A friend referred me to this and I was amazed that there were only approx. 3000 signatures when 20,000 are needed. Isn’t this something horse owners and enthusiasts would be in favor of?
Done. You can also make sure you call, email, write your senator and congressman.
As I have said before, an animal rights extremist BAN horse slaughter agenda, as it was fought in 2006 and this is, is NOT in the best interest of our rights to use animals, for those here horses.
As animal rights extremists have stated, the push for this BAN horse slaughter is just one step in their agenda.
Next they will come after all other we do, until they have all animals “safe” from humans “enslaving” them.
Yes, that means your pasture ornament and goldfish too.
Go lurk on their websites for a bit and be aware of what they really are after.:eek:
Look at what they are saying when they are attacking the NY carriage horses as an example of who they are.:dead:
That we have or not slaughter plants open is immaterial here, this is about the principle that we don’t want animal rights extremist agendas determining, for those of us that have animals, if we may or not do whatever we do with them.
Just give this a though or ten, before falling behind bandwagons with questionable agendas.:no:
I’m not an animal rights extremist, how about you cwg?
Signed.
Bluey, you defeat yourself with your own argument. If you won’t sign a petition for a cause you believe in, because you fear AR extremists, then you are letting them interfere with your decisions.
Just because i’ll vote for a ban against horse slaughter, doesn’t mean i’ll vote for a ban against carriages. Just sayin’…
I too was “just sayin’, of course”.
Each one of course has to make their own decisions as they see best.:yes:
SIGNED.
Signed and commented
Signed a while ago, OP thanks for bringing it to everyones attention though.
Bumping this up, for those that want to know animal rights extremists are back on the war path, again attacking to BAN something we do with our horses, anything, horse slaughter the easiest to attack.:no:
Here they are back and ready to put one more notch in their revolver, shooting at our rights to have animals.
This is not about horse welfare, they don’t really care about horses themselves.
BAN horse slaughter just a handy place to attack, the “ick” factor in their favor.
This is not about making anything we do, including slaughter, better.
This is, to them, one more handy place for their drive to push their ultimate agenda of eliminating all we do with animals, here horses, with a BAN.
Yes, we need to be aware of that, because what we do with our horses is also in their sights, is what some are already fighting, ask the NY carriage horses, eventing last one in their sights directly.
Whatever YOU do is what we will be fighting next to keep from being banned.
If you believe that supporting animal rights extremist drives is the way to go here and “I will deal with any consequences later”, there is your chance to help them with your vote.:yes:
Bluey, everyone has been “warned.” Enough already.
Bluey, if anyone is an “extremist” here, it’s you.
Absolutely no one with the slightest empathy for horses could condone what is currently going on. Time for the Dustbin of History for that bit of nastiness–it’s a little thing called “progress.”
[QUOTE=LauraKY;7118308]
I’m not an animal rights extremist, how about you cwg?[/QUOTE]
Definitely not an animal rights extremist. My friend (also not an animal rights extremist) wrote a paper for her master’s program on animal slaughter and suggested that I sign the petition for SAFE.
[QUOTE=LauraKY;7119032]
Bluey, everyone has been “warned.” Enough already.[/QUOTE]
.
Then why haven’t you learned.
HSUS President Waytne is a RABID VEGAN. No employees are allowed to wear or consume animal products to work.
[QUOTE=Lady Eboshi;7119059]
Bluey, if anyone is an “extremist” here, it’s you.
Absolutely no one with the slightest empathy for horses could condone what is currently going on. Time for the Dustbin of History for that bit of nastiness–it’s a little thing called “progress.”[/QUOTE]
To demand a ban for equine slaughter is to forward the agenda to ban all slaughter
[QUOTE=Lady Eboshi;7119059]
Bluey, if anyone is an “extremist” here, it’s you.
Absolutely no one with the slightest empathy for horses could condone what is currently going on. Time for the Dustbin of History for that bit of nastiness–it’s a little thing called “progress.”[/QUOTE]
First, no one can deny that the push to BAN horse slaughter is animal rights extremist driven.
