How did these cretins get so much influence through wanton idiocy? Do they understand consequences at all? Small children have a better grasp on reality!
Pvednes fucked around with this message on 10-15-2004 at 11:38 AM.
quote:
Arrenn Lightblade got all f'ed up on Angel Dust and wrote:
It is a group of like minded people. Which means that yes, they are all completely bonkers.
They're a group of like minded fanatics. It's an important distinction.
Send me an aussie-wool sweater and an authentic boomerang and an authentic didgeridoo!
quote:
Bajah had this to say about Optimus Prime:
For what it's worth, oh Great Aussie Farmers, most people I know have an intense dislike of A&F, so it's no big loss.Send me an aussie-wool sweater and an authentic boomerang and an authentic didgeridoo!
And a bullroarer, if I ever find one...
quote:
Pvednes said this about your mom:
And a bullroarer, if I ever find one...
I love those things.. Great for scaring people at halloween because the sound goes for MILES.
"Why?!" I hear you ask.
Because her family owns a center that does animal testing. Animal rights protestors are fucking psychos. 
quote:
Bajah enlisted the help of an infinite number of monkeys to write:
For what it's worth, oh Great Aussie Farmers, most people I know have an intense dislike of A&F, so it's no big loss.Send me an aussie-wool sweater and an authentic boomerang and an authentic didgeridoo!
Not many people in my generation have any intense hatred of A&F, and obviously A&F does pretty well for themselves. It's not like this is a TOTALLY minor thing for Australia.
What really bugs me isn't A&F's decision, it's PETA's tactics. They're basically threatening these companies to comply or else they'll open up yonder slander-cannon, and it pisses me off because it isn't right, whether or not they're "allowed" to. :\
sigpic courtesy of This Guy, original modified by me
quote:
The logic train ran off the tracks when Ja'Deth Issar Ka'bael said:
What is "Flystrike" and what is "Mulesing"
Well, assuming flystrike has something to do with them laying eggs on the exposed skin of the sheep... but what I can't figure out is how removing MORE skin protected them from it, I would have assumed the more skin the better
But then... sheep aren't my speciality
quote:
ACES! Another post by Mr. Parcelan:
The hell is a bullroarer
Sexual position.*
May also be a musical instrument. Mr. Gainsborough fucked around with this message on 10-15-2004 at 04:19 PM.
quote:
We were all impressed when Ja'Deth Issar Ka'bael wrote:
What is "Flystrike" and what is "Mulesing"
Basic definition. I think mulesing has its problems though, as I think it can cause infection because it's done right at the groin. Ouch. But if it saves sheep from sickness from flies and eating away of the wool by maggots and such, I can see why it's necessary.
So farmers solve this by cutting the folds off the butts of sheep.
Mulesing is not bad for the sheep, it only looks grisley. The folds are pinched off and amputated, the wounds are properly staunched and disinfected. Of course, though, PETA won't hear any of it. Like any intellectually bankrupt and juvenile thinkers, all they're concerned with is appearances.
"OH! How ghastly! Poor sheep! Let's stop this no matter what the cost to human life!"
quote:
Mortious thought about the meaning of life:
Animal rights protestors recently looted a grave of a sweet old grandmother in England, stealing the corpse to send back to her family in pieces."Why?!" I hear you ask.
Because her family owns a center that does animal testing. Animal rights protestors are fucking psychos.
omg.. 
quote:
Maradon! was listening to Cher while typing:
Sheep are bred to have fleshy folds of skin. This increases their surface area and each sheep yields more wool. The trouble is, poop gets caught between these folds, causes infection, and certain types of fly will lay eggs in it. The resulting maggots will eat away at the wool and potentially give the sheep blood poisoning (the mentioned flystrike)So farmers solve this by cutting the folds off the butts of sheep.
Mulesing is not bad for the sheep, it only looks grisley. The folds are pinched off and amputated, the wounds are properly staunched and disinfected. Of course, though, PETA won't hear any of it. Like any intellectually bankrupt and juvenile thinkers, all they're concerned with is appearances.
"OH! How ghastly! Poor sheep! Let's stop this no matter what the cost to human life!"
Okay so the process for removal is essentially similar to how they treat hemorrhoids in humans (distended veins in the case of 'roids as opposed to extraneous fleshy folds in sheep). If poop is getting stuck in the folds, the tissue could get infected, die, become necrotic, then the sheep gets the aforementioned septic blood poisoning, not to mention it eats the wool.
The farmers would be doing this ANYWAY even if it didn't affect the ass-wool they were getting from the sheep. Why? Because animals are expensive to replace.
Sounds like PETA's being a bunch of asshats. As usual.
sigpic courtesy of This Guy, original modified by me
quote:
Vorbis had this to say about Knight Rider:
PETA almost makes me ashamed to be a moral-vegetarian.
What's moral about denying the cows the sweet embrace of death!?
PETA shouldn't even have to enter into the process. 
quote:
Vorbis had this to say about Pirotess:
PETA almost makes me ashamed to be a moral-vegetarian.
A vegetarian diet incurs a larger animal death toll than a carnivorous one.
quote:
ACES! Another post by Maradon!:
A vegetarian diet incurs a larger animal death toll than a carnivorous one.
