When is enough, enough?

[wildone]

I would imagine that most people heard of the tragedy that occurred just outside of Winnipeg here in Canada just over a week ago.

 

To summarize the story, a passenger on a Greyhound bus suddenly attacked a random passenger with a knife and began repeatedly stabbing him. After the bus stopped immediately, the other passengers all got off the bus, leaving the attacker and the already dead victim left on the bus. The attacker than cut the head off the victim and carried it up to the front of the bus and manhandled it in front of the driver and a couple of other passengers who were keeping the bus door closed in order to prevent him from escaping.

 

When the police arrived, several hours of negotiation went on when finally the accused was taken into custody.

 

More shocking was what was revealed when he made his first court appearance. A bag containing an ear, a nose and a lip were found in his pocket. Also, the accused was seen consuming some of the flesh of his victim. The accused remained silent the entire time in court, refused any kind of counsel by shaking his head no, and nodding yes when the judge asked if he understood what was going on. Finally the judge asked the accused if he had anything to say, where after several moments of silence he spoke the only words since his arrest, "Kill Me".

 

This shocked our country and probably most of the world and was the top story on BBC and second top story on CNN, and countless other news services.

 

It is a horrible, disgusting, an unimaginable act that nobody wants to really comprehend happened.

 

The victims family is in shock, their 22 y/o son was on his way home, just over an hour away when this happened to him.

 

Now that the country and world is reeling over this event, who else would take this story and spin it to their advantage, other than PETA.

 

PETA felt that the correlation between this act and what happens to animals at a slaughter house and finally on peoples dinner plates to easy to pass over.

 

They tried to take out this ad in several newspapers and in my opinion were rightly refused.

 

 

 

This has me infuriated.

 

I understand that PETA is going for shock value and is trying to equate the similarity, but at what cost?

 

I know some of the members at GA are vegetarian, and I'm really curious if they feel that PETA is justified in trying to publish this ad in Canadian newspapers?

 

I guess I'm trying to understand how some people can use a family's, a countries', or the world's shock and pain to further their particular cause.

 

What do you think?

 

 

Steve

[Bondwriter]

I hadn't heard about this story. Quite a gruesome one, and from your lines something about a very disturbed person.

 

Not having been in the mayhem of this particular story (though for the last week here in France we've had a particularly bad tale of an 11-year old stabbed 40 times by a crazy vagrant...), I'd say it is in poor taste from PETA. But they aim at shock value, so your reaction is certainly the one expected from the people who put up this campaign. I don't agree with the message (one human life= one animal life), but it's effective in at least having people prone to hear the message stop and think.

[corvus]

PETA doesn't like meat. It obviously has bad taste.

 

 

*shrug*

[Tiger]

That's egregious. Just because you choose to be a vegetarian who doesn't own fur coats doesn't give you a right to force your views upon others. Cannibalism is not the same as eating a hamburger. Does it involve killing? Of course it does. They make it as quick and painless as possible. Personally I think we're doing the world a favor at this point. Imagine all the wild bovines and pigs everywhere when they're free to roam everywhere. Their populations would be out of control within a few decades.

[Razor]

That's egregious. Just because you choose to be a vegetarian who doesn't own fur coats doesn't give you a right to force your views upon others. Cannibalism is not the same as eating a hamburger. Does it involve killing? Of course it does. They make it as quick and painless as possible. Personally I think we're doing the world a favor at this point. Imagine all the wild bovines and pigs everywhere when they're free to roam everywhere. Their populations would be out of control within a few decades.

 

 

....erm, no. Slaughtering animals isn't always "quick and painless". Also, generally the animals used as livestock have awful living conditions, states of being you and I and anyone else would consider absolutely deplorable. From an ecological perspective, no, those populations would likely never be out of control.

 

Point is, it's fine to eat meat. It's not fine to deceive yourself into believing that what you are doing is free of any less savory aspects.

 

 

Anywho, PETA comparing this psycho to the slaughter of animals is just nucking futs. Bunch of crazies.

