The Chronicle of the Horse
MagazineNewsHorse SportsHorse CareCOTH StoreVoicesThe Chronicle UntackedDirectoriesMarketplaceDates & Results
 
Page 13 of 25 FirstFirst ... 3111213141523 ... LastLast
Results 241 to 260 of 484
  1. #241
    Join Date
    Jun. 24, 2005
    Location
    Lorena, Texas
    Posts
    4,114

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by JSwan View Post
    The goal of the animal rights movement is the abolition of ALL use of animals. As pets, food, entertainment. Extending 14th Amendment protections to nonhumans would accomplish that.
    And for any kind of research. That includes the kind that helps scientists understand more about disease mechanisms (knowledge that saves lives). And the kind that lets researchers develop better ways of treating diseases and better medications for both humans and other animals.

    Animal rights activists would rather see animals go extinct than be subject to "torture" from humans again. "Torture" includes being eaten, pet on, touched, looked at, ridden, fed, or owned.

    The Animal Rights Movement is insidious. It works on people who have little knowledge of agriculture or animals and it starts with things that most of us would agree with:

    Something like: You don't want the animals that became your hamburger to be TORTURED do you?

    No sane person wants any animal to be tortured, so people start worrying about the food they eat. What do you mean the cows aren't all frolicking on pastures 24/7 before giving up their lives for my hamburger or steak? Oh no! We must never eat steak again!

    Ok, that's an over-simplification of what happens - but that's how these animal rights activists start winning people over. They make big, sweeping statements that on the surface you could agree with. But if you dig deeper, you find out that their definition of torture is vastly different than yours. And that some of the things they say are just completely wrong. But unfortunately we live in a world where many people are far removed from agriculture and many have never walked through a dairy or been to a ranch. And they buy the touchy-feeling stuff behind the ARA without understanding the realities.
    Visit us at Bluebonnet Equine Humane Society - www.bluebonnetequine.org

    Want to get involved in rescue or start your own? Check out How to Start a Horse Rescue - www.howtostartarescue.com



  2. #242
    Join Date
    Sep. 11, 2008
    Location
    Snohomish, WA
    Posts
    3,908

    Default

    I totally understand what they want.
    I've seen PETA in action at dog shows. They were protesting the fact that I bought a leather leash
    The problem (one of them) is that the general public has absolutely no idea. The HSUS and PETA put out these pitiful commercials and they are tear jerkers. The general public I don't think realizes that it isn't exactly true. Where's the other side??
    Did anyone look at the link I posted the other day??
    Probably not - I'll have to find it again. Eva Hughes posted it - it was a picture in Times Square saying how bad the HSUS really is. So I believe that people in general are getting a little smarter about it - wanting to be more informed about where their food comes from and what's actually in it. All the fuss about Monsanto on FB and much more information is available about it.

    I did not know that certain drag hunts have now been banned.
    I thought at least you could still do that. After all wasn't the point to end that all about the poor little fox?? Or not.

    I totally totally understand this is what the AR people are doing. I still say that does not mean we get to treat animals cruelly just to prove a point. In order to use animals as we have, then we should make some of these things practically beyond reproach.
    There has been alot done to raise the standard for most of the animals "processed" except horses. Is the argument that we should have horse slaughter just because it's an infringement on our rights otherwise??
    We are losing our rights one by one but it isn't just horses.


    Quote Originally Posted by JSwan View Post
    Having an AR activist on record as saying animals should receive 14th Amendment protections is pretty damning.

    Read up on the 14th Amendment.

    I don't always agree with Bluey. But in this case Bluey is spot on.

    The goal of the animal rights movement is the abolition of ALL use of animals. As pets, food, entertainment. Extending 14th Amendment protections to nonhumans would accomplish that.

    I don't see how y'all can't understand how significant that statement is. That and the fact that step by step, little by little, they're working towards that goal. You're being nibbled to death by ducks.



