Video: PETA terrifies small children with comic book depicting mutilated cows; Update: PETA responds

posted at 8:31 am on February 6, 2014 by Ed Morrissey

PETA often employs controversy to get its point across to adults, but that usually takes the form of naked celebrities endorsing their message. With children, PETA uses a different strategy altogether — and that has parents in a Woodland Hills, California school district angry enough to consider a lawsuit. PETA distributed comic books with horrifyingly graphic images of butchery in order to terrify children into their ideology:

Claire Borsheim and many other parents at the Woodland Hills campus were outraged after PETA handed out the pamphlets to their children the same day a baby cow was on campus for a lesson about dairy farming.

The pamphlet appeared to be a cartoon comic and was titled “A Cow’s Life,” but the images inside were horrifying, parents said.

“My 6-year-old daughter was handed one of these comics, saw the insert of the mutilated cow that I ripped away right away, she started flipping through it and saw pictures of baby cows being electrocuted, factory farms with machetes, I mean, just graphically horrifying images for a 6 year old,” Borsheim said.

“The images are pretty graphic,” parent Shawn Belschner said. “They’re of mutilated cows, infected cows, cows being dehorned, cows in bad conditions. I don’t think it’s good for any child.”

PETA later claimed that they got their materials mixed up, and that the comic books were intended for adults:

Katie Arth of PETA says that it may have all just been an innocent mix up.

“PETA creates material for kids and for adults,” Arth said. “And it looks like there was just a mistake and our volunteers put the materials together to get them out quicker.”

Er, riiiiiiiiight. I’m sure that these comic books titled “A Cow’s Life” was intended for adults. Suuuuuuuure they were.

LAUSD said that they didn’t know PETA would distribute images like that to the children. The better question is why LAUSD allowed a protest group to distribute anything to children in the first place. Perhaps parents considering a lawsuit should think about adding the school and the school board to the list of respondents.

Update: PETA has responded to me about this post, and I have a point to make afterward. First, here’s the response from David Perle:

Hi, Ed. I wanted to let you know that PETA has sent a letter to Calabash Charter Academy in response to the recent mix-up in which volunteers, including one Calabash Elementary parent, gave students kid-friendly comic books about the dairy industry that contained a more graphic leaflet intended for adults, something that was not supposed to happen. (In your piece, you mocked the concept that the comic books were intended for adults. No, of course they weren’t. The problem was the leaflets that were mistakenly put inside of those child-friendly comic books.)

As PETA notes in its letter, the volunteers had been concerned that a representative of the dairy industry was visiting the school that day to sell the kids on cow’s milk, and PETA had intended for the in-depth leaflets to go to the students’ parents so that they could be fully informed about how the dairy industry hurts animals (and how dairy products can make kids and adults sick).

In an effort to mend fences, PETA has offered to provide staff and students at Calabash Elementary with Tofutti Cuties—delicious dairy-free ice cream sandwiches.

“Kids have a natural empathy for animals and know that the abuse that cows endure on factory farms—the pain of dehorning, the constant deprivation in filthy feedlots, and the ache of mastitis—is wrong,” says PETA Executive Vice President Tracy Reiman, who is also the mother of an elementary student in the Los Angeles area. “PETA’s child-appropriate comic book starts an honest conversation about how what we choose to eat and drink can help—or hurt—animals.”

He also included a letter to the principal of the school from PETA’s executive VP Tracy Reiman, which is referenced in the story, but I’ll include it here without the names included:

I wanted to contact you about the volunteers who visited your school on Thursday and to apologize for the fact that some students apparently received leaflets intended for adults and that had not been approved for distribution to kids for this visit. The volunteers, including a parent of a fifth-grader at Calabash, were concerned when they learned that the dairy industry would be visiting the school and wanted to offer your students kid-friendly comic books in order to help them understand how milk gets from cows to their cereal bowls as well as to offer parents more detailed information about the cruelty and health concerns associated with dairy products.

As the mother of a 10-year-old, I know that kids have a natural empathy for animals but may not understand the connection between the animals they see in picture books or on farms and the food on their plates. Our comic book was designed with the help of parents and educators in order to help start honest discussions with kids about helping animals. Most cows used in the dairy industry live in cramped, filthy conditions, often mired in their own waste, and are deprived of almost everything that is pleasant, natural, and important to them. They are genetically manipulated and given drugs that force them to produce more than four times the amount of milk that they would naturally, and this milk also promotes antibiotic resistance in humans who drink it. Their calves are taken away from them shortly after birth—females are cycled into milk production, and males are relegated to veal crates, which cause horrible animal suffering. The cows are repeatedly impregnated using artificial insemination, and up to half of them suffer from a painful udder infection called mastitis. Once their milk production wanes, at about only 4 or 5 years old, almost all mother cows are sent to slaughter. There is a health factor here, too, as milk and other dairy products have now been linked to serious illnesses, including heart disease, type 1 diabetes, and obesity.

PETA encourages parents and children to choose humane and healthy options, such as soy or almond milk, vegan cheese, and dairy-free ice cream. Unlike dairy products, which are loaded with cholesterol and saturated fat, nondairy milk is cholesterol-free and low in saturated fat as well as high in calcium and essential nutrients.

I’d be happy to meet with you or talk on the phone. We would like to mend fences and give the school some delicious dairy-free ice-cream sandwiches (Tofutti Cuties) for all the kids to enjoy.

Thanks so much, and I look forward to hearing back from you.

The last point, and one that supports Perle’s response: the comic book is on line, and while I wouldn’t give it to my granddaughters, the comic book itself does not contain the graphic images that concerned the parents — at least not as presented from their website. Still, I’d be demanding some answers from the school as to why this material was allowed at all. If PETA wants to target kids for their campaign, they should be working through parents rather than around them, and schools should know better.

Breaking on Hot Air

Blowback

Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.

Trackbacks/Pings

Trackback URL

Comments

Comment pages: 1 2

I would be interested to hear what part of my conversation here was ‘sanctimonious’
glidingone on February 6, 2014 at 10:36 AM

The part where you assume that consumers don’t know what happens to the animals that become the meat that we eat and wear. What you don’t seem to consider or accept is that we DO know what happens … and we still CHOOSE to eat beef lamb and pork and poultry, and we still CHOOSE to wear leather shoes and leather and fur coats.

If you’re against meat, don’t eat it. If you’re against leather or fur, don’t wear it. But you’re patronizing attitude that consumers aren’t aware of the conditions of animals before and during the process by which they become hamburgers and buffalo wings and shoes is condescending.

aunursa on February 6, 2014 at 11:14 AM

You are attributing a ‘patronizing attitude and condescension’ to me that does not exist. Thank you for responding so that I can re-iterate that fact to avoid any misunderstanding.

How are you 100% certain that most/all/many consumer’s are indeed aware of how the food that they choose to consume comes to be? Why?

I have to tell you, in my experience, and I have been around a lot of people in my years – the general thought process is that animals live on the farm and then are somehow humanely instantly killed and come to be the tasty food on your plate. Others don’t want to even know – “don’t tell me how it got here, just enjoy it” is a frequent phrase.

The true nature of the mass slaughter is a source of ignorance for the majority of people that I come across – sure people joke about it but when they actually visit the pens where cows and pigs live in their own filth, never see the light of day and are pumped full of who knows what… horns, testicles are chopped off without any pain medication … that seems to matter to quite a few of them… it’s called having morals and ethical standards.

I would disagree with your (in my opinion) ignorant assumption that most consumers are aware of the realities of mass produced meat and by extension mass produced animal byproducts.

One way or the other – thinking more about the topic and becoming more informed as to different perspectives is certainly not a sanctimonious process – but rather an enlightening one – that affords each person the knowledge to then make an informed decision about what their actions/demand for a product leads to.

glidingone on February 6, 2014 at 11:34 AM

One way or the other – thinking more about the topic and becoming more informed as to different perspectives is certainly not a sanctimonious process – but rather an enlightening one – that affords each person the knowledge to then make an informed decision about what their actions/demand for a product leads to.

glidingone on February 6, 2014 at 11:34 AM

I hope you are open to making that kind of “informed decision” about supporting PETA when people here point out how many household pets and strays PETA has killed over the years.

And furthermore, I hope you feel the same way about aborting human fetuses that you feel about eating the flesh of domesticated animals. You’ve worked so hard to avoid being condescending, and that is good. But I’m still waiting for the intellectual honesty and philosophical consistency in your argument. I gave up looking for honesty and consistency from Ingrid Newkirk a long time ago; she is utterly bereft of either.

gryphon202 on February 6, 2014 at 11:40 AM

And furthermore, I hope you feel the same way about aborting human fetuses babies…

gryphon202 on February 6, 2014 at 11:40 AM

FIFM

gryphon202 on February 6, 2014 at 11:40 AM

Ah Bishop – I like your posts and have read many over the years.

I do not have leather seats in my car, nor leather furniture in my house, nor do I wear leather shoes – but thank you Bishop for readily assuming hypocrisy on my behalf – that thought process is much like many liberals do as they sneer at Christians, Catholics and others who aspire to a moral high ground.

