.

I can remember helping my Grandma pluck chickens from a very young age. We fished and we hunted and we trapped. I've eaten frog, turtle, possum, deer, quail, duck, and rabbit and I am not ashamed of it. That's how we lived.

Probably quite a bit like the way most of my ancestors lived.

Perhaps PETA should try taking kids to a farm to see where food comes from. Of course the idea really hits home when your choices are eating what you saw to with your own hands or going hungry.

I have no problem with an agenda of trying make conditions better for food animals. I have no problem with people wearing leather or furs either.

PETA just takes their agenda over the edge of sanity at times and their tactics leave a lot to be desired.

[Nlighten1]

262. PETA does more harm than good.

:wtf: is their problem?

[Terwilliger]

269. Maybe these folks will be smart and not wear their fur

or, they can dodge the PETA folks

[DoNotRefill]

275. If they do...

the terrorists win.

[Terwilliger]

278. and the children will cry

[Kolesar]

279. read

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=104&topic_id=935746&mesg_id=941331&page=

[DoNotRefill]

286. I have...

and assault is still assault, terrorism is still terrorism, just as spiking trees that you don't own is still a criminal act.

BTW, what's the result of spiking trees? It puts blue-collar workers in immediate jeopardy of life and limb. NICE. I can't, for the life of me, understand why such conduct would be CRIMINAL.

[Plaid Adder]

281. They hope to accomplish what by doing this?

Mobilizing the children against the powerful Rabbit-Butchering-Mothers-of-America Lobby?

Anyway the best animal rights propaganda for kids is a movie like *Babe.* Any kid who can eat pork after watching that movie...

C ya,

The Plaid Adder

[Stompa1]

289. I agree

The majority of responses to PETA's new tactic are very well put and right on. Over the years they have done so many kooky things that I can only assume their leadership has only one thing in mind and that is obtaining donations by using off the wall protests. It would be interesting to see how much money they raise and exactly where it all goes. I don't think it's really helped alot of animals.

[blondeatlast]

315. Damn, you're good, Plaid.

I'm sure the PETA thugs found something terrible about "Babe," too.

[ronnykmarshall]

291. PETA can go to hell.

Flame away, because I don't give a damn about PETA. They are nothing but media whores.

I don't wear fur, never did never will. That's my choice.

PETA tactics are setting back the animal rights movement, not helping it.

[Terwilliger]

293. what would be helping it?

Seriously. If they object to the current and ongoing murder of animals for their fur, what should they do? Stand on a street corner and yell? Maybe they could find some politician willing to introduce legislation? OH, I forgot...we only have Democrats and Republicans. How about, they could all mobilize a trip to Scandinavia and north Asia to fight the mink traders hand-to-hand?

No. They do like any other public interest group in this country...they try to influence the market that creates the demand for fur. What else can they do?

[DoNotRefill]

297. Not like every other public interest group...

Most public interest groups don't commit or support acts of terrorism.

$50 grand to a convicted arsonist....yuppers, THAT'll help animals...

[Name removed]

306. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[DoNotRefill]

307. Peaceful, law abiding antiwar protesters are not terrorists...

but "black block" folks may be, depending on their actions.

Protesting something peacefully, without attacking or harming people, is not a terrorist act. Protesting by attacking people IS a terrorist kind of gig.

Carrying a sign in public expressing disgust = not terrorism.
Protesting something by lobbing molotov cocktails in an effort to frighten people = terrorism.
Giving obscene materials to 4 year olds in an attempt to coerce their parents = certainly criminal, possibly terrorism.

Pretty simple, actually.

[Mis-an-thrope1111]

311. oh there's an ignore list?

I think I may have need of it as well

[Kolesar]

312. it's that symbol with the "Z"s next to Refill's name on his posts

of course...heh heh...I cannot see them now
Welcome to the underground.
edit: I should have said "click that icon to hide his posts". He goes on to your ignore list and you will only see (ignored) whereever he posts.

You can ignore entire threads by clicking the X with a box on it next to the thread title in the "forum view" (such as General Discussion forum).

[trixie]

314. Is PETA targeting all kids or just little furites?

Are you handing out this junk to all the kids or just the ones holding the hands of people in fur?

[DoNotRefill]

317. Just the kids of the people in fur....

eom

[Turkw]

325. Little kids going to see the nutcracker = pro-fur?? Rove loves you

yes he truly does, because no matter who exactly is targeted he will spin and grin. Show any moderate parent THAT picture, and they will go ballistic- Against PETA

[blondeatlast]

316. Media Whores is exactly right.

The artsy-fartsy kids at school have found a political agenda. Since they can't see shades of gray, they can't take on really complicated issues. Well spoken, RonnyK.

[bushedout]

323. Hey loonman

Some guy named Az Joe is looking for you on another thread. I just can't remember which one now.

[opihimoimoi]

328. Why are those Kooky Conservative Pubs behind this idiot move?

This set up is gonna backfire fer shure

[mot78]

329. That's messed up

I'm not a vegetarian, let alone a PETA sympathizer. I don't know why they have to do demonstrations in front of little children.

[He loved Big Brother]

330. Good for them!

Food is one thing, taking a life for FASHION is just disgusting.

[DoNotRefill]

331. So, did anybody go?

after action report, anybody?

[Kolesar]

333. All talk, no action

Welcome to the sit-and-post underground