The Chronicle of the Horse
MagazineNewsHorse SportsHorse CareCOTH StoreVoicesThe Chronicle UntackedDirectoriesMarketplaceDates & Results
 
Page 5 of 33 FirstFirst ... 3456715 ... LastLast
Results 81 to 100 of 648
  1. #81
    Join Date
    Jun. 27, 2005
    Location
    KY
    Posts
    4,811

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by LauraKY View Post
    You'll have to ask Jen about cannibals...I suspect they're banned from participating.
    Unless they are from South Africa I suppose!

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


    1 members found this post helpful.

  2. #82
    Join Date
    Oct. 2, 1999
    Location
    Mendocino County, CA: Turkey Vulture HQ
    Posts
    14,852

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by newhorsemommy View Post
    I actually looked into the Humane Society after the last thread. Over the years, reading these threads, I had started to think there might really be a problem with HSUS. I had heard of Humane Watch (what a reasonable sounding name). Then, after doing a little digging, I found out who is behind Humane Watch. No need to go into here... Then I found out the the HSUS does, in fact, get good ratings from other organizations that rate non-profit organizations.

    They spend a lot of money on lobbying. So what? Both sides of every issue have paid lobbyists. Isn't that what United Horsemen is doing? Is only the side you agree with entitled to spend money on lobbying?

    And I really and truly don't believe that the HSUS is trying to take my horses, cats, and dogs away. Can we just think about that rationally for a second? Doesn't it seem obvious that their donations would vanish overnight if they started advocating for no pets?

    What about the ASPCA? Are they also RARA's?
    If you want your donated money to be spent on lobbying, that's well and good. However, it seems to me that a lot of people incorrectly believe that money sent to HSUS is saving puppies in shelters, and going to feed and help neglected animals. It's not.

    I personally am not comfortable with HSUS advocacy for the most part. My sense of them is that they don't really understand animals and can only see them as fellow humans in funny shapes.
    If you are allergic to a thing, it is best not to put that thing in your mouth, particularly if the thing is cats. - Lemony Snicket


    4 members found this post helpful.

  3. #83
    Join Date
    Sep. 7, 2009
    Location
    Lexington, KY
    Posts
    20,073

    Default

    Poltroon, I think many of us are not comfortable with the HSUS and ASPCA misleading fundraising, but many of us are sick and tired of being labeled RARAs, HSUS and PETA lovers, etc. because we find fault either with slaughter, or the present slaughter methods, oversight and testing of horses entering the food supply.

    Comrade Laura
    "We can judge the heart of a man by his treatment of animals." ~Immanuel Kant


    14 members found this post helpful.

  4. #84
    Join Date
    Oct. 2, 1999
    Location
    Mendocino County, CA: Turkey Vulture HQ
    Posts
    14,852

    Default

    I am not anti-slaughter. Once a horse is dead, I am fine if the carcass is eaten - truly the highest and best use of the remaining body. I am actually a little uncomfortable with the toxicity of chemical euthanasia and the large mass of toxic meat it leaves behind.

    However, this story does distress me greatly.

    “The only mistake I made was the halter shouldn’t have went with that horse. That’s where it all leaked out,” Priest told the Star.
    People tried to save this horse. The horse clearly had contraindications for entering the food chain, which were communicated directly to the slaughterhouse. There are ethics in maintaining the quality of our food supply - never mind any responsibility for animal welfare - that were directly and willfully ignored.

    This is not a problem of slaughter per se. It's a problem with slaughter regulation being inadequate to the job. And in all species, I want to see slaughter regulated so that animals are treated humanely and respectfully until the moment of death, and I want there to be appropriate measures taken to ensure that sick or chemically questionable animals aren't being sold as food to the general public.
    If you are allergic to a thing, it is best not to put that thing in your mouth, particularly if the thing is cats. - Lemony Snicket


    12 members found this post helpful.

  5. #85
    Join Date
    Nov. 2, 2001
    Location
    Packing my bags
    Posts
    33,602

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Bluey View Post
    So, sounds like you are with the ones that think, because your neighbor is lying about what he feeds his pigs, against regulations, now all such pig feeding should be banned, yours too, because you can't trust anyone to do it right?
    Lost cause.