  3. #243
    Join Date
    Oct. 18, 2000
    Posts
    22,415

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by luvmytbs View Post
    However, that is not a reason for myself and others to stop fighting for true animal welfare.

    I will not stand by and ignore or condone animal cruelty, because of some RARA agenda.
    But we don't ignore it either.

    Neither to do we fail to fight to improve the lives of domestic animals.

    Perhaps the difference is that people like me do so without working with HSUS and PETA, et al.

    These groups would have the world believe that only THEY care about animal welfare, and THEY are the only ones working on animal welfare issues. Which is a bald faced lie. They lie a lot. As I have witnessed first hand.
    Brothers and sisters, I bid you beware
    Of giving your heart to a dog to tear.
    -Rudyard Kipling



  4. #244
    Join Date
    Sep. 11, 2008
    Location
    Snohomish, WA
    Posts
    3,908

    Default

    Spot on!!

    Quote Originally Posted by cowgirljenn View Post
    And for any kind of research. That includes the kind that helps scientists understand more about disease mechanisms (knowledge that saves lives). And the kind that lets researchers develop better ways of treating diseases and better medications for both humans and other animals.

    Animal rights activists would rather see animals go extinct than be subject to "torture" from humans again. "Torture" includes being eaten, pet on, touched, looked at, ridden, fed, or owned.

    The Animal Rights Movement is insidious. It works on people who have little knowledge of agriculture or animals and it starts with things that most of us would agree with:

    Something like: You don't want the animals that became your hamburger to be TORTURED do you?

    No sane person wants any animal to be tortured, so people start worrying about the food they eat. What do you mean the cows aren't all frolicking on pastures 24/7 before giving up their lives for my hamburger or steak? Oh no! We must never eat steak again!

    Ok, that's an over-simplification of what happens - but that's how these animal rights activists start winning people over. They make big, sweeping statements that on the surface you could agree with. But if you dig deeper, you find out that their definition of torture is vastly different than yours. And that some of the things they say are just completely wrong. But unfortunately we live in a world where many people are far removed from agriculture and many have never walked through a dairy or been to a ranch. And they buy the touchy-feeling stuff behind the ARA without understanding the realities.



  5. #245
    Join Date
    Mar. 1, 2005
    Location
    maryland
    Posts
    5,219

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Bluey View Post
    Wherever you are in these issues we discuss regularly, if you wear a tin foil hat, or just like to accuse others of doing so, I thought you may find this opinion article about animal rights and the HSUS interesting.
    Why?
    It can directly affect our rights to use any animals, including horses.
    Why is it relevant to post that here?
    For most here, owning and using horses (and all other kinds of animals) is what we do (bolding mine):
    The HSUS is not the batch of nutjobs some make them out to be.

    If it wasn't for work of the HSUS, the American public wouldn't have the awareness it does today of the huge problem of dogfigthing. HSUS was the whistleblower a couple times on slaughterhouses dragging downed cows into the kill room to be used in the *human* food supply. HSUS is also one of the few national voices the horses have against problems such as soring.

    Don't buy into the factory-farmer's propaganda. The HSUS is not out to steal your animals and give them voting rights and dress them in human clothing. That's insane.

    Do keep in mind there is a strong ($$$) drive to keep the distrust against HSUS and related groups. Who benefits if HSUS dies? Factory-farmers, fur ranches, puppy mills, poor quality zoos, and other sources of concern for anyone who has any compassion for animals. Follow the money. Follow who is funding the supposed "Humane Watch", a fake so-called watchdog group, funded by Center for Consumer Freedom. The CCF is in turn funded by big ag interests. CCF is also the group that fought against MADD to keep liquor less regulated and fought against health advocates to keep tobacco regulated. Are these really the people who should be speaking for what the public wants in the way of basic animal welfare?