[AFriendlyFace]

I know some of the members at GA are vegetarian, and I'm really curious if they feel that PETA is justified in trying to publish this ad in Canadian newspapers?

As one of the vegetarian members, no I don't approve at all. Perhaps surprisingly, I'm not a big fan of PETA...they are a bit too extreme for my taste. This is a good example of that. I'm all about animal rights, and I definitely think people should be for the ethical treatment of animals, but that - and some of their other tactics - are just tasteless and shameful IMO.

 

....erm, no. Slaughtering animals isn't always "quick and painless". Also, generally the animals used as livestock have awful living conditions, states of being you and I and anyone else would consider absolutely deplorable. From an ecological perspective, no, those populations would likely never be out of control.

 

Point is, it's fine to eat meat. It's not fine to deceive yourself into believing that what you are doing is free of any less savory aspects.

 

 

Anywho, PETA comparing this psycho to the slaughter of animals is just nucking futs. Bunch of crazies.

 

Very well said, Jamie!

 

 

Take care all and have a great day

Kevin

[rknapp]

You know, that ad could easily be taken as the victim being the plant that the vegetarian eats.

 

To PETA I say, I am not more a monster than you. I can hear those tomatoes screaming as you cut them from their plant, slice them, dice them, turn them into ketchup, and eat them!

[AFriendlyFace]

You know, that ad could easily be taken as the victim being the plant that the vegetarian eats.

 

To PETA I say, I am not more a monster than you. I can hear those tomatoes screaming as you cut them from their plant, slice them, dice them, turn them into ketchup, and eat them!

OK Robbie, I know you're not serious, but I can't help commenting.

 

I'm not speaking of the morality of eating meat at all, but it is not comparable to eating vegetation/plants. Plants have no nervous system. They experience no thoughts, emotions, pain, or pleasure. Depending on the animal in question it probably does. Huge difference, dude. There's also a huge difference between animals.

 

If I weren't a vegetarian I would have no qualms (or few) about eating beef or mutton because cows and sheep are pretty stupid. Pork on the other hand would remain a moral no no for me because pigs are quite intelligent. Similarly I would eat chickens and wouldn't eat primates or dolphins. As far as I'm concerned there is definitely a hierarchy here.

 

Again, I'm not saying people shouldn't eat the animals I listed as intelligent; that's your business and I truly don't pass any judgment (I'm not just saying that).

[Graeme]

I heard about this on the radio yesterday as I was driving to work. The radio comperes, who said they normally support PETA in what they are trying to do, said they were shocked and disgusted and felt that PETA had gone too far. I think this was an example of extremely poor taste and judgement on behalf of PETA and their advertising company.

[JamesSavik]

PETA is simply a modern manifestation of one of the most ancient religions: animal worship or animalism.

 

When people believe in nothing, they will always find an idol to worship.

 

It's similar to the eco-nuts and their nature worship.

 

People have a natural void that only faith in something will fill. Just make sure that it is something worthy of your faith.

[Tiger]

....erm, no. Slaughtering animals isn't always "quick and painless". Also, generally the animals used as livestock have awful living conditions, states of being you and I and anyone else would consider absolutely deplorable. From an ecological perspective, no, those populations would likely never be out of control.

I said as possible, Jamie. It's definitely not comparable to the way that man was murdered. Their living conditions are bad in some instances. There are more cattle on this planet than humans. With freedom to roam, there would be a lot more traffic accidents involving them. Cows don't breed quickly, but pigs certainly do, and their numbers could skyrocket if nobody ate them. Sure, they are intelligent creatures, but once they are in the wild, they turn wild within a few weeks, and it even causes mutations in the next generation. They usually docile creatures become extremely temperamental in the wild, and they produce a lot of offspring. Thus, I beg to differ on pigs.

[Krista]

Oh my. I had heard about that disturbingly sad story on CNN and I thought it gross then. What PETA has done is just beyond me, I really cannot understand how anyone would want to turn that in order to get some message across. It was shocking, yes, but lord completely in poor taste and absolutely uncalled for.

