It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Only the Truly Needy Have Any Excuse to Wear Fur

page: 2
0
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Dec, 8 2004 @ 02:01 PM
link   
Getting rid of them wouldnt be in vain. If thats your excuse, PETA members should wear leather boots because after all, you wouldnt want the cows to have died in vain? Yeah right. Whats next, a bunch of construction guys giving their old leather boots to PETA so PETA can give homeless people footwear? Pretty soon, all animal by-products will be given to PETA instead of good will and what will PETA have to say? If you actually read the article you would have noticed that PETA isnt trying to keep the homeless warm. They are trying to demoralize the rich people by showing them that these homeless people are wearing furs, so why would you rich people want to wear them now? Come on, wake up! Why didnt PETA just ask for warm clothes donations to keep the homeless warm? Cause they could care less about the homeless. They are simply using the homeless to degrade the class of furs. Seriously, did you even take anything from that article?




posted on Dec, 8 2004 @ 02:04 PM
link   
And you have no leather belt, nor leather shoe? Nor leather seats in your lexus? Oh, and you use no down, in your vest, your jacket, your pillow? Oh, yes, and you eat no beef, pork, lamb, venison, or chicken? What you say, you use no product tested on the innocent animal? Say, how extreme are we? You drive no automobile at all, for fear of killing the bird you may hit, or the rabbit crossing the road, or the lowly bug upon the windshield? Oh, and the indirect killing of animals.....for production of the food you eat, what do you make of that? The dead mouse in the field, helplessly run over by the combine reaping the wheat? Or the snake, caught in the chopper of the corn picker? And what of the critters killed in the name of soy, so your tofu can be produced, and your veggie burgers? And what of the lumber in your homes, your furniture, your books and magazines? You think the trees do not live? Nor do they harbor life, lost when cut to supply your thirst for pulp? Do you heat your home with wood? Or oil? Or Natural Gas? What animal lives are lost so you can be fat and happy in the comfort of your homes?

PETA is a joke, and obviously I am not impressed.



posted on Dec, 8 2004 @ 02:10 PM
link   
Actually I was a vegetarian for years and I am not a big meat eater to start with. I do shop Cruelty free stores and if at all possible I do not use any products from companies that animal test...it a tough thing to try and do in today's society for sure. I do not eat venison and I don't believe in hunting for sport...and while the conditions our out food animals is absolutely horrid...at the very least when you wear leather....the animal has not been killed just for that leather, as the meat is being eaten



posted on Dec, 8 2004 @ 02:12 PM
link   

Originally posted by Gazrok
If you're against fur, fine, don't wear one.
If you're against eating meat, fine, don't eat it.

But what I truly despise are those who try to force me to adopt their viewpoints about it.


I'm with you.


My good health depends on meat. I won't go out of my way to buy fur but I'm not passing up a gift of fur.


I remember a similar topic like this came up before. I recall Gazrok's quote: vegetarians make poor hunters.



posted on Dec, 8 2004 @ 02:18 PM
link   

Originally posted by lost1
I never said anything about not showing ethical treatment towards animals, I simply said down with PETA! Why, because they are borderline.


It takes extreme action to get ANYTHING changed in this world!
You see those we apose use extreme methods, that's where we learn it from. Extreme wrongs require extreme action.
And calling PETA terrorists, you've been listening to your budy bush too much. Don't buy into the crap government feeds you. Think for yourself.
If it wasn't for extreme action, we would still have slavery, segregation, no womens vote, no education, no 40 hr week, no minimum wage, no overtime pay, no safe labour laws, fox hunting (UK) etc...
It's got nothing to do with not being able to afford a fur coat, that's just stoopid! Animals can't speak out for themselves, if we don't do it who will!




posted on Dec, 8 2004 @ 02:21 PM
link   
Well I could of done without seeing that! I do not watch any shows with animals being hurt as it will bother me for days...oh and as to not pushing this down others throat...I didn't see anywhere in this thread where anyone was doing that



posted on Dec, 8 2004 @ 02:22 PM
link   
A great quote (that I'll have to kind of paraphrase because I don't remember it exactly)

Why are animal rights groups more opposed to fur than leather? Because old rich women are easier targets than biker gangs.



posted on Dec, 8 2004 @ 02:25 PM
link   
Oh, and personally, if my wife was wearing a fur coat, and some Peta freak spray painted it, I'd be showing that person what a red-meat diet can lead to...increased muscle mass, hehe...