    Before you buy into the hateful stories about the HSUS, please read StopHumaneWatch. See where much of these press releases are really coming from before you buy into it.
    http://humanewatch.info/blog/about-hsus/

    And as someone who works every day in the equine welfare business, I can tell you that HSUS is not out to steal your horses. They've been a wonderful resource to independent animal rescues/shelters nationwide. I've been to one of the conferences they organized, and it was a wonderful learning opportunity. They're the national voice all the little shelters/rescues/sanctuaries need in Washington. Independently we're all little local organizations. We cannot fight the big $$$ lobbyists at the national level without help. There is a lot of money involved in keeping horse abuse legal. If we let the bad rumor mill divide us and turn us against other equine welfare causes, the bad guys win.



  6. #246
    Join Date
    Jun. 27, 2005
    Location
    KY
    Posts
    4,578

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by JSwan View Post
    But we don't ignore it either.

    Neither to do we fail to fight to improve the lives of domestic animals.

    Perhaps the difference is that people like me do so without working with HSUS and PETA, et al.

    These groups would have the world believe that only THEY care about animal welfare, and THEY are the only ones working on animal welfare issues. Which is a bald faced lie. They lie a lot. As I have witnessed first hand.
    And we kow, that you are a good egg. So was County. (Miss him a lot).

    It's the extremists on the pro side who accuse everyone who is remotely concerned with animal welfare, to be an RARA.


    There are a lot of animal advocates who work without any influence from HSUS/PETA.
    That doesn't mean that in some instances they don't come to the same conclusion.

    I am no fan of HSUS, however, I am thrilled of what their undercover Big Lick video has accomplished for the horses involved.
    None of us COTHers or any little animal welfare group could have gotten that kind of media attention.
    Last edited by luvmytbs; Oct. 10, 2012 at 06:21 PM.

    ************************
    \"Horses lend us the wings we lack\"



  7. #247
    Join Date
    Dec. 31, 2000
    Location
    El Paso, TX
    Posts
    12,310

    Default

    I agree about ARA. But there are those on here, that feel that supporting banning any act like soring TWH or horse slaughter for human consumption, makes you an ARA. I disagree with that. And I don't think that banning those two things, will result in us losing our animals. The fear of ARA's is making it harder to write laws banning truly abusive practices. And while I recognize that some people are ok with horse slaughter as it is currently practiced, being against it does not make someone an ARA.

    There are lots of issues, like dog fighting, canned hunts, horse tripping, horse slaughter for human consumption etc, that many people feel ARE abusive. But the people that find them abusive are not necessarily ARA's. It has become customary that instead of accepting that some people have the opinion that they are abusive, they want to label them as ARA's to try to diminish their opinion and denigrate them, in spite of them owning animals, riding, wearing leather and eating meat. Or they label them RARA's which is even more of an insult since a true RARA will use terroristic acts like violence, or letting animals loose.

    While you don't want to support AR agendas, it is also wrong to ignore abuse, misrepresent laws written to prevent abuse (like the legislation to prevent soring which is specific to TWH's), and call people names, just because they support banning an abusive act that you may be ok with.

    I'd be curious to know what issues those posting on this thread feel were wrong to be made illegal/or wrong to have people trying to make them illegal...dog fighting? cockfighting? horse tripping? canned hunts? gestation crates? cages for poultry where they can stand up and turn around? If you support banning even one of those issues, then you have no right to call someone an ARA that supports a ban on something else they consider abusive, if it doesn't involve losing the right to own animals, because that is the goal of an ARA. There are even people that don't think it is right to have carriage horses in Central park, that aren't ARA's. THey are ok with them elsewhere but object to having them on the city streets there. I may not agree, but that doesn't make them ARA's. (I mean do you really think Georgina Bloomberg and that other BN rider are ARA's, who want animal ownership banned?) they may not agree with your stance on the issue, but they aren't ARA's.



  8. #248
    Join Date
    Sep. 11, 2008
    Location
    Snohomish, WA
    Posts
    3,908

    Default

    True.


