|
PETA: What were you thinking?!? (pg. 2)
|
View this Thread in Original format
| Fir3start3r |
*sigh*
It just never stops with these guys does it?
| quote: |
Crucified lamb billboard 'blocked'
April 14, 2006
A BILLBOARD depicting a bloody, crucified lamb has been refused space above Sydney's roads this Easter, an animal rights group said today.
People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals (PETA), which has been running an international campaign against sheep mulesing in Australia, wanted to mount the confronting image for motorists to see over the Easter long weekend.
But the group says billboard owners have refused to lease out the space.
"PETA had hoped its new billboard opposing Australia's cruel treatment of sheep – which shows a blood-soaked lamb on a crucifix with the tag-line `Have mercy on them, stop mulesing and live exports' – would be up in time for Easter.
"But outdoor advertising companies want no part of it," the US-based group said in a statement.
Mulesing, widely practised by Australian sheep farmers, is the surgical removal of folds of skin from the backsides of sheep to prevent the painful and sometimes fatal condition of fly strike.
PETA's worldwide campaign against Australian producers who practise mulesing has damaged the industry.
The group said the billboard was designed to pressure Australian authorities to outlaw the practice and end live sheep exports.
"The lamb on a crucifix reminds us that these gentle animals are mutilated, tormented and killed every day in Australia for nothing more than very un-Christian greed," it said.
"If Christ were here, he would show mercy to these lambs, so we're asking the Australian government to follow his compassionate example and bring an end to these two hideous abuses."
A spokeswoman for PETA said the group had tried unsuccessfully to place the advertisement in Canberra before approaching billboard companies in at least three different locations in Sydney's centre.
"We were going for CBD locations but we actually in the end had it rejected in any location," she said.
The image was designed by British cartoonist and caricaturist Ralph Steadman, PETA said.
|
>Source< |
|
|
| Sunsnail |
:rolleyes: :rolleyes:
So this mulesing thing, is to prevent the sheep from dying?
| quote: |
Mulesing, widely practised by Australian sheep farmers, is the surgical removal of folds of skin from the backsides of sheep to prevent the painful and sometimes fatal condition of fly strike. |
but PETA is against that? |
|
|
| shaolin_Z |
| quote: | Originally posted by Sunsnail
Everytime I see PETA I want to eat chicken and steak. :whip:
Seriously though, those pictures are ridiculous. |
:haha: :haha: :haha: :haha: |
|
|
| shaolin_Z |
| quote: | Originally posted by George Smiley
Animal protestors really make my blood boil and the original article is one of the reasons why. They put the value of animals above that of humans. In the UK recently, animal protestors dug up the remains of some old woman who's family were linked to a lab that tested on animals. I have no problem with animal rights and of course I support it but they go to far, they fail to see that these aren't humans! |
Exactly!
@ Fir3starter: I'm in total agreement with you once again. :nervous: :p |
|
|
| Fir3start3r |
| quote: | Originally posted by shaolin_Z
Exactly!
@ Fir3starter: I'm in total agreement with you once again. :nervous: :p |
Wonders never cease ;)  |
|
|
| Moongoose |
| quote: | Originally posted by Fir3start3r
Wonders never cease ;) |
How true...i also agree with you :nervous:
| quote: | | "If Christ were here, he would show mercy to these lambs, so we're asking the Australian government to follow his compassionate example and bring an end to these two hideous abuses." |
If Christ were there he would eat those labs |
|
|
| priveye03 |
| To often do people associate PETA with all vegetarians. That's like associating all Christians with Pat Robertson. As long as I don't see a bloody steak on a road sign by the highway, I couldn't give a . They shouldn't push their values on you in unreasonable manners, and the same for the opposite. |
|
|
| -])ark-Maverick |
wow, I can't believe no one is actively supporting PETA on this forum. You first have to realise that PETA has an extremely sound argument:
We should, at all cost, prevent un-necessary suffering
Animals suffer un-nessecarily
We should, at all cost, prevent un-necessary animal suffering
We are doing harm onto these animals because they are a difference species, not because they feel pain. It's like saying, I'm going to cuz you pain because you are native americian, or I'm not going to let you vote because you are female. Race and Sex have nothing to do with pain or the right to vote. Animals can feel pain, yet we continue to hurt them. Sure, we like to eat me, we like the taste, but you forget that that steak was once a 'sentient' being. A being capable of pain and suffering. The analogy of Racism and Sexism are quite clear. Many un-educated people will reply, "I like steak" or "mmmm... steak". So childish, grow up, mature. Look at the argument, look at the arguments, and it's easy to see the right answer. I'm convinced that in our lifetime, we will see a great movement towards more animals rights, and all of you opposed, will be just like those that took lightly and supported Racism.
