It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

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

Thank you.


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


Where Do the Veep Candidates Stand on Animals?

page: 4
<< 1  2  3    5  6  7 >>

log in


posted on Sep, 1 2008 @ 12:35 AM

Originally posted by jamie83
Just when things seem like they can't sink any lower (and they probably can't) we are now comparing candidates for VP based on how they treat animals.


I'm more concerned with how they treat humans!

Well, Although I am concerned on how they treat humans, I am also concerned on their environmental stance.

And it appears that Biden wins this round!

Ding Ding.

You can't be "Pro-Life" and "Pro-Wolf/Bear Slaughter" at the same time.

[edit on 1-9-2008 by Quazga]

posted on Sep, 1 2008 @ 12:36 AM

As to the Republicans, they love the abortion issue so much that, although they have been in power for many years since Roe v. Wade, they have done absolutely nothing about it but use it to get elected.

boy you're sure right about that. i think it's a signal to other people that share similar values that this individual may stand more often on related topics, but i doubt abortion will ever been done away with. i have this theory that as science and technology advances, the need for real women will wane in proportion to its rise, and we'll be replaced by holographic and robotic, replicas. they'll need a way to get rid of all those women, like they do in india and china now. limit the number of children per family in a patriarchal society, and the female population gets culled to the point of extinction. don't need 'em anyway, got the bot to take care of business.

posted on Sep, 1 2008 @ 03:53 AM
im more worried about where they stand on Human Beings

but ya, i would hope they would want animal laws that cherish our furry friends, and protect them.

but we should be careful not to make laws that put animals over humans too often. that would be unfair to us too.

example, its hypocritical to say "dont kill any animals!" but kill a human being while saying it.

Human beings are animals too!

posted on Sep, 1 2008 @ 03:57 AM

Originally posted by muzzleflash

but we should be careful not to make laws that put animals over humans too often. that would be unfair to us too.

Human beings are animals too!

Well said.
Neither human nor wolf deserves to be shot in the head from a helicopter.
Unless they're suicide wolves, then yes shoot them.

[edit on 9/1/2008 by schrodingers dog]

posted on Sep, 1 2008 @ 06:50 AM

Originally posted by jamie83
Just when things seem like they can't sink any lower (and they probably can't) we are now comparing candidates for VP based on how they treat animals.


I'm more concerned with how they treat humans.

Even though a Catholic, Biden thinks it's ok to kill unborn babies. And of course Lord Obama himself said he wouldn't want his children PUNISHED with a baby.

On the other hand, even though Gov. Palin knew her baby would have Down Syndrome, she believed her child's life was sacred and a gift from God.

Maybe Biden should get a bumper sticker that says, "Kill Babies, Keep Kittens! Vote Obama/Biden!"

My turn!!!

I wanna see how low we can go!





sorry OP I couldn't resist....

[edit on 1-9-2008 by mental modulator]

posted on Sep, 1 2008 @ 07:13 AM
reply to post by mental modulator

Maybe Biden should get a bumper sticker that says, "Kill Babies, Keep Kittens! Vote Obama/Biden!"

Maybe you should get a bumper sticker proclaiming your position of power in the OotMm

Organization of the Moronic Masses

Seriously man. Can you explain to me what part of "freedom of choice" you dont understand?

They're not killing babies.
Babies are born.

Once a caterpillar spins its cocoon - is it AUTOMATICALLY a butterfly? Or is it still a caterpillar.

You have to answer that scientifically - and not ask Rush Limbaugh for an answer.

The fact is a fetus is a fetus until its born.
THen its a baby.


Because the fetus is a part of the woman carrying it until the umbilical cord is severed and the baby breaths on its own.

Until SCIENCE says otherwise - then this is a religious debate.
Politicians who mix religion with politics have no business in government

ESPECIALLY the white house.

I really wish you could set aside your ignorant illogical rhetoric of "baby killers" for one second, take a step back, and see you how the rest of the intelligent world does.

Maybe it'd do you some good.

posted on Sep, 1 2008 @ 08:57 AM
Just to try to bring the thread back to the OP which was the VP candidates stances/record on wildlife.
It has been brought up a few times on the thread that Alaskan sensibilities to hunting, for food or sport, should be taken in context of the culture of the state.

Mrs. Palin and daughter on caribou hunt.

I guess the killing lessons start early in Alaska. I know hunters will think that this is perfectly normal, I think the girl might be a little young for this. It's just creepy.

posted on Sep, 1 2008 @ 09:06 AM
reply to post by schrodingers dog
Below is a e-mail I saved that I received from Senator Obama.

