 |
 | Home | Contact Us | FAQ | Search & Site Map | Link to Us |
 | Sign In | Join | Other 45 Sites in Network |
| HomeDiscussion GroupsGeneral TopicsCat AnecdotesHealth and BehaviorRescue CatKB.com Contact UsLink To UsSearch & Site Map |
Cat Forum / Health and Behavior / April 2005How can you love some cats, but not all?
Someone I volunteer with is anti-TNR. She knows that I am strongly pro-TNR. Her main argument is that ferals destroy the wildlife, particularly songbirds. I, and another volunteer who does TNR, have gone round and round about this and have come to that "agree to disagree" point. Today she comes in with this article regarding the Wisconsin bill allowing people to shoot ferals (although their definition of a feral is really a stray). The article's point is that this bill is a good thing, it will help restore the songbirds, etc. I said it was bullshit, and the person who started the stupid bill just did it because he was sick of stray cats. She chuckled at me and said I was turning red. It was like she was baiting me, or thought it was "cute" that I was getting mad. Side note: I've had this happen in other situations because I'm normally a calm and quiet person, people think it's funny when I get mad. I honestly don't get how someone can claim to love cats, but not all cats. Like the feral cats are a lesser species. Her solution is the "kill-em-all" approach. Now, she did used to do wildlife rehab, but this was many years ago before TNR and managed colonies gained acceptance. So I can appreciate that there is a perspective I don't have, but still, I don't get it.  Signature-Kelly kelly at farringtons dot net "Wake up, and smell the cat food" -TMBG Kelly: I don't understand your friend, either. After all, especially when we are talking mostly about house cats that were dumped by their irresponsible, inconsiderate, idiot owners initially, and they had families, how can anyone say "kill them all"? They are just as lovable as the cuties at the local animal shelter, as far as I am concerned! I am pro-TNR. Just think of how over-run we would be with birds if the "ferals" didn't get some of them. We have a fair number of well-managed (tnr) feral cat colonies here, and I certainly have not noticed any shortage of birds. Shooting a cat just because it happens to be on your property? What happens if it escaped from a car at the vet clinic, and is on it's way home? (Yes, things like this do happen.) Someone shoots a much-loved companion animal. One of my neighbour's cats got out (don't let unreliable friends cat-sit), and came back 3 weeks later, much thinner and scraggly looking, but still alive. She was extremely distressed - - Phantom had lived with her for 12 years. Can you imagine if some homeowner had shot this "stray feral"? (by the weird definition in the Wisconsin bill) Your friend needs to re-examine her definition of "cat". I volunteer at our local shelter. One room has feral (real ones) cats in it. One of my treasured moments happened when I was handing out honeysuckle toys to the cats. I was putting one in the bottom kennel, and I could feel someone hooking at my hair. This HUGE stripey tomcat was repeatedly hooking and pulling at my hair and I said "Oh, you want another one? Okay!" I didn't realise he was supposed to be this really fierce, scary guy. He was a big sucky-puss to me. Must have been all that honeysuckle *g* I have related to a lot of ferals that had I a house, I would have tried to integrate them into my household. Cats are cats. Your friend needs to realise that ferals are the fault of human beings. They got there because sometime, someone ditched a pet cat. It is grossly unfair to say that because of that, now they, or their offspring, should be blasted away. Anyway, where colonies are concerned, as all intelligent people know, getting rid of a colony is pointless. Eventually another one will just move in. Trap, neuter, release into the colony, and . . . well, I'm preaching to the choir :) You have a sympathiser in me ..............I really do not understand your friend. My 3 year old, adopted Jan 22nd, was and still is pretty people-shy, not a feral but probably was much like an owned cat gone stray when she was confiscated by the SPCA. She came from a home that had 36 cats and 16 dogs. No doubt there was not a lot of time for the lady who lived there to socialize with all the animals - - she is a fulltime nurse. Animal control allowed her to keep 10 animals, so she kept 6 cats and 4 dogs. I cannot imagine how much that would hurt, having to give up your babies like that. She was very well-intentioned, but things got out of hand. It is really cruel to bait people about issues that hit core values or beliefs. That this person does this shows just how small minded and unintelligent she really is. Small minds are amused by small things. The hardest thing is not to react, but if you can, try not to. A cat IS a cat, feral or not. Your volunteer associate, however, is a fool. Melody > Someone I volunteer with is anti-TNR. She knows that I am strongly > pro-TNR. Her main argument is that ferals destroy the wildlife, [quoted text clipped - 18 lines] > I can appreciate that there is a perspective I don't have, but still, I > don't get it. > Kelly: > [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > anyone say "kill them all"? They are just as lovable as the cuties at the > local animal shelter, as far as I am concerned! <snip> I think she bases a lot of her stand on out-of-date information. I tried explaining the "what if your cat got out and was shot?" angle of that idiotic bill, but she said her cat wouldn't get out. I'm the most careful person and one of my cats got out and was missing for over a month. I'm glad none of my neighbors shot him! I guess ferals are almost like a different species to her. I still don't get how you can love and coo over the strays in the shelter, but say, if they were outside, someone has the right to shoot them? Don't get it. I think some of it was baiting me to get me mad, though. Signature-Kelly kelly at farringtons dot net "Wake up, and smell the cat food" -TMBG "KellyH" <Kelly@farringtonsNOSPAM.net> wrote in news:3aj326F6buvc0U1 @individual.net: > I > think some of it was baiting me to get me mad, though. Why do people do that? It always seems so hostile and disrespectful to me. --Catherine & Rosalie the calico > "KellyH" <Kelly@farringtonsNOSPAM.net> wrote in news:3aj326F6buvc0U1 > @individual.net: [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > > Why do people do that? It always seems so hostile and disrespectful to me. I think they are frustrated and need to vent their own anger in some way. Passive aggression, maybe? Anyway, it can be dangerous. There are far too many human powderkegs out here. It is *always* best not to screw with people. We just do not know what they are capable of. Some of the folks who like to "push buttons" find out soon enough. > It is really cruel to bait people about issues that hit core values or > beliefs. That this person does this shows just how small minded and > unintelligent she really is. Small minds are amused by small things. The > hardest thing is not to react, but if you can, try not to. I've learned not to talk about my beliefs with co-workers unless they're already friends and pretty obviously share my viewpoint. The respect I lose for people after I learn some of the things they believe can be detrimental to our working relationship, and that keeps me from getting my job done. Signaturemonique, who spoils Oscar unmercifully pictures: http://www.bounceswoosh.org/rpca > Someone I volunteer with is anti-TNR. She knows that I am strongly pro-TNR. > Her main argument is that ferals destroy the wildlife, particularly > songbirds. I, and another volunteer who does TNR, have gone round and round > about this and have come to that "agree to disagree" point. I have a problem with "managed colonies" in that they perpetuate breeding of cats that can't be TNRed. I don't know a single managed colony in which breeding has been stopped altogether. (I'm totally pro-TNR, BTW.) I also don't have any problem euthanizing FeLV and (truly) FIV positive cats when they cannot be rehomed. Completely healthy cats die daily for lack of homes. So in that regard, yes, I believe some cats are more "worthy" than others. You have to draw the line somewhere; you can't help them all. That's where I draw my line. Many times I have treated and rehomed cats with other illnesses. That being said, irradicating ferals is just plain stupid. Shooting them is even more stupid. -L. > I have a problem with "managed colonies" in that they perpetuate > breeding of cats that can't be TNRed. I don't know a single managed [quoted text clipped - 10 lines] > > -L. Probably every colony has a couple cats that won't go in the trap. But, I think it's better than them not being managed, not having someone look out for their well-being, and none of the cats being TNR'ed. I have mixed feelings on releasing FIV and FeLV cats. Some TNR groups don't test, others do. I have more issues with releasing a FeLV cat than FIV. FeLV is more easily spread, FIV has to be a deep bite wound or intercourse, which if the cat is s/n, they won't be doing anyway. Signature-Kelly kelly at farringtons dot net "Wake up, and smell the cat food" -TMBG > Probably every colony has a couple cats that won't go in the trap. But, I > think it's better than them not being managed, not having someone look out > for their well-being, and none of the cats being TNR'ed. i think they need to be TNR's. I just don't necessarily think they need to be fed. Feeding makes it much easier for them to thrive and breed. if they aren't fed, the population is controlled natually - more selective pressure. > I have mixed feelings on releasing FIV and FeLV cats. Some TNR groups don't > test, others do. I have more issues with releasing a FeLV cat than FIV. > FeLV is more easily spread, FIV has to be a deep bite wound or intercourse, > which if the cat is s/n, they won't be doing anyway. I agree with your sentiments here. The one problem I have with releasing FeLV and FIV cats is the possibility of them spreading disease to non-feral cats - whether they be indoor/outdoor or just an indoor cat that escaped accidently. -L. > i think they need to be TNR's. I just don't necessarily think they > need to be fed. Feeding makes it much easier for them to thrive and > breed. if they aren't fed, the population is controlled natually - > more selective pressure. I think feeding makes them less likely to roam, and it's easier for the human caretaker to look out for them, look for ill cats, pick up any friendlys that found the feeding station, etc. > I agree with your sentiments here. The one problem I have with > releasing FeLV and FIV cats is the possibility of them spreading > disease to non-feral cats - whether they be indoor/outdoor or just an > indoor cat that escaped accidently. That's part of the mixed feelings I have. Signature-Kelly kelly at farringtons dot net "Wake up, and smell the cat food" -TMBG > That being said, irradicating ferals is just plain stupid. Shooting > them is even more stupid. Depends on how much you value your ecosystem really. All our wildlife in New Zealand evolved without *any* major land-based predators, so most of it has no defence at all against cats, rats, stoats, weasels etc, which have already driven lots of birds, insects and reptiles to extinction. As a result, any feral cat found in New Zealand's countryside areas will be shot - and I have no problem with that. I wish it weren't that way and that cats had evolved in this land and this land had adapted to them - but they didn't and it hasn't. If we didn't shoot them the results would be disastrous. I don't known what the comparative situation is like in the States so can't comment on it. > > That being said, irradicating ferals is just plain stupid. Shooting > > them is even more stupid. [quoted text clipped - 11 lines] > I don't known what the comparative situation is like in the States so can't > comment on it. Well, the cats there certainly do have predators and they are *you.* We forget that people are animals too as as such as much a part of the natural system as any other animal. > I don't known what the comparative situation is like in the States so can't > comment on it. If one is shooting a "feral" in the US it is more likely that they are shooting a cat that belongs to someone. Ferals, in general, don't stick around long enough to be a target. -L. >> I don't known what the comparative situation is like in the States so > can't [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > shooting a cat that belongs to someone. Ferals, in general, don't > stick around long enough to be a target. Here, I'd draw the distinction between urban and rural. The feral cat problem in NZ is many a rural problem, and the areas we're talking about simply don't have people living in them. So any cat is most definitely a feral cat. They are trapped and shot by the Department of Conservation. Once you get to farmed areas, there is a possibility of killing someone's pet, but most farms are large and the only tame cats within the territory would belong to the property owners. Farmers shoot feral cats all the time. In urban areas it's a different story because a) it could be someone's pet and b) the main threat to wildlife in urban areas ain't cats - it's humans. The reason there aren't kiwi or kokako or tuatara in the middle of Auckland, or even Ekatahuna, for that matter, is that we've destroyed their habitat. Cats aren't a threat if there's nowhere for the wildlife to live, anyway. > I honestly don't get how someone can claim to love cats, but not all cats. How can some people claim to love "animals", and then eat them and/or wear their skins? (like me *heh*) Everyone has a line. The line is just different for some people than for others. Few of us can *really* explain with logic why our line is where it is. I know I can't, and I have yet to hear anyone really do so (except hard- core vegans). It's not really about logic. Just like we all have a different concept of 'love'. When some people say they love animals, they might not mean the same thing as you do when you say you love animals. It's one of those abstract concepts, so it's hard to say if one person's love of animals is the same as another's. It is more likely different, all things considered. Some people love them because they're tasty. *so sorry LOL* I mean, honestly, where is it written that cows are good eatin', but cats aren't? It's not logical. It's just something that IS for most of us in this culture. Other cultures have no problems eating cats and dogs. They may even keep a dog as a pet, but eat non-pet dogs. Like some people here in the US keep pigs as pets, but quite possibly do still eat ham and bacon. Signature-- ~kaeli~ Press any key to continue or any other key to quit http://www.ipwebdesign.net/wildAtHeart http://www.ipwebdesign.net/kaelisSpace >> I honestly don't get how someone can claim to love cats, but not all >> cats. [quoted text clipped - 23 lines] > keep a dog as a pet, but eat non-pet dogs. Like some people here in the US > keep pigs as pets, but quite possibly do still eat ham and bacon. You are completely right. I've had this internal struggle myself. I love animals, but I do eat them and wear them (not fur, the occasional leather). I drew my line for eating at poultry and fish, but recently started eating red meat again, damn pregnancy cravings! Plus, I'm anemic now. I know, I could load up on the spinach, what a hypocrite I am. I even ate bacon the other day, and I haven't eaten pig for a looong time. I felt bad getting a car with leather interior, but I wanted the options that went with that package. I'm sure if I had to kill my own food, I'd be a vegetarian. I've tried to be a vegetarian, but can't stick with it. I really do admire hard-core vegans. Signature-Kelly kelly at farringtons dot net "Wake up, and smell the cat food" -TMBG > You are completely right. I've had this internal struggle myself. I love > animals, but I do eat them and wear them (not fur, the occasional leather). [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > be a vegetarian, but can't stick with it. I really do admire hard-core > vegans. Honestly, if I had a farm and raised animals myself, I'd feel *less* guilty about eating them. I'd know they at least had a good and natural life prior to a humane slaughter. And I won't wear the skin of an animal that wasn't used as food. If you're going to kill it, you might as well use the