 

As far as PETA as a group/organization I have been against them for a long while. They kill, via euthanasia over 75-80% of the animals they rescue, including kittens and puppies, and pregnant animals. So I cannot think their cause is a just one at all - the retards.

[glomph]

The commercial production of many vegetables depends upon the slave labor of bees. They're forced to live in artificial hives, and their queen is held prisoner.

 

I don't see how vegetarians can live with themselves.

[jovian_w2002]

Omg, I feel terribly sorry for that family Gah, Peta just gets on my nerves. Admittedly, I do agree with some of their causes, but they are not advocating the right way. Instead, it aggravates a LOT of people. They act on emotions rather than logic. If they want to be vegetarians, let them be. They've taken their advocation to a new loathsome level. They should think about the victim's family and the ordeal they're going through before acting on their really inane emotions.

 

What even disgusts me is the fact that they're exploiting the tragic incident that happened by putting up an advertising campaign. Are they animals? Come to think about it... ARE they?

 

I could rant all I want about their treatment towards 'mankind', but I'll stop here. I've kept the family in my prayers. Hopefully they wouldn't be distracted by this abhorrent ad.

 

Sorry for ranting about this, but *pulls my hair out* Peta members need to stop bagging humanity and take a good hard look at themselves. I know there are some good PETA members out there; nevertheless, there are a good number of them who seriously need some re-wiring in their heads.

[shadowgod]

Sorry for ranting about this, but *pulls my hair out* Peta members need to stop bagging humanity and take a good hard look at themselves. I know there are some good PETA members out there; nevertheless, there are a good number of them who seriously need some re-wiring in their heads.

 

I have to agree with Jovian. Most groups have a militant faction that believes that they are in a war and instead of waiting for the fight to be brought to them; they actively seek to start skirmishes.

 

However, this is a major Ad campaign so the higher-ups had to know about it. I think everyone involved with that organization should be ashamed of themselves for using this incident to garner publicity. In the end that is all they are doing; making sure that their name is known.

 

They won.

 

Their Ad campaign was refused, but look, they still got what they wanted. All those papers that refused the full page ad turned around and ran the story giving peta the publicity they want and the don't have to pay a damned red cent for it.

 

Personally, i find continuing this thread, and giving them more notoriety useless. Sure we can all get enraged, and indignant for the victims family, for having been victimized again. But all we do in the end is give them more of what they want.

 

The sensationalism has to stop somewhere.

 

Steve

[Razor]

I said as possible, Jamie. It's definitely not comparable to the way that man was murdered. Their living conditions are bad in some instances. There are more cattle on this planet than humans. With freedom to roam, there would be a lot more traffic accidents involving them. Cows don't breed quickly, but pigs certainly do, and their numbers could skyrocket if nobody ate them. Sure, they are intelligent creatures, but once they are in the wild, they turn wild within a few weeks, and it even causes mutations in the next generation. They usually docile creatures become extremely temperamental in the wild, and they produce a lot of offspring. Thus, I beg to differ on pigs.

 

Of course it's not comparable. That's part of what I said, that PETA are screwy in the head for doing that. What kind of normal, sensitive, sane individual would make that sort of a link seriously? It's just freakish.

 

Now, from a biological standpoint, I must say that you are completely incorrect. If any animal on the planet is out of control in regard to population, it is humans. We far exceed natural carrying capacity, and we're the only animals that can possibly sustain themselves in this manner. Pigs, for instance, would likely exceed carrying capacity for a brief period of time before nature took its course and stabilized the population.

 

As for causing mutations, mutations are exceedingly rare from a genetic standpoint. What you're talking about is natural selection, which is the normal course of nature. The traits that enable the pig to survive more effectively in the wild would be selected for and within a few generations, the pigs would indeed be a bit different. That's not because of mutations, that's because that's how nature works. If you want to get picky about it, we're doing something slightly messed up by breeding animals (and plants for that matter). The pigs we eat are nothing like wild pigs because they've been bred over the course of several generations to be the animals we want to eat. Artificial selection has completely destroyed the natural course of things as far as that's concerned.

