http://apnews.myway.com/article/20060925/D8KBS6AG0.html
Uhm, WTF?!
They're damned roaches! Eat them or I'll stomp on them!
That's so stupid. I wonder if they're against eliminating foul infected with the avian flu?
Quote from: Sidoh on September 25, 2006, 01:59:59 PM
That's so stupid. I wonder if they're against eliminating foul infected with the avian flu?
I'm absolutely sure that they ARE against killing those foul, as well as against killing cows with BSE (mad cow disease). Because after all, they're all animals, and PETA is People for the Ethical Treatment of
Animals.
I may not like PETA, but I totally understand why they'd take this position.
People
Eatting
Tasty
Animals.
I fucking hate PETA people. Especially this women. Who the fuck cares?! You don't see them protesting against Lions for eatting animals do you? What's so different between a human eatting an animal/bug and a Lion eatting an animal. Atleast when we do it isn't as messy and the animal dies quicker.
Quote from: iago on September 25, 2006, 02:12:40 PM
I'm absolutely sure that they ARE against killing those foul, as well as against killing cows with BSE (mad cow disease). Because after all, they're all animals, and PETA is People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals.
I may not like PETA, but I totally understand why they'd take this position.
Then what do they recommend we do? Lock them up in a cage, quarantined from the outside world? That's not very ethical either. It doesn't seem that they can think past five minutes in the future.
Quote from: Sidoh on September 25, 2006, 02:39:52 PM
Then what do they recommend we do? Lock them up in a cage, quarantined from the outside world? That's not very ethical either. It doesn't seem that they can think past five minutes in the future.
Why are you asking me? I don't know!
Quote from: iago on September 25, 2006, 03:03:06 PM
Why are you asking me? I don't know!
But you said you can see why they take the stance they do! :(
Haha, I see reason for being against that, but there are far too many reasons to outlaw it, I think.
Quote from: Sidoh on September 25, 2006, 05:12:35 PM
Quote from: iago on September 25, 2006, 03:03:06 PM
Why are you asking me? I don't know!
But you said you can see why they take the stance they do! :(
Haha, I see reason for being against that, but there are far too many reasons to outlaw it, I think.
I do see why, killing the birds isn't very nice. But I don't know what they'd choose for an alternative, and I'm neither going to research their viewpoints, nor am I going to pretend I know :P
Quote from: iago on September 25, 2006, 05:16:51 PM
I do see why, killing the birds isn't very nice. But I don't know what they'd choose for an alternative, and I'm neither going to research their viewpoints, nor am I going to pretend I know :P
Haha. That's what I'm saying. I'd be interested to hear what the propose that people do as an alternative (I'm not asking you :P). They say killing disease-ridden birds is mean, but there really isn't much of an ethical solution as of now that doesn't also entail high amounts of danger to humans.
Personally, I think most of PETA's viewpoints are dumbass hasty statements.
Quote from: Sidoh on September 25, 2006, 05:20:25 PM
Quote from: iago on September 25, 2006, 05:16:51 PM
I do see why, killing the birds isn't very nice. But I don't know what they'd choose for an alternative, and I'm neither going to research their viewpoints, nor am I going to pretend I know :P
Haha. That's what I'm saying. I'd be interested to hear what the propose that people do as an alternative (I'm not asking you :P). They say killing disease-ridden birds is mean, but there really isn't much of an ethical solution as of now that doesn't also entail high amounts of danger to humans.
Personally, I think most of PETA's viewpoints are dumbass hasty statements.
So if a group of humans got an infectious disease that was 50% likely to be fatal, would you prefer that those humans be killed, or quarantined?
Quote from: Rule on September 25, 2006, 08:23:49 PM
Quote from: Sidoh on September 25, 2006, 05:20:25 PM
Quote from: iago on September 25, 2006, 05:16:51 PM
I do see why, killing the birds isn't very nice. But I don't know what they'd choose for an alternative, and I'm neither going to research their viewpoints, nor am I going to pretend I know :P
Haha. That's what I'm saying. I'd be interested to hear what the propose that people do as an alternative (I'm not asking you :P). They say killing disease-ridden birds is mean, but there really isn't much of an ethical solution as of now that doesn't also entail high amounts of danger to humans.
Personally, I think most of PETA's viewpoints are dumbass hasty statements.
So if a group of humans got an infectious disease that was 50% likely to be fatal, would you prefer that those humans be killed, or quarantined?
Leper colonys.