whole thing. But to farm them just for fur or to hunt and kill non-prey animals for fur (i.e. foxes, leopard) is abhorrent to me. I will wear lambskin or leather because I will eat lamb and cow. My prime beef (pardon the pun) with eating animals is knowing how common it is for them to live horrid lives punctuated by a horrible death. I do my best to buy only free-range prey, but we all go out to eat every now and then (I try to stick with chicken and not think about overcrowding and the other nasty things they do to the poor birds). I fully support any legislation that helps end inhumane practices and I think we as a culture don't do enough to ensure decent lives for our prey animals. Sure, chickens aren't cute and cuddly, but I don't think that justifies some of the terrible things I've heard are done to them. I wish it were easier to find out what the laws really are, what companies really do, who to contact to bitch about it, and so on. I wouldn't consider myself a big animal rights person, but I am into animal welfare. There just isn't any justification to torture one's food for weeks, months, or even years before one eats it. / thinks the PETA nuts have given animal welfare a very bad name Signature-- ~kaeli~ Why do they sterilize the needles for lethal injections? http://www.ipwebdesign.net/wildAtHeart http://www.ipwebdesign.net/kaelisSpace > Honestly, if I had a farm and raised animals myself, I'd feel *less* > guilty [quoted text clipped - 32 lines] > > / thinks the PETA nuts have given animal welfare a very bad name I think we are along much the same lines. I have these little fantasies about having some egg-laying hens and a dairy cow. I just don't know if I could do the actual killing for meat. I try to buy only free-range or cage-free meat, but like you, we go out to eat once in a while and don't always stick to it. I'm totally of the same mindset on the rest of your post. Signature-Kelly kelly at farringtons dot net "Wake up, and smell the cat food" -TMBG PETA actually has done a lot of good things for the welfare of animals. Yes, they have sometimes gone off the deep end, I will admit. At times, this is just to get the attention they need. Some of the undercover videos they have taken of the food industry are enough to turn your stomach. My diet is completely meat-free, I do not drink cow's milk (never did like the stuff) and prefer soy cheese to dairy cheese. Not to mention that vegetarian and vegan are much healthier than a meat-based diet. I was surprised to find out that red meat does not drive that industry - - - it is the leather that does. I had thought that the leather was more of a by-product.......the cows were in demand for meat and then the leather was used from that cow. Nope. The leather is in higher demand than the meat. I was surprised. So if you buy leather goods, you are helping to drive the factory farm industry. If anyone is actually interested in finding out more about the meat industry and strides that PETA has taken to make things better for animals, the web address is: http://www.peta.org/ The video clips of their ads and undercover videos are here. Some are pretty graphic: http://www.petatv.com/ This is how I found out that in some countries they do eat cats and dogs, yet have some as pets. I find that whole concept disgusting. I love them all. How can you eat any of them? Melody >> You are completely right. I've had this internal struggle myself. I >> love [quoted text clipped - 50 lines] > > / thinks the PETA nuts have given animal welfare a very bad name > PETA actually has done a lot of good things for the welfare of animals. > Yes, they have sometimes gone off the deep end, I will admit. At times, > this is just to get the attention they need. Some of the undercover videos > they have taken of the food industry are enough to turn your stomach. They (well, the founders, Alex Pacheco and Ingrid Newkirk) also were the first organization to prosecute a NIH researcher for animal abuse and neglect. They are also instrumental in passing welfare legislation in many states (like the case pig abuse in the slaughter house in North Carolina). If you get a chance, read the book Monkey Business by Cathy Snow Guillermo. Great read and instrumental to PeTA's history. -L. > My diet is completely meat-free, I do not drink cow's milk (never did like > the stuff) and prefer soy cheese to dairy cheese. Not to mention that > vegetarian and vegan are much healthier than a meat-based diet. That very much depends. If you decide to become vegetarian, it's easy to load up on saturated fats via cheese. It's also hard to get the proteins you need. I agree that it's possible to be healthy as a vegetarian or vegan, but it takes more planning, and it's very difficult for someone who exerts themselves a lot. A friend of mine managed to hike the appalachian trail and stay vegetarian, but it was very difficult for her, she had little energy, and honestly for her health's sake I wish she had buckled down and opened up a can of tuna. A friend of mine who's hiking the pacific crest this summer purposely started introducing meats, including red meat, into her diet a few months ago because she knew her body would be craving the protein and fat it would need. Signaturemonique, who spoils Oscar unmercifully pictures: http://www.bounceswoosh.org/rpca > I was surprised to find out that red meat does not drive that industry - - - > it is the leather that does. I had thought that the leather was more of a > by-product.......the cows were in demand for meat and then the leather was > used from that cow. Nope. The leather is in higher demand than the meat. Where did you learn this? I find it intriguing, but I'd like to know the source. Signature-- ~kaeli~ You can't have everything. Where would you put it? http://www.ipwebdesign.net/wildAtHeart http://www.ipwebdesign.net/kaelisSpace >Honestly, if I had a farm and raised animals myself, I'd feel *less* guilty >about eating them. I'd know they at least had a good and natural life prior >to a humane slaughter. My family lived on a small farm for 4 years, and I kept chickens for eggs. When my parents had them killed, I was horrified. I refused to eat chicken, and kept checking the freezer til they were all gone. I just can not eat something I have seen alive. But strangely, as sick as I was over eating my own chickens, I would have to say that chicken is my favorite meat. I know it is completely illogical, but I separate it by whether I have seen it alive or not. I can't look at a live crab and chose it for dinner, but I can buy a dead one and eat it. Also, any type of meat that i have not tried before adulthood is simply off limits. I see no reason to try a new kind of meat, and thus kill another kind of animal. But I can't convince myself to give up anything I already like, mainly because i hate most veggies, and withot meat, I would starve to death. I just don't like many kinds of food. I won't wear fur, not even fake fur, because it looks like real fur. I do like leather, though I don't wear it much. My old letterman's jacket has leather, and I have a jacket with suede. My checkbook cover is also leather. I accept leather since I know it comes from animals that died for food. Signature-- Meghan & the Zoo Crew Equine and Pet Photography http://www.zoocrewphoto.com > Also, any type of meat that i have not tried before adulthood is > simply off limits. I see no reason to try a new kind of meat, and thus > kill another kind of animal. But I can't convince myself to give up > anything I already like, mainly because i hate most veggies, and > withot meat, I would starve to death. I just don't like many kinds of > food. Thank you! I have the same rule about not trying new meat, and my husband just thinks I'm being weird. Signature-Kelly kelly at farringtons dot net "Wake up, and smell the cat food" -TMBG >>Also, any type of meat that i have not tried before adulthood is >>simply off limits. I see no reason to try a new kind of meat, and thus [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > Thank you! I have the same rule about not trying new meat, and my husband > just thinks I'm being weird. I'll chime in and say I have the same rule too. Why start eating MORE animals? I'd like to eat LESS of them!!! <snip> > Also, any type of meat that i have