 

And again, I'm all for eating meat. Look at your teeth; you were obviously designed to eat both meat and plants. It's one of the amazing points of versatility that makes humans so adaptable. I say kill it and eat the hell out of it. Hell if you want you can go ahead and kill a dolphin or a chimp, so long as you eat it. I don't really care as long as you're not just killing something to kill it. Chimps kill other chimps sometimes, and dolphins have been known to be oddly aggressive at times. Hmph, if you're pressed for food and somebody keels over, eat their ass, too, why not? Be careful about that, though, since cannibalism is really bad for you... there's some kind of disease it causes, I forget.

 

Mmm, meat. As a gay man, I really like that double entendre.

 

I'm just saying that while it's fine to eat meat, you should really take into consideration the fact that the animals you're eating are NOT happy animals. They were in pain when they were alive, and they were very likely in pain as they died. They were shot full of hormones and antibiotics, and fed until they were big enough to slaughter. That's all they were for, food, and it was likely painfully obvious even to them.

[AFriendlyFace]

PETA is simply a modern manifestation of one of the most ancient religions: animal worship or animalism.

I disagree to some extent. I don't think most PETA members are ostensibly (though perhaps practically) deifying animals. They're usually simply arguing for greater rights and better treatment for animals, which personally I agree with. It's their general application, not their ideology, where I personally differ with them.

 

People have a natural void that only faith in something will fill. Just make sure that it is something worthy of your faith.

That's a very good point.

 

I said as possible, Jamie. It's definitely not comparable to the way that man was murdered. Their living conditions are bad in some instances. There are more cattle on this planet than humans. With freedom to roam, there would be a lot more traffic accidents involving them. Cows don't breed quickly, but pigs certainly do, and their numbers could skyrocket if nobody ate them. Sure, they are intelligent creatures, but once they are in the wild, they turn wild within a few weeks, and it even causes mutations in the next generation. They usually docile creatures become extremely temperamental in the wild, and they produce a lot of offspring. Thus, I beg to differ on pigs.

Jamie already said most of the things I was going to say in response to this, but I'll add one more. We've artificially inflated the population of pigs (and other livestock), if they were living in nature they likely wouldn't have gotten so over-populated in the first place.

 

The commercial production of many vegetables depends upon the slave labor of bees. They're forced to live in artificial hives, and their queen is held prisoner.

 

I don't see how vegetarians can live with themselves.

 

As I said, not all living things are created equally. There's a very definite hierarchy IMO. I'm willing to eat - and exploit - forms of life lower on the hierarchy, but I'm given pause when it comes to beings higher up on it.

 

Omg, I feel terribly sorry for that family Gah, Peta just gets on my nerves. Admittedly, I do agree with some of their causes, but they are not advocating the right way. Instead, it aggravates a LOT of people. They act on emotions rather than logic. If they want to be vegetarians, let them be. They've taken their advocation to a new loathsome level. They should think about the victim's family and the ordeal they're going through before acting on their really inane emotions.

Very well said!

 

However, this is a major Ad campaign so the higher-ups had to know about it. I think everyone involved with that organization should be ashamed of themselves for using this incident to garner publicity.

I disagree, Steve. I'm not a PETA member, but I know several people who are. They would likely find this tactic reprehensible as well. Yet they still believe in the overarching message of a more humane, ethical treatment of animals...why should they be condemned because a faction within their group acts in an extreme way?

 

...On the other hand stuff like this is precisely why I haven't become involved with PETA myself, so I guess I could argue the point either way.

 

Of course it's not comparable. That's part of what I said, that PETA are screwy in the head for doing that. What kind of normal, sensitive, sane individual would make that sort of a link seriously? It's just freakish.

 

Now, from a biological standpoint, I must say that you are completely incorrect. If any animal on the planet is out of control in regard to population, it is humans. We far exceed natural carrying capacity, and we're the only animals that can possibly sustain themselves in this manner. Pigs, for instance, would likely exceed carrying capacity for a brief period of time before nature took its course and stabilized the population.