Again, if you want to be all tree-hugging, vegan, hey, that's cool, but don't infringe on MY rights while doing it. That's when it becomes "uncool"....

I have a few vegan/vegetarian friends. We may not agree on each others' views, but at least we respect each others' rights to have them. And if they're over for dinner, I'll make every effort to accomodate them (for those who aren't vegan, YOU try finding a good recipe that doesn't use ANY animal by-products, hehe...). It SOUNDS easy, but man you'd be surprised how much stuff has either chicken broth, butter, cheese, etc. Pretty much ends up being pasta, veggies, and a tomato basil sauce, hehe...



posted on Dec, 8 2004 @ 02:27 PM
link   

Originally posted by cubiehole
A great quote (that I'll have to kind of paraphrase because I don't remember it exactly)

Why are animal rights groups more opposed to fur than leather? Because old rich women are easier targets than biker gangs.


HAHAHA, I'm a Harley owner/rider, and that was just great!!!

Yeah, try and take the leather off my bike and see what happens.

That's just friggin' hilarious.

Poor little cow cow



posted on Dec, 8 2004 @ 02:29 PM
link   

Originally posted by cubiehole


Why are animal rights groups more opposed to fur than leather? Because old rich women are easier targets than biker gangs.


The answer to that question "should" be a no brainer....and you would also have an answer had you read the posts in this thread. Leather is the by product of our food...fur is the killing of an animals for no reason other than to take it's skin. Understand it now? I hardly think it' has anything to do between old woman and bikers...

Gazrok...I'm still confused on this one as I musta missed something...where is anyone trying to push it on others?
it was just a friendly conversation till here at the end and no one even now is pushing anything on anyone else....



posted on Dec, 8 2004 @ 02:39 PM
link   
Sorry ANOK, my views about PETA existed far before Bush was in office. Although I didnt call them terrorists, I do feel that they are. Maybe I shouldnt have used the word extremist, but instead terrorist. I agree with you that extreme measures changes things, but when I was refering to PETA, I should have stated their fanatical ways of getting things done. I am complacent with the killing of animals for food, and I dont mind the use of thier skins for other products, thats how it is. But the article was showing how PETA was using these homeless people for their own agenda. Thats a reason I hate PETA. I love animals, but I also hate certain animals. I guess everyone has to find their medium. Also, I am taking out the part about what I said about people who cant afford furs because it is making you take the topic off subject.



posted on Dec, 8 2004 @ 02:40 PM
link   
Sarcastic comments first: wear fake fur made from Iraqi oil, or cotton made from filled and plowed Southern bogs. End of sarcasm.

I'm with Gazrok, Smoke-n-Mirrors and TheLibra on this one. But I am also with Lady V. I say grow your own food; eat less meat; wear only fur you hunt yourself. I am a Green. I am also a Native American Indian. While it is admirable to avoid causing suffering to sentient beings, we are a hunting and fishing species. It is infantile to care about the feelings of animals and whine about people wearing fur coats whilst living a modern lifestyle in apartments or suburban homes powered by oil, gas, coal and nuclear electricity. Humanity has two natures: the artificial and the natural. If you love animals, you are going to have to abandon technology- because technology will eventualy poison the entire planet. Or you can join the Voluntary Human Extinction movement, which will castrate you for free if you are a guy (why does that make me LIKE Arnold?). But without technology, asteroids kill all the animals so... I think PETA miss the mark because the problem is not fur coats, the problem is the economic exploitation of animals, people, and planet for paper profits. When most of us had to make food and shelter from meat and fur for ourselves, nature provided quite well for people and animals. When money (a strange, imaginary idea) entered the picture, Beaver became endangered. My Elders tell me the answer is technology for the few (space defense) and fur for the many. Imagine a world like that: lots of seals, happy Eskimos, Neil Armstrong shoving an asteroid off course. The world we are slowly heading for instead is rather more Philip K. Dick-ian.

