PETA documentary last night

[Mat Sklansky]

I wouldn't have to think about it. In the situation you describe where I instinctively stretch my arms out to save a life, I wouldn't even see the human being.

Part of this answer comes from personal experience regarding my dog and the attachment I feel to her. She was attacked by a large pitbull mix last year. I consider myself a real pussy. I've never been in a real fight, but my instinct was to jump on top of the pit and put my fingers in it's mouth. Pure instinct.

But maybe this isn't an act of love for a life force. How would I react if someone tried to steal my car? Maybe I would be stupid enough to put my fingers in their mouth. Instinct. I would say such an act is unthinkable, but I would have said the same thing regarding my dog if you asked me before that incident.

Getting back to this whole PETA thing. How many of us consumers wouldn't be willing to pay just a little bit more for a pound of animal flesh if we could be certain the animal wasn't "tortured" in that short period of time it had while waiting for us to eat it? And, sure, "torture" means different things to different people. But, by your definition, would you pay 50 cents more per pound to avoid the "torture" of the animal you eat? I'm pretty sure the loungers would. Not so sure about the golfers.

[Kiera]

When our dog, dhar, was attacked by the pit, I was incapacitated. Mat dove under my jeep coming back up with the pit by the back of the neck and our dog at her throat. This image haunts me.

Mat’s complete disregard for his own safety to save the life of our dog was driven by an adrenalin rush of super human strength to save her life. Dhar’s own self defense mechanisms kicked in and she sacrificed a front tooth in the brawl.

In the meantime, I only half lived as a spectator.

To get back to the point, when he says, “I wouldn’t even see the human being”, to me that means that his respect for life is not colored by the conventional definitions of life. He didn’t even see the canine in this case. What he saw was simply the love for life.

When it comes to peta, I think that what has happened is that it takes a huge action to get a reaction. We are so used to wearing leather and eating meat, it is so much a part of the normal lifestyle that it takes an act outside of the norm to make a slight impact on reconsidering the ethics of those beliefs.

[kerowo]

[ QUOTE ]
Getting back to this whole PETA thing. How many of us consumers wouldn't be willing to pay just a little bit more for a pound of animal flesh if we could be certain the animal wasn't "tortured" in that short period of time it had while waiting for us to eat it? And, sure, "torture" means different things to different people. But, by your definition, would you pay 50 cents more per pound to avoid the "torture" of the animal you eat? I'm pretty sure the loungers would. Not so sure about the golfers.

[/ QUOTE ]

I don't know, I think I'd be more willing to pay more for fruits and vegetables to provide a living wage and better working conditions to migrant farm workers before trying to tackle "humane torture" to cows.

[Fishwhenican]

[ QUOTE ]
I wouldn't have to think about it. In the situation you describe where I instinctively stretch my arms out to save a life, I wouldn't even see the human being.

Part of this answer comes from personal experience regarding my dog and the attachment I feel to her. She was attacked by a large pitbull mix last year. I consider myself a real pussy. I've never been in a real fight, but my instinct was to jump on top of the pit and put my fingers in it's mouth. Pure instinct.

But maybe this isn't an act of love for a life force. How would I react if someone tried to steal my car? Maybe I would be stupid enough to put my fingers in their mouth. Instinct. I would say such an act is unthinkable, but I would have said the same thing regarding my dog if you asked me before that incident.

Getting back to this whole PETA thing. How many of us consumers wouldn't be willing to pay just a little bit more for a pound of animal flesh if we could be certain the animal wasn't "tortured" in that short period of time it had while waiting for us to eat it? And, sure, "torture" means different things to different people. But, by your definition, would you pay 50 cents more per pound to avoid the "torture" of the animal you eat? I'm pretty sure the loungers would. Not so sure about the golfers.

[/ QUOTE ]

I save my dog first if the drowning person is one of the PETA Wackjobs. After that for most people I do not hesitate to save the human being, unless I know they are child molestors or something of that sort. In that case I make sure to push them under and do everything I can to make sure my dog lives and they die.

