The Chronicle of the Horse
MagazineNewsHorse SportsHorse CareCOTH StoreVoicesThe Chronicle UntackedDirectoriesMarketplaceDates & Results
 
Page 18 of 19 FirstFirst ... 816171819 LastLast
Results 341 to 360 of 376
  1. #341
    Join Date
    Jun. 19, 2011
    Posts
    3,187

    Default

    I am sorry that I responded and changed the direction., Let me know and I will remove my non relevant posts. Again..sorry...



  2. #342
    Join Date
    Dec. 19, 2005
    Location
    Some where in the middle of nowhere.
    Posts
    3,657

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by up-at-5 View Post
    You tell me who the Canadian was who called, Leo. Tell us all. Quit insinuating that it was me, for cripes sake. Prove it. I double dare you.
    Gotta say 5 that taking the time to copy quote all of that by fairfax did nothing but convince me you either A. Need a hobby and have far to much time on your hands or B. Are = to or more unstable then the accused.
    "I would not beleive her if her tongue came notorized"


    3 members found this post helpful.

  3. #343
    Join Date
    Jan. 4, 2007
    Location
    TX
    Posts
    42,493

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by jetsmom View Post
    I have been saying for yrs I have no problem with someone killing adn eating their own horse. I think that the commercial horse slaughter for human consumption system, starting with auction to the actual killing is inhumane, rife with abuse and fraud and support banning commercial horse slaughter. You seem to feel that banning anything animal welfare related (like commercial horse slaughter, horse tripping, dog fighting, bull fighting, etc) makes one a RARA. I disagree.
    Getting more and more absurd in your quest to defend animal rights extremist groups by bashing any and all that you can hit with a bat, are you.

    Sorry, you can't spend years now defending those all the way and expect anyone to now believe you really were not doing so?


    2 members found this post helpful.

  4. #344
    Join Date
    Dec. 31, 2000
    Location
    El Paso, TX
    Posts
    13,041

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Bluey View Post
    Getting more and more absurd in your quest to defend animal rights extremist groups by bashing any and all that you can hit with a bat, are you.

    Sorry, you can't spend years now defending those all the way and expect anyone to now believe you really were not doing so?
    Not until you learn the difference between animal rights and animal welfare. There IS a difference. Banning something doesn't make someone an RARA. But you would rather see horse tripping, dog fighting and horse slaughter be legal, just so the sky doesn't fall, and you don't slide down the slippery slope. I happen to think that you can pick and choose your fights, and that banning something abusive won't cause them to take away our animals. Things are not black and white, but gray.

    But you can continue with the name calling if you like.


    5 members found this post helpful.

  5. #345
    Join Date
    Jan. 4, 2007
    Location
    TX
    Posts
    42,493

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by jetsmom View Post
    Not until you learn the difference between animal rights and animal welfare. There IS a difference. Banning something doesn't make someone an RARA. But you would rather see horse tripping, dog fighting and horse slaughter be legal, just so the sky doesn't fall, and you don't slide down the slippery slope. I happen to think that you can pick and choose your fights, and that banning something abusive won't cause them to take away our animals. Things are not black and white, but gray.

    But you can continue with the name calling if you like.
    No, you don't know the difference, since you defend continuously animal rights extremists saying they are for welfare only, ignoring that is for them and their followers only a stepping stone to eventually eliminate all uses.

    There are already laws determining what is good animal husbandry and banning what is not, don't confuse that also.
    That all falls under animal welfare, that is how we USE our animals.

    Animal rights extremists are after bans in ALL we do, not just what is already legally defined.

    Hope that helps you understand the important differences.


    2 members found this post helpful.

  6. #346
    Join Date
    Dec. 19, 2005
    Location
    Some where in the middle of nowhere.
    Posts
    3,657

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by jetsmom View Post
    I have been saying for yrs I have no problem with someone killing adn eating their own horse. I think that the commercial horse slaughter for human consumption system, starting with auction to the actual killing is inhumane, rife with abuse and fraud and support banning commercial horse slaughter. You seem to feel that banning anything animal welfare related (like commercial horse slaughter, horse tripping, dog fighting, bull fighting, etc) makes one a RARA. I disagree.
    Jetsmom can I ask a legit question. If you have no issue with horse consumption but rather take issue with the commercialization because you feel its rife with issues. Then shouldn't your soapbox be the one that reforms the slaughter process instead of against it in the first place since you don't take issue with horse consumption?
    "I would not beleive her if her tongue came notorized"


    3 members found this post helpful.