How is that?
quote:
Tegadil thought about the meaning of life:
How is that?
When veggies are harvested smaller animals like rabbits, rats, etc. Are caught up in the machinery that helps in harvesting. A square mile of field can contain hundreds of those animals. It adds up fast.
I still love the idea that the salad some vegitarian is munching on could have had some nice thick rat blood on it before being washed.
quote:
Zair had this to say about Pirotess:
The article ignores the fact that animals mass raised for food suffer a much longer duration of suffering.
The "Least Harm" justification for moral vegetarianism doesn't concern suffering. If it did, moral vegetarians could not object to eating free range meat.
If you're concerned with suffering, eat free range meat. If you're concerned only with a body count, however, you should eat free range meat. Maradon! fucked around with this message on 10-15-2004 at 10:05 PM.
quote:
Maradon! impressed everyone with:
The "Least Harm" justification for moral vegetarianism doesn't concern suffering. If it did, moral vegetarians could not object to eating free range meat.
There is a theory that believes just that. It is pretty much that Singer theory I made a thread about awhile back. The utilitarian approach pretty much did condone eating meat, under free range type conditions.
quote:
Zair had this to say about Pirotess:
There is a theory that believes just that. It is pretty much that Singer theory I made a thread about awhile back. The utilitarian approach pretty much did condone eating meat, under free range type conditions.
And I see no fallacy in moralizing that it is wrong to eat the meat of animals that have suffered but ok to eat the meat of animals that have not. It's only when people try to take a moral highground in being vegetarian that I have a problem.
quote:
Nobody really understood why Maradon! wrote:
The "Least Harm" justification for moral vegetarianism doesn't concern suffering. If it did, moral vegetarians could not object to eating free range meat.If you're concerned with suffering, eat free range meat. If you're concerned only with a body count, however, you should eat free range meat.
I eat free-range meat for the simple reason that it tastes better. If you're concerned with flavour, eat free range meat. Pvednes fucked around with this message on 10-15-2004 at 10:13 PM.
quote:
Pvednes had this to say about Captain Planet:
I eat free-range meat for the simple reason that it tastes better.
I still think that's a myth. A bicep doesn't know if it's out in a field or in a cage.
And besides, I enjoy the taste of suffering. Maradon! fucked around with this message on 10-15-2004 at 10:20 PM.
quote:
Check out the big brain on Maradon!!
A vegetarian diet incurs a larger animal death toll than a carnivorous one.
Because obviously if someone has a carnivorous diet, they sustain themselves off of a diet of concentrated meat paste--and nothing else.
I'm a moral vegetarian seeing as I'm a vegetarian because I believe that's the moral thing for me to do. I don't feel that everyone should be vegetarian, nor do I feel that it is immoral to not be a vegetarian if the ability to be one is present. It's not about reducing the number count or suffering--one person will not be able to deter either of those things--but about personal removal from, what I see as, the moral problem.
I don't think it's morally responsible for me, someone who is affluent and willing enough to live a vegetarian life, to not do so. It's also not morally responsible for someone who isn't willing to live a vegetarian life to be pressured into it for the sake of morals.
Just to clarify.
quote:
Maradon! had this to say about John Romero:
And I see no fallacy in moralizing that it is wrong to eat the meat of animals that have suffered but ok to eat the meat of animals that have not.
We seem to be in agreement then.
quote:
We were all impressed when Maradon! wrote:
I still think that's a myth. A bicep doesn't know if it's out in a field or in a cage.And besides, I enjoy the taste of suffering.
I assure you it's not. There is a really quite noticable difference...battery chicken is bland, free-range chicken is distinctly tastier. It's in the feed, I think... Especially the eggs. Free range eggs are very different. Get some free range eggs and normal eggs and try them together sometime...you'd be surprised. Pvednes fucked around with this message on 10-15-2004 at 10:28 PM.
quote:
Vorbis wrote, obviously thinking too hard:
Because obviously if someone has a carnivorous diet, they sustain themselves off of a diet of concentrated meat paste--and nothing else.
Meat is far, far more sustaining than vegetables. One one includes meat in one's diet, the amount of vegetables one must eat decreases dramatically, and many little furry lives are saved.
quote:
Vorbis thought about the meaning of life:
I don't think it's morally responsible for me, someone who is affluent and willing enough to live a vegetarian life, to not do so. It's also not morally responsible for someone who isn't willing to live a vegetarian life to be pressured into it for the sake of morals.
Congrats, you're tolerant of other opinions. That's very admirable of you and the world would be a hundreds times better if there were more people like you.
But that doesn't mean you aren't a fair target for criticism of a fault in logic.
quote:
We were all impressed when Pvednes wrote:
I assure you it's not. There is a really quite noticable difference...battery chicken is bland, free-range chicken is distinctly tastier. It's in the feed, I think...
So...feed them the same thing?
quote:
Especially the eggs. Free range eggs are very different. Get some free range eggs and normal eggs and try them together sometime...you'd be surprised.
I have tried free range eggs. They tasted like eggs.
Maybe I somehow got a batch from a depressed chicken...
