-
Myth: Animal rights activists protest hunting but buy meat in a supermarket.
Fact: Some people who eat meat may protest hunting, but animal rights activists oppose both hunting and buying meat from a supermarket. Animal rights activists advocate veganism, and do not consume any meat, eggs, dairy or other animal products. -
Myth: Animal rights activists protest whaling, but not the killing of cows.
Fact: While some people oppose the killing of whales because various whale species are threatened or endangered, or out of a belief that whales are special, animal rights activists oppose whaling because they believe it is wrong to kill sentient beings for food. Animal rights activists advocate veganism, but in general, protests against the killing of cows, pigs or chickens do not garner as much media coverage as protests against whaling, which might explain how this myth arose. -
Myth: Animal rights activists are privileged, white, educated, urban women.
Fact: Animal rights activists are diverse when it comes to class, ethnicity, race, education, gender and geography. Although the animal rights movement may not appear diverse based on attendance at conferences or protests, it would be wrong to judge the entire movement based on a small number of events. Much animal activism goes on in homes, churches, temples, and within communities and countries that are underrepresented in mainstream American media.
http://animalrights.about.com/od/animalrights101/tp/AnimalRightsFactsMyths.htm
Someone set loose the crazy train today.
[QUOTE=Bluey;7119150]
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?
[/QUOTE]
Lack of agreement doesn’t equal lack of understanding.
[QUOTE=Bluey;7119150]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.[/QUOTE]
No. Over many decades this slaughter industry was run in a roughshod, cruel manner disregarding legislation that was in place to make it not so.
Common sense is realizing that when the industry ignores what the public, including the consumers, wants it may be time to do away with it altogether.
The pro-slaughter faction would do so much for their ‘slice and dice’ cause if they called on the carpet those who within their ranks were harming their cause… rather than making excuse after excuse for them, and insisting that it is only the Animal Rights people who are the problem.
The animal rights peeps wouldn’t have a toe hold if you all would make sure that things were run how you insist it can be.
[QUOTE=Angela Freda;7119161]
Lack of agreement doesn’t equal lack of understanding.
No. Over many decades this slaughter industry was run in a roughshod, cruel manner disregarding legislation that was in place to make it not so.
Common sense is realizing that when the industry ignores what the public, including the consumers, wants it may be time to do away with it altogether.
The pro-slaughter faction would do so much for their ‘slice and dice’ cause if they called on the carpet those who within their ranks were harming their cause… rather than making excuse after excuse for them, and insisting that it is only the Animal Rights people who are the problem.
The animal rights peeps wouldn’t have a toe hold if you all would make sure that things were run how you insist it can be.[/QUOTE]
Using the abuse and mismanagement cards is immaterial, because we are not talking about how to REGULATE horse slaughter here.
We already have all kinds of regulations and inspections and punishment for transgressors.
Makes sense if you don’t think those are upheld, to work on that.:yes:
A BAN is a shotgun approach to abuse and mismanagement, throwing the baby out with the bathwater, ban religions so there won’t be any kids molested by church people, etc.
There is NO COMPROMISE in a BAN about how to haul, what size trailers, what kind of gun, no need to go there.
Bringing that up is just a distraction to the reality of the animal rights extremist agenda stepping stone this BAN horse slaughter drive is.
[QUOTE=Bluey;7119167]
Using the abuse and mismanagement cards is immaterial, because we are not talking about how to REGULATE horse slaughter here.
We already have all kinds of regulations and inspections and punishment for transgressors.
Makes sense if you don’t think those are upheld, to work on that.:yes:
A BAN is a shotgun approach to abuse and mismanagement, throwing the baby out with the bathwater, ban religions so there won’t be any kids molested by church people, etc.
There is NO COMPROMISE in a BAN about how to haul, what size trailers, what kind of gun, no need to go there.
Bringing that up is just a distraction to the reality of the animal rights extremist agenda stepping stone this BAN horse slaughter drive is.[/QUOTE]
The reason its come down to a ban is because there was no interest in cooperation towards improving the issues, enforcing the regulations and inspections and punishment for transgressors, from the industry.
Don’t like that it is now an all or nothing option?
You have the participants at all levels of the industry to blame for that.
When you find yourself painted in a corner, and you’re holding the paint brush, it’s non-sensical to blame someone else for your situation.
Why is that so hard to understand?
You need to understand HSUS strategy in order to counter it. HSUS isolates one part of the ag industry at a time. There is obvious advantage to this. HSUS is only fighting a one-front war, which limits its opponents’ size and allows HSUS to focus all of its P.R. resources into beating up one target. And with a huge pension plan you know it has a long timeframe to accomplish its mission.
Further, HSUS doesn’t seem to be an anti-agriculture or anti-meat/egg/dairy group when it’s just pushing for one type of reform in one part of the ag industry. This allows HSUS to continue to position itself as primarily a cat-and-dog group, when in fact HSUS leaders believe ag is the number one enemy.
HSUS took this piecemeal approach to beat up on the egg industry and create market uncertainty for egg farmers. We can’t let this continue.
The North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) is built on the idea that an attack on one is an attack on all. Want to screw with Latvia? You’ll have the U.S., Germany, and Great Britain to deal with.
The ag industry needs to make a similar pact. It’s not enough for individual companies or small groups to respond to HSUS when it comes knocking on the door. The fight is almost always lost by that point.