Second, if others want to jump on that bandwagon, at least be honest about it, don’t deny this is animal rights extremist driven, because, well, if it walks like a duck and all that.
ANIMAL WELFARE would be to work to correct what you don’t like in anything we do with animals, INCLUDING slaughter.
Many here have stated, “if slaughter was this or that, I won’t object to it”.
Common sense indicates that then you work to make it what you think it should be.
A BAN, to throw away the baby with the bathwater, that is what animal rights extremists agenda is and that is why they push for this BAN.
Third, if someone can push for animal rights extremist agendas here, where we are not an animal rights extremist web site, then they will have to let other than animal rights extremist have their say also, inconvenient that is to what they are pushing, here the animal rights extremist driven BAN horse slaughter agenda.:yes:
[QUOTE=Lady Eboshi;7119059]
Bluey, if anyone is an “extremist” here, it’s you.
Absolutely no one with the slightest empathy for horses could condone what is currently going on. Time for the Dustbin of History for that bit of nastiness–it’s a little thing called “progress.”[/QUOTE]
Do you realize that some think the same way about ANYTHING we do with horses, that riding a horse is cruel and unnecessary in our enlightened world and should be relegated to “the Dustbin of History”?:eek:
Right, those same people that are working to BAN horse slaughter and all else, to eventually eliminate all uses of animals by humans, “no more animal slaves”.
Be careful what you wish for, because there indeed are unintended consequences to all we do.
A good chess player can see several moves ahead.
Be that player, because our rights to have animals to use does hang in the balance.
Thanks, OP! Frankly, I don’t care who is behind it (and Bluey, you don’t have to respond, I already know what your post will say, got it, heh!). If Jeffrey Dahmer started a campaign to end human rights abuses via war crimes, I’d support that too. If bloody Rush Limbaugh was campaigning to end human trafficking, even though I would love an asteroid to land on him, heck yeah, I’d support that. I am a big enough person to delineate those issues.
I don’t have to agree with every single aspect of every single participant’s thinking to know what is right or wrong and to decide what I feel is the ethical course of action. Everyone is, as you say, welcome to their opinion, but the issues are larger than personal squabbles and if I limited myself to only those campaigns that were 100% backed by people exactly like me, well, it would be slim pickings and nothing would get done.
In the larger picture, this also is a large reason why things can’t get done in Congress either (I KNOW, sorry, I hate politics too, but…). Solutions require people from different walks of life and different philosophies working TOGETHER towards a common goal. If we let ourselves constantly be separated and bickering, as is the current state, no solutions are ever achieved.
That is all. 
[QUOTE=wildlifer;7119134]
Thanks, OP! Frankly, I don’t care who is behind it (and Bluey, you don’t have to respond, I already know what your post will say, got it, heh!). If Jeffrey Dahmer started a campaign to end human rights abuses via war crimes, I’d support that too. If bloody Rush Limbaugh was campaigning to end human trafficking, even though I would love an asteroid to land on him, heck yeah, I’d support that. I am a big enough person to delineate those issues.
I don’t have to agree with every single aspect of every single participant’s thinking to know what is right or wrong and to decide what I feel is the ethical course of action. Everyone is, as you say, welcome to their opinion, but the issues are larger than personal squabbles and if I limited myself to only those campaigns that were 100% backed by people exactly like me, well, it would be slim pickings and nothing would get done.
In the larger picture, this also is a large reason why things can’t get done in Congress either (I KNOW, sorry, I hate politics too, but…). Solutions require people from different walks of life and different philosophies working TOGETHER towards a common goal. If we let ourselves constantly be separated and bickering, as is the current state, no solutions are ever achieved.
That is all. :D[/QUOTE]
Short sighted.
The issue is not only who is behind the ban, of course.:rolleyes:
We are talking about a drive to BAN with ulterior motives.
There is NO COMPROMISE on a BAN, so you can’t go there.
Do look to the ulterior motives, keep your eye on the ball, not the sleigh of hand.
There is so much more at play here.
BAN horse slaughter is just a small step to further a much larger agenda.
Why is that so hard to understand?