    I got some puppies of CL, why don't you come over and we kick them around a bit!
    Quote Originally Posted by Bristol Bay View Post
    Try setting your broomstick to fly at a lower altitude.


    1 members found this post helpful.

  6. #86
    Join Date
    Feb. 28, 2006
    Location
    The rocky part of KY
    Posts
    9,507

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by LauraKY View Post
    Bluey, I don't think you can see the forest for the trees.
    Thank you.
    Courageous Weenie Eventer Wannabe
    Incredible Invisible


    2 members found this post helpful.

  7. #87
    Join Date
    Feb. 28, 2006
    Location
    The rocky part of KY
    Posts
    9,507

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by poltroon View Post
    I am not anti-slaughter. Once a horse is dead, I am fine if the carcass is eaten - truly the highest and best use of the remaining body. I am actually a little uncomfortable with the toxicity of chemical euthanasia and the large mass of toxic meat it leaves behind.

    However, this story does distress me greatly.


    People tried to save this horse. The horse clearly had contraindications for entering the food chain, which were communicated directly to the slaughterhouse. There are ethics in maintaining the quality of our food supply - never mind any responsibility for animal welfare - that were directly and willfully ignored.

    This is not a problem of slaughter per se. It's a problem with slaughter regulation being inadequate to the job. And in all species, I want to see slaughter regulated so that animals are treated humanely and respectfully until the moment of death, and I want there to be appropriate measures taken to ensure that sick or chemically questionable animals aren't being sold as food to the general public.
    Exactly.
    Courageous Weenie Eventer Wannabe
    Incredible Invisible


    2 members found this post helpful.

  8. #88
    Join Date
    Aug. 5, 2007
    Posts
    1,146

    Default

    It isn't a problem with regulation, it is a problem with enforcement.

    More laws is never a viable substitute for failing to enforce an existing law.


    As to the death of a horse that was wanted $$ alive, that IS tragic.

    However, would it be legal to force a person to sell their horse to someone if they choose not to?

    IF there had been dispute as to the legal ownership of the horse, i.e. right to sell then I would imagine the horse could have been pulled aside until that was settled, and in the meantime proof of drug administration making the future carcase unsuitable could be produced and publicized to inspectors and the press.

    That would have 'freed' the live horse to be sold out of the slaughter pipeline.

    If plan A fails you better have a viable plan B.


    In my opinion, hopping on the HSUS/PETA supporter bandwagon is a ride to disillusionment for anyone who appreciates and wants to preserve and protect the future of domestic animals.

    I do not and will not support them.
    Give LOCALLY where you can see the difference you make.


    1 members found this post helpful.

  9. #89
    Join Date
    Jan. 4, 2007
    Location
    TX
    Posts
    43,023

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by D_BaldStockings View Post
    It isn't a problem with regulation, it is a problem with enforcement.

    More laws is never a viable substitute for failing to enforce an existing law.


    As to the death of a horse that was wanted $$ alive, that IS tragic.

    However, would it be legal to force a person to sell their horse to someone if they choose not to?

    IF there had been dispute as to the legal ownership of the horse, i.e. right to sell then I would imagine the horse could have been pulled aside until that was settled, and in the meantime proof of drug administration making the future carcase unsuitable could be produced and publicized to inspectors and the press.

    That would have 'freed' the live horse to be sold out of the slaughter pipeline.

    If plan A fails you better have a viable plan B.


    In my opinion, hopping on the HSUS/PETA supporter bandwagon is a ride to disillusionment for anyone who appreciates and wants to preserve and protect the future of domestic animals.

    I do not and will not support them.
    Give LOCALLY where you can see the difference you make.
    Thank you.



  10. #90
    Join Date
    Jun. 30, 2006
    Location
    SF Bay Area, California
    Posts
    4,680

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by LauraKY View Post
    We're inclusive..vegans, vegetarians, omnivores and carnivores. You'll have to ask Jen about cannibals...I suspect they're banned from participating.

    Welcome Comrades.
    Laure is correct. I feel we should draw the line at cannibalism. I apologize if this hurts anyone's feelings.
    Proud owner of a Slaughter-Bound TB from a feedlot, and her surprise baby...!
    http://i42.photobucket.com/albums/e350/Jen4USC/fave.jpg
    http://i42.photobucket.com/albums/e3...SC/running.jpg


    2 members found this post helpful.

