• 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

PETA's 10 Commandments of Horse Care/edit post #1

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

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

    Comment


    • 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"

      Comment


      • 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?

        Comment


        • 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.

          Comment


          • 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.

            Comment


            • 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"

              Comment


              • 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...

                Comment


                • 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.

                  Comment


                  • 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

                    Comment


                    • 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.

                      Comment


                      • 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.

                        Comment


                        • 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.

                          Comment


                          • 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".

                            Comment


                            • 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.
                              Life doesn't have perfect footing.

                              Bloggily entertain yourself with our adventures (and disasters):
                              We Are Flying Solo

                              Comment


                              • 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.

                                Comment


                                • This x 10.

                                  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.
                                  The problem with political jokes is that they get elected.
                                  H. Cate

                                  Comment


                                  • 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.

                                    Comment


                                    • 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.



                                      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.

                                      Comment


                                      • 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!

                                        Comment


                                        • 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\"

                                          Comment

                                          Working...
                                          X