not tried before adulthood is > simply off limits. I see no reason to try a new kind of meat, and thus > kill another kind of animal. We switched to buffalo from beef when the BSE outbreak hit too close to home. We have found a source where the buffalo are not housed near any cattle and are humaely slaughtered on-site. Personally, I could do without meat the rest of my life and be perfectly happy. I was vegan for 4 years and veggie about 8. My husband OTOH is a true omnivore. He's gotta have his dead animal. -L. >. I accept leather since I know it comes from animals > that died for food. Meghan, I believe I responded to a former post with some information about the leather industry.....animals do not die for food and then have their skins used, it is the other way around. The skins industry is the driving force. I will post a couple of paragraphs from a peta factsheet that has attached footnotes from outside sources regarding the meat and skins industry, as it relates to cattle only. (If you want to read the rest of the article, it is at http://www.peta.org/factsheet/files/FactsheetDisplay.asp?ID=58 Some of the information there is rather disturbing as it refers to the Asian market for furs and skins of animals we consider pets. begin article: (with permission from PETA to reproduce) Leather: Animals Abused And Killed for Their Skins -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Every year, the global leather industry slaughters more than a billion animals and tans their skins and hides.1 Many animals from whom these skins are taken suffer all the horrors of factory farming, including extreme crowding and confinement, deprivation, unanesthetized castration, branding, tail-docking, dehorning, and cruel treatment during transport and slaughter. High Byproduct Value The multibillion-dollar meat industry profits from more than just the animals' flesh. The byproducts of meat consumption include fats and blood that are used in livestock feed, tires, explosives, paints, and cosmetics; organs that are used in pet food; and heart valves that are used in the pharmaceutical industry.2,3 The skin of the animal, however, represents "the most economically important byproduct of the meat packing industry."4 When dairy cows' production declines, their skin is also made into leather; the hides of their offspring, "veal" calves, are made into high-priced calfskin. Thus, the economic success of the slaughterhouse and the dairy farm is directly linked to the sale of leather goods. <snip> <begin snip> References 1Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations, Slaughtered/ Production Animals 2002, FAOSTAT Database, 21 Aug. 2003 <http://apps1.fao.org/servlet/XteServlet.jrun?Areas2&items7&Items9&Items=1>. 2 Rothsay, "The Products of Rendering," Rothsay Online, 20 Jun. 2003 <http://www3.sympatico.ca/rothsay/products.html>. 3A. Severin Johnson, "Packing House Byproducts," Agricultural Marketing Resource Center, Iowa State University, Feb. 2003. 4David G. Bailey, "Gamma Radiation Preservation of Cattle Hides: A New Twist on an Old Story," Agricultural Research Service, United States Department of Agriculture, 18 Dec. 1998. <end pertinent snip> >>. I accept leather since I know it comes from animals >> that died for food.=20 > >Meghan, I believe I responded to a former post with some information = >about the leather industry.....animals do not die for food and then have = >their skins used, it is the other way around. =20 I believe I posted before I saw your post, and this is something I had never heard before. I must admit I was saddened by that post, because I had always assumed that the leather wa sthe by-product. I probably won't by leather any more, but that is not a problem for me anyway since I have so little. As far as I know, I currently have one coat, purchased in 1987, with leather sleeves. That's my letterman's jacket. And I have two checkbook covers. One is plain leather and one is custom designed with animals on it for my animal photography business account. My mom made it for me as a gift. I'm not sure if my shoes are real leather or not. I know a lot of shoes have leather uppers, and confess, I am not going to rule out a pair of shoes if that is the only issue. I only have two pairs of shoes. One is my work pair, and i have been using the same style for years since the company produces work shoes with special soles. My other pair is a sneaker type of riding shoe. I bought them for riding, but they are more comfortable, so I wear them now instead of regular shoes. I also have a computer laptop bag that is leather. I bough the computer a couple months ago. It was a used computer and the bag came with it. It was not part of my decision in purchasing the computer. I didn't even know what kind of bag was included until I got to the person's house to buy the computer. If I have anything else with leather, it wasn't purchased because of the leather or with my knowledge of it having leather. I'm sorry if I gave the impression that I purchase a lot of products with leather. I simply haven't objected to them since I thought they were a by-product. Signature-- Meghan & the Zoo Crew Equine and Pet Photography http://www.zoocrewphoto.com > I believe I posted before I saw your post, and this is something I had > never heard before. I must admit I was saddened by that post, because > I had always assumed that the leather wa sthe by-product. IIRC this is a more recent development since beef prices have gone downhill over the last decade. Beef used to be the main reson cattle were slaughtered, but that's not the case now. <snip> > I'm not sure if my shoes are real leather or not. I know a lot of > shoes have leather uppers, and confess, I am not going to rule out a > pair of shoes if that is the only issue. <snip> FWIW, there are a lot of really good synthetics on the market now, especially those with microfiber technology - some of the performace is superior to leather. http://ww.veganessentials.com has a decent selection of hikers ans such. -L. (vegan in lifestyle) >> I believe I posted before I saw your post, and this is something I >had [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] >downhill over the last decade. Beef used to be the main reson cattle >were slaughtered, but that's not the case now. I wonder if that is because of the diet trends as well as the mad cow scares. I know I quit buying beef for awhile after the mad cow was found here in Washington. >FWIW, there are a lot of really good synthetics on the market now, >especially those with microfiber technology - some of the performace is >superior to leather. http://ww.veganessentials.com has a decent >selection of hikers ans such. I will probably look when I am buying new styles, but I am so happy with my current shoes, that I just wouldn't want to switch. My first pair lasted 3 years before it got a hole in the seam. I bought a new pair last October, and they look pretty new still. When I got them, I slipped them on, and they fit like they were made for me. Signature-- Meghan & the Zoo Crew Equine and Pet Photography http://www.zoocrewphoto.com > >IIRC this is a more recent development since beef prices have gone > >downhill over the last decade. Beef used to be the main reson cattle [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > scares. I know I quit buying beef for awhile after the mad cow was > found here in Washington. Diet trends more than anything else. The beef industry has declined since the 80's - also due in part to E. coli O175: H7 and the associated deaths. I don't think BSE had much effect except for places like the PNW (I live here as well - Portland) where people took it seriously. Pretty ironic that our gov't banned imported beef from Canada when the outbreak happened there, yet told Americans that the beef supply was still wholesome, when the outbreak happened here. <shaking head> > >FWIW, there are a lot of really good synthetics on the market now, > >especially those with microfiber technology - some of the performace is [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > pair last October, and they look pretty new still. When I got them, I > slipped them on, and they fit like they were made for me. Can't argue with that. I did the same when I first went Vegan. Had a pair of leather hiking