Yes, I do think about the fact that an animal was slaughtered for my comfort when I do sit on an item made from an animal – and I think to myself – is it necessary for this particular comfort for a living creature to die? In the case of what I sit on – the answer is a clear cut no.

glidingone on February 6, 2014 at 10:13 AM

Kudos to you glidinggone! My wife and I are heavily involved in marine and shark conservation, and the first step is getting people to think differently about the animals we share the earth with. Keep up the good work!

Bandit13 on February 6, 2014 at 11:42 AM

One way or the other – thinking more about the topic and becoming more informed as to different perspectives is certainly not a sanctimonious process – but rather an enlightening one – that affords each person the knowledge to then make an informed decision about what their actions/demand for a product leads to.

glidingone on February 6, 2014 at 11:34 AM

I hope you are open to making that kind of “informed decision” about supporting PETA when people here point out how many household pets and strays PETA has killed over the years.

And furthermore, I hope you feel the same way about aborting human fetuses that you feel about eating the flesh of domesticated animals. You’ve worked so hard to avoid being condescending, and that is good. But I’m still waiting for the intellectual honesty and philosophical consistency in your argument. I gave up looking for honesty and consistency from Ingrid Newkirk a long time ago; she is utterly bereft of either.

gryphon202 on February 6, 2014 at 11:40 AM

I have zero idea as to why you just wrote that to me – I am not PETA, I do not support PETA, nor have I ever said that I do.

If you care to take the time to actually see the course of my posts this morning – start from the top of the comments (FIRST PAGE) and work your way down – please do so – otherwise you are wasting your time beating a strawman who certainly is not me.

You are preaching to the choir – direct thy ire elsewhere.

glidingone on February 6, 2014 at 11:43 AM

Kudos to you glidinggone! My wife and I are heavily involved in marine and shark conservation, and the first step is getting people to think differently about the animals we share the earth with. Keep up the good work!

Bandit13 on February 6, 2014 at 11:42 AM

Humanize the animals and dehumanize the humans.

Brilliant./

gryphon202 on February 6, 2014 at 11:43 AM

A few salient points the PETA folks do not consider:
1. What would we do with all of the domesticated animals if we all suddenly stopped eating them? The problem is that they are too big to maintain large herds for pets. The domesticated part mans these animals have no instincts for self-survival. The farmers would be forced to wholesale slaughter them until none were left and then what do we do to get rid of the bodies of these millions of slaughtered animals? The health problems that many rotting corpses would be staggering. This is really insane.
2. Milk being distributed to schools for all students was done because of rickets. Many undernourishment issues were corrected by wide-spread distribution of food stuffs including meats. Many of these problems are returning because people are drinking less milk, using almost no salt (iodized salt corrected thyroid issues), and meat corrected low iron problems.
My husband is a hunter and I admit to being a hypocrite. I told him to involve me when the meat looked like something I’d buy in the grocery store. But, I also do not like the nature shows in which the lion kills the impala or the alligator gets the bird. However, I clearly know how the meat gets to the store and how the animals hunt…does not mean I have to be a spectator. PETA folks, however, do not want the rest of us to keep pets (not ethical according to them) nor to eat meat…that is their choice – now leave the rest of us alone.

evie1949 on February 6, 2014 at 11:47 AM

I have zero idea as to why you just wrote that to me – I am not PETA, I do not support PETA, nor have I ever said that I do.

If you care to take the time to actually see the course of my posts this morning – start from the top of the comments (FIRST PAGE) and work your way down – please do so – otherwise you are wasting your time beating a strawman who certainly is not me.

You are preaching to the choir – direct thy ire elsewhere.

glidingone on February 6, 2014 at 11:43 AM

They’re anti-meat too. And anti-farm. And anti-slaughterhouse. And anti-pet. What part of their agenda do you disagree with, aside from the fact that they kill 80-90% of the domesticated animals brought to their shelters?

gryphon202 on February 6, 2014 at 11:48 AM

You are preaching to the choir – direct thy ire elsewhere.

glidingone on February 6, 2014 at 11:43 AM

And as for the whole “not PETA” business, that is exactly what this post is about.

PETA terrifies small children with comic book depicting mutilated cows

So no need to get uppity with me.

gryphon202 on February 6, 2014 at 11:49 AM

Humanize the animals and dehumanize the humans.

Brilliant./

gryphon202 on February 6, 2014 at 11:43 AM

Humans are evolved mammals. What is your point?

Bandit13 on February 6, 2014 at 11:55 AM

A few salient points the PETA folks do not consider:
1. What would we do with all of the domesticated animals if we all suddenly stopped eating them? The problem is that they are too big to maintain large herds for pets. The domesticated part mans these animals have no instincts for self-survival. The farmers would be forced to wholesale slaughter them until none were left and then what do we do to get rid of the bodies of these millions of slaughtered animals? The health problems that many rotting corpses would be staggering. This is really insane.

They exist in such large quantities because of the demand to consume them as food. If we were to lessen/cease that demand at least to a point where the animal could grow up and wander a field somewhat that would be a definite life improvement for the animal. But anyway – the domesticated food fodder animals would not exist in such numbers if the demand were not so great. Lower the demand, the supply will also lower… this could be done gradually even.

I am just pointing out that this first point is entirely non-consequential in the decision to not not mass produce & slaughter animals. “well they are there so I must eat them is not in and of itself a reason to keep on carrying on”.

Sounds like you readily recognize that it’s a messy, nasty process to end the life of a living creature and you don’t want to be reminded of that process – just bring it to you on the plate once it is less evident that it was once alive right? Yep – shut out that conscience, turn off the moral/ethical standards because tastebuds and convenience trump all of those right?

*sidenote – being a hunter and hunting wild game, depending upon how it is done, is far different than mass production and slaughter.

Playing devil’s advocate with you – take it as you please. It’s interesting really – your stance towards PETA sounds quite a lot like many folks feel about Christianity/morality. How dare they share what they believe with me – the nerve of being faced with an alternate viewpoint!

glidingone on February 6, 2014 at 11:56 AM

Playing devil’s advocate with you – take it as you please. It’s interesting really – your stance towards PETA sounds quite a lot like many folks feel about Christianity/morality. How dare they share what they believe with me – the nerve of being faced with an alternate viewpoint!

glidingone on February 6, 2014 at 11:56 AM

It’s not the sharing of an alternate viewpoint that bothers me. It’s people in expensive clothing getting splashed with red paint. It’s PETA’s rank hypocrisy in killing, on average, 90% of the animals it receives in its shelters every year. It’s Ingrid Newkirk’s assertion that I am damned to Hell for owning a pet. [side note: Maybe PETA really is like religion. I'll be damned...(!)] All of this, of course, while PETA sidesteps issues of human dignity and literally refuses to answer questions about alternatives to omnivorous diets in poor, developing countries.

So yeah, in being anti-meat, I’m sorry to have to be the one to point it out to you, but these are the people you’re throwing your hat in with even if you’ve never been a member or donated a dime. And I, in ribbing you about PETA, am not the one pulling this thread off-topic.

gryphon202 on February 6, 2014 at 12:02 PM

I have zero idea as to why you just wrote that to me – I am not PETA, I do not support PETA, nor have I ever said that I do.

If you care to take the time to actually see the course of my posts this morning – start from the top of the comments (FIRST PAGE) and work your way down – please do so – otherwise you are wasting your time beating a strawman who certainly is not me.

You are preaching to the choir – direct thy ire elsewhere.

glidingone on February 6, 2014 at 11:43 AM

They’re anti-meat too. And anti-farm. And anti-slaughterhouse. And anti-pet. What part of their agenda do you disagree with, aside from the fact that they kill 80-90% of the domesticated animals brought to their shelters?

gryphon202 on February 6, 2014 at 11:48 AM

You are preaching to the choir – direct thy ire elsewhere.

glidingone on February 6, 2014 at 11:43 AM

And as for the whole “not PETA” business, that is exactly what this post is about.

PETA terrifies small children with comic book depicting mutilated cows

So no need to get uppity with me.

gryphon202 on February 6, 2014 at 11:49 AM

I am going to go out on a limb here and guess that you didn’t take the time to read my prior posts on the first page… that’s okay – why be bothered when you can get on your soapbox and preach against the invisible statements that I didn’t make.

You are the one that attacked my post without seeing the prior conversations attributing me to = PETA – I nicely corrected that misunderstanding but it would appear that you do not care to read my reply nor my previous posts to see where I am coming from. That’s fine but there is no need to waste my time when we no doubt agree.

glidingone on February 6, 2014 at 12:02 PM

I’d gladly allow PETA to distribute this if I we’re allowed to show the same kids a video of an abortion being performed. (Same kids, but a few years more mature, of course.)

mugged on February 6, 2014 at 12:03 PM

Playing devil’s advocate with you – take it as you please. It’s interesting really – your stance towards PETA sounds quite a lot like many folks feel about Christianity/morality. How dare they share what they believe with me – the nerve of being faced with an alternate viewpoint!

glidingone on February 6, 2014 at 11:56 AM

LOL. That one is going to bunch their panties.

Bandit13 on February 6, 2014 at 12:05 PM

I am going to go out on a limb here and guess that you didn’t take the time to read my prior posts on the first page… that’s okay – why be bothered when you can get on your soapbox and preach against the invisible statements that I didn’t make.

I read them all. Is it fair or unfair to say that you see eating meat as an issue of moral imperative? I know PETA does. Is that how you would characterize your stance?