[edit on 8-12-2004 by Chakotay]



posted on Dec, 8 2004 @ 02:51 PM
link   
I for one am all for the -ethical- treatment of animals, and aside from perhaps pulling a dogs tail as a toddler or something, have never raised my hand to hurt any animal, nor have I ever hunted, or anything.

I am, however, an omnivore, as nature intended me to be, and I also have worn animal skin (leather) and fur. I have held tools and instruments made of bone, shell, scales, and feathers. I have even gone so far as to dance around wearing and holding all of the above, for all to see!!! I even have bits of functional art at home, made from animal parts!

Shocked? Agape at my callousness? According to PETA, for the above crimes, I would be considered worse than Hitler. However, what they fail to take into account is the fact that I am:

* A Native American
* A Practicing Shaman
* Am an active member of my tribe
* Our ways were around long before there was even an America, much less, a PETA.

For you see, a blanket condemnation of others for their use of animal parts (and the skin, or fur is most certainly a part), such as PETA endorses, is to destroy some things that are beautiful, and go against the way of nature.

Should I throw away my medicine rattles, because they were made from tortoise shell and eagle feathers, by someone else over a hundred years ago? Should I insult the spirits of my ancestors by tossing the leather, feather, and sinew-made medicine wheel of my great great grandmother into the fire? Should I shamefully hide the gifts given me by the other members of the tribe, because they are made from what nature provided them, rather than a factory?

Far from it...

I keep these things enshrined when not in use. I honor the ancestors by keeping them clean, and maintained. I wear them in ceremonies that honor both the tribe and the animals AND plants that are all a part of the collective spirit of the world. I keep the stories behind them alive, within me, and look forward to the day when I can pass them on to my children, or grandchildren, or failing that, a new promising wisdom in the tribe. I treat these items with more respect than most men treat their cars, and with more care than most women apply to their makeup.

I am neither needy, nor rich. And I wear fur. I will continue to wear and use other animal parts until my dying day, and my spirit will be at peace because of it. I have honored those animals to the highest degree I know how...

Now perhaps you forgive me... Perhaps PETA might make an exception in my case, or perhaps not. After all, it's okay for "Indians" to wear it and use it, because they're all at one with nature or something...right? So maybe you personally won't indulge in using animal parts, but you can at least condone my use...

Doesn't that strike a hypocritical bone though? Why is my way any more right than anyone elses? Who is to say the fella on the street, wearing a leather jacket, has any less right to wear it than I do my ceremonial garb? Perhaps it was the last thing he has to remember his father by. Or the lady in the soft mink coat, perhaps it was an anniversary gift from her late husband, or it belonged to her grandmother, who loved and cared for her in youth...

Who are PETA to dare judge others based on their appearance? Who are ANY of us to judge?



posted on Dec, 8 2004 @ 02:52 PM
link   

Originally posted by Chakotay
I am also a Native American Indian. While it is admirable to avoid causing suffering to sentient beings, we are a hunting and fishing species.


osiyo Chakotay, dohitsu...we are also a species which uniquely understands the fine balance of our world....there is no need for hunting today, and our would is very much out of balance...that said however, if you are going to hunt, it must be for food with the rest of the animal also being used...otherwise...this is wrong for our people....



posted on Dec, 8 2004 @ 02:59 PM
link   

Originally posted by Chakotay
Sarcastic comments first: wear fake fur made from Iraqi oil, or cotton made from filled and plowed Southern bogs. End of sarcasm.



or..we could just end the stupid law against industrial hemp and let us in KY supply you with quality fabrics and oil at a deflated cost!