Obama does support protecting our citizens of this planet that don't have the power of human speech. All life is precious.


Thank you for writing to express your strong support for S.1406, the Polar Bear Protection Act. I appreciate hearing from you.

Like you, I am concerned about the divergent threats confronting these animals and agree that protecting vulnerable species and their habitats must be a priority. This year, my colleagues and I sent a letter to the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service urging the agency to list the Polar Bear as a Threatened Species under the Endangered Species Act (ESA). A copy of that letter is attached. Additionally, Senator Kerry proposed an amendment to the Marine Mammal Protection Act of 1972, which protects polar bears from the adverse effects that sport hunting may have on the species' population in Canada. Under this law, the importation of polar bear skins and parts from sport hunts to the U.S. would be prohibited.

As you note, polar bears are being threatened on many fronts. Global warming is causing catastrophic environmental change in the Arctic, including the rapid melting of the sea ice upon which the species depends for its survival. The Center for Biological Diversity suggests that polar bears are in danger of being the first mammals in the world to lose 100% of their habitat due to global warming.

There is no question that accumulated carbon dioxide levels in the air during the past 100 years have resulted in a negative effect on global agriculture, weather patterns, temperatures, ocean levels, wildlife and flora. The evidence is compelling that even if carbon dioxide emissions are restricted to today’s levels, the earth’s climate could be up to several degrees warmer in the next 50 years. This is an issue I am unwilling to ignore.

I am an original cosponsor of the Climate Stewardship and Innovation Act introduced by Senators McCain and Lieberman, which would require industry to reduce harmful greenhouse gas emissions to 2000 levels by 2010. I am also a proud cosponsor of the 2007 Global Warming Pollution Reduction Act by Senators Sanders and Boxer, a long-term plan which would cap greenhouse gas emissions beginning in 2010, with a goal of reducing emissions to 80% below their 1990 levels by the year 2050. It is an ambitious, forward-thinking bill that would require manufacturers to meet heightened standards for new motor vehicles or engines, and encourage new research into energy-efficient technologies. In my view, these efforts to address global warming reflect one of the greatest fights we can make for all vulnerable species, including the polar bear.

You can rest assured that I share your desire to protect these magnificent creatures, and I support polar bear conservation efforts. S.1406 has been referred to the Senate Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation, a panel on which I do not serve. However, I will urge my colleagues on the Committee to take timely action on this proposal.

Thank you again for your letter. Please stay in touch in the future.


Barack Obama
United States Senator

posted on Sep, 1 2008 @ 09:12 AM
reply to post by ofhumandescent

Hey, well done O, thank you for including the email.
It's good to have any candidate's position on this issue in clear written form.
I obviously agree with Obama's position on this issue.

posted on Sep, 1 2008 @ 09:13 AM
obama said that his girls would like to have a dog, never happen because they don't give their kids gifts. pets are a big responsibilty ,i spoil mine,just seems to me that they wont find the time to spend with a dog. he doesn't find the time for his own kids.

posted on Sep, 1 2008 @ 09:18 AM

Originally posted by skeptic1
And, here is what I could find on Palin:

In 2007, Palin announced a $150 bounty for wolves. Why? Because wolves prey on moose and caribou, two favorite targets for hunters in Alaska. So Palin instituted a program to encourage hunters to kill wolves so that there would be more moose and caribou for hunters to kill.

I just want to point this out again... Palin kills wolves because they are in COMPETITION with the humans who want to kill the moose and caribou. She chooses to KILL the competition instead of rehome or share with them... She makes Cheney look like a Teddy bear.


In addition, Palin has sued the Bush administration to delist polar bears under the Endangered Species Act because the protection of polar bears interferes with drilling for oil and gas.

Again, she chooses to KILL the COMPETITION instead of work with them for a more environmentally and ecologically sound solution...

RRConservative, the number of Polar Bears has risen because they've been on the endangered species list! That's what happens when people aren't allowed to kill them. They survive. That's a GOOD thing.

This attitude that we can just let them die so Palin can have a pretty white dead fur and head on her office couch is sickening.

posted on Sep, 1 2008 @ 09:26 AM
One of the best books I have read in the last decade was An Unnatural Order: Roots of Our Destruction of Nature by Jim Mason.

Unnatural Order analyzes the West's dominionist world view which exalts humans as overlords and the rightful owners of all other life on our planet.