boots I couldn't bear to part with (I have since gotten over that). I did give my niece all of my leather bags, though, including a brand-new navy Coach that I had received as a gift. That was a little hard to do at the time, LOL...now I just see it as dead cow. :) -L. > >Meghan, I believe I responded to a former post with some information = > >about the leather industry.....animals do not die for food and then have = > >their skins used, it is the other way around. =20 > > I believe I posted before I saw your post, and this is something I had > never heard before. I'd love a source that wasn't from PETA, myself. They mean well, but they certainly CAN spin things. It's like relying on FOX news for all your viewpoints. ;) > I must admit I was saddened by that post, because > I had always assumed that the leather wa sthe by-product. I don't see where it says it isn't. ------- High Byproduct Value The multibillion-dollar meat industry profits from more than just the animals' flesh. The byproducts of meat consumption include fats and blood that are used in livestock feed, tires, explosives, paints, and cosmetics; organs that are used in pet food; and heart valves that are used in the pharmaceutical industry.2,3 The skin of the animal, however, represents "the most economically important byproduct of the meat packing industry."4 ... When dairy cows' production declines... "veal" calves, are made into high-priced calfskin... -------- BYPRODUCT. If people stopped buying leather, the animals would be no better off. The animals will die or be used in bad ways (IMO, factory-farmed dairy cows have a nasty life) anyway. We might as well use ALL of them. There is no such thing as killing a cow for it's skin and throwing the rest away. They don't raise cattle for the express purpose of getting their skins. Although I bet if people stopped eating meat, they might. But then the skin wouldn't be the byproduct. Right now, it is. Not that I'm not for INTENSE reform of our factory farming. I think it's terrible. And if I could find out things I could do to help change/reform the laws and get them better cared for, I'd do it in a heartbeart. Especially since I don't think the meat, leather, and fur industries are going anywhere anytime soon. I think any effort to protect our factory animals would be time well spent and of far more benefit than merely not buying the products. If we don't buy the products, that's all well and good for our conscience, but it doesn't really hurt the industry. Too many others will buy. If we could find a way to get people together to change/reform the laws to better care for the animals and make their lives more humane, I think we could get a lot more people onboard with that. IMO, most people who eat meat won't stop. But I bet a lot more of them would be behind laws to make slaughter animals have better lives. (does ANYONE know who to contact about the laws, getting them reformed, and so on? congress? house rep?) [[ Just my 2 cents, of course. Everything I post is my opinion based on what I believe to be true. ]] Signature-- ~kaeli~ You can't have everything. Where would you put it? http://www.ipwebdesign.net/wildAtHeart http://www.ipwebdesign.net/kaelisSpace > In article <d260dh$kbi$0$216.145.17.199@ccom.net>, > friesian@zoocrewphoto.com [quoted text clipped - 12 lines] > FOX > news for all your viewpoints. ;) The actual document was from a PETA fact-sheet, however, there were many quotes within the sheet that were NOT from PETA sources. There were, I believe, 4 footnotes, which were numbered, and then the sources copied and pasted from the document, into the pertinent post. So, the paragraphs that were in my post would have a difficult time having a spin on them with outside source quotes. And the demand from leather is the drive behind the meat-packing industry. If there were no demand for leather at all, far less cattle would die. PETA is not the only source I have derived this from. I also read several Canadian industry sourcebooks in my search for information on grains/beans vs. livestock, and they did take the arguments that far. (I live in Canada, so I did not research other countries.) Taking the time to read some of the information on the PETA website (even though you appear to think it biased, a lot of the information is well-sourced and foot-noted.) would well-inform you. I was very surprised by some information. Reading "Food Revolution" and "Diet for a Small Planet" by John Robbins, would-have-been heir to the Baskin-Robbins ice-cream empire (his father and uncle made the business, but John chose to walk away from it when his father refused to admit that his products could be contributing to his weight/health problems, and his uncle's early coronary death). Both books are excellent.......all footnotes are excellently sourced. Talk about eye openers! I have found many people would rather walk around with their eyes shut, though. Since I went totally veg, I lost 45 pounds, AND KEPT IT OFF................it has been 3 years, and I am a steady 127. When I turned 38, I gained weight and nothing, no amount of gym word, diet, etc. would lose it. Co-workers want to know my secret. I tell them and you can see their eyes go blank. Oh, gee, I have to quit eating my carcasses. I want a magic pill. John Robbins talks about the meat industry in his books, So if you want to skip PETA, perhaps see if your library has those books. Okay, I am wayyy off topic here, sorry! Mel > And the demand from leather is the drive behind the meat-packing industry. I agree with a lot of what you posted, but this is the one thing I don't see *proven* anywhere. In fact, some of the quotes seemed to say the opposite. So I did some looking around. I found sources that claimed leather drove the meat industry and sources that said the opposite. Of course, everything I found seemed biased for the position they were taking. For example, all sources I found claiming the former (as you do) were animal rights and/or vegan oriented. The sources claiming the latter had ties to the industry and reasons for not wanting people to not want leather. I even found numbers from leather people (tanners council) that were trying to promote leather as being important. I sure wish I could find real data that wasn't already propaganda for *somebody*. I don't know what to believe on this one. But since I know the meat, leather, and other animal industries aren't going away any time soon, I'd really like to see the industries change in regards to how they treat their stock animals. > I have found many people would rather walk around with their eyes shut, > though. Absolutely. I've even done it myself, as much as I try to have an open mind. Not just in regards to this, though. People really don't like to change their minds on firmly held beliefs (or change whatever they find convenient just because some facts get in the way, i.e. declawing). Especially when there really ARE two or more sides to something -- then it really gets rough. I mean, if you look at how people went off on John Kerry for changing his mind on things, you see how the American people, as a general rule, seem to think that having an open enough mind to allow it to change based on what you currently believe to be true is somehow a bad thing. (did that make sense at all? LOL) Signature-- ~kaeli~ If at first you don't succeed, skydiving is not for you. http://www.ipwebdesign.net/wildAtHeart http://www.ipwebdesign.net/kaelisSpace > I sure wish I could find real data that wasn't already propaganda for > *somebody*. Well, but the animal rights groups are not trying to *sell* you anything, they're trying to do what's best for animals. Doesn't that make them a little less suspect than the industry trafficing in dead animal products? --Catherine & Rosalie the calico >> I sure wish I could find real data that wasn't already propaganda for >> *somebody*. > > Well, but the animal rights groups are not trying to *sell* you anything, > they're trying to do what's best for animals. Doesn't that make them a > little less suspect than the industry trafficing in dead animal products? Not really. We're talking about leather vs. meat here. Animal rights groups would typically prefer that we not have leather *or* meat, but they know that more people are upset by animals being