Nah, southern cotton growers and Dupont won't let that happen.



posted on Dec, 8 2004 @ 03:03 PM
link   


that said however, if you are going to hunt, it must be for food with the rest of the animal also being used...otherwise...this is wrong for our people....


Well, LadyV, you are entitled to feel that way, but even those who hunt for sport still have rules to abide by. Maybe poachers are considered wrong by today's standards, but then again, when you hunt for sport, you have to do it in season or its illegal. Even if its for sport and you dont use the meat for food, you are still keeping the balance of nature. You are thinning out thier numbers. If there are too many of a particular animal in the area, there can be a scarcity of food adn they all could die. So see, even if you hunt for sport, you are maintaining the balance. When I say for sport, I mean during the hunting seasons for a particular animal. Not just some person picking up a gun, and running around killing animals for the hell of it.



posted on Dec, 8 2004 @ 03:07 PM
link   

Originally posted by lost1
When I say for sport, I mean during the hunting seasons for a particular animal. Not just some person picking up a gun, and running around killing animals for the hell of it.

My "personal" biggest problem with those that hunt for sport.....is the mentality of those doing it. I have problem with any human and their character as a person, that enjoys killing anything for sport...to take something's life away...for the sport of it...regardless if it's legal or not...that's how "I" feel about it!



posted on Dec, 8 2004 @ 03:14 PM
link   

Originally posted by LadyV
My "personal" biggest problem with those that hunt for sport.....is the mentality of those doing it. I have problem with any human and their character as a person, that enjoys killing anything for sport...to take something's life away...for the sport of it...regardless if it's legal or not...that's how "I" feel about it!


I agree. I have hunted and been taught how though I don't need to because I buy my food but hunters should be reverant of the life given for their sustanance. I always was growing up in the hills. Life is precious, human or animal. I think hunters who only care about the size of a buck's rack or breaking a record are dead wrong in the ideology of it.

As for having pets. I cannot say I have two dogs because I really just make sure they're fed and sheltered. They do whatever the hell they want the rest of the time. I did always feel guilty having to keep them confined in the burbs even though they were cared for and seemed to have enough room to run in and am glad they can now venture out for miles if they wish.



posted on Dec, 8 2004 @ 03:24 PM
link   

Originally posted by lost1
Sorry ANOK, my views about PETA existed far before Bush was in office. Although I didnt call them terrorists, I do feel that they are..


Sry but again if it wasn't for fanatics, extremists, you wouldn't be here with the freedom to post on this site.
Groups like PETA have no choice but to use extreme methods, and NO it is NOT terrorism. That word has become a blanket label for any group that works for change. A bush admin byword for anything that could be a threat to the rich corporate ruling elites. Don't buy into that crap. Can't you see that putting labels like that on things is eroding YOUR freedom? Are all forms of disent gonna be labeled terror acts. What if that happened to the human rights ppl in the 60's. Can you say segregation? What if the Suffragettes were labled terrorists? No vote for women. Can you see my point?
Using your anology then you must agree with me that the government are terrorists too?

(And sry for posting that pic Ladyv, but it takes extremes to wake ppl up.)



posted on Dec, 8 2004 @ 03:33 PM
link   
Listen ANOK, I am NOT disagreeing with you about extreme measures or denying the fact that they got us to where we are today. This thread isnt even about that. Just because extreme measures gets things done, doesnt make them right. So stay on topic. I am speaking of the tactics used by PETA to employ their message. They fall into the terrorist category and PETA should be no more! Furs or no furs, PETA shouldnt be using these homeless people to attract attention to them. So ANOK, please, no more crap about how extreme measures got us where we are today, we arent denying that. I am however acknowledging the fact that extreme measures under violent tactics, like PETA are worthy of the term terrorism.



new topics

top topics



 
0
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join