  7. #347
    Join Date
    Dec. 31, 2000
    Location
    El Paso, TX
    Posts
    13,041

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Bluey View Post
    No, you don't know the difference, since you defend continuously animal rights extremists saying they are for welfare only, ignoring that is for them and their followers only a stepping stone to eventually eliminate all uses.

    There are already laws determining what is good animal husbandry and banning what is not, don't confuse that also.
    That all falls under animal welfare, that is how we USE our animals.

    Animal rights extremists are after bans in ALL we do, not just what is already legally defined.

    Hope that helps you understand the important differences.
    Show me where I defended PETA.
    This whole thing for you has to do with you feeling that just because someone supports an issue which the HSUS/PETA also supports, means that they are a RARA. But you don't have the backbone to say that you agreed with banning horse tripping or dog fighting, because then your argument falls flat. I challenge you to give a straight answer to whether you agreed with those two bans. I bet you equivocate, and refuse to answer because then you would have to either admit that banning something abusive doesn't mean someone is a RARA or you would have to admit that you don't want anything banned no matter how abusive.

    Go ahead and answer that. Try, just for once not to go off on a tangent about how we already have laws banning those, in order to avoid answering. I know they are illegal now. Because people like me, LauraKY, jenM, all were willing to speak out and support banning them. But people had to speak out. People that aren't RARAs. I want to know whether you supported banning them, or whther you would have called those supporting banning them RARAs.

    Try not avoiding the question just this once. See if you actually have any integrity at all, and are able to stand up for what you believe...


    5 members found this post helpful.

  8. #348
    Join Date
    Dec. 31, 2000
    Location
    El Paso, TX
    Posts
    13,041

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Lynnwood View Post
    Jetsmom can I ask a legit question. If you have no issue with horse consumption but rather take issue with the commercialization because you feel its rife with issues. Then shouldn't your soapbox be the one that reforms the slaughter process instead of against it in the first place since you don't take issue with horse consumption?
    That's a good, valid question. I personally feel that we would never have local abbatoirs in nearly every city (or even state), due to the lack of profit for the SH's, since we don't eat horsemeat as a general rule. It would cost too much money to try to ship meat overseas, from all over the place, plus build EU compliant SH's. The way the Humane transport laws, and Humane handling laws are, and the lack of enforcement means that once a horse is considered a "slaughter horse", it is treated inhumanely in many cases. Look at the Los lunas auction as an example, where several horses lay dying and suffered a couple of days, in spite of the NM livestock inspector, vet, and auction owner being aware of it. The videos are out there if you haven't seen them.
    Or the long transport, and lack of vet care for injured horses, no food and water for long hours, etc. Then you have the fraud, which KB's engage in, from lying about their purpose for buying your horse, lying on the EIDs, and dumping the rejected horses in the desert. (Over 5000 last yr. We had 70 from WI dumped 20 min from me, and left to starve after the 2 trailer loads were rejected at the Santa Teresa POE.)
    Then the SH facilities themselves have problems with high miss rates (40%-50% over a 2 day monitored period at a Temple Grandin designed state of the art facility.) She even stated on tape that as soon as her back is turned, the violations start. One horse was hit with a captive bolt gun 11 times.
    You have USDA vets testifying before Congress that their hands are tied by their higher ups that don't want the line slowed down or stopped for Humane handling violations.

    So while I would love to see a small abattoir in every town, it'll never happen. I believe it COULD be done humanely in that situation but since there would be no profit, and people don't want them in their backyard, it'll never happen.

    Lobbying for more enforcement and succeeding, will never happen, because since we as a country don't eat the meat, there is a lack of concern by the authorities, and no funding to even enforce existing Humane laws. If the SH industry wanted to change, they had more incentive than ever back in 2005-2007 before there was the huge push to shut down the horse SH's here. They didn't do anything. There were 906 pages of violations in an 11 mo period at just ONE US horse SH shortly before they shut down (Beltex FOIA docs).