    Quote Originally Posted by luvmytbs View Post
    And we kow, that you are a good apple. So was
    County. (Miss him a lot).

    It's the extremists on the pro side who accuse everyone who is remotely concerned with animal welfare, to be an RARA.


    There are a lot of animal advocates who work without any influence from HSUS/PETA.
    That doesn't mean that in some instances they don't come to the same conclusion.

    I am no fan of HSUS, however, I am thrilled of what their undercover Big Lick video has accomplished for the horses involved.
    None of us COTHers or any little animal welfare group could have gotten that kind of media attention.



  9. #249
    Join Date
    Dec. 19, 2005
    Location
    Some where in the middle of nowhere.
    Posts
    3,572

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by jetsmom View Post
    I agree about ARA. But there are those on here, that feel that supporting banning any act like soring TWH or horse slaughter for human consumption, makes you an ARA. I disagree with that. And I don't think that banning those two things, will result in us losing our animals. The fear of ARA's is making it harder to write laws banning truly abusive practices. And while I recognize that some people are ok with horse slaughter as it is currently practiced, being against it does not make someone an ARA.

    There are lots of issues, like dog fighting, canned hunts, horse tripping, horse slaughter for human consumption etc, that many people feel ARE abusive. But the people that find them abusive are not necessarily ARA's. It has become customary that instead of accepting that some people have the opinion that they are abusive, they want to label them as ARA's to try to diminish their opinion and denigrate them, in spite of them owning animals, riding, wearing leather and eating meat. Or they label them RARA's which is even more of an insult since a true RARA will use terroristic acts like violence, or letting animals loose.

    While you don't want to support AR agendas, it is also wrong to ignore abuse, misrepresent laws written to prevent abuse (like the legislation to prevent soring which is specific to TWH's), and call people names, just because they support banning an abusive act that you may be ok with.

    I'd be curious to know what issues those posting on this thread feel were wrong to be made illegal/or wrong to have people trying to make them illegal...dog fighting? cockfighting? horse tripping? canned hunts? gestation crates? cages for poultry where they can stand up and turn around? If you support banning even one of those issues, then you have no right to call someone an ARA that supports a ban on something else they consider abusive, if it doesn't involve losing the right to own animals, because that is the goal of an ARA. There are even people that don't think it is right to have carriage horses in Central park, that aren't ARA's. THey are ok with them elsewhere but object to having them on the city streets there. I may not agree, but that doesn't make them ARA's. (I mean do you really think Georgina Bloomberg and that other BN rider are ARA's, who want animal ownership banned?) they may not agree with your stance on the issue, but they aren't ARA's.

    Just to clarify Jetsmom Georgina Bloomburg is an ASPCA Welfare Amabassador. I personally have never seen her speak out in her own words about the carriage horses. I believe her name ends up on that list by default through her association with them.
    "I would not beleive her if her tongue came notorized"



  10. #250
    Bluey is offline Schoolmaster Premium Member
    Original Poster
    Join Date
    Jan. 4, 2007
    Location
    TX
    Posts
    40,173

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by philosoraptor View Post
    The HSUS is not the batch of nutjobs some make them out to be.

    If it wasn't for work of the HSUS, the American public wouldn't have the awareness it does today of the huge problem of dogfigthing. HSUS was the whistleblower a couple times on slaughterhouses dragging downed cows into the kill room to be used in the *human* food supply. HSUS is also one of the few national voices the horses have against problems such as soring.

    Don't buy into the factory-farmer's propaganda. The HSUS is not out to steal your animals and give them voting rights and dress them in human clothing. That's insane.

    Do keep in mind there is a strong ($$$) drive to keep the distrust against HSUS and related groups. Who benefits if HSUS dies? Factory-farmers, fur ranches, puppy mills, poor quality zoos, and other sources of concern for anyone who has any compassion for animals. Follow the money. Follow who is funding the supposed "Humane Watch", a fake so-called watchdog group, funded by Center for Consumer Freedom. The CCF is in turn funded by big ag interests. CCF is also the group that fought against MADD to keep liquor less regulated and fought against health advocates to keep tobacco regulated. Are these really the people who should be speaking for what the public wants in the way of basic animal welfare?