killed just for their skin than they are by animals being killed for food, so if they can "show" that the skin is the driver and the meat is going to waste ... Signaturemonique, who spoils Oscar unmercifully pictures: http://www.bounceswoosh.org/rpca >>> I sure wish I could find real data that wasn't already propaganda >>> for *somebody*. [quoted text clipped - 10 lines] > can "show" that the skin is the driver and the meat is going to waste > ... I seriously doubt that the animal rights groups are manipulating this data in the way you suggest, but you're entitled to your opinion. Their agenda, though, is for fewer animals to die -- if everyone went vegan tomorrow, these groups would not gain anything economically. I just tend to trust the principle-driven a bit more than the financially-driven. And I think killing animals and eating or wearing them is icky. What difference does it make whether the "meat" industry drives the "leather" industry or vice versa? --Catherine & Rosalie the calico >I seriously doubt that the animal rights groups are manipulating this >data in the way you suggest, but you're entitled to your opinion. Their [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] >difference does it make whether the "meat" industry drives the "leather" >industry or vice versa? So, out of curiosity, what would you feed your cat if everyone went vegan tomorrow? Orchid See Orchid's Kitties! -- http://nik.ascendancy.net/bengalpage Want a Purebred Cat? Read This! -- http://nik.ascendancy.net/orchid >>And I think killing animals and eating or wearing them is icky. What >>difference does it make whether the "meat" industry drives the "leather" >>industry or vice versa? > > So, out of curiosity, what would you feed your cat if everyone > went vegan tomorrow? Well, I know. I've confessed to this weak spot before. I like having these little carnivores around, I must say. --Catherine & Rosalie the calico >>>And I think killing animals and eating or wearing them is icky. What >>>difference does it make whether the "meat" industry drives the "leather" [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] >Well, I know. I've confessed to this weak spot before. I like having these >little carnivores around, I must say. Me too. :) Although I have manged to balance the ethical line when it comes to eating meat. Other than that which I have hunted myself, DH and I only buy meat from the farmer's market. There we get free-range, organic, and humanely-raised and killed beef, lamb, chicken, pork, goat, rabbit, and veal. Oh, and humanely-produced dairy too. Orchid See Orchid's Kitties! -- http://nik.ascendancy.net/bengalpage Want a Purebred Cat? Read This! -- http://nik.ascendancy.net/orchid > Me too. :) Although I have manged to balance the ethical > line when it comes to eating meat. Other than that which I have > hunted myself, DH and I only buy meat from the farmer's market. There > we get free-range, organic, and humanely-raised and killed beef, lamb, > chicken, pork, goat, rabbit, and veal. Oh, and humanely-produced > dairy too. > Orchid That's sort of what I do. I respect those who have chosen vegetarian or vegan lifestyles, but I can't seem to last on that diet. So I buy free-range chickens/eggs..but how can you be sure the beef is humanely raised/killed? Is it advertised as such? How can you tell which dairies treat the cattle more humanely? We even raised our own chickens once...it wasn't that hard since I don't seem to become emotionally attached to chickens. And at least you know *your* chickens only have one bad day. The rest of the time, they're just running around out doing chicken-things all day, not caged. Here's what I learned from the experience: Yard chickens have no resemblence to grocery store chickens. The skin is much yellower. (store chickens are bleached). The breast meat is much smaller (because they're not fed hormones?). The meat is tougher, probably because of better muscle development, not being raised in a cage. Still, it wasn't bad. > > Me too. :) Although I have manged to balance the ethical > > line when it comes to eating meat. Other than that which I have [quoted text clipped - 23 lines] > better muscle development, not being raised in a cage. Still, it wasn't > bad. Hmm. I thought yellow dye was added to Perdue chickens. Shows you what I know about chickens. > Hmm. I thought yellow dye was added to Perdue chickens. Shows > you what I know about chickens. Ha! You know as much about chickens as we did. The experience did give me more respect for our pioneer women, who apparantly began Sunday dinner by chasing down the chicken. It's a heck of a lot of work when you compare it to buying only boneless, skinless cellophane-wrapped chicken breast, which is what I always did. Sherry > > Hmm. I thought yellow dye was added to Perdue chickens. Shows > > you what I know about chickens. [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > > Sherry Wow, you are braver than me! I have heard about marigold being fed to chickens to make them more yellow, have you heard of this? >Here's what I learned from the experience: Yard chickens have no >resemblence to grocery store chickens. The skin is much yellower. >(store chickens are bleached). The breast meat is much smaller (because >they're not fed hormones?). The meat is tougher, probably because of >better muscle development, not being raised in a cage. Still, it wasn't >bad. Interesting. I refused to eat the chickens we had when we lived on a farm. I was definitely emotionally attached, so I just couldn't do it. But when I visited my exchange sister in Mexico, the chickens were yellow, and I always wondered why. Now I know. Signature-- Meghan & the Zoo Crew Equine and Pet Photography http://www.zoocrewphoto.com >That's sort of what I do. I respect those who have chosen vegetarian or >vegan lifestyles, but I can't seem to last on that diet. So I buy >free-range chickens/eggs..but how can you be sure the beef is humanely >raised/killed? Is it advertised as such? How can you tell which dairies >treat the cattle more humanely? Because I am buying directly from the producers and they invite people to come out and see their operations. That's the lovely thing about farmers' markets -- you know the provenance of your food. It's a little more expensive, but DH and I firmly believe in putting our money where our mouths are, as it were. :) As well, grass-fed beef is *so* much better than the corn-finished beef in grocery stores. It's amazing. >Here's what I learned from the experience: Yard chickens have no >resemblence to grocery store chickens. The skin is much yellower. >(store chickens are bleached). The breast meat is much smaller (because >they're not fed hormones?). The meat is tougher, probably because of >better muscle development, not being raised in a cage. Still, it wasn't >bad. Actually, the meat is tougher because you're not killing meat breeds at 12 weeks of age. :) The breasts were smaller because they weren't bred to have enormous breasts, like the meat breeds are. It's really nice to be able to get stewing hens and such at the farmers' market -- older birds simply don't exist in the commercial poultry-raising operations. Orchid See Orchid's Kitties! -- http://nik.ascendancy.net/bengalpage Want a Purebred Cat? Read This! -- http://nik.ascendancy.net/orchid > >That's sort of what I do. I respect those who have chosen vegetarian or > >vegan lifestyles, but I can't seem to last on that diet. So I buy [quoted text clipped - 9 lines] > beef is *so* much better than the corn-finished beef in grocery > stores. It's amazing. I've been buying organic eggs, milk, and some cheese at my store that is produced by a cooperative made up of small family farmers -- free-range chickens, etc. I can't tell you how much BETTER they taste than the other stuff. Makes me wonder about what's in the mass-produced stuff. There's also been blood in the eggs occasionally, which is a sign they are fresh. Yes, more expensive, but I'm feeding only myself, so it's worth the extra cost, and I like the idea of helping to support young couples, etc., who farm in this way. Signaturehttp://www.slywy.com/ > Actually, the meat is tougher because you're not killing meat breeds at 12 > weeks of age. :) The breasts were smaller because they weren't bred to [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > market -- older birds simply don't exist in the commercial poultry-raising > operations. I'm assuming a 12 week old chicken isn't sexually mature, so how do they get more chicken without having some older birds? Signaturemonique, who spoils Oscar unmercifully pictures: http://www.bounceswoosh.org/rpca >> Actually, the meat is tougher because you're not killing meat breeds at 12 >> weeks of age. :) The breasts were smaller because they weren't bred to [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] >I'm assuming a 12 week old chicken isn't sexually mature, so how do they get >more chicken without having some older birds? Let me clarify -- older birds are simply not sold in grocery stores, etc. :) Orchid See Orchid's Kitties! -- http://nik.ascendancy.net/bengalpage Want a Purebred Cat? Read This! -- http://nik.ascendancy.net/orchid Mice :) SignatureGod requires that we assist the animals, when they need our help. Each being (human or creature) has the same right of protection. -St. Francis of Assisi- One can measure the greatness and the moral progress of a nation by looking at how it treats her animals. -Mahatma Gandhi - > >>I seriously doubt that the animal rights groups are manipulating this [quoted text clipped - 13 lines] > See Orchid's Kitties! -- http://nik.ascendancy.net/bengalpage > Want a Purebred Cat? Read This! -- http://nik.ascendancy.net/orchid >Mice :) *grin* You know, I would *kill* to find a 'mouse' cat food. Ground-up whole mice in a can -- it'd be awesome. Or hell, ground-up whole mouse in a frozen raw diet sort of thing. Orchid See Orchid's Kitties! -- http://nik.ascendancy.net/bengalpage Want a Purebred Cat? Read This! -- http://nik.ascendancy.net/orchid > >Mice :) > > *grin* You know, I would *kill* to find a 'mouse' cat food. Well, if you would kill then you can kill the mice and start your own business! > Ground-up whole mice in a can You can buy mice pretty cheap... (okay, ewww.) *heh* Signature-- ~kaeli~ Kill one man and you are a murderer. Kill millions and you are a conqueror. Kill everyone and you are God. http://www.ipwebdesign.net/wildAtHeart http://www.ipwebdesign.net/kaelisSpace > > Ground-up whole mice in a can > [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > > *heh* Actually, you can't. Mice run about a buck a piece, even frozen. -L. (serpent keeper) >> In article <760m411bnvcchs7672596kjm19ilnlbk9j@4ax.com>, > neko@ascendancy.net [quoted text clipped - 11 lines] > -L. > (serpent keeper) I suppose if one started their own cat-food business, they could breed them for the express purpose of cat food and thus would cost less. Grain-fed mice :) A buck each? That's quite steep! How large are these mice?! Just what are you putting these frozen mice into? I see 'serpent keeper' at the bottom of your post.....................do they not need live critters for lunch? I read a survey that stated out of all the meats offered cats, they preferred mice. Duh! Who ever saw a housecat take down a cow? Plenty of beef cat foods, but no mice cat foods. Mel > I suppose if one started their own cat-food business, they could breed them for the express purpose of cat food and thus would cost less. Grain-fed mice :) Actually from what I understand, pound-for-pound they are more costly to raise than other feed animals. > A buck each? That's quite steep! How large are these mice?! Not jumbos - those run about $1.30. These are just adults and sub-adults. rats run about $2.00 or more. > Just what are you putting these frozen mice into? I see 'serpent keeper' at >the bottom of your post.....................do they not need live critters for >lunch? Nope. My snakes are fed frozen mice that are thawed, and warmed. Much easier on the keeper. ;) The mice are surplus mice from research labs - those bred but never used. I buy them from a source in Texas and they fly them here via FED EX on dry ice. $1.00 each is pretty cheap, actually. Here's a retailer- not the one I use though: http://www.miceonice.com > I read a survey that stated out of all the meats offered cats, they preferred >mice. Duh! Who ever saw a housecat take down a cow? Plenty of beef cat >foods, but no mice cat foods. I think it's cost-prohibitive. Besides, mice are stinky! -L. >> I suppose if one started their own cat-food business, they could > breed them for the express purpose of cat food and thus would cost [quoted text clipped - 27 lines] > > -L. Melody ; okay, that really made me laugh......they have an image of a very happy mouse on ice skates for their intro page :) Mice-sicles and Rat-sicles.............sorry, but the images are just to funny. Instead of a popsicle I can whip a rat on a stick out of my freezer and scare the crap out of my 6 and 10 year old nephews. Ohhh, that would be fun! (ha ha, I am an evil aunt ;) ) Tail on, of course. What fun would it be without that! I had always thought that rodents bred so prolifically that they would be cheap, but then again . . . I have never actually researched this. One is never to old to learn something! I am glad I never took on snakes as room-mates, then. They are nice enough creatures, but their food bill would probably break me :) Mel > I had always thought that rodents bred so prolifically that they would be > cheap, but then again They have to be fed and cared for. Signaturehttp://www.slywy.com/ <snip> > One is never to old to learn something! I am glad I never took on snakes as > room-mates, then. They are nice enough creatures, but their food bill would > probably break me :) > > Mel They only eat once a week. So food is relatively inexpensive, especially whern they are small (pinkies and fuzzies are cheap). Upkeep is inexpensive. They need to be cleaned weekly or biweekly - the best substrate is plain paper, so that's inexpensive. Overall they're just low-mainenance, inexpensive companions. :) They are a ball to grow from a baby snakelet. My girl Delilah was about 7 inches long and smaller 'round than a pencil when I first got her. Just as cute as could be. When she died (age 8) she was almsot 5 feet in length. Plus, she was hot-pink and white. Very pretty. She looked most like the juvenile "Amelanistic Okatee" variant here: http://www.cornsnakemorphs.com/available.html But as she got older she became more ywllow like the plain amel., in the pic above. -L. > <snip> > [quoted text clipped - 23 lines] > > -L. Sigh. I try. I really do, and my motto is always "live and let live." You remember me posting about the bullsnake living in the cellar. I had hoped he was a rambling kind of snake and would move on down the road eventually, but he's still here. He is well over 5 feet long and apparently thinks he is a rattlesnake, because he's got the posture down pat. I know he is beneficial, I know he is harmless. But he still scares the crap out of me every time I run onto him unexpectedly. He doesn't run from me, though. He is perfectly ready to stand ground and put up a fight. Isn't that weird behavior for a snake?? I do not go into the cellar, ever. DH went down there to get my canning jars for me, came out and said, "Jake says hey." Hey indeed. Sherry >> <snip> >> [quoted text clipped - 39 lines] > > Sherry Hahaha. Jake. I like that. > Sigh. I try. I really do, and my motto is always "live and let live." > You remember me posting about the bullsnake living in the cellar. I had [quoted text clipped - 10 lines] > > Sherry LOL...But you don't have any mice in the house, do you, now? ;) You can call a local herp group and have someone come and relocate him if you want. Just make sure they will relocate him and not make him into a "pet". -L. > <snip> > [quoted text clipped - 23 lines] > > -L. What is their average life span? My guitar teacher has a corn snake. It is rather interesting to watch sometimes, although mostly it just sleeps. THey can get respritory infections pretty easily (it seems to mean from discussions with him about his snake) if you aren't careful about humidity control and such. I find it interesting they still have vestiges of one lung (defunct) and one long active lung. > What is their average life span? My guitar teacher has a corn snake. It is > rather interesting to watch sometimes, although mostly it just sleeps. THey > can get respritory infections pretty easily (it seems to