    I don't believe it could ever be made humane without a large number of local abattoirs and a huge increase in funding of Humane enforcement laws. I don't see either happening.


    Unfortunately, I don't think the ban will be effective without somehow enforcing export fees (for out of the country) that are around 1000-1500.00 per horse like Mexico does when you want to bring one from Mex to the US. I think the KB's will just label the horses as riding horses, since we know they have no problem with fraud, and then ship them to the feedlot/SH anyway.

    My apologies for the thread hijack. I tried to answer that as completely as possible, and didn't mean to do a novel.


    7 members found this post helpful.

  9. #349
    Join Date
    Jun. 7, 2002
    Posts
    1,214

    Default

    Jetsmom, you're not the one hijacking the thread, lol. I really wish the mods would start policing the gang of five, since they are making every thread they descend on an uninteresting mud slinging contest.
    \"Non-violence never solved anything.\" C. Montgomery Burns



    9 members found this post helpful.

  10. #350
    Join Date
    Jan. 4, 2007
    Location
    TX
    Posts
    42,493

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by MandyVA View Post
    Jetsmom, you're not the one hijacking the thread, lol. I really wish the mods would start policing the gang of five, since they are making every thread they descend on an uninteresting mud slinging contest.
    Are you serious?

    This is a thread about PETA and you think only animal rights extremist should be heard?

    You are on the wrong forum for that, go to an animal rights extremist forum for that and there yes, any other than animal rights extremists will be banned.
    Here, sorry to inform you, those that defend our rights to use animals, horses in this instance, still can have a voice, annoying as that may be for you.


    1 members found this post helpful.

  11. #351
    Join Date
    Jan. 4, 2007
    Location
    TX
    Posts
    42,493

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by jetsmom View Post
    Show me where I defended PETA.
    This whole thing for you has to do with you feeling that just because someone supports an issue which the HSUS/PETA also supports, means that they are a RARA. But you don't have the backbone to say that you agreed with banning horse tripping or dog fighting, because then your argument falls flat. I challenge you to give a straight answer to whether you agreed with those two bans. I bet you equivocate, and refuse to answer because then you would have to either admit that banning something abusive doesn't mean someone is a RARA or you would have to admit that you don't want anything banned no matter how abusive.

    Go ahead and answer that. Try, just for once not to go off on a tangent about how we already have laws banning those, in order to avoid answering. I know they are illegal now. Because people like me, LauraKY, jenM, all were willing to speak out and support banning them. But people had to speak out. People that aren't RARAs. I want to know whether you supported banning them, or whther you would have called those supporting banning them RARAs.

    Try not avoiding the question just this once. See if you actually have any integrity at all, and are able to stand up for what you believe...
    You are not listening when someone answers, that is why I quit trying to answer long ago.

    My answers have been all over and you keep ignoring them, because they don't suit you, you want me to say I eat puppies for breakfast and beat my horses regularly and that is the only answer that will please you.

    I, on the other hand, would say I am tired of you trying to make anyone not against the animal rights extremist drive to ban this or that we do with animals, including horse slaughter, be terrible people everyone should hang on principle.

    I will respond this one more time directly:

    See post above, where I explain what ANIMAL WELFARE is?
    THERE is your answer, why is that so hard to understand?

    ANIMAL WELFARE determines what is proper use and under what circumstances and what is not and is abuse and we have many laws and regulations already defining that.

    Of course no one here is for anything that is illegal, like dog fighting or other such, just because they think the animal rights extremist driven bans are an assault on our rights to use animals, unlike true animal welfare work is.

    Seems that you keep insisting anyone thinking those bans are absurd animal rights extremist propaganda has to be an abuser is something you do it as a character assassination point.

    You know better, but keep bandying that around just to make people defensive and your side feel good.
    Sorry, that halo is slipping when you do that, all that does is come across as an absurd attack when you accuse others like that.

    Hope this answers your question, once again.
    Not that anyone here needs to answer such absurd, repeated questions, just because they fit the way you debate.
    That is the old and trite "did you beat your wife today yet"? to make the rest of the audience snicker and put someone down.
    That is a mean and uncalled for way to debate, but be my guest if that is where you want to go.