Through very astute analyst, Mr. Mason explains how our society came up with this "might is right / bullying" attitude and how this same archaic and selfish mindset is not only adversely effecting every living thing on this planet but the very planet itself.

This single book should be read by every kid in highschool, it's that important of a book.

All life is precious.

posted on Sep, 1 2008 @ 09:29 AM
reply to post by Quazga
Tell me how a man treats his dog and I'll tell you how he treats his fellow human.

All life is precious.

posted on Sep, 1 2008 @ 09:31 AM

Originally posted by undo
what does this have to do with palin? her state of origin and the common lifestyle there, is lending an additional layer of complexity to the topic. perhaps it's an issue of culture? eskimo culture and the lifestyle in alaska is seriously different in that regard.

Inuit hunt and kill animals for food and tools. They don't shoot and kill their competition from helicopters so they'll have the pleasure of killing the majestic animals for trophies to hang on their walls and drape on their bodies.

The people of Alaska aren't eating wolf, although they may use the pelts for something.

posted on Sep, 1 2008 @ 09:32 AM
reply to post by ofhumandescent

Did you read the E. Tolle quote I included earlier:
I think it speaks to it beautifully.

posted on Sep, 1 2008 @ 09:33 AM
reply to post by schrodingers dog
BS Hunting is a primitive outdated bloodlust sport.

posted on Sep, 1 2008 @ 09:38 AM
reply to post by mental modulator
I have several other emails from Obama that he answered when I checked up on how he voted for various issues I consider important.

Do you watch the House of Rep's and Senate Floor programs?

Do you check in and "advise" your state's political leaders on how you feel about important issues?

How many books have you read on various political issues and leaders in the past year?

No, voting party prejudice and watching Fox News or CNN does not qualify you for being educated enough to really vote intellegently.

That is exactly why our country was manipulated into a trillon dollar war that is going to financially drain our country, by a man / party that stole the previous two elections, is a liar, cheat and moron.

Freedom does not come cheap or easy. We must be ever vigilant least we lose our freedoms.

posted on Sep, 1 2008 @ 09:45 AM

Originally posted by undo
erm, i dunno. as i said, i'm a moderate, but there's one thing i'm not very moderate about and that's the idea of a woman in the white house. i really would like to see that.

Just to add a point. I would LOVE to see a woman in the white house. My disgust of Palin has nothing to do with her being a woman. It has to do with who she is. Her politics, her religious righteousness, her positions on most issues in life. The more I get to know about her, the more I don't like her.

I'm a woman.
I would LOVE to have a woman president. But not at the cost of having someone more callous and disrespectful of nature and animals than Dick Cheney.

posted on Sep, 1 2008 @ 09:50 AM
reply to post by mental modulator
Abortion is actually a class & woman issue.

Did you know that back in the 50's and 60's rich women can and did hop a plane and "have their little problem" taken care of in Europe under the care of a certified doctor.

Poor women on the other hand were left in the hands of street corner butchers.

I have a girlfriend who has a sister that had a illegal abortion back in the 60's. She bled so much that her brain suffered. She has been a "retarded" "mentally challenged" person for the last 40 years.

Don't we have enough unwanted and unloved babies / children in the world that are not being raised correctly?

Do we have to keep building more and more prisons before people realize that most of the inmates came from "disadvantaged" backgrounds?

Where do you think you get off telling any woman what she can and can't do with her body?

fyi: I was almost raped back 30 years ago and I thought long and hard, what if? Well, personally if I were even raped and impregnated, if any baby has 50% of my bloodline runing through their veins I would not personally abort them. However, that does not give you, me or anyone the right to dictate such a personal and private matter as carrying a baby to term.

The best solution is really good birth control and knowledge.

Most people that say "you will carry that baby to term" are married, have a spouse that will care for them and their child and have financial resources, they have no EMPATHY for how the other half live.

If abortion is once again outlawed, it is the women who can't afford to hop a plane and get a safe abortion that will suffer.

posted on Sep, 1 2008 @ 09:52 AM
Let's not forget that hunting is only part of Gov. Palin's general approach to wildlife.
As was referenced in the OP, she is basically willing to hand the state of Alaska to oil companies to literally drill/explore/exploit anywhere they want.
A literal "carte blanche" approach with little or no regulation exposing one of the world's last self sufficient ecosystems to untold contamination and damage.

new topics

top topics

<< 1  2  3    5  6  7 >>

log in