 

As for causing mutations, mutations are exceedingly rare from a genetic standpoint. What you're talking about is natural selection, which is the normal course of nature. The traits that enable the pig to survive more effectively in the wild would be selected for and within a few generations, the pigs would indeed be a bit different. That's not because of mutations, that's because that's how nature works. If you want to get picky about it, we're doing something slightly messed up by breeding animals (and plants for that matter). The pigs we eat are nothing like wild pigs because they've been bred over the course of several generations to be the animals we want to eat. Artificial selection has completely destroyed the natural course of things as far as that's concerned.

Exactly! Great points, Jamie

 

Take chickens for example, chickens are not the animals nature intended. Instead they have ridiculously disproportionately massive breasts and they mature at a freakish rate.

 

Even if I were going to eat chicken I would be hesitant given all the hormones and chemicals to which they are subjected. Indeed I seem to remember reading somewhere that chicken had the highest quantities of growth hormones present of all food compared in the study (sorry, but I can't recall any other details or come up with links, I'm going strictly from memory).

 

I'm really not an organic food nut, but when it comes to chicken I intend to serve any kids or spouse I may later acquire nothing but organic chicken meat. I won't be a nutty zealot though, if they occasionally eat chicken at restaurants or something no big deal, but I'm not going to serve them the hormone enhanced goo at home.

 

 

Just my thoughts,

-Kevin

[Drewbie]

Said it there are places that do not give hormones be nice if they would put a sticker on and make sure it's lugit. Deftitinley agree organic meat or chicken is better.

 

 

It does seem the ones at top are the peta members that are the nut-case's.

Edited August 9, 2008 by Drewbie

[wildone]

They won.

 

Their Ad campaign was refused, but look, they still got what they wanted. All those papers that refused the full page ad turned around and ran the story giving peta the publicity they want and the don't have to pay a damned red cent for it.

 

Personally, i find continuing this thread, and giving them more notoriety useless. Sure we can all get enraged, and indignant for the victims family, for having been victimized again. But all we do in the end is give them more of what they want.

 

Steve

 

 

Steve,

 

I fully agree with you and I can tell you that I was fully aware that I was actually giving PETA what they wanted by starting this thread, and even going so far as posting their ad.

 

I was just so mad at what they were doing. I know that the majority of PETA members don't decide what campaigns to run and which ones not to, I was more interested in what other members felt about this campaign.

 

I have to admit that I feel better when I think about this subject, knowing that my thoughts and disgust are not alone. Also, some people have added a touch of humour, which actually has me smiling at their response ( thanks Robbie , I really needed that ).

 

I did make one major mistake though. I started out by saying:

Now that the country and world is reeling over this event, who else would take this story and spin it to their advantage, other than PETA.

 

I should have known better to think PETA would be the only ones to try to capitalize on this.

 

Winnipeg Free Press

 

I so glad that 250 people turned out and hopefully deterred this ilk from upsetting the family more.

 

Steve

 

For an even more powerful message read this

Edited August 10, 2008 by wildone

[S.L. Lewis]

ARRRGGGHHH!!

Okay, now that that's out of the way, I have to say this.

First of all, I pity the family that had their childs murder used in such a way by people who are supposedly pro-life. The higher ups of PITA need a firm boot up where the sun don't shine, that is if they get their heads out of there first.

To do that is just disgusting and makes other more then ticked, but also unwilling to listen to what they have to say.

 

Second of all, there are companies out there that are SOME companies, not all, but SOME that don't use hormones and try to keep their animals healthy and happy for their sometimes short lives. Unhappy animals usually lead to sick and lean animals, hormones or not.

 

Now that I'm done with my rant...I'm off!

[Umbathri]

That ad is of course deplorable. If PITA can be that thoughtless and regardless of their fellow man, how can they point fingers at anyone else?

 

Besides omnivores are by nature inclined to eat herbivores. Maybe vegetarians need to reevaluate their stance? I think I wouldn

Edited August 10, 2008 by Umbathri