Quote from: Rule on September 25, 2006, 08:23:49 PM
Quote from: Sidoh on September 25, 2006, 05:20:25 PM
Quote from: iago on September 25, 2006, 05:16:51 PM
I do see why, killing the birds isn't very nice. But I don't know what they'd choose for an alternative, and I'm neither going to research their viewpoints, nor am I going to pretend I know :P
Haha. That's what I'm saying. I'd be interested to hear what the propose that people do as an alternative (I'm not asking you :P). They say killing disease-ridden birds is mean, but there really isn't much of an ethical solution as of now that doesn't also entail high amounts of danger to humans.
Personally, I think most of PETA's viewpoints are dumbass hasty statements.
So if a group of humans got an infectious disease that was 50% likely to be fatal, would you prefer that those humans be killed, or quarantined?
We obviously have more & higher rights than animals. We're the dominate species on earth, we make the rules.
Quote from: Rule on September 25, 2006, 08:23:49 PM
So if a group of humans got an infectious disease that was 50% likely to be fatal, would you prefer that those humans be killed, or quarantined?
Quarantined, assuming it is contageous.
Quote from: AntiVirus on September 25, 2006, 02:36:34 PM
People
Eatting
Tasty
Animals
No wonder they're against this. Cockroaches do not taste good. If this were a cow eating contest with A1 steak sauce I'm sure they'd approve.
Quote from: Rule on September 25, 2006, 08:23:49 PM
Quote from: Sidoh on September 25, 2006, 05:20:25 PM
Quote from: iago on September 25, 2006, 05:16:51 PM
I do see why, killing the birds isn't very nice. But I don't know what they'd choose for an alternative, and I'm neither going to research their viewpoints, nor am I going to pretend I know :P
Haha. That's what I'm saying. I'd be interested to hear what the propose that people do as an alternative (I'm not asking you :P). They say killing disease-ridden birds is mean, but there really isn't much of an ethical solution as of now that doesn't also entail high amounts of danger to humans.
Personally, I think most of PETA's viewpoints are dumbass hasty statements.
So if a group of humans got an infectious disease that was 50% likely to be fatal, would you prefer that those humans be killed, or quarantined?
A leper should be quarantined. Someone with the avian flu should be asked not to bite others.
EDIT -
This reminds me of a local outbreak of Whooping Cough, recently. The victims of Whooping Cough were quarintined to their homes officially.
Quote from: Sidoh on September 25, 2006, 08:51:18 PM
Quote from: Rule on September 25, 2006, 08:23:49 PM
So if a group of humans got an infectious disease that was 50% likely to be fatal, would you prefer that those humans be killed, or quarantined?
Quarantined, assuming it is contageous.
So, if those in PETA believe the same standards of treatment should be applied to non-human animals and human-animals, then it does make sense that PETA would take the stance that the chickens shouldn't be killed. Not that I would support quarantining the chickens, and we don't know whether or not PETA would either. In any case, I think publicly providing incentive for lots of people to do something extremely obscene is in very poor taste, and eating live "hissing" cockroaches for a large audience is definitely obscene. How can we say that this is less obscene than a woman exposing her breasts in public? And it is generally illegal for a woman to do this, solely because it is "obscene."
Quote from: Rule on September 26, 2006, 02:00:39 AM
So, if those in PETA believe the same standards of treatment should be applied to non-human animals and human-animals, then it does make sense that PETA would take the stance that the chickens shouldn't be killed. Not that I would support quarantining the chickens, and we don't know whether or not PETA would either. In any case, I think publicly providing incentive for lots of people to do something extremely obscene is in very poor taste, and eating live "hissing" cockroaches for a large audience is definitely obscene. How can we say that this is less obscene than a woman exposing her breasts in public? And it is generally illegal for a woman to do this, solely because it is "obscene."
Since that is a subjective conclusion (eating a cockroach being compared equally to a woman exposing her breasts), I'm not sure. There is nudity in movies and on some networks at certain hours. The ratings of the show that has this content indicate that. While whatever show it is that's doing this probably doesn't have some sort of rating tag indicating the assimilation of live cockroaches, it probably has a rating of "TV14" or "M," I'd guess.
I'm not saying that I agree with any sort of "competition" involving people eating cockroaches. I think all of that kind of "entertainment" is pretty stupid, but, alas, so many people clap their hands together in gleeful disgust when they watch something like this.
Quote from: Newby on September 25, 2006, 09:50:54 PM
Quote from: AntiVirus on September 25, 2006, 02:36:34 PM
People
Eatting
Tasty
Animals
No wonder they're against this. Cockroaches do not taste good. If this were a cow eating contest with A1 steak sauce I'm sure they'd approve.
Probably. Those crazy PETA people.