You are the one that attacked my post without seeing the prior conversations attributing me to = PETA – I nicely corrected that misunderstanding but it would appear that you do not care to read my reply nor my previous posts to see where I am coming from. That’s fine but there is no need to waste my time when we no doubt agree.

glidingone on February 6, 2014 at 12:02 PM

Then tell me, oh gliding one: What do you disagree with PETA on, aside from killing 90% of the animals that come into their shelter? I’m still waiting for you to tell me. But that might be one of those first-page posts I missed.

And another gentle reminder: This post IS about PETA and their reprehensible agitprop. I’m not the one who pulled this thread off-topic.

gryphon202 on February 6, 2014 at 12:08 PM

Playing devil’s advocate with you – take it as you please. It’s interesting really – your stance towards PETA sounds quite a lot like many folks feel about Christianity/morality. How dare they share what they believe with me – the nerve of being faced with an alternate viewpoint!

glidingone on February 6, 2014 at 11:56 AM

It’s not the sharing of an alternate viewpoint that bothers me. It’s people in expensive clothing getting splashed with red paint. It’s PETA’s rank hypocrisy in killing, on average, 90% of the animals it receives in its shelters every year. It’s Ingrid Newkirk’s assertion that I am damned to Hell for owning a pet. [side note: Maybe PETA really is like religion. I'll be damned...(!)] All of this, of course, while PETA sidesteps issues of human dignity and literally refuses to answer questions about alternatives to omnivorous diets in poor, developing countries.

So yeah, in being anti-meat, I’m sorry to have to be the one to point it out to you, but these are the people you’re throwing your hat in with even if you’ve never been a member or donated a dime. And I, in ribbing you about PETA, am not the one pulling this thread off-topic.

gryphon202 on February 6, 2014 at 12:02 PM

Your logic is off-base.

Choosing not to partake in mass produced, mass slaughtered meat for moral and ethical reasons does not = agreement with each and every single one of PETA’s statements/thoughts/actions etc…

Unless you are saying that because one organization happens to share one of my own moral convictions that one MUST therefore be a part of that organization and agree with every single thing that this organization says and does… That is inane, dumb and stupid thinking.

Does everyone that agrees with some members of the republican party on some issues automatically agree with the main rebulican party that we should continue to raise the debt ceiling, national debt, continue without a real budget etc..? NO

Stop a moment and think about what you are posting.

glidingone on February 6, 2014 at 12:09 PM

glidingone on February 6, 2014 at 11:34 AM

It’s this same attitude that I see as a Jew living in a predominantly Christian country. Some Christians assume that we non-Christians don’t have any understanding of Jesus and the New Testament and Christian theology, and that it falls to them to educate us in spite of the fact that we ARE aware of it. These Christian evangelists cannot seem to comprehend how a Jew could understand Christian theology and yet still reject it. (So they assign ad hominem explanations, such as the Jews are spiritually blind, remain hostile due to centuries of Christian persecution, etc.) They don’t seem to realize how patronizing it is.

In the same manner, militant animal rights activists assume that consumers aren’t aware of how their meat got to the supermarket. You cannot comprehend the idea that we ARE aware of the living conditions — because groups like PETA keep beating us over the head with stunts like this. You cannot comprehend that we are aware and we still CHOOSE to snack on beef jerky and gobble down a bacon cheeseburger (well, not the observant Jews*) and wear leather shoes and coats. It really is quite condescending of you to assume that it’s YOUR job to educate us because we are too stupid to know what is going on.

* Observant Jews make up for this by using tefilim, which are made entirely of animal products, when reciting daily prayers.

aunursa on February 6, 2014 at 12:10 PM

Your logic is off-base.

Choosing not to partake in mass produced, mass slaughtered meat for moral and ethical reasons does not = agreement with each and every single one of PETA’s statements/thoughts/actions etc…

Unless you are saying that because one organization happens to share one of my own moral convictions that one MUST therefore be a part of that organization and agree with every single thing that this organization says and does… That is inane, dumb and stupid thinking.

Does everyone that agrees with some members of the republican party on some issues automatically agree with the main rebulican party that we should continue to raise the debt ceiling, national debt, continue without a real budget etc..? NO

Stop a moment and think about what you are posting.

glidingone on February 6, 2014 at 12:09 PM

Okay. So what parts of PETA’s agenda do you disagree with? I’m waiting for you to tell us. This is a PETA thread, you know. Try to stay on-topic and focused.

gryphon202 on February 6, 2014 at 12:11 PM

My question is the same as Ed’s, what the hell was PETA doing on campus in the first place. Any school would never allow a religous organization on campus. I think PETA should be sued out of existence for this one

Leopard1996 on February 6, 2014 at 12:15 PM

I’m okay with people that choose not to eat meat. I really am, even though I may not sound like it at this particular point in time.

I am not okay with folks trying to convince me that I am a bad person because I do not share their view of the carnivorous lifestyle. I don’t give a flying fig if a person is a member of PETA or not, or how abhorrent they find certain of PETA’s practices. Unless and until I can convince the world that saving an unborn baby’s life is worth any risk, I will not accept the high moral dudgeon of anyone who thinks that killing a domesticated cow is wrong.

gryphon202 on February 6, 2014 at 12:16 PM

I’d gladly allow PETA to distribute this if I we’re allowed to show the same kids a video of an abortion being performed. (Same kids, but a few years more mature, of course.)

mugged on February 6, 2014 at 12:03 PM

Well said. If we are going to share realities with mature children – let’s do it. As well as showing the effects of drug use, testimonials of folks who were just living the if it feels good do it sexual free life style share how that lifestyle has left them with _____ diseases, they gave it to their wife, their life is chock full of pain and suffering because of those careless actions etc…

Reality is a natural thought provoker. But oftentimes government education (as well as parents at times) like to soften/hide the real details.

glidingone on February 6, 2014 at 12:20 PM

So I got a commercial for Covered California on Hot Air????

NerwenAldarion on February 6, 2014 at 12:25 PM

Your logic is off-base.

Choosing not to partake in mass produced, mass slaughtered meat for moral and ethical reasons does not = agreement with each and every single one of PETA’s statements/thoughts/actions etc…

Unless you are saying that because one organization happens to share one of my own moral convictions that one MUST therefore be a part of that organization and agree with every single thing that this organization says and does… That is inane, dumb and stupid thinking.

Does everyone that agrees with some members of the republican party on some issues automatically agree with the main rebulican party that we should continue to raise the debt ceiling, national debt, continue without a real budget etc..? NO

Stop a moment and think about what you are posting.

glidingone on February 6, 2014 at 12:09 PM

Okay. So what parts of PETA’s agenda do you disagree with? I’m waiting for you to tell us. This is a PETA thread, you know. Try to stay on-topic and focused.

gryphon202 on February 6, 2014 at 12:11 PM

I am a little at a loss here as to your dogmatic insistence that I am part of/on board with PETA. I thought that I was really clear in my last posts that simply making a moral choice to not consume mass produced meat does not equate to a religious adherence or even association to whatever PETA does or does not believe.

I have no interest in being a part of or associated with PETA as I do not agree with many of their stances. You really ought to stop stereotyping and lumping INDIVIDUALS who care to use individual thoughts to come to a conclusion with blindly following organizational members.

Stop equating me to PETA – you keep on beating this air puppet that does not exist.

No, why would I want to agree with killing animals in shelters on the whole? That is a case by case issue depending upon the health of the animal, the animal’s temperament, funding etc… I don’t know the details because I am not a part of PETA, nor do I agree with them or their tactics – is that clear enough? I only said it 5 times previously.

I don’t understand your concern or the fact that you even care what PETA may or may not do to animals in their shelters? If you don’t think that animals matter and they should be slaughtered to please your tastebuds/the unwanted ones are just ground up anyway etc.. why do you care if they do the same with another animal that so happens to not normally be eaten? What’s the difference – it is purely societal norms.

glidingone on February 6, 2014 at 12:28 PM

So far, I have yet to see why glidingone is such a favorite target right now. He (She? Correct me if wrong) posted a viewpoint that’s different, but I haven’t seen any praising of PETA for its nutty acts. Just because one (or several; yeah there are a lot of weird animal rights groups out there) group has perverted an ideology doesn’t mean that certain viewpoints they hold are inherently wrong.

That being said, I don’t have a major problem with eating meat or the methodologies of slaughtering our meat-creatures. Burgers are tasty. Heh. If someone wants to treat an animal nicely, that’s their prerogative. And if they want to talk about, why shut them up? This is as much a debate forum as it is arm-chair commentating.

My Opinion: PETA is a nutcase group that gets worse and worse each year. Honestly, it would not surprise me if the pamphlets were put into the comics on purpose. They seem to be doing a lot more damage control this time around however, so it’s hard to say whether they’re sincere (for once) or didn’t anticipate this much of a lashing.

Naga_Jolokia on February 6, 2014 at 12:31 PM

I fear that I would have bjork’d those handing out the pamphlets like a mama bear.

