waterpanther, on Jun 20 2005, 08:52 PM, said:
I was referring to human parents here, who have the option of verbal communication. When they choose not to exercise it and strike children instead, the only message they send is that might makes right, and force insures confromity. It does not teach right from wrong; quite the contrary.
~.~ I realize you meant humans, I was simply pointing out that animals also use threats. You had mentioned the 'threat of punishment' and it seemed to me that you said even the threat was wrong. I was pointing out that threat (again, not threat of abuse/beating) is not bad, nor unusual. With my son, the threat of being in trouble was more than enough. But now we are getting off the subject of PETA.
I'm not sure what you're referring to here, since the comics were to be distributed only to urban children whose mothers were wearing fur. Does anyone know, by the way, whether these flyers were ever given out? Everything I could find on the net about them said they "would be" distributed, or that "PETA planned" to do so, but nothing I ran into said they actually were.
~.~ Comics? No, these were not comics and around here, we don't wear fur. It's not even that common in the bigger cities. Actually, you would find that more often at the casinos. According to the paper they were actually distributed, it was not the school that told me about this action. I can look for it, so we both know whether it was true or not.
Funny, in an odd way, story. I knew someone (not with PETA) that constantly berated me for not being against hunting/trapping. Did this stop her from eating meat? No. Did it stop her from buying a fur coat? No. This is the holier than thou type I have experience with.
And what defensiveness is it that I'm feeling now?
~.~ I meant as you defend PETA, you can't help but feel defensive. My point was that you and others in this thread were feeling the same defensiveness. There was no insult intended, only a hope of getting you and everyone to see that you are feeling the same thing as you come from different sides.
Do you actually have any idea what I take for granted? I doubt it, very seriously.
~.~ You mentioned that people against PETA take their beliefs for granted, I was simply pointing out that perhaps you take your belief in PETA for granted. Maybe that is not wording it correctly, but I am trying to point out that the way you see PETA, others on the receiving end of their attention or simply on the other side, may not feel the same.
Where did I say I don't eat meat? Where did I say you shouldn't?
~.~ I apologize. I was merely giving an example, not attempting to say that I know whether you do or don't eat meat. From my experience, PETA does have the stance that one basically cannot eat meat and that by doing so, one is being cruel to animals. I have never been cruel to any animal. This is a sore subject for me, especially this year, so I am most likely not making the best of sense.
As for the PETA person who said you shouldn't geld you colts, she obviously does not represent the official position of the organization. (And obviously doesn't know anything about horses.) Why take her word for policy over the actual mission statement?
~.~ Since I have had to put up with her quite alot, it is hard to disconnect her from them, I will readily admit that. See, this is where people are going to get a bad impression and if PETA does not feel this way, they need to make certain the public (and their members) is aware of that. One way to do that would be to loudly voice a disapproval of extremist activity. You may be surprised how many out there are just like her.
Do you assume that all Christians are homophobes, say, because a few idiots are?
~.~ No, I know better than that, but those few do make a bad impression, don't they? And it seems that is all it takes to place a bad mark on a group. I will say, in my family, all of those that go to church are indeed, homophobic. Sad, but true.
I don't follow you here. No, PETA does not in general deal with wild animals. There are several fine organizations that
Their missions are complementary, not contradictory. (The "unnatural" interactions I'm referring to here are things such as laboratories, factory farms, fur farms. And in those circumstances, no one does the muckraking investigations any better than PETA.)
~.~ I took this:
In fact, the lack of naturalness in most such interactions is one of their most strongly argued points.
to mean they were against human/animal interaction as it is unnatural. I stand corrected.
I think it's remarkable, actually, the way many people respond to PETA. For most Americans, possibly most Westerners, the organization challenges the special position
the same respect we pay ourselves. They draw vitriol from left and right equally. When I googled "PETA,ALF,funding," what I came up with was a clutch of right-wing sites run by anti-regulatory groups, hunting publications and fundamentalists. One one of them--I forget which, and I'm not going wading through that sludge again--railed that PETA was "typically
been touched in a way that the fact that human and chimpanzee DNA are 99% identical doesn't reach to.
~.~ sorry, I had to snip that, I hate that I am making such large posts. I understand what you are saying, but do you have hands on experience with those that are against some of PETA's work? Have you actually talked to anyone that has been a (for lack of a better word) target? (I am not saying you haven't, I am simply asking) You are about the first PETA supporter that I have talked to that is not talking to me as a crazy. I used to support them long ago, until I was on the receiving end of attacks from a few other supporters. This is why I react the way I do, why I have no time for them, the experience I have had has left a very sour taste in my mouth. And, as much as I like you, you have one very large moutain to climb to convince me that they are not extremists. And, believe it or not, I do realize that there has to be others like you, I just have not had experience with them.
After all, we call our enemies "animals," don't we? Where would all our superiority go, if we were animals, too?
~.~ I am an animal. I have always known this and have only felt as an equal to the animals around me.
I do know people that take some offense to the notion, but most seem to agree that we are animals, they just feel they are 'more evolved'. One of my firsts posts on the SUSA Xena board was a discussion about animals being sentient, believe me, my view was quickly ridiculed by one poster.
~edit cuz I missed a quote tag.
Edited by Elara, 20 June 2005 - 11:41 PM.