To anyone that cares to enlighten themselves, "In Defense of Animals: The Second Wave" by Peter Singer is a great book. There are numerous essays outlining the bases of these arguments. I doubt anyone can read that book and deny his conclusion. The only way to do so is thru ignorance |
|
|
| kush paintings |
| Im sorry, but what I dont understand is where do you draw the line. You say you want more animal rights, then as long as we are providing rights for other species, where is the line drawn. Is swatting a fly all of a sudden cruel and forbiedden? Personally I dont see the difference between stepping on an ant and killing a cow, but I think some would disagree. If so, why? |
|
|
| -])ark-Maverick |
| The argument is with regards to pain and suffering. Flys, ants and most insencts lack the biological complexity required for physical pain. The line is then drawn only where suffering begins. Fish, for example, feel little/ no pain when they are killed (it's not like finding nemo here). This is what the entire argument hinders on; the ability to feel pain. We used the same deductive reasoning when considering if slavery was really justifiable. My question, is why is slavery wrong? Your response, because they are members of our own species. Then comes my crucial, and most contraversial point, why should species determine who gets to suffer? My point is, why should animals, when they clearly are capable of suffering, be subjected to it? I'm not against eating meat, only factory farmed meat where conditions are appalling. I hope this answers your concern... I look forward to more :) |
|
|
| Fir3start3r |
| quote: | Originally posted by kush paintings
Im sorry, but what I dont understand is where do you draw the line. You say you want more animal rights, then as long as we are providing rights for other species, where is the line drawn. Is swatting a fly all of a sudden cruel and forbiedden? Personally I dont see the difference between stepping on an ant and killing a cow, but I think some would disagree. If so, why? |
You show me an animal with responsibilities and I'll show you an animal with rights... |
|
|
| Moongoose |
Im sory, what?
| quote: | Originally posted by -])ark-Maverick
wow, I can't believe no one is actively supporting PETA on this forum. You first have to realise that PETA has an extremely sound argument: |
O Rly?
| quote: | Originally posted by -])ark-Maverick
We should, at all cost, prevent un-necessary suffering |
Just the unnecessary? I figure if your goal is to stop suffering migh as well go all out and stop the necessary suffering(which supposebly exist based on this argument) as well. No reason to get the job half done.
| quote: | Originally posted by -])ark-Maverick
Animals suffer un-nessecarily |
So do people, whats your point?
| quote: | Originally posted by -])ark-Maverick
We should, at all cost, prevent un-necessary animal suffering |
Why focus just on preventing animal suffering when you included them in in the first sentance? Oh, right. PETA doesnt care about people.
| quote: | Originally posted by -])ark-Maverick
We are doing harm onto these animals because they are a difference species, not because they feel pain. |
:wtf:
| quote: | Originally posted by -])ark-Maverick
It's like saying, I'm going to cuz you pain because you are native americian, or I'm not going to let you vote because you are female. Race and Sex have nothing to do with pain or the right to vote. |
:wtf: :wtf:
| quote: | Originally posted by -])ark-Maverick
Animals can feel pain, yet we continue to hurt them. Sure, we like to eat me, we like the taste, but you forget that that steak was once a 'sentient' being. A being capable of pain and suffering. |
So whats your point? Its not like only animals get killed or feel pain daily? Other sention beings, like people for instance get killed or have pain inflicted on them by other people on the daily basis also, and they are the same species. So much for the racism argument.
| quote: | Originally posted by -])ark-Maverick
The analogy of Racism and Sexism are quite clear. |
Must remember to pick up a new pair of glasses becouse i even though this analogy is so clear i still fail to see it.
| quote: | Originally posted by -])ark-Maverick
Many un-educated people will reply, "I like steak" or "mmmm... steak". So childish, grow up, mature. Look at the argument, look at the arguments, and it's easy to see the right answer. I'm convinced that in our lifetime, we will see a great movement towards more animals rights, and all of you opposed, will be just like those that took lightly and supported Racism. |
What arguments? You havent given a single valid one to support your cause. With arguments like yours you will not only fail to see any great movement tawards animal righs in your lifetime, but it is much more likely that people in general will stop listening to you all together on the count that some day they will get fed up with all the BS you are throwing into their faces.
| quote: | Originally posted by -])ark-Maverick
To anyone that cares to enlighten themselves, "In Defense of Animals: The Second Wave" by Peter Singer is a great book. There are numerous essays outlining the bases of these arguments. I doubt anyone can read that book and deny his conclusion. The only way to do so is thru ignorance |
Ill try to pick that one up just for the fun of it but i doubt any library aound has one. |
|
|
|
|