As far as animals that are "tortured" for food goes, Most animals that are raised for food or milk or whatever are treated pretty darn well. I am actually convinced that cows would be extinct if it wasn't for humans. I have worked cows and know a lot of ranchers around here and they love their animals and take as good a care of them as they can. This is one of the reasons it is perfectly legal to shoot dogs that are harassing cows. It is also one of the reason why it is legal to shoot coyotes on sight and why wolves and Grizzly bears are not really welcome in a lot of places. I have watched ranchers as we work cows talk about nearly every cow and how long they have been on the ranch and it's almost is as if they are members of their family. I am sure there are some things that are done to animals that could be considered cruel but for the most part domesticated animals are pretty pampered.

Did I mention that I hate PETA!

[Rick Nebiolo]

[ QUOTE ]
I wouldn't have to think about it. In the situation you describe where I instinctively stretch my arms out to save a life, I wouldn't even see the human being.

[/ QUOTE ]

From my example it seemed pretty clear that the choice was between the pet you love and an unknown stranger. I thought it was obvious in the example you saw them both fall in so you would "see the human being".

Hmmm, I wonder if Sam Harris, Richard Dawkins, Christopher Hitchens and/or your Dad would answer the question the same way?


[ QUOTE ]
Part of this answer comes from personal experience regarding my dog and the attachment I feel to her. She was attacked by a large pitbull mix last year. I consider myself a real pussy. I've never been in a real fight, but my instinct was to jump on top of the pit and put my fingers in it's mouth. Pure instinct.

[/ QUOTE ]

Sorry about your dog and the pitbull (and perhaps your fingers not knowing the outcome) but this isn't related to my original question.


[ QUOTE ]
But maybe this isn't an act of love for a life force. How would I react if someone tried to steal my car? Maybe I would be stupid enough to put my fingers in their mouth. Instinct. I would say such an act is unthinkable, but I would have said the same thing regarding my dog if you asked me before that incident.

Getting back to this whole PETA thing...

[/ QUOTE ]

My question in the earlier post directly relates to the "PETA thing". Essentially it is in asking is a single human life more sacred and/or important than a single animal's life, even when you have an attachment to the particular animal and the human is a stranger? In the example you are in position to chose to save one life but not the other. You have to chose. But it's a lot easier than Sophie's Choice.


[ QUOTE ]
How many of us consumers wouldn't be willing to pay just a little bit more for a pound of animal flesh if we could be certain the animal wasn't "tortured" in that short period of time it had while waiting for us to eat it? And, sure, "torture" means different things to different people. But, by your definition, would you pay 50 cents more per pound to avoid the "torture" of the animal you eat? I'm pretty sure the loungers would. Not so sure about the golfers.

[/ QUOTE ]

Some loungers (e.g., my friend John Cole) golf so perhaps you should have said "country club, frat guy types". Kidding aside I don't have a problem with people using improved and more humane techniques in breeding animals for food and so on.

But I could never take PETA's extreme position. After all, if we didn't butcher cattle surely predators would without our protection (e.g. fences in grazing areas).

~ Rick

[andyfox]

Shelly Berman, the old-time comedian (who plays Larry David's father on Curb), used to say that he had a joke in his act that involved throwing his dog and his mother-in-law out of his 5th story window. He says he used to get tons of letters denigrating him for harming the dog, but never one for harming his mother-in-law.

I know lots of people for whom their dog is the most important "person" in their life. if it makes life easier, more bearable, more enjoyable for them, that's great. Most of them have trouble relating to other human beings.

With all the problems that people have in the world, it has always bothered me that some people with energy, enthusiasm and empathy would channel those qualities into support for animals. I don't give a sh*t about a mink or a chicken or a dog. Like all good hypocrites, I would never hunt or intentionally harm an animal, but I have no problem doing nothing about animal experimentation or eating a dead chicken. And, likewise, I have no problem doing virtually nothing about human disease in Africa.

