Animals / Hunting / Michael Vick

[OneAugustKnight]

vern,

I agree with you about PETA. They misrepresent themselves on the euthanizing of animals, and at least the local animal shelter will dispose of the remains properly.

PETA’s methods for pushing their agenda are completely immoral, such as distribution of graphic materials to young children aimed at demonizing the child’s parent’s for eating meat.

Plus they also seem promote the idea that an animal’s life is more sacred than that of a human being. When they promote humane treatment of animals, what they seem to mean is treating animals like humans.

 

[melensdad]

PETA gets condemned a lot because they fight for animals and not humans…well, the organization is for animals, what’s the problem?

Part of the problem may rest in the fact that PETA has been caught in many lies.

PETA tends to overdo things at times, I’m not denying that, but they do make good points that shouldn’t be overlooked because they’re not focusing on other issues. It is an animal organization for the *humane treatment of animals *(which every Christian should support ).

PETA supports a very radical agenda, it does not support the “humane treatment of animals” as you suggest, it supports the cause of a totally vegan society (no animals, no milk, no dairy, no fish in our diets), it even opposed pet ownership. PETA has been linked to groups like the Animal Liberation Front, a known terrorist group that has killed and murdered people in the defense of their ‘cause’. Please do a more in depth study of PETA and their agenda.

 

[vern_humphrey]

vern,

I agree with you about PETA. They misrepresent themselves on the euthanizing of animals, and at least the local animal shelter will dispose of the remains properly.

PETA’s methods for pushing their agenda are completely immoral, such as distribution of graphic materials to young children aimed at demonizing the child’s parent’s for eating meat.

Plus they also seem promote the idea that an animal’s life is more sacred than that of a human being. When they promote humane treatment of animals, what they seem to mean is treating animals like humans.

I think they promote animal life as superior to human life – for example, they never condemned suicide bombings, but they did condemn the use of a donkey, (which was killed) to carry a suicide-type bomb.

 

[latinmasslover]

I haven’t been involveded with PETA for several years and was totally unaware of what you all have mentioned, but in my defense I did say they go overboard. However, not everything they say is untrue, and what I don’t support is the inhumane treatment of animals that are raised for food (or any animal for that matter), and that is the ***only ***reason why I did go vegan.

 

[latinmasslover]

Oh, I know it’s in the Bible, I just thought that the Flood story was mostly symbolic and not really historical.

One of the priests at my parish teaches that also, so that is a common interpretation of Genesis among the faithful. The Church has always condemned that opinion of the Old Testament (and of the New for that matter) being merely symbolic and not historical. I’d like to add that this modern interpretation was also condemned by John Paul II.

 

[melensdad]

I haven’t been involveded with PETA for several years and was totally unaware of what you all have mentioned

There are many anti-PETA websites, but here is a website that looks at non-profit organizations. Here is their page on PETA.
activistcash.com/organization_overview.cfm/oid/21

The website looks at various organizations, follows their money trails, follows their actions and details their words. Please draw your own conclusions. There are many more websites that take an objective view of various groups, this one seems to be objective.

While many are aware of PETA’s activist agenda, not many are aware of the Humane Society of the United State’s radical agenda. Do NOT confuse the HSUS with your local animal shelter, they are totally different organizations. Many, however donate tot he Humane Society of the United States under the mistaken belief that it is affiliated with the local shelters.

 

[PeteZaHut]

I do know that PETA has an ongoing campaign against KFC that is very convincing. It was an easy decision for me not to ever eat from KFC again after I watched a video on how they treat chickens.

 

[melensdad]

I do know that PETA has an ongoing campaign against KFC that is very convincing. It was an easy decision for me not to ever eat from KFC again after I watched a video on how they treat chickens.

You do realize that KFC buys the chicken meat from suppliers who raise them? KFC does not raise or slaughter chickens.

PETA lied again. You bought it hook, line & sinker.

The supplier in question was Pilgrims Pride, they process some of the chickens for KFC. It should also be noted that the company FIRED a bunch of workers for abusing the chickens, animal abuse is a violation of its policies and work rules. If you purchased chicken in the supermarket you probably bought some of the same brand that KFC purchased. The difference is that PETA has targeted many large companies with their sensationalist claims because large targets are also “easy” targets to hit. It is much easier to go after a name brand company like KFC than it is to go after a supplier like Pilgrim’s Pride, which is not as common a name in the eyes of the consumers. Still, if you look into many consumer items, you will find Pilgrim’s Pride is the supplier of the chicken. There are other similar companies as well.