    Before you buy into the hateful stories about the HSUS, please read StopHumaneWatch. See where much of these press releases are really coming from before you buy into it.
    http://humanewatch.info/blog/about-hsus/

    And as someone who works every day in the equine welfare business, I can tell you that HSUS is not out to steal your horses. They've been a wonderful resource to independent animal rescues/shelters nationwide. I've been to one of the conferences they organized, and it was a wonderful learning opportunity. They're the national voice all the little shelters/rescues/sanctuaries need in Washington. Independently we're all little local organizations. We cannot fight the big $$$ lobbyists at the national level without help. There is a lot of money involved in keeping horse abuse legal. If we let the bad rumor mill divide us and turn us against other equine welfare causes, the bad guys win.
    Pure nonsense that I have already addressed in some post before on this thread.

    Animal rights extremist groups are riding the coattails of those of us that take care of animals.
    Why do you think they have trouble finding abuses and use those same videos time and again?
    That would be like using whatever the name of that college football team trainer that is a sexual predator story to say all college team coaches are like that, beware!

    Temple Grandin has been paid for decades now to study how to better manage cattle.
    She is part of the beef industry, just like others like her, that have always been trying to do better and better.

    Animal rights groups go around the back way to find abuses and use that for their agenda to eliminate all animal use.
    They never do anything good for any animals, they are after whatever serves their agenda to show any animal use in the worst light they can manage and make a good living off that too.

    Abusers we ought to know by now are in anything we do and it is not because we use animals that there are abusers, but because there are some defective people that are abusers of anything they can abuse, even other humans and yes, animals too.

    Don't kid yourself, the world is better every day and getting even better for more and more, humans and animals and that is because those caring for everything, including animals, are doing a better job, not because some extremist groups are making a living by crying abuse and putting their hands out for the gullible to donate to them to "make it go away".

    Those groups are a scam at many levels and definitely not but rarely they do any real good, that is not also in their own interest to make anyone with animals look terrible and so gain track on their push to eliminate all use of animals.

    Already forgotten the lawsuit they lost against that circus, where in court it was shown they made up the charges?
    You talk about abuses?
    What do you call what those you defend did to the circus people?
    Nice folks you are defending there.



  11. #251
    Join Date
    Sep. 11, 2008
    Location
    Snohomish, WA
    Posts
    3,908

    Default

    The world is better everyday???
    We have more chemicals in everything. The farmers make less to grow gmo soybeans and corn
    Have you seen the pollution??
    Have you noticed how many people are overweight these days (including myself). If not actually obese?? We hardly have REAL food anymore. Do you ever read labels???
    Why has TG worked to improve things?? Do you really think McDonald's would have started improving things for cattle just because??? I'm sure they're just angels right???
    None of us likes the extremists but we do need the checks and balances. There are abuses out there and someone needs to make sure they don't happen.
    The faster things have to happen leaves more room for mistakes.


    Quote Originally Posted by Bluey View Post
    Pure nonsense that I have already addressed in some post before on this thread.

    Animal rights extremist groups are riding the coattails of those of us that take care of animals.
    Why do you think they have trouble finding abuses and use those same videos time and again?
    That would be like using whatever the name of that college football team trainer that is a sexual predator story to say all college team coaches are like that, beware!

    Temple Grandin has been paid for decades now to study how to better manage cattle.
    She is part of the beef industry, just like others like her, that have always been trying to do better and better.

    Animal rights groups go around the back way to find abuses and use that for their agenda to eliminate all animal use.
    They never do anything good for any animals, they are after whatever serves their agenda to show any animal use in the worst light they can manage and make a good living off that too.

