The Ur-Quan Masters Discussion Forum

thought you guys might want to know the truth...

http://www.petakillsanimals.com/

those hypocritical bastards....

sign the petition on the site and get their tax exempt status revoked


DISCUSS!

This site (and situation) absolutely SCREAMS "logical fallacy".

I'll look past the fact that the site is biased to the 9th layer of hell to begin with. It's supposed to be, because it's opponent is as well.
The article wordings are so loaded they ought to be considered deadly weapons. They're pulling emotional strings as hard as they can, "Your Kids, PETAs Pawns" made that little fact blatantly obvious to me.
Granted, they use newspapers as citations. However, some of the articles themselves are loaded in and of themselves. I.E.: "Channel Five On Your Side"- news is not meant to be on any 'side'. News is supposed to be objective information, not subjective like some of these articles were. Some, however, were a good read; perhaps if the information they give was presented in a more objective light, my response would've been better.
I love animals and dislike PETA, this is true. That site, however, is an attempt to get you to get emotions mixed in with fact. Instead of saying "Dead Animals Found Near PETA Building", they say, "PETA KILLS CUTE PUPPIES AND FUZZY KITTENS!" It's a messy situation, and it's exactly what they want you to buy in to...apparently they got you hook, line and sinker.
No offense my good fellow, but if you want to point the finger at a group, don't use some off-the-wall site like this.

Oh yeah! I bet you'd do something if they were killing clones! Wouldn't you! You animal hating hypocrite!!! Filthy clone!

Sarcasm tag for the dumber amongst you

I have to agree with NECRO-99, I’ve seen way to much anti-anything literature to see anything else in this.

Besides a shelter can only hold so many animals, and they ether have to be adopted out or disposed of some other way. To euthanize seems to be the most humane way do go about doing it.

Don’t get me wrong I have pets and like most animals too, but some people aren’t responsible enough with their pets and don’t get there animals spade or neutered. If people would be more responsible with their pets we probably would not have this sort of problem at all.     

Just sterilize them all darn it! 

Yknow, I dont think there are any laws governing cloning period, not to mention what you can and can't do to a clone should you ever come across one.

Luki....<3. This is why I like this forum.

There's something to be said for that. After millenia of human breeding, most domesticated animals have had painfully destructive genetic weaknesses bred into them.



There's a supposed ban in the US, put in by Bill Clinton. It is untested though, obviously.

peta uses raw emotion to ensare more people into their agenda. This sight also uses raw emotion to pull mostly the younger generation that has been targeted more because you know, young people are like clay (easy to tell them whats what). Old people in my sense are more like steel. You have to break (or melt it) to change it. Anyway even though the facts are hyped with raw emotion they are still facts.

This is true, but we also can't have strays running wiled all the time in our cities.

And there are enough mutts in this would that I think that they will be ok genetically, Its just too bad for the pure breeds. 

Judging by what you say in the main body of text, and then by structure of the line two lines down, I assume you fall into the "young people" category. That's fine and dandy, but your all-caps screaming and emotionally fueled rants won't impress. At least, not me anyway.

You seem to forget the people who work for PETA are the same people who are holding those "Animal Abuse" signs outside of Rodeos and Circuses harrassing families and other normal people trying to enjoy  a good show. Yes I agree with some of your points but you seem to think that PETA is capable of no wrong doing. I draw these from your posts. I could be wrong but all I have is your posts to work with. I once went to PETA's forums.

In my opinion:

They will never listen to any opinion you have about animal rights, unless it is: OMG!!1!!111 LIK SAVE TEH ANIMALZ!!1!!!!1! They are also renowned for having the most oppressive forums known to man. A simple post of a not strict vegan/vegetarian ideal is taboo here, and no matter what topic it is about, will be called trolling by people who cant even spell the phrase "I think your a lazy apethatic earth expliotting whore." They will never accept your ideas, and even the most cunning argument will shrink in the face of their cunning responses of: OmMmggGG!!!1!11!!!!1 YoU R t3eH sUuUuUuXXUxxUxxoOoOr.

ME: Hi guys! im new, and i would like to ask a question. Well, i eat meat, but only because the animal has already been killed. I figure that if i eat it it wont make that much of a difference, besides ensuring that the animal died for a purpose. Since i am eating meat from an animal that was already killed, i cannot do anything about this, which means i should stop whining about how sad everything is, and chow down. But, just because i eat dead animals, does not mean i disrespect live ones. I am for live animal's rights, not dead one's.

SAvteranimelz123450: OMFG U MAET ETING FUCK BURN IN HELL BITHC

ZOozReval: Troll UR A FUCKING TROLL (not mentioining the fact that i have over 100 posts credited to my name)

Fer=Saten: i think your a lazy apethatic earth expliottinh hore. all meat eartrs ar dumb eh?!?!?@!