    I know you will keep bringing that up, as it sure gets a response from those that follow animal rights extremist views, using that as a chance to bash others, as someone quickly took the chance to do.


    4 members found this post helpful.

  12. #352
    Join Date
    Sep. 7, 2009
    Location
    Lexington, KY
    Posts
    19,557

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Lynnwood View Post
    Gotta say 5 that taking the time to copy quote all of that by fairfax did nothing but convince me you either A. Need a hobby and have far to much time on your hands or B. Are = to or more unstable then the accused.
    I've seen that collection of quotes before and not from 5.
    "We can judge the heart of a man by his treatment of animals." ~Immanuel Kant


    1 members found this post helpful.

  13. #353
    Join Date
    Jan. 4, 2007
    Location
    TX
    Posts
    42,493

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by MandyVA View Post
    Jetsmom, you're not the one hijacking the thread, lol. I really wish the mods would start policing the gang of five, since they are making every thread they descend on an uninteresting mud slinging contest.
    I wanted to add, I think that there are a handful of animal rights extremists posting here that always come to stir up things, don't really contribute much else but here and there for show.

    Those few you can always count to pipe in with inane comments and personal attacks in threads discussing animal rights extremist views, like ban this or that.
    I think they have a right to do that, this is an open forum, unless their posting degenerates to pure animal rights extremist propaganda, as it does at times.

    Guess that it depends on which side you may be in the different topics, who you may feel should be "voted off the island".



  14. #354
    Join Date
    Apr. 2, 2009
    Location
    North Carolina
    Posts
    5,380

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by michaleenflynn View Post
    What I did notice, though, was that my on-topic responses to some of the bigger ha-ha-PETA-isn't-a-threat posters are going unanswered. Which leads me to wonder if I am making points they cannot rebut, and they are using the avalanche of off-topic posts for cover? hmmmm
    I did my best to answer, however, I think it's more of a case that the train got up to top speed so far up the tracks, that some of us give up and just watch the show at that point. I have no delusions that typing on the internet is ever going to change the mind of anyone who is not open to thoughtful examination of facts and issues in an intelligent manner. So rather than assume a hidden conspiracy, I'd expect that many like me recognize a threshold of futility.


    3 members found this post helpful.

  15. #355
    Join Date
    Dec. 31, 2000
    Location
    El Paso, TX
    Posts
    13,041

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Bluey View Post
    You are not listening when someone answers, that is why I quit trying to answer long ago.

    My answers have been all over and you keep ignoring them, because they don't suit you, you want me to say I eat puppies for breakfast and beat my horses regularly and that is the only answer that will please you.

    I, on the other hand, would say I am tired of you trying to make anyone not against the animal rights extremist drive to ban this or that we do with animals, including horse slaughter, be terrible people everyone should hang on principle.

    I will respond this one more time directly:

    See post above, where I explain what ANIMAL WELFARE is?
    THERE is your answer, why is that so hard to understand?

    ANIMAL WELFARE determines what is proper use and under what circumstances and what is not and is abuse and we have many laws and regulations already defining that.

    Of course no one here is for anything that is illegal, like dog fighting or other such, just because they think the animal rights extremist driven bans are an assault on our rights to use animals, unlike true animal welfare work is.

    Seems that you keep insisting anyone thinking those bans are absurd animal rights extremist propaganda has to be an abuser is something you do it as a character assassination point.

    You know better, but keep bandying that around just to make people defensive and your side feel good.
    Sorry, that halo is slipping when you do that, all that does is come across as an absurd attack when you accuse others like that.

    Hope this answers your question, once again.
    Not that anyone here needs to answer such absurd, repeated questions, just because they fit the way you debate.
    That is the old and trite "did you beat your wife today yet"? to make the rest of the audience snicker and put someone down.
    That is a mean and uncalled for way to debate, but be my guest if that is where you want to go.

    I know you will keep bringing that up, as it sure gets a response from those that follow animal rights extremist views, using that as a chance to bash others, as someone quickly took the chance to do.
    So you still won't answer the question poised. No integrity or courage to state whether you supported banning horse tripping or dog fighting. (And saying you don't support something illegal, is just avoiding the question.)