By the way, KFC suspended its purchases from Pilgrim’s Pride until the supplier terminated all the employees in quesiton, reviewed its policies, and took other corrective measures.

What you did was hurt KFC by not eating its chicken. KFC, however was not to blame. So your actions inflicted financial pain on your local KFC/franchisee because you believed a lie. Doesn’t seem right anymore does it?

By the way, other companies owned by the parent company of KFC include A&W, Pizza Hut, Long John Silvers and Taco Bell.

 

[vern_humphrey]

The supplier in question was Pilgrims Pride, they process some of the chickens for KFC. It should also be noted that the company FIRED a bunch of workers for abusing the chickens, animal abuse is a violation of its policies and work rules.

If you drive through these hills, you see Pilgrom’s Pride signs everywhere – they are the main chicken-producing company in these parts.

Farmers work as private contractors – they must build and equip their own chicken houses to Pilgrim’s Pride standards. Pilgrim’s Pride delivers the chicks and feed, and takes away the grown out chickens, paying the farmers based on their efficiency.

Pilgrim’s Pride rules are very stict. Chicken houses and operations are inspected frequently and they are constantly upgrading their standards. I can tell you that while you can always find someone cheating in any field (it isn’t just limited to raising and slaughtering chickens) no one runs a tighter ship than Pilgrim’s Pride.

 

[melensdad]

I can tell you that while you can always find someone cheating in any field (it isn’t just limited to raising and slaughtering chickens) no one runs a tighter ship than Pilgrim’s Pride.

So it seems all the more tragic to boycott KFC, especially since it was not to blame, and especially since bad people exist in any organization, but we don’t go out condeming the whole organization for the acts of a few bad eggs. If we did condem whole organizations, we’d have to start with our own church do to the child abuse inflicted by a very small % of priests. So to is probably the case with the chicken processing at Pilgrim’s Pride. A very small minority of the employees was at fault, yet a large multi-national company was hurt because people beleived the lies of PETA, which were sensationalized by the press. And we all know that the press never sensationalized any story, always reports honestly and in depth, and fully investigates all its sources

 

[vern_humphrey]

So it seems all the more tragic to boycott KFC, especially since it was not to blame, and especially since bad people exist in any organization, but we don’t go out condeming the whole organization for the acts of a few bad eggs. If we did condem whole organizations, we’d have to start with our own church do to the child abuse inflicted by a very small % of priests. So to is probably the case with the chicken processing at Pilgrim’s Pride. A very small minority of the employees was at fault, yet a large multi-national company was hurt because people beleived the lies of PETA, which were sensationalized by the press. And we all know that the press never sensationalized any story, always reports honestly and in depth, and fully investigates all its sources

Or to put it another way, if we held PETA to the same standards PETA wants to apply to KFC, PETA would have been out of business long ago.

 

[melensdad]

Or to put it another way, if we held PETA to the same standards PETA wants to apply to KFC, PETA would have been out of business long ago.

Seems like foul play the way PETA created the fowl story

*Sorry, I couldn’t resist *

 

[vern_humphrey]

Seems like foul play the way PETA created the fowl story

*Sorry, I couldn’t resist *

They had it coming, my man, they had it coming.

 

[melensdad]

They had it coming, my man, they had it coming.

Well maybe some people did have it coming but I won’t make that claim.

My concern, as this thread evolves is that people actually believe the lies that groups like PETA and the HSUS have been spreading around. The reality is that PETA funds terrorists, in fact there are 2 groups that PETA is linked with by the FBI that are considered to be serious domestic threats. The groups have killed people and they are funded by PETA which seems to glorify animal live over human life, justifies its actions with lies, and still manages to raise millions of dollars from unsuspecting people it dupes.

The HSUS is nearly as bad as PETA, is not considered as radical, but is far more influential and just as dubious. It dupes tens of millions of dollars out of sympathic folks who think they are helping out the animal shelters but, in fact, are supporting a radical liberal agenda.