mean from > discussions with him about his snake) if you aren't careful about humidity > control and such. I find it interesting they still have vestiges of one lung > (defunct) and one long active lung. In captivity they can live 25-35 years. Delilah got a bad mouse and died from it, I think - I was completely shocked. Corns aren't as sensitive to humidity, etc. as other species. They are pretty hardy. Put them in a large tank with an under tank heater on one side, a hide box on both sides and a water bowl in the middle, keep them clean, and they are happy. -L. > I just tend > to trust the principle-driven a bit more than the financially-driven. Having seen what the principle-driven people are capable of, I don't trust either group as far as I can throw them. ;) Signature-- ~kaeli~ "When dogma enters the brain, all intellectual activity ceases" -- Robert Anton Wilson http://www.ipwebdesign.net/wildAtHeart http://www.ipwebdesign.net/kaelisSpace >> I just tend to trust the principle-driven a bit more than the >> financially-driven. > > Having seen what the principle-driven people are capable of, I don't trust > either group as far as I can throw them. ;) The catholic church was principle-driven during the time of the inquisition, right? So were the Nazis when they burned books and killed/tortured people ... And now that I've dragged this down to Godwin's Law, I'll shut up ... Signaturemonique, who spoils Oscar unmercifully pictures: http://www.bounceswoosh.org/rpca >>> I just tend to trust the principle-driven a bit more than the >>> financially-driven. [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > > And now that I've dragged this down to Godwin's Law, I'll shut up ... Oops! I meant, good, humane principles. SignatureCatherine & Rosalie the calico > > The catholic church was principle-driven during the time of the > > inquisition, right? So were the Nazis when they burned books and [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > > Oops! I meant, good, humane principles. But who defines good and humane? Do you think the Catholics didn't honestly believe they were doing the right thing? Do you think the people who bomb research facilities to "free" the animals don't truly believe in their cause? They DO think they are being good and furthering whatever cause they believe is Right. The problem with causes is that the people behind them really do fervently believe in them as being Good and Righteous. They're not often involved in them for lack of anything better to do today. Signature-- ~kaeli~ Murphy's Law #2030: If at first you don't succeed, destroy all evidence that you tried. http://www.ipwebdesign.net/wildAtHeart http://www.ipwebdesign.net/kaelisSpace >> > The catholic church was principle-driven during the time of the >> > inquisition, right? So were the Nazis when they burned books and [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > > But who defines good and humane? We all have to learn to judge what is good and what is humane. > Do you think the Catholics didn't honestly believe they were doing the > right thing? No one could argue that the Inquisition was humane -- they did believe they were doing God's will which they thought was more important than human life. That's why I said "good AND humane" rather than just good. Do you think the people who bomb research facilities to > "free" the animals don't truly believe in their cause? They DO think > they are being good and furthering whatever cause they believe is [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > fervently believe in them as being Good and Righteous. They're not > often involved in them for lack of anything better to do today. You are certainly right that principle-driven people can be driven by incorrect principles. That's where sound reasoning and good judgment come in. I happen to think that the people who wish to protect the lives of animals tend to be more reliable than people who wish to make money from the killing of animals. YMMV. SignatureCatherine & Rosalie the calico > >> I just tend to trust the principle-driven a bit more than the > >> financially-driven. [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > > And now that I've dragged this down to Godwin's Law, I'll shut up ... :) Monique Y. Mudama <spam@bounceswoosh.org> wrote in rec.pets.cats.health+behav: >>> I sure wish I could find real data that wasn't already >>> propaganda for *somebody*. [quoted text clipped - 10 lines] > for food, so if they can "show" that the skin is the driver and > the meat is going to waste ... Okay, okay... I'm not sure what chinchilla tastes like, but I will eat them so I can feel better about my coat. ;) SignatureBrandy??Alexandre? http://www.swydm.com/?refer=BrandyAlx Well, would you? > > I sure wish I could find real data that wasn't already propaganda for > > *somebody*. > > Well, but the animal rights groups are not trying to *sell* you anything, > they're trying to do what's best for animals. Doesn't that make them a > little less suspect than the industry trafficing in dead animal products? They are trying to sell something--an idea--or a set of them. Anyone with any agenda at all tends to get in the way of the truth at times. > > I sure wish I could find real data that wasn't already propaganda for > > *somebody*. > > Well, but the animal rights groups are not trying to *sell* you anything, > they're trying to do what's best for animals. Doesn't that make them a > little less suspect than the industry trafficing in dead animal products? Short answer: No. Long answer available upon request. :) Signature-- ~kaeli~ Once you've seen one shopping center, you've seen a mall. http://www.ipwebdesign.net/wildAtHeart http://www.ipwebdesign.net/kaelisSpace >> I sure wish I could find real data that wasn't already propaganda for >> *somebody*. > >Well, but the animal rights groups are not trying to *sell* you anything, >they're trying to do what's best for animals. Doesn't that make them a >little less suspect than the industry trafficing in dead animal products? Actually, they are selling a concept. So, yes, they are still biased. Consider this, whether you are a republican or democrat, chances are that you consider the opinions of the other side to be biased. Republicans typically consider regular news to be biased. And Democrats consider Fox news to be biased. Both are promoting information and opinion, basically selling a concept. Whether is seems biased or not depends on your own bias. If you agree with them, then they seem pretty fair and objective. If you disagree with them, then they seem biased. This is the same thing as Peta vs the meat industry. We tend to believe whichever source we agree with most. Both sides are clearly biased. That is why it is best to find sources who have no vested interest one way or another. Signature-- Meghan & the Zoo Crew Equine and Pet Photography http://www.zoocrewphoto.com > >> I sure wish I could find real data that wasn't already propaganda for > >> *somebody*. [quoted text clipped - 21 lines] > > -- I have to agree with you. Objectivity is the hardest thing to find anywhere--and particularly within ourselves at times. > I sure wish I could find real data that wasn't already propaganda for > *somebody*. I don't know what to believe on this one. Man, how often have I thought this about all sorts of subjects, including leather vs. beef. The problem is that studies cost money, so someone has to really *want* those studies, and the people with lots of money and the desire to produce studies are typically biased. Signaturemonique, who spoils Oscar unmercifully pictures: http://www.bounceswoosh.org/rpca > > I sure wish I could find real data that wasn't already propaganda for > > *somebody*. I don't know what to believe on this one. [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > studies, and the people with lots of money and the desire to produce studies > are typically biased. EXACTLY. It's such a conundrum for those of us who would love to made an honestly educated choice -- on ANY debatable issue. Including drug studies and such. Signature-- ~kaeli~ Once you've seen one shopping center, you've seen a mall. http://www.ipwebdesign.net/wildAtHeart http://www.ipwebdesign.net/kaelisSpace |
Enable EMail Alerts
Start New Thread
Reply to this Message