Originally posted by: cookj
Thanks .
I just finished off a plate or chicken wings
What's wrong with Rush? Rush rocks! You can never go wrong with a band like that!Originally posted by: MicroChrome
Well, keep listening to rush and bush... I would rather be informed thank you very much!Originally posted by: The Raven
I'd rather someone give me some misinformation than terrorism (of any kind) anyday.
Uh, no. Obesity in our society is a result of excessively high carbohydrate intake (usually from plant matter and vegetable oils).obesity in america is a result of meat loving people
That should give PETA enough to ramp-up their other goals, such as the total elimination of animal use by people for any purpose whatsoever, including the "slavery" that is pet and companion animal ownership (PETA's words, not mine).if I have a billion dollar, i would give at least 500 million to peta to convince the world to stop eating meat so there is less suffering for the animals as they are already an endangered species in the natural world.
Originally posted by: tcsenter
Uh, no. Obesity in our society is a result of excessively high carbohydrate intake (usually from plant matter and vegetable oils).
]That should give PETA enough to ramp-up their other goals, such as the total elimination of animal use by people for any purpose whatsoever, including the "slavery" that is pet and companion animal ownership (PETA's words, not mine).
It never fails to amaze me just how misinformed the typical PETA supporter is about PETA's ideology and goals.
lol! 90+% of the US public (indeed the world) does not share the ideology or objectives of PETA, and a significant percentage of the tiny minority who do, wouldn't if they actually understood PETA's ideology and objectives. PETA has been able to build support for its causes only to the extent it can mislead people about its ideology and objectives.Hmmm, selling an agenda, I see. Obesity in our, or any, society is from excessive caloric intake. And that's it.
LOL... you think PETA doesn't use others as a means to an end? That's fscking rich... :laugh:Originally posted by: Gilby
Seems pretty consistant and honest to me. They take Kantian ethics (Don't use others as a means to an end) and apply them to animals as equal to humans. May not seem all that tenable to me or any others, but the backlash from the likes of you certainly makes one wonder if perhaps they're hitting a hidden amount of collective-conscience guilt.
the beef flaps?Originally posted by: NuNuNYC
Just got my PETA Pamela Anderson DVD today...Gruesome pics they have on the inside flaps >=T
Originally posted by: Xyclone
Originally posted by: tcsenter
In chronological order:
1. Pam gets silicon breast implants, which were approved only after decades of testing on thousands upon thousands of animals
2. Pam makes tens of millions of dollars using her heaving boobs
3. Pam gets her implants removed
4. Pam cares so much about animals that she wants to shame you into not supporting the harming of animals for frivolous reasons such as feeding millions of people (you know, compared to the far more important reason of making her filthy rich)