  11. #91
    Join Date
    Feb. 8, 2008
    Location
    Delaware Valley
    Posts
    1,810

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by LauraKY View Post
    many of us are sick and tired of being labeled RARAs, HSUS and PETA lovers, etc. . .
    This. If you're going to call me names, I'll wear my "insult" like a badge of honor


    6 members found this post helpful.

  12. #92
    Join Date
    Feb. 15, 2004
    Location
    Ontario
    Posts
    8,230

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Discobold View Post
    This. If you're going to call me names, I'll wear my "insult" like a badge of honor
    me too... can I join the club too?


    3 members found this post helpful.

  13. #93
    Join Date
    Aug. 5, 2007
    Posts
    1,146

    Default

    Why would anyone accept a false label that is pejorative or does not align with your true opinion?

    I may make wrong decisions from time to time, but I am neither an idiot nor a moron and fear nothing from people calling a name.

    Wearing the clothing of an aggressive, destructive group, and blazoning their insignia across yourself tends to cause others to see you as what you are (hopefully) not.

    Open discussion should be able to get past this kind of pettyness. I see each of you as an individual with a valuable, thought through input, not as a 'mouth' for some agency with a larger agenda.


    ...unless you want me to see you that way; I rule nothing out.


    2 members found this post helpful.

  14. #94
    Join Date
    Sep. 7, 2009
    Location
    Lexington, KY
    Posts
    20,073

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by D_BaldStockings View Post

    Open discussion should be able to get past this kind of pettyness. I see each of you as an individual with a valuable, thought through input, not as a 'mouth' for some agency with a larger agenda.
    I completely agree, but sadly, several other posters insist on labeling anyone who disagrees with them as radical animal rights activists. Since we can't have a cogent discussion, we might as well have some fun.

    For Pete's sake, even JSwan was called a RARA.
    "We can judge the heart of a man by his treatment of animals." ~Immanuel Kant


    10 members found this post helpful.

  15. #95
    Join Date
    Aug. 5, 2007
    Posts
    1,146

    Default

    I guess I don't have a good sense of humor about RARAs, PETA, or HSUS.

    Apologies.

    It is possible to respond to whatever part of a discussion interests you; but not to pick who responds to your posts.

    And 'NO' can be a complete sentence if necessary.


    1 members found this post helpful.

  16. #96
    Join Date
    Sep. 7, 2009
    Location
    Lexington, KY
    Posts
    20,073

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by D_BaldStockings View Post
    I guess I don't have a good sense of humor about RARAs, PETA, or HSUS.

    Apologies.

    It is possible to respond to whatever part of a discussion interests you; but not to pick who responds to your posts.

    And 'NO' can be a complete sentence if necessary.
    That is true. However, those same posters can be so offensive that many posters who might have something interesting and valid to share are run off.
    "We can judge the heart of a man by his treatment of animals." ~Immanuel Kant


    6 members found this post helpful.

  17. #97
    Join Date
    Jan. 4, 2007
    Location
    TX
    Posts
    43,023

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by LauraKY View Post
    That is true. However, those same posters can be so offensive that many posters who might have something interesting and valid to share are run off.
    Yes, that is what they tell me on PMs and guess who here are the ones name calling?
    Right.

    Let me try to explain this to you.
    Saying someone is following animal rights extremist drives to ban all animal uses, here horse slaughter as a handy place to do so, is not calling names.

    Saying that anyone not an anti, that doesn't think it is sensible to ban slaughter outright following animal rights extremist drives, is automatically an uncaring ogre and in some instances making them fear being followed into personal life to brand them as public enemy #1 for not being an anti, in my opinion, is name calling.



  18. #98
    Join Date
    Sep. 7, 2009
    Location
    Lexington, KY
    Posts
    20,073

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Bluey View Post
    Yes, that is what they tell me on PMs and guess who here are the ones name calling?
    Right.

    Let me try to explain this to you.
    Saying someone is following animal rights extremist drives to ban all animal uses, here horse slaughter as a handy place to do so, is not calling names.

