WOW, PETA people really are crazy!

[r3vbr]

Have you guys stopped and read the PETA homepage? These are not stuff people make up about them, it's actually on THEIR PAGE:

“How can you justify spending your time helping animals when there are so many people who need help?”

PETA-Helping animals is not any more or less important than helping human beings


Read LOTS more insane ideas here:
http://www.peta.com/about/faq.asp

How can anyone with a brain endorse this organization? They are one of the best funded charities on the world with millions in revenue. stop donating you fools

[r3vbr]

In summary, what they are basically saying is that a man, a dog, and even an INSECT are the same, should be treated equal, and have the same rights, and they compare stepping on an ant to running over a person. Read the site and you will see just how crazy they are.

[tpir]

[ QUOTE ]
They are one of the best funded charities on the world

[/ QUOTE ]
false

[tpir]

[ QUOTE ]
they compare stepping on an ant to running over a person

[/ QUOTE ]
fact: both involve harm being done to living things!

[x] OP responding to his own OP is lame

[Lestat]

I actually agree with some of it, but certainly not all of it. I'm in between. I recognize animal's rights, but only to the extent that humans do in fact come first. I mean, we're carnivores, and at the top of the food chain, so I can find little wrong with eating animals. Although I think they should be slaughtered in the most humane manner possible. Ditto with clothing. We're in a technological age where there are just too many alternatives to animal skins/furs, or parts. So yes, I'm willing to buy a nice looking belt made of some other fabric than animal hide, if that saves the needless killing of an animal.

On the other hand, I sometimes like unkown animals more than unkown humans. I abhore hunting for sport. In fact, if a hunter looking to bag a big rhino as a trophy were to get killed by the rhino, I'm perfectly ok with that! Seriously... If I could watch the hunt, I would actually be rooting for the rhino to kill the hunter! I've heard of several instances where hunters were killed or maimed by their prey and I always have a good laugh at that. I wish it would happen more often!

I should say that if a hunter eats what he kills, I can tolerate it. But I'd still be rooting for some mishap where the hunter shoots himself or his gun jams and the animal kills him.

I like animals and respect their place along side the human animal in the world.

[Lestat]

There are people who torture and kill cats for the fun of it on holloween. If we lived in a lawless society, I think it would be more fun to find the people that do this and torture and kill them.

Would I be wrong to do that? Why?

[PLOlover]

[ QUOTE ]
There are people who torture and kill cats for the fun of it on holloween. If we lived in a lawless society, I think it would be more fun to find the people that do this and torture and kill them.

Would I be wrong to do that? Why?

[/ QUOTE ]

for one thing, you might kill someone by mistake that didn't actually do anything wrong.

[FortunaMaximus]

[ QUOTE ]
There are people who torture and kill cats for the fun of it on holloween. If we lived in a lawless society, I think it would be more fun to find the people that do this and torture and kill them.

Would I be wrong to do that? Why?

[/ QUOTE ]

Certainly not, if you choose that as an individual expression of justice. Probably better to isolate them and let them "Kilkenny cat" themselves.

But if you can render judgments with a probability of 1, as stated in reply above, then I guess you're qualified, aren't you.

Thing is, I don't think there's anybody on this planet, human or otherwise, that can make this judgment yet. Willing to be convinced otherwise.

It should be implied that if an individual or a collection of individuals are capable of creating those situations where perfectly correct judgments can be carried out, they also have the ability to create situations where the individual or individuals in question with regards to bring harm to cats, and crimes of that sort can express their inclinations without actually harming cats. They should do so, actually. It ain't a crime to build the walls.

And they end up judging themselves in the end and coming to their own resolutions. Or they perish. One needn't have a proactive hand in the process, just the ability to create scenarios where they're isolated.

But I'm repeating myself. Plz not to be harming the felines, though.

[tomdemaine]

[ QUOTE ]
There are people who torture and kill cats for the fun of it on holloween. If we lived in a lawless society, I think it would be more fun to find the people that do this and torture and kill them.

Would I be wrong to do that? Why?

[/ QUOTE ]

Because then your moral position would be it's ok to torture and kill those who torture and kill. But if it's ok for you to do it then it's ok for the original people to do it as animals torture and kill other animals all the time.

[Lestat]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
There are people who torture and kill cats for the fun of it on holloween. If we lived in a lawless society, I think it would be more fun to find the people that do this and torture and kill them.

Would I be wrong to do that? Why?

[/ QUOTE ]

Because then your moral position would be it's ok to torture and kill those who torture and kill. But if it's ok for you to do it then it's ok for the original people to do it as animals torture and kill other animals all the time.

[/ QUOTE ]

I'm not sure that's true. The circle needs to start somehow, and I'm not willing to start it. I only get pleasure from killing those who derive pleasure from killing helpless innocents. If they don't exist, there's nothing in it for me.

[edit:] I just noticed your last sentence, which (almost) complicates things for me, since animals DO torture and kill all the time. The difference is, they do so out of necessity and not for fun. That makes all the difference to me.