    And for the record, I have posted in the past, that I have no doubt that you take good care of the animals you own. I have NEVER accused you of eating puppies for breakfast/abusing animals.


    1 members found this post helpful.

  16. #356
    Join Date
    Sep. 11, 2008
    Location
    Snohomish, WA
    Posts
    4,226

    Default

    This x 10.

    Quote Originally Posted by MandyVA View Post
    Jetsmom, you're not the one hijacking the thread, lol. I really wish the mods would start policing the gang of five, since they are making every thread they descend on an uninteresting mud slinging contest.


    2 members found this post helpful.

  17. #357
    Join Date
    Jan. 4, 2007
    Location
    TX
    Posts
    42,493

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by jetsmom View Post
    So you still won't answer the question poised. No integrity or courage to state whether you supported banning horse tripping or dog fighting. (And saying you don't support something illegal, is just avoiding the question.)

    And for the record, I have posted in the past, that I have no doubt that you take good care of the animals you own. I have NEVER accused you of eating puppies for breakfast/abusing animals.
    Sorry, some times, maybe I don't make myself clear enough, but here I think it is not I who is rather dense.

    Not that I expected a different result, as that has been the same always.

    Keep on keeping on, as all can see, it is your standard way to bash others, to bring those leading, accusatory questions time and again and then not want to hear the answers.

    I will say one more time, after 40 years in dogs, as a volunteer teaching classes and helping put on performance dog shows, helping at the local animal control shelter, fostering and helping with rescue and muttfest days, therapy dogs and all that those in the dog world do, do you really think it makes any sense to keep saying I defend dog fighting?

    Such asinine statements are reason to respond back with a few insults, but I won't.

    Just don't be surprised if some times some just don't bother answering your worthless, uncalled for accusations as those you keep using to bash posters that don't agree with you.


    2 members found this post helpful.

  18. #358
    Join Date
    Jan. 4, 2007
    Location
    TX
    Posts
    42,493

    Default

    Originally Posted by MandyVA
    Jetsmom, you're not the one hijacking the thread, lol. I really wish the mods would start policing the gang of five, since they are making every thread they descend on an uninteresting mud slinging contest.



    Quote Originally Posted by JGHIRETIRE View Post
    This x 10.
    To be fair, you should have added who those few mud slingers are, but then, that is not about being fair, is it.



  19. #359
    Join Date
    Nov. 2, 2001
    Location
    Packing my bags
    Posts
    33,273

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Bluey View Post
    Originally Posted by MandyVA
    Jetsmom, you're not the one hijacking the thread, lol. I really wish the mods would start policing the gang of five, since they are making every thread they descend on an uninteresting mud slinging contest.





    To be fair, you should have added who those few mud slingers are, but then, that is not about being fair, is it.
    uhoh... name calling!
    You are such a meany!
    http://www.chronofhorse.com/forum/sh...85#post6961885

    but hey, they got their own thread now!, all to themselves!
    Quote Originally Posted by fargaloo View Post
    Do you not understand how asking "why now?" is EXACTLY part of the reason why assault victims feel silenced?



  20. #360
    Join Date
    Jun. 27, 2005
    Location
    KY
    Posts
    4,762

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Alagirl View Post

    but hey, they got their own thread now!, all to themselves!
    That's because you can't find anything that would justify banning free speech, can you.

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



Similar Threads

  1. Replies: 115
    Last Post: Oct. 26, 2012, 02:56 AM
  2. Allowing partial self-care board at full-care facility
    By Watermark Farm in forum Around The Farm
    Replies: 17
    Last Post: Nov. 16, 2011, 07:39 PM
  3. COTH Ten Commandments
    By SmartAlex in forum Off Course
    Replies: 167
    Last Post: Nov. 12, 2011, 02:10 AM
  4. Highveld Horse Care - South Africa, tragic horse stories
    By Old Mac Donald in forum Horse Care
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: Apr. 14, 2010, 10:06 AM
  5. PETA's Stance on horseback riding?
    By Shodan VIII in forum Off Course
    Replies: 120
    Last Post: Sep. 18, 2006, 03:36 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
  •