VVVVVeegie: no mattr wat you think yu r stell a murderar

(the list goes on and on, but I would never sentence you to such a mind numbing torture)

That is who speaks for PETA, just visit their forums and say something very similar to what I said, I guarantee you will get a twin example of this...

Feel free to point out where exactly we say that PETA can do no wrong. The few posts this attracted simply stated that the "SUPER ANTI PETA WE HATE YOIU" site you linked to seemed rather bias. As in, we prefer to make our own opinions. That doesn't immediately mean that our opinions would be the complete opposite of that site, simply that we prefer not to be told what to think.


And thus you judge any member of PETA for what someone on their online forum does?  I'm not sure if you've noticed, but not all forums are as calm and civilized as this one. That doesn't mean that the forumgoers of, say VGCats in any way represent the opinions of the creator of the comics. There are retards everywhere.

For the record, I believe PETA is a flawed premise with some very unorthodox methods. That doesn't mean I'll be jumping o nthe bash PETA OLOLOLOL bandwagon though. and not jumping o nthe bandwagon doesn't make me their closest ally in any way.

Check out Penn & Teller's show Bullshit, they did an expose of PETA....freaky freaky shit. I think they're free online now.

If only people practiced what they preached eh?

Just found out that this site which is made by the center for consumer freedom is supported by the food and tobacco industry. Had the link, but lost it. Doesn't make their information any less creditable, if you count the facts and not just the rants. 

Nothing wrong with being vegetarian. I am a vegetarian. I eat from the Moo tree.
A strange tree, the Moo tree. It has four trunks and can move around. Moo juice is good in coffee too. Very healthy stuff, Moo juice.
Just watch out for the big black tree with the two dead branches - don't pick the fruit!

Actually, someone should post that on the PETA forum... might give them all fatal heart attacks...

Tempting...

In fact, from an energy conservation point of view, a vegetarian lifestlye is much wiser than a non-vegetarian one The amount of pasture used to feed cows and suchlike, could, in itself, feed many more people than thsoe cows can. Using livestock is a huge waste of energy, which sooner or later might become completely impossible.

I saw that episode...I couldn't believe it! They said the president was the worst offender of them all. Crazy stuff. I remember P&T saying recycling was complete BS too.

I should rename myself "ThreadJacker"  ;) Also, if I say something here which is not correct and thus make myself look like a blithering idiot, please let me know. Politely for preference, although I'm not choosy.

Our bodies are adapted for an omnivorous lifestyle. We are supposed to eat both animal AND vegetable matter to obtain essential proteins to carry on. All of the nutrients inside animal matter (i.e. meat, milk, etc) can just as easily be found in plant matter, since it has to come from somewhere to begin with. Animal proteins, however, can only be found in animals, while plant proteins only in plants. AFAIK we have to consume both kinds of protein.
What the effects of not ingesting the correct proteins - for an extended period, at least - are, I don't know, and probably wouldn't like to find out, at least not personally.

In my circle, my sister is the one qualified in biological science, not me, so if I'm incorrect or something it would not surprise me. Now, unless anyone has any objections, I am going to go and consume a Medium Rare Moo Slice.

And don't try to collect its juice.   :P

Btw, more trees are cut down every year to make room for Soy crops than cattle. Soy also devestates the soil it's planted in far more than cultivating animals do.

Indeed. We can eat almost anything. Whilst this gives us a fair advantage when it comes to surviving, it doesn't mean that we need to eat everything. Granted, animal matter contains much more protein/amino acids, so you need to eat less and from fewer sources, which has made it a more viable alternative all throughout time.
 

Sidestepping the whole "supposed" thing, as I don't really feel like debating wether our dietary habits are somehow predetermined o a product of evolution, I think you might be confusing proteins and amino acids (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Amino_acids), especially the essential (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Essential_amino_acid) ones. Also, if your theory held through, there would be no vegetarians or vegans. Since there are, clearly you are mistaken.


Because they cannot grow soy where the cattle currently grazes. Don't forget, most of those grazing areas used to be something else as well. If you grew soy instead of catle there, you'd need less space and thus not have to cut down any trees. It's running both soy and cattle simultaineously that causes trouble. As for soils, that depends very much on the quality of the soil, and the expertise of the farmer. You can completely destroy a field by growing anythign on it for a long period of time.

Thanks. Now I know.

I've been hearing that scientists are finding soy isn't so good for our bodies as we once thought. I've heard that there are some toxins in the soybean. I base these finding on a concrete foundation of nothing. Just kidding, heres an article

http://www.soyonlineservice.co.nz/

I also read some articles published in my daily newspaper  the San Francisco Chronicle ( I live in the bay area in California).