• Welcome to the Chronicle Forums.
    Please complete your profile. The forums and the rest of www.chronofhorse.com has single sign-in, so your log in information for one will automatically work for the other. Disclaimer: The opinions expressed here are the views of the individual and do not necessarily reflect the views and opinions of The Chronicle of the Horse.

Announcement

Collapse

Forum rules and no-advertising policy

As a participant on this forum, it is your responsibility to know and follow our rules. Please read this message in its entirety.

Board Rules

1. You’re responsible for what you say.
As outlined in Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act, The Chronicle of the Horse and its affiliates, as well Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd., the developers of vBulletin, are not legally responsible for statements made in the forums.

This is a public forum viewed by a wide spectrum of people, so please be mindful of what you say and who might be reading it—details of personal disputes are likely better handled privately. While posters are legally responsible for their statements, the moderators may in their discretion remove or edit posts that violate these rules. Users have the ability to modify or delete their own messages after posting, but administrators generally will not delete posts, threads or accounts upon request.

Outright inflammatory, vulgar, harassing, malicious or otherwise inappropriate statements and criminal charges unsubstantiated by a reputable news source or legal documentation will not be tolerated and will be dealt with at the discretion of the moderators.

2. Conversations in horse-related forums should be horse-related.
The forums are a wonderful source of information and support for members of the horse community. While it’s understandably tempting to share information or search for input on other topics upon which members might have a similar level of knowledge, members must maintain the focus on horses.

3. Keep conversations productive, on topic and civil.
Discussion and disagreement are inevitable and encouraged; personal insults, diatribes and sniping comments are unproductive and unacceptable. Whether a subject is light-hearted or serious, keep posts focused on the current topic and of general interest to other participants of that thread. Utilize the private message feature or personal email where appropriate to address side topics or personal issues not related to the topic at large.

4. No advertising in the discussion forums.
Posts in the discussion forums directly or indirectly advertising horses, jobs, items or services for sale or wanted will be removed at the discretion of the moderators. Use of the private messaging feature or email addresses obtained through users’ profiles for unsolicited advertising is not permitted.

Company representatives may participate in discussions and answer questions about their products or services, or suggest their products on recent threads if they fulfill the criteria of a query. False "testimonials" provided by company affiliates posing as general consumers are not appropriate, and self-promotion of sales, ad campaigns, etc. through the discussion forums is not allowed.

Paid advertising is available on our classifieds site and through the purchase of banner ads. The tightly monitored Giveaways forum permits free listings of genuinely free horses and items available or wanted (on a limited basis). Items offered for trade are not allowed.

Advertising Policy Specifics
When in doubt of whether something you want to post constitutes advertising, please contact a moderator privately in advance for further clarification. Refer to the following points for general guidelines:

Horses – Only general discussion about the buying, leasing, selling and pricing of horses is permitted. If the post contains, or links to, the type of specific information typically found in a sales or wanted ad, and it’s related to a horse for sale, regardless of who’s selling it, it doesn’t belong in the discussion forums.

Stallions – Board members may ask for suggestions on breeding stallion recommendations. Stallion owners may reply to such queries by suggesting their own stallions, only if their horse fits the specific criteria of the original poster. Excessive promotion of a stallion by its owner or related parties is not permitted and will be addressed at the discretion of the moderators.

Services – Members may use the forums to ask for general recommendations of trainers, barns, shippers, farriers, etc., and other members may answer those requests by suggesting themselves or their company, if their services fulfill the specific criteria of the original post. Members may not solicit other members for business if it is not in response to a direct, genuine query.

Products – While members may ask for general opinions and suggestions on equipment, trailers, trucks, etc., they may not list the specific attributes for which they are in the market, as such posts serve as wanted ads.

Event Announcements – Members may post one notification of an upcoming event that may be of interest to fellow members, if the original poster does not benefit financially from the event. Such threads may not be “bumped” excessively. Premium members may post their own notices in the Event Announcements forum.

Charities/Rescues – Announcements for charitable or fundraising events can only be made for 501(c)(3) tax-exempt organizations. Special exceptions may be made, at the moderators’ discretion and direction, for board-related events or fundraising activities in extraordinary circumstances.

Occasional posts regarding horses available for adoption through IRS-registered horse rescue or placement programs are permitted in the appropriate forums, but these threads may be limited at the discretion of the moderators. Individuals may not advertise or make announcements for horses in need of rescue, placement or adoption unless the horse is available through a recognized rescue or placement agency or government-run entity or the thread fits the criteria for and is located in the Giveaways forum.

5. Do not post copyrighted photographs unless you have purchased that photo and have permission to do so.

6. Respect other members.
As members are often passionate about their beliefs and intentions can easily be misinterpreted in this type of environment, try to explore or resolve the inevitable disagreements that arise in the course of threads calmly and rationally.

If you see a post that you feel violates the rules of the board, please click the “alert” button (exclamation point inside of a triangle) in the bottom left corner of the post, which will alert ONLY the moderators to the post in question. They will then take whatever action, or no action, as deemed appropriate for the situation at their discretion. Do not air grievances regarding other posters or the moderators in the discussion forums.

Please be advised that adding another user to your “Ignore” list via your User Control Panel can be a useful tactic, which blocks posts and private messages by members whose commentary you’d rather avoid reading.

7. We have the right to reproduce statements made in the forums.
The Chronicle of the Horse may copy, quote, link to or otherwise reproduce posts, or portions of posts, in print or online for advertising or editorial purposes, if attributed to their original authors, and by posting in this forum, you hereby grant to The Chronicle of the Horse a perpetual, non-exclusive license under copyright and other rights, to do so.

8. We reserve the right to enforce and amend the rules.
The moderators may delete, edit, move or close any post or thread at any time, or refrain from doing any of the foregoing, in their discretion, and may suspend or revoke a user’s membership privileges at any time to maintain adherence to the rules and the general spirit of the forum. These rules may be amended at any time to address the current needs of the board.

Please see our full Terms of Service and Privacy Policy for more information.

Thanks for being a part of the COTH forums!

(Revised 1/26/16)
See more
See less

And another one falls through the cracks! :(

Collapse
This topic is closed.
X
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #81
    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\"

    Comment


    • #82
      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

      Comment


      • #83
        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

        Comment


        • #84
          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

          Comment


          • #85
            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!
            Originally posted by BigMama1
            Facts don't have versions. If they do, they are opinions
            GNU Terry Prachett

            Comment


            • #86
              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

              Comment


              • #87
                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

                Comment


                • #88
                  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.

                  Comment


                  • #89
                    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.

                    Comment


                    • #90
                      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

                      Comment


                      • #91
                        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

                        Comment

                        • Original Poster

                          #92
                          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?

                          Comment


                          • #93
                            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.

                            Comment


                            • #94
                              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.

                              Comment


                              • #95
                                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.

                                Comment


                                • #96
                                  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.

                                  Comment


                                  • #97
                                    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.

                                    Comment


                                    • #98
                                      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.

                                      Comment


                                      • #99
                                        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.

                                        Comment


                                        • 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.

                                          Comment

                                          Working...
                                          X