Tsar of Earth on February 6, 2014 at 12:36 PM

It takes a village. /s

NerwenAldarion on February 6, 2014 at 12:25 PM

I use Firefox and adblock, works great.

deptofredundancydept on February 6, 2014 at 12:36 PM

I don’t understand your concern or the fact that you even care what PETA may or may not do to animals in their shelters? If you don’t think that animals matter and they should be slaughtered to please your tastebuds/the unwanted ones are just ground up anyway etc.. why do you care if they do the same with another animal that so happens to not normally be eaten? What’s the difference – it is purely societal norms.

glidingone on February 6, 2014 at 12:28 PM

He finds their hypocrisy appalling. They are the ones that rail on/call killers/throw red paint on people for eating meat…and then slaughter 90% of the cats/dogs that end up in their shelters.

cptacek on February 6, 2014 at 12:40 PM

I am a little at a loss here as to your dogmatic insistence that I am part of/on board with PETA. I thought that I was really clear in my last posts that simply making a moral choice to not consume mass produced meat does not equate to a religious adherence or even association to whatever PETA does or does not believe.

I have no interest in being a part of or associated with PETA as I do not agree with many of their stances. You really ought to stop stereotyping and lumping INDIVIDUALS who care to use individual thoughts to come to a conclusion with blindly following organizational members.

Stop equating me to PETA – you keep on beating this air puppet that does not exist.

No, why would I want to agree with killing animals in shelters on the whole? That is a case by case issue depending upon the health of the animal, the animal’s temperament, funding etc… I don’t know the details because I am not a part of PETA, nor do I agree with them or their tactics – is that clear enough? I only said it 5 times previously.

I don’t understand your concern or the fact that you even care what PETA may or may not do to animals in their shelters? If you don’t think that animals matter and they should be slaughtered to please your tastebuds/the unwanted ones are just ground up anyway etc.. why do you care if they do the same with another animal that so happens to not normally be eaten? What’s the difference – it is purely societal norms.

glidingone on February 6, 2014 at 12:28 PM

Now you are mischaracterizing what I said. I said that you seem to agree with PETA that eating meat or not eating meat is an issue of morality. Thus far nothing you have said on the first page or the second has contradicted this. You seem to want to distance yourself from PETA while at the same time agreeing with the most public and visible part of their agenda.

PETA killing animals doesn’t bother me. I’ve become quite attached to animals that had to be put down for medical reasons, or because the shelter I volunteered at simply got too full. What bothers me is the hypocrisy. And what bothers me the most about the hypocrisy is the way that self-righteous vegan crusaders such as yourself dance around the issue.

And so, I ask again: What part of the PETA agenda do you disagree with? If being equated with PETA bothers you so damn much, all you have to do is tell me if their kill shelters bother you, if the red blood-like paint bothers you, or if Ingrid Newkirk’s loony ranting about what she wants done with her body after her death bothers you. There’s plenty of radical, out-there stuff for a reasonable vegan to disagree with in PETA’s platform. I wouldn’t be hounding you on this question if I weren’t seeking a sincere answer.

gryphon202 on February 6, 2014 at 12:42 PM

We would like to mend fences and give the school some delicious dairy-free ice-cream sandwiches (Tofutti Cuties)

Tofutti Cuties.
I think that pretty much says it all.

partsnlabor on February 6, 2014 at 12:45 PM

So far, I have yet to see why glidingone is such a favorite target right now. He (She? Correct me if wrong) posted a viewpoint that’s different, but I haven’t seen any praising of PETA for its nutty acts. Just because one (or several; yeah there are a lot of weird animal rights groups out there) group has perverted an ideology doesn’t mean that certain viewpoints they hold are inherently wrong.

That being said, I don’t have a major problem with eating meat or the methodologies of slaughtering our meat-creatures. Burgers are tasty. Heh. If someone wants to treat an animal nicely, that’s their prerogative. And if they want to talk about, why shut them up? This is as much a debate forum as it is arm-chair commentating.

My Opinion: PETA is a nutcase group that gets worse and worse each year. Honestly, it would not surprise me if the pamphlets were put into the comics on purpose. They seem to be doing a lot more damage control this time around however, so it’s hard to say whether they’re sincere (for once) or didn’t anticipate this much of a lashing.

Naga_Jolokia on February 6, 2014 at 12:31 PM

PETA is a nutcase group, all right. And Glidingone appears to agree with the most visible and public part of their agenda while explaining to us why vegetarianism is morally sound. Won’t even come out and tell me what part(s) of PETA’s platform he disagrees with. That’s kind of sad for PETA being such a “nutcase group,” isn’t it?

gryphon202 on February 6, 2014 at 12:45 PM

Returning to the blog’s post topic I’ll re-post:

This is interesting – so teaching kids about s*x/s*x acts/self pleasuring and abnormal sexual behaviors/attraction in classrooms/school is 100% okay around this age no?

But showing them the reality of where their lunch meat comes from is terrifying/damaging.

It is either one or the other – if you are going to go full on reality with them – then both are fair game no? Or if reality is harmful to their young minds/innocence, then they should be sheltered from it.
(Assuming that one believes that it is the state/federal/union’s determination when and what to teach your child of course).

Sometimes I wonder that in our zeal for taste/sensory personal pleasure that we do not gloss over the reality of the distasteful/messy process that gets the tasty food to our mouths… Children (generally) find slaughter, cruelty and pain to animals to be shocking and horrible… what does it say about adults that they cannot be bothered to consider their own dietary choice consequences in an honest manner?

The age of the children here is definitely a topic for conversation as well as the fact that the parents do not have control over how and to what degree/presentation the reality is shared with them. All in all – thought provoking.

glidingone on February 6, 2014 at 9:39 AM

glidingone on February 6, 2014 at 12:48 PM

Tofutti Cuties.
I think that pretty much says it all.

partsnlabor on February 6, 2014 at 12:45 PM

I think they mean estrogen cubes.

cptacek on February 6, 2014 at 12:50 PM

f* peta.
I ignore them, the few times any supporter responds to a comment I ignore them there too.
worthless piles of s*it

dmacleo on February 6, 2014 at 12:55 PM

“not approved for kids”? IT’s on the petakids website and has the petakids logo on it.

BrunoMitchell on February 6, 2014 at 12:57 PM

glidingone on February 6, 2014 at 12:48 PM

Um, yeah, I read that post on the first page. And I am genuinely sorry if I was a little harsh. But let me explain my thoughts to you in terms perhaps a bit more…politic:

If PETA gets its way, millions of people in developing countries would necessarily starve. Americans might not have to go back to a hunter-gatherer subsistence agricultural lifestyle, but there are entire countries where that would summarily become the norm if animals were not allowed to be farmed for food.

And you may not feel like you have a dog in the hunt (pun intended), but these same people who are pointing out things about meat consumption that make you squeamish are the people that think pet ownership is unethical. They kill pets even as they claim pet ownership is unethical.

And don’t even get Newkirk started on the subject of terrorism. She was once famously quoted, in a letter to Yassir Arafat, as expressing concern for the donkeys used in suicide bombings!

You do seem to be okay with PETA attempting to show children the “seemy underside” of the meat packing industry. I don’t think that’s unfair at all to say. But PETA’s efforts are failing, and they will be doomed to fail as long as a solid majority of the world’s population literally depends on meat for its very sustenance. If that makes you uncomfortable, then thank whatever God you worship that you live someplace where you are free and wealthy enough to make that choice for yourself.

gryphon202 on February 6, 2014 at 12:57 PM

I am a little at a loss here as to your dogmatic insistence that I am part of/on board with PETA. I thought that I was really clear in my last posts that simply making a moral choice to not consume mass produced meat does not equate to a religious adherence or even association to whatever PETA does or does not believe.

I have no interest in being a part of or associated with PETA as I do not agree with many of their stances. You really ought to stop stereotyping and lumping INDIVIDUALS who care to use individual thoughts to come to a conclusion with blindly following organizational members.

Stop equating me to PETA – you keep on beating this air puppet that does not exist.

No, why would I want to agree with killing animals in shelters on the whole? That is a case by case issue depending upon the health of the animal, the animal’s temperament, funding etc… I don’t know the details because I am not a part of PETA, nor do I agree with them or their tactics – is that clear enough? I only said it 5 times previously.

I don’t understand your concern or the fact that you even care what PETA may or may not do to animals in their shelters? If you don’t think that animals matter and they should be slaughtered to please your tastebuds/the unwanted ones are just ground up anyway etc.. why do you care if they do the same with another animal that so happens to not normally be eaten? What’s the difference – it is purely societal norms.

glidingone on February 6, 2014 at 12:28 PM

Now you are mischaracterizing what I said. I said that you seem to agree with PETA that eating meat or not eating meat is an issue of morality. Thus far nothing you have said on the first page or the second has contradicted this. You seem to want to distance yourself from PETA while at the same time agreeing with the most public and visible part of their agenda.

PETA killing animals doesn’t bother me. I’ve become quite attached to animals that had to be put down for medical reasons, or because the shelter I volunteered at simply got too full. What bothers me is the hypocrisy. And what bothers me the most about the hypocrisy is the way that self-righteous vegan crusaders such as yourself dance around the issue.

And so, I ask again: What part of the PETA agenda do you disagree with? If being equated with PETA bothers you so damn much, all you have to do is tell me if their kill shelters bother you, if the red blood-like paint bothers you, or if Ingrid Newkirk’s loony ranting about what she wants done with her body after her death bothers you. There’s plenty of radical, out-there stuff for a reasonable vegan to disagree with in PETA’s platform. I wouldn’t be hounding you on this question if I weren’t seeking a sincere answer.

gryphon202 on February 6, 2014 at 12:42 PM

I am becoming concerned that any responses to you are fruitless as you are repeatedly failing to comprehend what I am writing.