[Rick Nebiolo]

[ QUOTE ]
Shelly Berman, the old-time comedian (who plays Larry David's father on Curb), used to say that he had a joke in his act that involved throwing his dog and his mother-in-law out of his 5th story window. He says he used to get tons of letters denigrating him for harming the dog, but never one for harming his mother-in-law.

[/ QUOTE ]

No fair again. The audience knew his mother-in-law and their mother-in-laws and mother-in-laws in general. But a good joke anyway.

I'd pick apart the rest of your post but "No Country For Old Men" finally made it down to a local theater so I gotta go before my friend gets here. [img]/images/graemlins/grin.gif[/img]

~ Rick

[Dominic]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
This issue can't be too controversial for the lounge, can it?

I'm disappointed. Wouln't we all kill countless random humans for the safety of our dogs or houses or cars?

[/ QUOTE ]

The pet you love and a unknown stranger have just fallen off a bluff into the ocean and you only have time to save one of them.

Do you save your pet or the stranger?

~ Rick

PS I'm guessing this has been done before, perhaps on your Dad's SMP forum, but I just had to ask anyway.

Edit to add I realize I may be questioning something said very much tongue in cheek.



[/ QUOTE ]

I love my dog but would rescue the unknown human without a second thought. I mean, it's literally not even questionable, IMO.

I am all for treating all animals as humanely as possible, but they are NOT equal in my mind to humans.

[Fishwhenican]

Oh Please! (I promise to try and restrain myself)

PETA IS a bunch of lunatic wackjobs and should not in any way shape or form be respected. The danger in thinking that they are only doing things and making statements that are outlandish is that you miss the fact that these idiots actually believe what they are saying. They are not doing it to "make a point". They really would put a stop to anything involving use of animals like eating or making clothes. This includes things very near and dear to me like hunting and fishing.

I will go on record saying I have zero respect for PETA. Should people be nice to animals, yes. Should we fight Pit bulls, No. Should we be allowed to hunt and fish, Yes. Should we be allowed to enjoys a great big juicy steak for dinner, Yes. Should we be allowed to wear leather shoes, Yes. PETA is an abomination or irrational, delusional idiots.

Here is the problem with having a rational discussion about PETA. Most people are fairly rational and normal with their views on animals. Some are at the edges in the extreme areas, lets say Peta on one end and Michael Vick and dog fighters on the other. I am not going to be able to convince a Peta person about anything. Rational arguement doesn't work because the idiots are not rational. Same thing with a dog fighter. They may realize that what they did was in fact illegal but deep inside they do not see that what they were doing was actually wrong. A rational person in the middle of all of this should be able to make some common sense decisions about how animals are treated but with PETA out there trying to convince people that things like Fishing should be stopped it muddys the water.

I didn't say all of that well but make no mistake, I do not in any way shape or form like or respect PETA. The only PETA I respect is "People for the Eating of Taasty Animals". Make no mistake, if you like your steaks and burger, If you want to wear leather motorcycle jackets, if you want to take a kid fishing some day, you cannot see PETA as anything other than a bunch of no good lunatic wack jobs.

Oh, Did I mention that I HATE PETA! Not much really makes me really see red but PETA gets my blood boiling.

[diebitter]

I think anyone suggesting we stop farming for meat and dairy is a whackjob, and actually will be effectively driving those species we derive food from into extinction. Humans do that, if some big lumbering animal is competing with us for food in some form, we kill it till there's no more. IF you don't believe me, google on the Pleistocene Extinction, and see exactly how long humans have been doing this - very effectively, I might add (though more often for ood than for competing resources, I'll add).

However, personal and institutional cruelty is really not acceptable. Even if you don't care about the animals, cultivating behaviours that desensitise people to suffering can't be good.