    Abusers we ought to know by now are in anything we do and it is not because we use animals that there are abusers, but because there are some defective people that are abusers of anything they can abuse, even other humans and yes, animals too.

    Don't kid yourself, the world is better every day and getting even better for more and more, humans and animals and that is because those caring for everything, including animals, are doing a better job, not because some extremist groups are making a living by crying abuse and putting their hands out for the gullible to donate to them to "make it go away".

    Those groups are a scam at many levels and definitely not but rarely they do any real good, that is not also in their own interest to make anyone with animals look terrible and so gain track on their push to eliminate all use of animals.

    Already forgotten the lawsuit they lost against that circus, where in court it was shown they made up the charges?
    You talk about abuses?
    What do you call what those you defend did to the circus people?
    Nice folks you are defending there.



  12. #252
    Join Date
    Apr. 3, 2006
    Location
    Spooner, WI
    Posts
    2,199

    Default

    Can someone please post where it has been said that these groups really want to take all the animals away? Please do not repost ad naseum the out of context "one generation and out." (whatever that really means) What else you got that explicitly says, without a doubt, they want to take our animals away?

    I'm sorry, but just saying it over and over with no real 'true' source is not good enough for me and my critical thinking.

    Parcell's "one generation and out" with the whole content doesn't even make any real sense. Except they don't care about heritage cattle?



  13. #253
    Bluey is offline Schoolmaster Premium Member
    Original Poster
    Join Date
    Jan. 4, 2007
    Location
    TX
    Posts
    40,173

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by JGHIRETIRE View Post
    The world is better everyday???
    We have more chemicals in everything. The farmers make less to grow gmo soybeans and corn
    Have you seen the pollution??
    Have you noticed how many people are overweight these days (including myself). If not actually obese?? We hardly have REAL food anymore. Do you ever read labels???
    Why has TG worked to improve things?? Do you really think McDonald's would have started improving things for cattle just because??? I'm sure they're just angels right???
    None of us likes the extremists but we do need the checks and balances. There are abuses out there and someone needs to make sure they don't happen.
    The faster things have to happen leaves more room for mistakes.
    Every industry has many laws, regulations, supervisors, inspectors and government and industry itself are continuously tweaking those as problems come up.

    The cattle industry had since 1984 BQA, that has trained many in the industry, from ranchers to feedlots to truckers for many years and certifies premises.

    If you work in any industry, as a professional, even as a teacher or trucker, you would know that.

    Yes, things are better all along and getting better.
    Quit listening to all that is wrong and look around you and wonder at all that we have already made better.
    Someone did all that for the rest of us to live better, so you can now sit behind a computer and complain, with a handy refrigerator full or a service industry that brings you ready to eat food, with all else that keeps our societies functioning and helping those that don't yet get there.

    Of course there is always more to do, some that is not quite right, some bad, but to only see that as you keep bringing up, that is very shortsighted of you.

    As long as you only look at what is still not good enough, all you will do is become frustrated and look for someone to blame.
    Fine, if that is what floats your boat, but when you come here to tell us, sorry, there are too many of us that know better.



  14. #254
    Join Date
    Nov. 2, 2001
    Location
    Packing my bags
    Posts
    31,006

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by JGHIRETIRE View Post
    The world is better everyday???
    We have more chemicals in everything. The farmers make less to grow gmo soybeans and corn
    Have you seen the pollution??
    Have you noticed how many people are overweight these days (including myself). If not actually obese?? We hardly have REAL food anymore. Do you ever read labels???
    Why has TG worked to improve things?? Do you really think McDonald's would have started improving things for cattle just because??? I'm sure they're just angels right???
    None of us likes the extremists but we do need the checks and balances. There are abuses out there and someone needs to make sure they don't happen.
    The faster things have to happen leaves more room for mistakes.
    Yes, the wolrd is much better than it used to be.
    At least in terms of pollution and chemicals.
    We have made great strides in eliminating many such contaminants.
    And don't bring in China. They ar eout of our reach and sadly have not paid any attention to the failures of ours from the 60s and 70s.