“My goal is the abolition of all animal agriculture.”
— HSUS grassroots coordinator John “J.P.” Goodwin

“I’m not an admirer of HSUS. They’ve always been primarily a direct-mail operation, and what’s known in animal rights circles as a credit-grabber.”
— HSUS co-founder Cleveland Amory

“The Humane Society should be worried about protecting animals from cruelty. It’s not doing that. The place is all about power and money.”
— HSUS consultant and former HSUS Chief Investigator Robert Baker, in U.S. News & World Report

“The life of an ant and that of my child should be granted equal consideration.”
— HSUS senior scholar Michael W. Fox

“[T]he Humane Society of the United States (HSUS) is not affiliated with, nor is it a parent organization for, local humane societies, animal shelters, or animal care and control agencies … The HSUS does not operate or have direct control over any animal shelter.”
— From a 2001 disclaimer issued by the Humane Society of the United States (HSUS)
​

 

[thechrismyster]

i love vegans.

it’s simple supply and demand… the more people who abstain from meat, the cheaper the prices for me.

and i get to eat more meat.

thank you, non-meat eaters for potentially fattening my wallet.

/nothing really to add to this thread except vegetarians… if you don’t want to eat meat, goodie for you.enjoy your seitan and sprouts till the cows come home… i love animals - pan seared, fried or baked… its just food with legs to me. nothing more or less.

 

[thechrismyster]

I do know that PETA has an ongoing campaign against KFC that is very convincing. It was an easy decision for me not to ever eat from KFC again after I watched a video on how they treat chickens.

folks that easily swayable are a marketing/advertisers dream.

 

[rlg94086]

Wow. I never thought of it that way. I will have to start encouranging veg-heads. Viva la Vegans!

i love vegans.

it’s simple supply and demand… the more people who abstain from meat, the cheaper the prices for me.

and i get to eat more meat.

thank you, non-meat eaters for potentially fattening my wallet.

/nothing really to add to this thread except vegetarians… if you don’t want to eat meat, goodie for you.enjoy your seitan and sprouts till the cows come home… i love animals - pan seared, fried or baked… its just food with legs to me. nothing more or less.

 

[thechrismyster]

PETA gets condemned a lot because they fight for animals and not humans…well, the organization is for animals, what’s the problem? Nobody condemns Priests for Life because their work doesn’t focus on animals and the planet, which needs a lot of attention.

Peta, overboard?? NNNNooooo…

i posted this picture at first, and then i rethought it… i don’t want to offend people because this link is a picture of the type of tactics PETA uses…

moonbattery.com/archives/peta-blasphemy.jpg

click the link for a sample of the type of imagery used in their marches… its nothing more than sheer blasphemy.

 

[AHapka]

I might get some flack for this, but from a devil’s advocate point of view…

It seems to me that if one doesn’t want to eat meat because it would involve killing a living thing, one also should not eat plant life as well. Does not killing a plant also involve killing a living thing?

Perhaps in the past there was no way around this, but in this day and age we have a sufficiently advanced chemical industry that there should be completely synthetic nutrients out there. Does anyone know if those nutritional drinks like Ensure are all synthetic or do they use natural products?

Anyway, in my personal opinion when God told St. Paul “slaughter and eat,” he made it clear that he approved killing animals for food.

Also, there are no vegitarian Catholics anyway. We all eat flesh and/or drink blood every time we receive Holy Communion.

Andy

 

[rlg94086]

I might get some flack for this, but from a devil’s advocate point of view…

It seems to me that if one doesn’t want to eat meat because it would involve killing a living thing, one also should not eat plant life as well. Does not killing a plant also involve killing a living thing?

You mean like these folks…
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fruitarianism

Definition of fruitarian
Some fruitarians will eat only what falls (or would fall) naturally from a plant, that is: foods that can be harvested without killing the plant. These foods consist primarily of culinary fruits, nuts, and seeds.[6] Many do not eat grains, believing it is unnatural to do so,[7] and some fruitarians feel that it is improper for humans to eat seeds.[8] Additionally, there are fruitarians who believe they should eat only plants that spread seeds when the plant is eaten.[9] Others eat seeds and some cooked foods.[10]
Many fruitarians use the botanical definitions of fruits and consume pulses,[11] while others include green leafy vegetables[12] and/or root vegetables in their diet. Some occasionally consume some dairy products as well.

I’ve mentioned them before on this thread - forums.catholic-questions.org/showpost.php?p=2558299&postcount=30

I’m guessing a Catholic fruitarian would have to receive only the blood, since the accidents are in the form of wine. They would have to overlook the whole “body, blood…” part of the equation.