When HSUS attacks one part of the ag industry, whether it’s egg, hog, or dairy farmers or ranchers, everybody else needs to condemn it. We all know that HSUS’s goal is the elimination of animal agriculture. So why pretend like an attack on any one isn’t an attack on all?
Why play HSUS’s game when you can change the rules?
It’s not just meat producers that have a dog in this fight, either. HSUS, PETA, and other groups are always complaining about how meat is supposedly environmentally inefficient because it takes so much grain to produce a pound of meat. The more meat production declines due to HSUS/PETA efforts, the more that will harm feed producers.
Ditto.
Ditto on the ditto.
[QUOTE=Angela Freda;7119176]
The reason its come down to a ban is because there was no interest in cooperation towards improving the issues, enforcing the regulations and inspections and punishment for transgressors, from the industry.
Don’t like that it is now an all or nothing option?
You have the participants at all levels of the industry to blame for that.
When you find yourself painted in a corner, and you’re holding the paint brush, it’s non-sensical to blame someone else for your situation.
Why is that so hard to understand?[/QUOTE]
Look at their Myths…and study their true agenda…which I now presume is YOUR agenda. End all slaughter. Wouldn’t it have been more honest if you would have stated that from the beginning instead of continuing to lie and say I am only for animal welfare…not the end of all slaughter and animal rights. ???
Strange…you ALWAYS ignore the fact that slaughter CAN operate for horses in a humane atmosphere and it has been proven at the Fort.
Only problem is NO industry can be perfect 100% of the time…and that is what you demand of slaughter and equine slaughter.
COTH had technical problems…and they were not up and functioning a few months ago…by your methodology…they should NEVER be allowed to reopen …Quit cherry picking 100%…all or nothing
Angela…are you a VEGAN? Yes or No…
If NOT…why are you trying to end all slaughter?
[QUOTE=Angela Freda;7119176]
The reason its come down to a ban is because there was no interest in cooperation towards improving the issues from the industry.
Don’t like that it is now an all or nothing option?
You have the participants at all levels of the industry to blame for that.
Why is that so hard to understand?[/QUOTE]
Wrong.
Slaughter, as any other we do, as many other countries do, is as good or bad as the ones managing it.
Animal righs extremist from the get go have not done any other than push for a ban, bringing up time and again, as you tried to do there, the abuse and mismanagement card, but driving for a BAN all along.
They sure have never worked for any other that whatever came to a BAN.
Imagine if they had really worked on getting whatever they don’t like remedied, all that money spent on the BAN horse slaughter propaganda used there and we would ALL be behind that.
No, that is not ANIMAL RIGHTS, it is called ANIMAL WELFARE.
That is just not good enough for ANIMAL RIGHTS EXTREMISTS, only a BAN is.:no:
[QUOTE=luvmytbs;7119186]
Ditto.[/QUOTE]
Therefore you and Laura and Sunridge are all Vegans…striving to end ALL slaughter which means consumption of all animal products?
By the way, slaughter is not only about being a vegan and you are home free, because we get so many more products from the slaughter process than animal proteins for our nutrition.
Here is some we get just from one animal species, multiply that by the many we use one more time thru slaughter, as the natural, renewable resources animals are for each other, if acquired thru the slaughter process directly or bopping them over the head or, if you are, say, a lion, chasing your prey down.
It is all part of how our world evolved and still germane to how we live today, regardless of what some may think:
Leo, I am not a vegan, not even a vegetarian. As a matter of fact I like my steak rare.
I also drink milk and eat eggs.
Being anti horse slaughter has absolutely NOTHING to do with the U.S. food animal industry.
But you already know that.
[QUOTE=luvmytbs;7119202]
Leo, I am not a vegan, not even a vegetarian. As a matter of fact I like my steak rare.
I also drink milk and eat eggs.
Being anti horse slaughter has absolutely NOTHING to do with the U.S. food animal industry.
But you already know that.[/QUOTE]
But, but, it does indeed, because the BAN horse slaughter would not even exist without it being a handy and so well used propaganda drive for animal rights extremists.
Those animal rights extremists, as Fairfax has so well presented already, are after ALL our uses of animals, just in a divide and conquer effort, so you may not see their hand but here and there.
Oh, yes, following animal rights extremists in their drive to BAN horse slaughter has very much to do with the US food animal industry, if you want to admit it or not.
Remember, divide and conquer is a valid mode of attack.
Here is evident how it helps those using it win their share of support by the gullible, that don’t see past what their propaganda shows them, as your words indicate.:no:
Don’t bother to answer them. The troll force must be strong today. Is it a full moon?
[QUOTE=Bluey;7119201]
By the way, slaughter is not only about being a vegan and you are home free, because we get so many more products from the slaughter process than animal proteins for our nutrition.
Here is some we get just from one animal species, multiply that by the many we use one more time thru slaughter, as the natural, renewable resources animals are for each other, if acquired thru the slaughter process directly or bopping them over the head or, if you are, say, a lion, chasing your prey down.
It is all part of how our world evolved and still germane to how we live today, regardless of what some may think:[/QUOTE]
So how come there’s a cow in that picture and not a horse?
[QUOTE=luvmytbs;7119218]
So how there’s a cow in that picture and not a horse?[/QUOTE]
Read for comprehension, don’t just look at the picture and it will be obvious.:lol:
Oh, and Leo. Do you eat horse?
BTW: signed 
[QUOTE=LauraKY;7119216]
Don’t bother to answer them. The troll force must be strong today. Is it a full moon?[/QUOTE]
Can’t help it sometimes. I love how foolish they make themselves look.