    The 'chemicals' of today ar emuch more targeted than in the past. Also, due to cost, they are used much more sparingly.

    The GMO crops? Well, the jury is out on them still. They have not been out long enough. And while some suspect them in having a hand in certain conditions, so far it's annecdotal evidence (Much of it supported by Rodale Press...but not many more) The Monsanto angle is much more worrisome, but for a different reason.

    Seriously, read more real sources and less of the populistic ones.
    Quote Originally Posted by Mozart View Post
    Personally, I think the moderate use of shock collars in training humans should be allowed.



  15. #255
    Join Date
    Nov. 13, 2011
    Location
    Lisbon, Portugal
    Posts
    1,451

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by luvmytbs View Post
    And we kow, that you are a good egg. So was County. (Miss him a lot).

    It's the extremists on the pro side who accuse everyone who is remotely concerned with animal welfare, to be an RARA.


    There are a lot of animal advocates who work without any influence from HSUS/PETA.
    That doesn't mean that in some instances they don't come to the same conclusion.

    I am no fan of HSUS, however, I am thrilled of what their undercover Big Lick video has accomplished for the horses involved.
    None of us COTHers or any little animal welfare group could have gotten that kind of media attention.
    I'm with you on that. PETA and HSUS do have their use, when there are actual cases of cruelty that they can get the media on. Unfortunately most of the time they're too busy souting insanity. But hy, at least one good thing came out of there being RARA's: the horrors of the Big Lick shows finally ot some exposure. In the long run, I don't think they can accomplish much in the way of getting people to loose the right to have pets of livestock, because those of us with common sense and who truly care for animals still outweigh the crazies.
    Yes, I smell like a horse. No, I don't consider that to be a problem.

    Quote Originally Posted by DottieHQ View Post
    You're just jealous because you lack my extensive koalafications.



  16. #256
    Bluey is offline Schoolmaster Premium Member
    Original Poster
    Join Date
    Jan. 4, 2007
    Location
    TX
    Posts
    40,173

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by sunridge1 View Post
    Can someone please post where it has been said that these groups really want to take all the animals away? Please do not repost ad naseum the out of context "one generation and out." (whatever that really means) What else you got that explicitly says, without a doubt, they want to take our animals away?

    I'm sorry, but just saying it over and over with no real 'true' source is not good enough for me and my critical thinking.

    Parcell's "one generation and out" with the whole content doesn't even make any real sense. Except they don't care about heritage cattle?

    What do you think it will mean to give animals the same rights that we give humans, as the OP article explains animal rights groups attorneys are working to get passed?

    Do I need to say more?



  17. #257
    Join Date
    Sep. 11, 2008
    Location
    Snohomish, WA
    Posts
    3,908

    Default

    Yes and you can sit behind a computer and say the sky is falling.
    And thank you for pointing out what I would know as a professional. As happens I can see both sides.
    I'm actually trying not to be shortsighted or have blinders on. Unlike some.


    Quote Originally Posted by Bluey View Post
    Every industry has many laws, regulations, supervisors, inspectors and government and industry itself are continuously tweaking those as problems come up.

    The cattle industry had since 1984 BQA, that has trained many in the industry, from ranchers to feedlots to truckers for many years and certifies premises.

    If you work in any industry, as a professional, even as a teacher or trucker, you would know that.

    Yes, things are better all along and getting better.
    Quit listening to all that is wrong and look around you and wonder at all that we have already made better.
    Someone did all that for the rest of us to live better, so you can now sit behind a computer and complain, with a handy refrigerator full or a service industry that brings you ready to eat food, with all else that keeps our societies functioning and helping those that don't yet get there.

    Of course there is always more to do, some that is not quite right, some bad, but to only see that as you keep bringing up, that is very shortsighted of you.