    Saying that anyone not an anti, that doesn't think it is sensible to ban slaughter outright following animal rights extremist drives, is automatically an uncaring ogre and in some instances making them fear being followed into personal life to brand them as public enemy #1 for not being an anti, in my opinion, is name calling.
    If I have time, I'll go through your posts to prove it...you consistently accuse people who disagree with you of being a radical animal rights activist. You refuse to realize that someone may just be against slaughter of equines, may just be against the slaughter of equines as it has been done in the U.S. and other countries, or even just have a problem with horses that are loaded with drugs entering the food chain. But there is no reasoning with you...one is either with you are is a radical animal rights activist or is blindly following a RARA agenda that wants to eliminate all uses of animals.

    I don't believe anyone has called you public enemy #1, I don't even think you were called a liar...although you were playing loose with the truth.
    "We can judge the heart of a man by his treatment of animals." ~Immanuel Kant


    13 members found this post helpful.

  19. #99
    Join Date
    Aug. 5, 2007
    Posts
    1,146

    Default

    I think pigeonholing people is labeling for convenience no matter how it is done.

    And the purpose is to be able to respond to an amorphous 'position' not an individual human opinion.

    A person can be of the opinion that slaughter is not a valid disposal method without being a rabid RARA monster.

    Or a person can be of the opinion that slaughter is the best disposal method without being a bloody ripper monster.


    That does seem to be where the discussions end up, however.

    I wonder, if faced with the problem of 'a horse you know personally' being discovered in a similar situation: what ideas does anyone have of changing a step here or there that would change the outcome?
    That is how I looked at the discussion.


    2 members found this post helpful.

  20. #100
    Join Date
    Jan. 4, 2007
    Location
    TX
    Posts
    43,023

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by LauraKY View Post
    If I have time, I'll go through your posts to prove it...you consistently accuse people who disagree with you of being a radical animal rights activist. You refuse to realize that someone may just be against slaughter of equines, may just be against the slaughter of equines as it has been done in the U.S. and other countries, or even just have a problem with horses that are loaded with drugs entering the food chain. But there is no reasoning with you...one is either with you are is a radical animal rights activist or is blindly following a RARA agenda that wants to eliminate all uses of animals.

    I don't believe anyone has called you public enemy #1, I don't even think you were called a liar...although you were playing loose with the truth.
    That is your story, because you are biased here, being on one side of that fence you fell off from.

    Yes, some have called me directly a liar and other too, but that is fine.

    In reality, what many don't realize is that the antis are on a mission and full of fire to ban.

    The rest of us, we know what place slaughter has.
    We know what the issues are about it, just as they are for any other we do in life.
    We know that, unlike most other we do in life, where there is not a group/s like the animal rights extremist groups, with millions to use, that are using accusing slaughter of any and all possible evils and out of context to further their agenda and get donations in to keep making their living at, well, getting donations in, slaughter is a target for those groups and it is not only horse slaughter, that is only what is discussed here, but the assault is in other fronts, an assault many here seem not to be aware of.

    Some of us know there is more to this than just banning horse slaughter and all will be fine, the world will rejoice.
    We know this is one little battle only, we will have to deal with the next crisis in animal use those groups will again bring to the table, until they eliminate all uses of animals.

    I know what slaughter is and know that it is extremely sad to consider and, as someone said, "disgusting".
    I know that is not a good reason to ban slaughter.
    The rest, accusations of abuse or mismanagement are not good reasons to ban anything, that falls under working to stop abuse and manage any process better, here would fall under animal welfare and that definitely is not calling for a ban, that is animal rights extremism.

    THAT is what I keep stating and of course, as already defined how antis for the ban act, that seems to get them into attack mode, hard to have a rational discussion.

    Guess that we will have to agree to disagree here, each one of us coming from a different place to what we are getting out of these debates.



Similar Threads

  1. Hoof cracks
    By Perchmom in forum Horse Care
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: May. 25, 2011, 03:39 PM
  2. quarter cracks...HELP!
    By TwistofRed289 in forum Horse Care
    Replies: 6
    Last Post: Nov. 19, 2010, 04:45 PM
  3. Cracks in the foundation
    By snoopy in forum Eventing
    Replies: 123
    Last Post: Jun. 22, 2010, 12:09 PM
  4. Quarter Cracks
    By EquestrianRunner in forum Horse Care
    Replies: 9
    Last Post: Feb. 17, 2010, 04:39 PM
  5. Hoof cracks - what can be done to help?
    By Live2Jump in forum Horse Care
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: Sep. 23, 2009, 06:12 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
  •