Nothing about what I have said was/is in the spirit of ‘self righteous vegan attitude’ It seems to me as though you have some deep guilt or anger when it comes to this issue and are choosing to attack/lash out against anyone who may dare to hold an opinion different than your own when it comes to the consumption of mass produced meat. I would put forward that this kind of wild reaction to viewpoints different than you own is unhealthy and not profitable personally.

I have (against my better judgement) already repeated myself roughly 7 times to your hectic posts shrieking that I am one with the PETA folks and I responded that I do not agree with PETA as an organization, support it or otherwise at any point in time follow what they do or do not do. PETA is irrelevant to my own moral belief in this area.

I feel like the innocent guy being repeatedly asked when he stopped beating his wife… I am being called to the mat to defend PETA when I have nothing to do with them… Have fun with your stawmen… you and our dear king seem to have that skill in common.

glidingone on February 6, 2014 at 12:57 PM

I feel like the innocent guy being repeatedly asked when he stopped beating his wife… I am being called to the mat to defend PETA when I have nothing to do with them… Have fun with your stawmen… you and our dear king seem to have that skill in common.

glidingone on February 6, 2014 at 12:57 PM

Check a couple of posts upthread, Gliding. I dialed back the outrageous outrage.

gryphon202 on February 6, 2014 at 12:58 PM

Eh. Animal slaughter doesn’t have to be awful and in most cases it isn’t. PETA finds awful slaughterhouses and promotes that as the norm, but regulated and well run slaughterhouses are not horrible. They may smell bad because of the blood and the excrement, but that is what animals smell like.

A well run slaughterhouse walk animals down a shoot calmly, brains them with an air bolt, slits their throats, and then off they go down the line to get butchered. Temple Grandin has made a huge, immeasurable impact for the better in this industry.

I will have no problem with my son going hunting in a few years (he’s two now) and gutting/slaughtering the deer. In fact, he will have to or my husband won’t take him. That will be a responsibility he will have to do if he is going to have the pleasure of hunting. My cousin’s 4 year old daughter can already pluck and clean a dove and a pheasant with no help from her dad.

cptacek on February 6, 2014 at 12:58 PM

Well I would be ok with PETA handing this out to kids if we can hand out the same of abortions to every kid in sex ed.

AH_C on February 6, 2014 at 9:26 AM

I’m okay with both. Actually, I understand the problem with marketing this to kids, since kids don’t choose to eat meat, but rather eat whatever (or whoever) is put in front of them. If you’re an adult and you proudly eat meat, however, you shouldn’t have any problem with the comic book in and of itself, just like you shouldn’t complain about “graphic” depictions of abortions if you proudly call yourself pro-choice.

bmmg39 on February 6, 2014 at 12:59 PM

Eh. Animal slaughter doesn’t have to be awful and in most cases it isn’t. PETA finds awful slaughterhouses and promotes that as the norm, but regulated and well run slaughterhouses are not horrible. They may smell bad because of the blood and the excrement, but that is what animals smell like.

A well run slaughterhouse walk animals down a shoot calmly, brains them with an air bolt, slits their throats, and then off they go down the line to get butchered. Temple Grandin has made a huge, immeasurable impact for the better in this industry.

I will have no problem with my son going hunting in a few years (he’s two now) and gutting/slaughtering the deer. In fact, he will have to or my husband won’t take him. That will be a responsibility he will have to do if he is going to have the pleasure of hunting. My cousin’s 4 year old daughter can already pluck and clean a dove and a pheasant with no help from her dad.

cptacek on February 6, 2014 at 12:58 PM

Personally, I am a big supporter of Temple Grandin’s work in animal husbandry. I like the idea that because domestic animals can not live without us, we have a responsibility to give them the best lives possible. I’m okay with that.

Upwards of 80% of all the abbatoir facilities in America now use systems of one sort or another designed by Grandin with these ideas in mind. I may be opposed to animal rights, but I am most certainly all for animal welfare. No pain, no fear, no boredom.

gryphon202 on February 6, 2014 at 1:03 PM

Bishop on February 6, 2014 at 10:29 AM

Both rennet and stearic acid can be derived from vegetable sources. Indeed, most common cheeses purchased in the United States are not made with animal rennet. Many brands of cosmetics (including basic needs like shaving lotion, soap, and toothpaste) have non-animal varieties found in Trader Joe’s and now most supermarkets, too.

bmmg39 on February 6, 2014 at 1:14 PM

I wonder how many of these comic books are published.
I’ve never heard of a PETA comic book before.

BubbaHoTep on February 6, 2014 at 1:15 PM

Both rennet and stearic acid can be derived from vegetable sources. Indeed, most common cheeses purchased in the United States are not made with animal rennet. Many brands of cosmetics (including basic needs like shaving lotion, soap, and toothpaste) have non-animal varieties found in Trader Joe’s and now most supermarkets, too.

bmmg39 on February 6, 2014 at 1:14 PM

Artisan cheeses are all made with animal rennet in the traditional manner. I don’t see that changing any time soon. Besides which, PETA is against all farming of animals, including for eggs and dairy.

gryphon202 on February 6, 2014 at 1:17 PM

My children and I enjoy those mutilated animals. Just last night, we ate the remains of a pig that had been killed, decapitated, and then had it’s skin pealed from it’s body. As if that wasn’t enough, it was then cut into many pieces. Of these pieces, we enjoyed several slices after they were “cooked” in a “pan”.

My girls were well aware that they were eating pig meat. My 8 year old enjoyed it so much, she ate some of the left over remains for breakfast.

Just so you know, they have also enjoyed the slaughtered remains of chickens, cows, turkeys, fish, and other animals knowing full well what that animal was.

AnyJusticeButEqualIsNotJustice on February 6, 2014 at 1:29 PM

Meat is murder..tasty tasty murder

thunderhorse on February 6, 2014 at 1:51 PM

Maybe it wasn’t intentional but it’s still inexcusable.

Someone hands you a bunch of pamphlets and says, “Put these in these comic books.” Don’t you even think twice about what you’re doing? Don’t you think about the suitability of putting adult material in reading matter intended for children? Don’t you bother to flip through the pamphlet and see what’s in it?

It’s possible it’s all very innocent. But it seems like something that should have been caught.

And anyway, what about the suitability of material for adults? People are entitled to make their arguments; they’re not entitled to be callous toward other people’s well-being and sense of proportion.

bobs1196 on February 6, 2014 at 1:51 PM

Peta Kills Animals

And here’s proof for the deniers.

gryphon202 on February 6, 2014 at 11:42 AM

Yup, their animal slaughter has been out there for years yet the deniers still deny. I saw a debate between Wayne LaPierre and a rep from PETA. When LaPierre exposed their animal slaughter the PETA guy basically said in their defense that it was better that these dogs and cats be killed rather than end up as “slaves” (pets) for our own selfish needs. These people are insane.

jawkneemusic on February 6, 2014 at 1:55 PM

Meat is murder..tasty tasty murder
thunderhorse on February 6, 2014 at 1:51 PM

The really believe this.

I had a conversation with these guys about their thoughts on abortion since they believe eating meat and drinking milk is murder and rape. I bet you can guess how they feel about abortion.

jawkneemusic on February 6, 2014 at 1:58 PM

And anyway, what about the suitability of material for adults? People are entitled to make their arguments; they’re not entitled to be callous toward other people’s well-being and sense of proportion.

bobs1196 on February 6, 2014

How is well-being and sense of proportion defined? That is a nebulous concept in this day and age is it not? (I do not disagree with your comment, I do wonder how practically a ambiguous notion such as sense of proportion and well-being is perceived)

How does it harm a functioning adult’s well-being to face the reality of mass dairy farming and mass produced meat? If we are truly a nation of ignorants, does that improve or lessen our culture?

Doctors can no longer inform those engaged in risky sexual behaviors that their actions are likely to have consequences… without being accused of attacking a person’s well-being and sense of proportion… where does sharing the truth in a matter of fact evidence manner end and harm of proportion and well-being begin?

glidingone on February 6, 2014 at 2:00 PM

I had a conversation with these guys about their thoughts on abortion since they believe eating meat and drinking milk is murder and rape. I bet you can guess how they feel about abortion.

jawkneemusic on February 6, 2014 at 1:58 PM

You had a conversation with whom, exactly? Every vegetarian on Michael Medved’s God’s Green Earth, or three of them? The long battle between animal-rights groups and pro-life groups was tiresome twenty years ago, especially since the causes are quite similar and many people are in both camps.

bmmg39 on February 6, 2014 at 2:04 PM

They also think that having a vermicomposting bin is enslaving worms for their poop.

cptacek on February 6, 2014 at 2:04 PM

Eh. Animal slaughter doesn’t have to be awful and in most cases it isn’t. PETA finds awful slaughterhouses and promotes that as the norm, but regulated and well run slaughterhouses are not horrible.

Regulation in slaughterhouses and living areas is notoriously loose/non-existent in reality from what I have been able to gather. FWIW, YMMV – do not be lulled into a sense of peace due to government regulation competence in this area nor any other for that matter.

glidingone on February 6, 2014 at 2:06 PM

The human race, for the most part, is a horrible thing. The cruelty it visits on the creatures over which it has power, is demonic. And all for a tasty meal.

If there is a hell, and if entrance to such is determined by one’s knowing contribution to this misery, then those people will be going there. Think about that if you believe in an afterlife. You may have to consider that entrance to a hell or a heaven is determined by this and not by any other ideas you may have been fed.

If eating an egg is an abortion – the killing of a fetus – then our meat industry is the equivalent of trucking billions of sentient viable people to killing factories. And no, I don’t eat eggs.

HugoDrax on February 6, 2014 at 2:07 PM

Regulation in slaughterhouses and living areas is notoriously loose/non-existent in reality from what I have been able to gather. FWIW, YMMV – do not be lulled into a sense of peace due to government regulation competence in this area nor any other for that matter.

glidingone on February 6, 2014 at 2:06 PM

Temple Grandin actually recommends requiring them to have videocameras hooked up to the internet so someone other than the government could look at the operations. She thinks that pressure from their customers and suppliers would clean up any bad operators.

cptacek on February 6, 2014 at 2:09 PM

Regulation in slaughterhouses and living areas is notoriously loose/non-existent in reality from what I have been able to gather. FWIW, YMMV – do not be lulled into a sense of peace due to government regulation competence in this area nor any other for that matter.

glidingone on February 6, 2014 at 2:06 PM

Government regulation only goes so far where it exists. Temple Grandin has successfully convinced many abbatoir managers that it is in their best interest to treat their animals humanely, as well. Better meat quality, for instance.

gryphon202 on February 6, 2014 at 2:09 PM

cptacek on February 6, 2014 at 2:09 PM

That may have been a though experiment by her and not an actual recommendation. I’m going from memory.

cptacek on February 6, 2014 at 2:11 PM

Can I give the kids “a life of a fetus” pamphlet? Hypocrisy much?

Whitey Ford on February 6, 2014 at 2:14 PM

You had a conversation with whom, exactly? Every vegetarian on Michael Medved’s God’s Green Earth, or three of them? The long battle between animal-rights groups and pro-life groups was tiresome twenty years ago, especially since the causes are quite similar and many people are in both camps.
bmmg39 on February 6, 2014 at 2:04 PM

Similar in what way? One is an animal and the other is a human being. How can an animal rights activist claim to be against the “murder” of chickens and cows yet be A okay with the murder of a tiny human being? I know a lot of vegetarians and animal activists. I travel in music circles where it seems to be the trend nowadays. Especially in the punk rock community. 99% of them are just fine with the 55,000,000 dead babies since Roe v Wade but gasp in horror when I drink a glass of milk or eat a steak.

jawkneemusic on February 6, 2014 at 2:15 PM

A definition I got online:

Wanton
(of a cruel or violent action) deliberate and unprovoked.
“sheer wanton vandalism”
synonyms: deliberate, willful, malicious, spiteful, wicked, cruel;
gratuitous, unprovoked, motiveless, arbitrary, groundless, unjustifiable, needless, unnecessary, uncalled for, senseless, pointless, purposeless, meaningless, empty, random;

capricious

“wanton destruction”

Animals slaughtered for food is neither “wanton” nor “murder”.
It is deliberate, but it is not unprovoked. The animal’s purpose is to provide food.

RDH on February 6, 2014 at 2:19 PM

Time to start hitting PETA with lawsuit after lawsuit. These looney tunes are really out of control, from hunter harassment – which is now illegal in many states – to throwing paint at your wife’s fur coat (a very foolish move in a concealed carry state). They indulge in false hyperbole and it is about time they get to defend their statements in a libel lawsuit.

sharpshooter on February 6, 2014 at 2:20 PM

why do you care if they do the same with another animal that so happens to not normally be eaten? What’s the difference – it is purely societal norms.

glidingone on February 6, 2014 at 12:28 PM

It’s PETA’s hypocrisy and fund-raising. They put out materials claiming that they are interested in animal welfare, raise money, use the funds to set up shelters and then kill healthy animals rather than let them be placed.

I am not a vegetarian,I wear leather, but most of our pets have been strays or rescues.

It is very wrong of PETA to run shelters if they are not doing it in the interests of the animals when that is their theoretical raison d’etre. If all they care about is vegetarianism and people not wearing fur, they should stay out of the shelter business and stop killing healthy animals without any purpose and let people who care about animals and are actually trying to help them run the shelters.

talkingpoints on February 6, 2014 at 2:21 PM

Similar in what way? One is an animal and the other is a human being. How can an animal rights activist claim to be against the “murder” of chickens and cows yet be A okay with the murder of a tiny human being? I know a lot of vegetarians and animal activists. I travel in music circles where it seems to be the trend nowadays. Especially in the punk rock community. 99% of them are just fine with the 55,000,000 dead babies since Roe v Wade but gasp in horror when I drink a glass of milk or eat a steak.

jawkneemusic on February 6, 2014 at 2:15 PM

It is fairly simple – decades and decades of strident teaching that a fetus is a lump of cells, not really a human being etc… part of the mother, not it’s own separate entity is the normal knowledge of our society.

Therefore abortion does not equal ending a human life because there is no human life (because that is what they have been taught and varying opinions are oftentimes never presented).

You are coming at it from a different perspective than they are. We each have to gently and kindly re-educate them because they have been fed a lie that speaks to a natural human inclination of selfishness and convenience.

glidingone on February 6, 2014 at 2:30 PM

A definition I got online:

Wanton
(of a cruel or violent action) deliberate and unprovoked.
“sheer wanton vandalism”
synonyms: deliberate, willful, malicious, spiteful, wicked, cruel;
gratuitous, unprovoked, motiveless, arbitrary, groundless, unjustifiable, needless, unnecessary, uncalled for, senseless, pointless, purposeless, meaningless, empty, random;

capricious

“wanton destruction”

Animals slaughtered for food is neither “wanton” nor “murder”.
It is deliberate, but it is not unprovoked. The animal’s purpose is to provide food.

RDH on February 6, 2014 at 2:19 PM

I would split hairs with you – what you are saying is that the slaughter of an animal for food usage has a ‘purpose’.

The slaughter in the setting of a slaughterhouse is indeed unprovoked (the animal is not attacking you, threatening your life, the animal is being forced towards it’s own death and oftentimes is prevented from protecting itself in any way that it knows how) and it is a cruel and violent action (a bolt to the head is not a Christmas present, decidedly violent and murdering/killing something unless in defense is generally considered to be cruel).

It has a purpose to be sure in the case of food production, but it is still deliberate unprovoked action resulting in the death of the life of a living animal.

That is the way of things – just splitting hairs with you.

Now in the case of just hatched chicks on the conveyer belt… where the females are kept and the males continue on down into the grinder while fully alive, after being de-beaked of course… that would be wanton cruelty/murder.

glidingone on February 6, 2014 at 2:40 PM

My daughter is a second-grader at the school in question. She didn’t see the comic book or the more graphic images that were “mistakenly” included, and apparently the school did all it could to hustle the protestors away and apologize afterwards (I’ve gotten a couple of emails from the school about the matter). I don’t believe the school was complicit in any way, and I believe they shut the protest down as quickly as they could. I wasn’t there and didn’t see it happen but from where I’m sitting, the school handled it about as well as can be expected. That’s about all I have to contribute: a borderline first-hand account about how the school isn’t to blame.

Incidentally the most upsetting part of it for me was that my daughter, who loves animals, got to see a real live cow at school and I had to find out about it on the news. I’ve resolved to press her for more details when I come home from work and ask her how her day was; I won’t just let her say “fine” and go back to playing Minecraft. Lesson learned.

Courtesybears on February 6, 2014 at 2:43 PM

“schools should know better.”

Protip: We’re talking LAUSD.

GEAH on February 6, 2014 at 2:54 PM

HugoDrax on February 6, 2014 at 2:07 PM

I am assuming you failed biology right?

All of life works on the basis of food chains. For the most part at this point, we are on top of it, and have the use of many animals for use in our diet. But even we get to become worm food at some point.

Arguments that humans do not need to eat meat and other forms of animal fat are biologically incorrect. Vegetarianism and especial veganism are naturally unhealthy lifestyles which require very diligent nutritional supplement regimens for their followers to remain healthy. Low fat is behind a great deal of the diabetes explosion. I am not suggesting we need to eat meat all the time and in obscene quantities, that’s just gluttony. But meat and animal fat products are extremely important in weight management and maximum muscle and nervous system functioning.

Can you be a non-meat eater and be healthy? Yep. Especially if your system doesn’t tolerate much of it.

But the nutritional information put out by non-meat eaters is mostly devoid of facts – and low-fat means early death more often than not.

And of course on the morality play button that is just silly.

Zomcon JEM on February 6, 2014 at 2:58 PM

Zomcon JEM on February 6, 2014 at 2:58 PM

Judging by the physical fat/gut size of the normal meat eating American… maybe it isn’t really the veggies that are ‘causing’ diabetes… gluttony is a real and active vice.

With respect – your statements are entirely unfounded. All things in moderation – meat eaters who fail to eat veggies and fruit are nutritionally deficient as well and fall prey to disease as well.

Scientists say one thing one month and another thing another. Vary your intake with known healthy items and get the best of all worlds.

glidingone on February 6, 2014 at 3:26 PM

In an effort to mend fences, PETA has offered to provide staff and students at Calabash Elementary with Tofutti Cuties—delicious dairy-free ice cream sandwiches.

How about you intellectually bankrupt sociopaths stay the hell away from kids altogether. I hope you end up wearing those crappy ice cream sandwiches as you’re kicked to the curb.

RadClown on February 6, 2014 at 3:32 PM

Judging by the physical fat/gut size of the normal meat eating American… maybe it isn’t really the veggies that are ‘causing’ diabetes… gluttony is a real and active vice.

With respect – your statements are entirely unfounded. All things in moderation – meat eaters who fail to eat veggies and fruit are nutritionally deficient as well and fall prey to disease as well.

Scientists say one thing one month and another thing another. Vary your intake with known healthy items and get the best of all worlds.

glidingone on February 6, 2014 at 3:26 PM

Meat/fruit/vegetables have helped me lose 40 pounds and got me on the way to being a mother once again. Meat/fruit/vegetables has restored my fertility, my health, my moods and my hope. Take meat out of that trio and it doesn’t work.

cptacek on February 6, 2014 at 3:35 PM

I think its wonderful that PETA is willing provide young children soy-based treats that contain estrogen-like compounds.

It would be very difficult without the help of soy products to push the age of menarche down to 8 or 9 years old or even younger. PETA proudly joins with other progressive organizations in freeing these young ladies to enjoy their sexualized girlhood even earlier.

/it’s for the cows

Its all part of the plan, Stan.

Pless1foEngrish on February 6, 2014 at 4:05 PM

If eating an egg is an abortion – the killing of a fetus – then our meat industry is the equivalent of trucking billions of sentient viable people to killing factories. And no, I don’t eat eggs.

HugoDrax on February 6, 2014 at 2:07 PM

Eggs aren’t fertilized (unless you got a rooster in your backyard coop) so it isn’t an abortion. Geez, if you are going to be so hyperbolic, at least use science to lure us in.

cptacek on February 6, 2014 at 4:24 PM

Meat/fruit/vegetables have helped me lose 40 pounds and got me on the way to being a mother once again. Meat/fruit/vegetables has restored my fertility, my health, my moods and my hope. Take meat out of that trio and it doesn’t work.

cptacek on February 6, 2014 at 3:35 PM

That is awesome work by you! Good on you for finding a diet that works well with your unique body needs.

I do find that walnuts, almonds, natural grains, beans (refried, kidney, red, chickpeas etc..) work well for me in terms of replacing proteins often desired in meats – for what it is worth. I realize that is not a popular dietary choice =)

glidingone on February 6, 2014 at 4:28 PM

Grains are a great big no-no for me if I want to lose weight. Even beans can stop my progress.

cptacek on February 6, 2014 at 4:31 PM

LOL, I really don’t think PETA cares about kids or cows. I think they care about screaming their heads off trying to destroy Western Civ. Even if the cow lived in a barn like a spa, and roamed a wonderland pasture, they would STILL not want anyone to drink its milk, or turn the cow into any product whatsover. And yet…. they have a point there about those conditions. It’s not good to treat a cow that way. The best way to handle that isn’t regulation, but DEREGULATION. Because the regs are influenced by agro-businesses, not 40 acre farmers and the like, it’s the “Rand Principle” all over again. The big companies lobby or tacitly approve of regs they can live, and that the small companies can’t. De-regulate, and come up with some simple rules (like “keep your animals healthy”) and that’s all that’s needed.

One of the other posters here is Aunursa, a Jew–orthodox, conservative, reform, or Ashkenazi or Sephardic, I don’t know, but I suppose he can appreciate the concept of only having 613 laws. Of course, Judaism believes in much more–the Talmud is literally the size of an encyclopedia set–but still, it’s a good idea.

ps Aunursa, I used to live in Jerusalem! Highly recommended. Nothing quite like Shabbot on the West Side. East Side, the Arab side, every day is Monday. Nuts.

RockinRickOwen on February 6, 2014 at 4:37 PM

That is awesome work by you! Good on you for finding a diet that works well with your unique body needs.

I do find that walnuts, almonds, natural grains, beans (refried, kidney, red, chickpeas etc..) work well for me in terms of replacing proteins often desired in meats – for what it is worth. I realize that is not a popular dietary choice =)

glidingone on February 6, 2014 at 4:28 PM

Nor will it ever be. Humans have been eating meat since before the dawn of recorded history. That’s a mighty powerful cultural predilection for anti-meat crusaders to be pushing against.

gryphon202 on February 6, 2014 at 4:38 PM

Well, it seems that registration has been assaulted by anti-human trolls, this time around.

OldEnglish on February 6, 2014 at 4:53 PM

Well, it seems that registration has been assaulted by anti-human trolls, this time around.

OldEnglish on February 6, 2014 at 4:53 PM

Well in fairness, I don’t think being anti-meat necessarily means being anti-human. It just seems to me that a solid majority of PETA’s rank-and-file members have no idea who Ingrid Newkirk is or what she really believes.

gryphon202 on February 6, 2014 at 4:56 PM

Well, it seems that registration has been assaulted by anti-human trolls, this time around.

OldEnglish on February 6, 2014 at 4:53 PM

As one of the OTHER newbies, I’d have to agree. In fact, that’s the problem with Glidingone’s “logic.” The premise is off-base. Animals aren’t people. A man can’t murder an animal–he can only be kill it. And vice versa.

Here’s some food for thought:
“Any animal can fight for freedom, but only a man can fight for liberty.”
“Any monkey can bang away at a typewriter and eventually produce ‘Hamlet,’ but only a man would find it very interesting.”

If animals were people, they wouldn’t need PETA to defend them. They’d be able to apprehend the abstract concepts involved in the struggle for liberty and organize themselves accordingly. As much as I love “Wind in the Willows,” “Alice in Wonderland” and “Winnie the Pooh,” I don’t live in a fantasy world of anthropomorphic animals. I live in a real world of “theomorphic” men.

RockinRickOwen on February 6, 2014 at 5:05 PM

I’ve been a member of this website for 6/7 years… I just don’t post very often… so since it was mostly me posting an alternative opinion – I don’t think that OldEnglish is in any danger of being frequently confronted with opinions different than his own in the area of unabated meat consumption =) *whew* caught a break there!

As for the other opinions of new registrants… well that will make for good entertainment!

glidingone on February 6, 2014 at 5:07 PM

gryphon202 on February 6, 2014 at 4:56 PM

If that view were for personal consumption only, I would agree. However, this seems to be an official mantra being pushed upon those who prefer to eat, not analyze the source (never, ever ask what’s in a sausage – just enjoy it).

My main objection lies in applying human conditions to animals – and then demanding that humans put their welfare below that of animals. If acceded to, there would be mass starvation in many parts of the world.

OldEnglish on February 6, 2014 at 5:08 PM

glidingone on February 6, 2014 at 5:07 PM

My apologies for miscasting you – it’s the first time I’ve noticed your name, and haven’t (yet) gone through the registration thread.

OldEnglish on February 6, 2014 at 5:12 PM

As one of the OTHER newbies, I’d have to agree. In fact, that’s the problem with Glidingone’s “logic.” The premise is off-base. Animals aren’t people. A man can’t murder an animal–he can only be kill it. And vice versa.

Here’s some food for thought:
“Any animal can fight for freedom, but only a man can fight for liberty.”
“Any monkey can bang away at a typewriter and eventually produce ‘Hamlet,’ but only a man would find it very interesting.”

If animals were people, they wouldn’t need PETA to defend them. They’d be able to apprehend the abstract concepts involved in the struggle for liberty and organize themselves accordingly. As much as I love “Wind in the Willows,” “Alice in Wonderland” and “Winnie the Pooh,” I don’t live in a fantasy world of anthropomorphic animals. I live in a real world of “theomorphic” men.

RockinRickOwen on February 6, 2014 at 5:05 PM

I am not a newbie – I visit every day but besides that – just because a living creature is less intelligent than a human is does not give us leave to be cruel to it. If you watch little baby chicks flapping around in confusion on the conveyer belt until they hit the grinder and do not feel a prick on your conscience – that is a sad and disappointing state of mind.

I did not say – do not eat meat… if anyone cared to notice – I said mass produced, confined animal slaughter – it’s a mess and it’s disgusting. Pigs are trapped in little cages and cannot move at all – they know nothing else – it’s horrible.

Much much different than at least affording the animal some time to enjoy some portion of life in their own animal way (you cannot tell me that you look at a goat romping around in the yard and cannot see some form of animal joy in that) Or the little duck following it’s mother etc… Creatures are not equal to humans and if necessary, they can be consumed to be sure. It does not make it any less awful to end life. Life is precious and should be treated with respect.

glidingone on February 6, 2014 at 5:13 PM

Well in fairness, I don’t think being anti-meat necessarily means being anti-human. It just seems to me that a solid majority of PETA’s rank-and-file members have no idea who Ingrid Newkirk is or what she really believes.

gryphon202 on February 6, 2014 at 4:56 PM

Definitely true – there are a lot of uninformed PETA folks out there who see the truth in the cruelty aspect and may well not be aware of what the main organization or factions therein may be saying.

To be clear – I don’t follow PETA – I don’t support PETA. Blind belief and followers are typical however – look no further than the cult of our president.

glidingone on February 6, 2014 at 5:18 PM

Much much different than at least affording the animal some time to enjoy some portion of life in their own animal way (you cannot tell me that you look at a goat romping around in the yard and cannot see some form of animal joy in that) Or the little duck following it’s mother etc… Creatures are not equal to humans and if necessary, they can be consumed to be sure. It does not make it any less awful to end life. Life is precious and should be treated with respect.

glidingone on February 6, 2014 at 5:13 PM

On that salient point, you and I can agree. Life is precious, and it should be treated with respect. What you and I seem to disagree on is that animals, though not things, can be property. And we owe them the best and most painless life we can, right up until we use them as food. I see no moral or ethical quandary in this. PETA does. That’s an ideological gulf that you’ll never be able to bridge with me. Animals may not be things, but they can still be property.

gryphon202 on February 6, 2014 at 5:18 PM

Pigs are trapped in little cages and cannot move at all – they know nothing else – it’s horrible.
glidingone on February 6, 2014 at 5:13 PM

You mean farrowing crates, designed so that mother pigs don’t roll over on their babies and kill them?

cptacek on February 6, 2014 at 5:23 PM

Gliding, I agree that one ought not to be cruel to animals. I had read your post somewhere above, and in it you certainly seemed to be talking as if creatures were on the same level as humans. We probably agree more than disagree on this point.

However, I should like to point out that the difference is not one of mere intelligence. A cube isn’t simply a bigger square, but another geometric shape. Plants are alive, but do not think, feel, or possess volition. Mammals, such as cows, do–although the thoughts probably aren’t worth noting. Mammals dream. But they don’t imagine. They lack a dimension humans possess. The difference is not one of mere degree of intelligence, but one which we have called having a living soul.

RockinRickOwen on February 6, 2014 at 5:36 PM

i read over this comic book while eating a meat lovers pizza….it was good…..the pizza, that is…..

getthelibsout on February 6, 2014 at 5:37 PM

I’m not agreeing with glidingone, but I’m glad I’m not the only mostly lurker/occasional commenter around today. I feel ya there.

I’d be seeing red if our school let PeTA distribute anything to my child. Luckily mine go to a private school that aligns with our beliefs. I do know where most of my meat, dairy, and produce comes from since we buy local or grow and can our own.,

Anna on February 6, 2014 at 5:41 PM

Gliding, I agree that one ought not to be cruel to animals. I had read your post somewhere above, and in it you certainly seemed to be talking as if creatures were on the same level as humans. We probably agree more than disagree on this point.

However, I should like to point out that the difference is not one of mere intelligence. A cube isn’t simply a bigger square, but another geometric shape. Plants are alive, but do not think, feel, or possess volition. Mammals, such as cows, do–although the thoughts probably aren’t worth noting. Mammals dream. But they don’t imagine. They lack a dimension humans possess. The difference is not one of mere degree of intelligence, but one which we have called having a living soul.

RockinRickOwen on February 6, 2014 at 5:36 PM

Well said. I am right with you. I think that many people are ignorant (understandable in some instances) as to the nature and cruelty experienced by some of the mass farmed/slaughtered/produced animals before they make it to their gullets.

We as humans have a responsibility/stewardship to rule, but rule kindly over those creatures that are lesser than humans – I fear that oftentimes this important aspect to ‘dominion’ is overlooked and degraded in our zeal for tasty meat and such. The disconnect from the reality of slaughtering/ending life is also concerning.

Welcome by the way RockinRick.

glidingone on February 6, 2014 at 5:44 PM

I do know where most of my meat, dairy, and produce comes from since we buy local or grow and can our own.,

Anna on February 6, 2014 at 5:41 PM

That is the way to do it – the best is if you have a local neighbor or member of your Church that has hens and lays unfertilized eggs and lets the hens life in a semi-natural way (protected from [predators ideally!)

That way there is no mystery or disconnect or chance that your dollars are supporting undue cruelty/suffering etc…

Thanks – most of the time other posters say what I am thinking before I do – no need to add to it – so I look and think but don’t post.

glidingone on February 6, 2014 at 5:47 PM

Only humans have the luxury of feeling compunctions about how they feed themselves. ‘Lower’ animals simply follow their natures. Humans, of course, are omnivorous by nature and anything else by nurture. It is a sign of PETA’s arrogance and undeserved feelings of moral superiority that they would even consider getting involved with a child’s food choices.

Knott Buyinit on February 6, 2014 at 10:56 PM

One might re-consider how one treats those who have a different mindset than you do… people who do not condone the murder/slaughter of animals when other food sources are available are entitled their opinion and to life out their own strongly held ideals on the subject. They are likewise entitled to share their strongly held ideas on the subject with those around them (truly the content & manner of how those ideas are shared to those of a young age is a topic for thoughtful discussion).

glidingone on February 6, 2014 at 9:46 AM

What a load of B.S. PeTA basically condemns the slaughter of food animals, and pests like cockroaches, but if you bring your cat or dog to them and ask to put it up for adoption, they think nothing of killing the animals immediately.

zoyclem on February 7, 2014 at 11:50 AM

Tofutti Cuties.
I think that pretty much says it all.

partsnlabor on February 6, 2014 at 12:45 PM

How so?

They’re good. Now sold in many mainstream supermarkets. Just like ice cream sandwiches, only dairy free and smaller (hence “Cuties”).

bmmg39 on February 7, 2014 at 2:10 PM

You had a conversation with whom, exactly? Every vegetarian on Michael Medved’s God’s Green Earth, or three of them? The long battle between animal-rights groups and pro-life groups was tiresome twenty years ago, especially since the causes are quite similar and many people are in both camps.
bmmg39 on February 6, 2014 at 2:04 PM

Similar in what way? One is an animal and the other is a human being. How can an animal rights activist claim to be against the “murder” of chickens and cows yet be A okay with the murder of a tiny human being? I know a lot of vegetarians and animal activists. I travel in music circles where it seems to be the trend nowadays. Especially in the punk rock community. 99% of them are just fine with the 55,000,000 dead babies since Roe v Wade but gasp in horror when I drink a glass of milk or eat a steak.

jawkneemusic on February 6, 2014 at 2:15 PM

“Similar in what way?” They both involve speaking up for those who cannot speak for themselves.
“One is an animal and the other is a human being.” Yeah, and the pro-choicer says, “One is a person, and the other is a fetus.” Except that the human fetus is a human being just like the person already born, and the human being is an animal, just as the other animal is.

I question your “99%” figure, as that means you’ve met at least 100 vegetarians in the music community. Anyway, you’ve met me now, so you can dial that number down a bit.

bmmg39 on February 7, 2014 at 2:18 PM

One might re-consider how one treats those who have a different mindset than you do… people who do not condone the murder/slaughter of animals when other food sources are available are entitled their opinion and to life out their own strongly held ideals on the subject. They are likewise entitled to share their strongly held ideas on the subject with those around them (truly the content & manner of how those ideas are shared to those of a young age is a topic for thoughtful discussion).

glidingone on February 6, 2014 at 9:46 AM

What a load of B.S. PeTA basically condemns the slaughter of food animals, and pests like cockroaches, but if you bring your cat or dog to them and ask to put it up for adoption, they think nothing of killing the animals immediately.

zoyclem on February 7, 2014 at 11:50 AM

Why would a desire to not partake in mass produced meat and to avoid slaughtering living animals be one and the same with PETA’s actions as an overall organization? The fact that this concept is difficult for some on here to grasp is mind-boggling. Did you know that the democratic party lays full claim to caring for the poor? So if I were to truly help a poor person get their life together, I would be automatically be a member of the democratic party – and they support murdering babies?

Do you see what I am saying here? Just because one group happens to share a believe/moral that I have does not mean that I agree with the group as a whole… nor that I am a part of that group… that is not .. crap… as you so eloquently put it… that’s called individual thinking?

You said that what I wrote is nonsense – but I do not comprehend why you would say that unless you read what was not written there and assumed that I somehow support PETA’s slaughter of animals in one aspect of their shelters. I would wager that the majority of PETA’s supporters would not support kill shelters either.

Regardless, I don’t have any information on PETA or their actions – what do they have to do with my comment that I made that you quoted? Are you afraid of people who dare to think and consider what their daily actions are and why they do them? If you disagree with them, then great – politely explain why that is the case and make thoughtful argument for your manner of thinking.

glidingone on February 7, 2014 at 5:22 PM

Tofutti Cuties.
I think that pretty much says it all.

partsnlabor on February 6, 2014 at 12:45 PM

How so?

They’re good. Now sold in many mainstream supermarkets. Just like ice cream sandwiches, only dairy free and smaller (hence “Cuties”).

bmmg39 on February 7, 2014 at 2:10 PM

It is the name… you see it sort of looks like ‘fruity’ and we all know that ‘fruity’ is a derisive term.. except… that apparently the GOP and democrats and most of the nation thinks that ‘fruity’ is okay now… but I digress…

Nevermind that Cuties are delicious treats for those of us who cannot process dairy… it’s just an attempt to be ‘funny’ nothing more, nothing less.

glidingone on February 7, 2014 at 5:24 PM

Comment pages: 1 2