    As long as you only look at what is still not good enough, all you will do is become frustrated and look for someone to blame.
    Fine, if that is what floats your boat, but when you come here to tell us, sorry, there are too many of us that know better.



  18. #258
    Join Date
    Apr. 3, 2006
    Location
    Spooner, WI
    Posts
    2,199

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Bluey View Post
    What do you think it will mean to give animals the same rights that we give humans, as the OP article explains animal rights groups attorneys are working to get passed?

    Do I need to say more?
    The ultimate dream for animal rights advocates would be something like the application of the 14th Amendment's equal protection to animals as well as humans. Such a ruling might ban the rearing of domesticated animals for meat altogether. And some major thinkers in the field -- most famously Steve Wise of the Nonhuman Rights Project -- are actively pursuing it.

    "Right now, it's really easy to determine who has the capacity to have a right," he explained. "You look at the species. If you're human, you have rights. If you're not, you don't. What we're arguing is that species is completely arbitrary. There are many nonhuman animals that have really serious cognitive complexity. And we think that cognitive complexity alone is a sufficient condition to make some animals legal persons."
    Well yes you do. Steven Wise has no affiliation with HSUS or Peta for that matter. He is his own man, The Nonhuman Rights Project to be precise.

    So we degrade HSUS who are now considered 'moderate' by lumping Wise in with them in the article. News sites you just can't trust them.That critical thinking AND reading for comprehension will get you every time.



  19. #259
    Bluey is offline Schoolmaster Premium Member
    Original Poster
    Join Date
    Jan. 4, 2007
    Location
    TX
    Posts
    40,173

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by sunridge1 View Post
    Well yes you do. Steven Wise has no affiliation with HSUS or Peta for that matter. He is his own man, The Nonhuman Rights Project to be precise.

    So we degrade HSUS who are now considered 'moderate' by lumping Wise in with them in the article. News sites you just can't trust them.That critical thinking AND reading for comprehension will get you every time.
    You really believe the HSUS doesn't has an interest in all those topics and helps where help is needed to further them, as in the guardianship voting in CO lately and so many other out there lobbying?

    You know, the HSUS has been realizing they could not really show how extreme they are, so the past few years have done much PR and toned it down, but a tiger by any name still has stripes.

    I can't believe anyone that supposedly has animals and comes to a horse training forum thinks it can defend animal rights extremists.
    There is a great disconnect there.



  20. #260
    Join Date
    Sep. 11, 2008
    Location
    Snohomish, WA
    Posts
    3,908

    Default

    In some ways yes in some ways no it isn't.
    Not even touching China
    I read the labels on food. Instead of asking where's the beef you can now ask where's the food. Or better yet.. what the he@@ is that?

    Quote Originally Posted by Alagirl View Post
    Yes, the wolrd is much better than it used to be.
    At least in terms of pollution and chemicals.
    We have made great strides in eliminating many such contaminants.
    And don't bring in China. They ar eout of our reach and sadly have not paid any attention to the failures of ours from the 60s and 70s.

    The 'chemicals' of today ar emuch more targeted than in the past. Also, due to cost, they are used much more sparingly.

    The GMO crops? Well, the jury is out on them still. They have not been out long enough. And while some suspect them in having a hand in certain conditions, so far it's annecdotal evidence (Much of it supported by Rodale Press...but not many more) The Monsanto angle is much more worrisome, but for a different reason.

    Seriously, read more real sources and less of the populistic ones.



Similar Threads

  1. Rights of a half-leaser
    By Aria in forum Off Course
    Replies: 17
    Last Post: Aug. 10, 2012, 11:54 AM
  2. HELP! What are my legal rights?
    By JumpEmHigh in forum Around The Farm
    Replies: 6
    Last Post: Dec. 30, 2011, 09:08 PM
  3. Water rights for wild horses questioned
    By poltroon in forum Off Course
    Replies: 11
    Last Post: Jan. 16, 2011, 04:22 PM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •