Originally posted by flexmoreI'm not against gays either. I just can't figure out why it should bother me as a straight man that gays want to be married. Doesn't bother me a bit. I hear all these preachers getting upset that "the sacred institution of marriage is coming to an end because of the godless fornication and sexual depravations of the homosexual heathen." And you know the night before the "traditional" marriage" he's had a grand ole time with strippers. Plus they've been a bangin' for a long time prior to marriage and during the ceremony they're trying their best to keep a straight face while some tired old minister is up there waxing eloquently about the holy union of marriage. As a minister, I must say that ministers have done more to destroy "traditional marriage" as we know it today than gays ever could.
kirksey you are a legend; gays need to be punished with the ability to marry!!! and divorce!!!!!! and settlements!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
LOL !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!1
( and no i am not against gays nor am i gay, just laughing like crazy)
Originally posted by kirksey957It's not even the strippers that illustrate this double standard. It's the squirrels 😛!
I'm not against gays either. I just can't figure out why it should bother me as a straight man that gays want to be married. Doesn't bother me a bit. I hear all these preachers getting upset that "the sacred institution of marriage is coming to an end because of the godless fornication and sexual depravations of the homosexual heathen." And you k ...[text shortened]... have done more to destroy "traditional marriage" as we know it today than gays ever could.
Originally posted by pradtfgood point...😉
i really don't see why you have formed this picture of peta people as this (i think i understand most of it correctly though i'm not up on kurt cobain whatever that is). just because they advocate for creatures who can't defend themselves, doesn't mean snot is profusely emanating from their noses and running on to their grungy clothes.
some supporters ...[text shortened]... nately did not get him labelled as a middle-grounder in that era with rather dire consequences.
Originally posted by kirksey957Kirksey, what denomination are you affiliated with?...as a minister, how do you explain the Bible's stand on homosexuality. I'm not trying to stir the pot; I'm just curious about your religious philosophy/ideals...🙂
I'm not against gays either. I just can't figure out why it should bother me as a straight man that gays want to be married. Doesn't bother me a bit. I hear all these preachers getting upset that "the sacred institution of marriage is coming to an end because of the godless fornication and sexual depravations of the homosexual heathen." And you k ...[text shortened]... have done more to destroy "traditional marriage" as we know it today than gays ever could.
Originally posted by pradtfEver seen a sheep? Live anywhere near a farm?
[b]suspicion is good, because then people can hopefully find out what really happens
Maggotty wool, full of urine is worthless. Why would a farmer try to raise wool like this?
Shearers are paid usually by the sheep and are not paid for sheep that are wounded. It makes no sense to damage an animal.
Sheep not sheared simply shed their wool. They are not that far removed from nature - they live in the open, and there is mortality. Just the same as for any animal.
Originally posted by steerpikeYeah, the media and activists can warp the facts a bit when bringing a subject like this to light.
Ever seen a sheep? Live anywhere near a farm?
Maggotty wool, full of urine is worthless. Why would a farmer try to raise wool like this?
Shearers are paid usually by the sheep and are not paid for sheep that are wounded. It makes no sense to damage an animal.
Sheep not sheared simply shed their wool. They are not that far removed from nature - they live in the open, and there is mortality. Just the same as for any animal.
Some animals are mistreated, but those are only extreme and isolated cases.
Almost half my family are or have been farmers and they always treat their animals quite well.
Dopn't let the propaganda influence you too much - take it for what it is. Isolated cases being used to filter the propaganda through to the man on the street.
1 edit
Originally posted by chancremechanicYou may be in the middle ground in the US (I wouldn't know), but you would be considered far right here.
I'll answer both of your questions...
1. What's wrong with anarchy, radical liberals and militants? Well, anarchy is absence of government and law, and that describes a Mad Max film. Do you want to live in that type of environme ...[text shortened]... al thousand people soy burgers instead of fish. In friendship...😉
The majority of people these days don't celebrate Christmas for its religious aspect. In fact from what I've read it was actually a pagan tradition long before Christianity adopted it in an attempt (successful, obviously) to stamp out the old meaning.
And on gay weddings, what difference does it make to your life if a same sex couple get married? Are you claiming they can't love each other in the same way a hetro couple can?
Please tell me if I understood you correctly. Two gay people shouldn’t be allowed to wed because you think it’s wrong, yet people shouldn’t be allowed to force their ideas on animal cruelty on you because your life isn’t any of their business. I happen to agree with the latter, yet perhaps you can see how it may come off as a tad hypocritical compared to the former.
Originally posted by steerpikeyes i have seen sheep - they have 4 legs and go baa
Ever seen a sheep? Live anywhere near a farm?
Maggotty wool, full of urine is worthless. Why would a farmer try to raise wool like this?
Shearers are paid usually by the sheep and are not paid for sheep that are wounded. It makes no sense to damage an animal.
Sheep not sheared simply shed their wool. They are not that far removed from nature - they live in the open, and there is mortality. Just the same as for any animal.
yes i live near several farms.
have you seen the website? here it is again: www.woolisbaad.com
have you seen the video?
it is correct that maggotty wool is worthless and a farmer wouldn't raise wool like that. that's the whole point of the barbaric mulesing 'operation'. there are alternatives to mulesing such as diet, spraying or raising a breed other than the Merinos - but apparently these alternatives are rarely pursued because it doesn't increase the bottom line.
whether shearers are paid by the hour or by the sheep as you claim, amounts to the same thing: the faster the job is done, the more money they will make. either way, it is the sheep who pay the price:
"Says one eyewitness: "[T]he shearing shed must be one of the worst places in the world for cruelty to animals ? I have seen shearers punch sheep with their shears or their fists until the sheep's nose bled. I have seen sheep with half their faces shorn off ?" (from the website)
this is what happens in mass agriculture whether it is on the sheep, pig farm or cattle farm or any related organization which attempts to maximize profit. it's not good for the animals and not surprisingly it's not good for the small farmers either many of whom do try to take good care of their animals.
in friendship,
prad
Originally posted by Crowleyi am glad you say your family treated their animals well. animals get a much better break on smaller farms. i knew a cattle farmer who admitted that he himself couldn't kill any of his cows. he would send them to slaughter house by transport, of course, but the thought of doing the deed himself was loathsome.
Yeah, the media and activists can warp the facts a bit when bringing a subject like this to light.
Some animals are mistreated, but those are only extreme and isolated cases.
Almost half my family are or have been farmers and they always treat their animals quite well.
Dopn't let the propaganda influence you too much - take it for what it is. Isolated cases being used to filter the propaganda through to the man on the street.
the mistreatment is unfortunately neither extreme nor isolated. it is not possible to raise huge numbers of animals and treat them 'quite well'. surely you are not suggesting that the video on the website is mere propaganda with paid human and sheep actors simulating the mulesing operation? surely you are not suggesting that all the media and activists have been doing is creating a myth about factory farming all these years?
we have had a couple of local pig farmers go out of business. why? because they just cannot compete with the big guys. it was not because they suddenly developed a deep respect for all lifeforms. factory farming is no myth to them.
mass farming is a reality not propaganda. it effects our environment as well (many people try to deny this too, just as they deny the cruelty to the animals). for example, about 90% of New Zealand's greenhouse gas emissions come from methane 'enteric fermentation' belching and flatulation by livestock (mostly sheep apparantly). now this seems a little high for a few sheep to produce, but interestingly enough the government did propose 'taxing sheep farmers to pay for emissions research'. if the government considers the problem seriously enough to consider a 'fart tax', may be things don't smell too good after all.
if anyone is doing the propaganda, i respectfully suggest that it is the various components of the mass agricultural industry. they have the lobby groups. they do the advertising. they even design large parts of the educational curriculum. and most important - they make the big bucks. it is definitely in their interest to keep the 'man on the street' believing and doing exactly what they want him to.
in friendship,
prad
In SA there hasn't really been reports of livestock mistreatment, hopefully because it doesn't happen. Also here we don't need such mass production.
I know animals probably don't get treated as they should, but there is definately some biased reporting from both sides.
The activists will say animals get mistreated and show video, pictures etc.
The farmers will show perfect farms with good living conditions for the animals.
Me, I don't really care.
5 edits
Originally posted by Crowleyyou may be right to some degree regarding SA. i know that the factory farming in canada is not as extensive as it is in the US. however, i was surprised several years ago to find that it actually does happen in canada and that they are just as horrific as anywhere in the world.
In SA there hasn't really been reports of livestock mistreatment, hopefully because it doesn't happen. Also here we don't need such mass production.
I know animals probably don't get treated as they should, but there is definately so ...[text shortened]... od living conditions for the animals.
Me, I don't really care.
as far as the biased reporting, it is not quite as simple as that. even if you look at pure numbers, it is easy to determine that the farms with the perfect living conditions can harbour only a certain number of 'happy' animals blissfully grazing in the field (we have such a farm down the road from us). however, what the 'activists' (in quotes, because they are by no means all activists) show are animals corralled into small stalls where they can barely move. we are not talking of a herd of 100 cattle at home on the range here - we are tallking about
"100,000 animals are herded together on huge feedlots. These animals do not graze on grass, as picture books tell us; they can't graze at all. Feedlots are crowded, filthy, stinking places with open sewers, unpaved roads and choking air. The animals would not survive at all but for the fact that they are fed huge amounts of antibiotics." (Steve Boyan PhD recently retired from his post as a political science professor at University of Maryland, Baltimore County - www.earthsave.org)
the california government promotes their dairy industry with the 'happy cows' commercial. they are being taken to court for false advertising, because these are not the conditions the cows live in. in this case, the propaganda is an outright lie. interestingly enough, lies are OK when it comes to the government:
"While California has strict laws against false advertising, Judge David Garcia of the Superior Court of California, County of San Francisco, ruled that the government can't be sued for violations of these laws, no matter how egregious such violations may be. The judge did acknowledge that California cows probably aren't happy and that if the ads implying that they were happy had been made by a private individual, false-advertising laws might apply." (http://www.peta.org/feat/caldairy/)
again, i think if you look at the bottom line you will see that it is the agri-industries who make money - animal rights organizations don't (and many ar activists live near the poverty line). even the most influencial and 'wealthy' ar organization PETA revenue amounts to under $18 million - compare that with the revenues of the groups they are fighting against (http://www.peta.org/feat/ar2003/17.html) - they are not doing it for the money, but the other guys are.
you just cannot make the big bucks running small farms.
as far as not caring, i didn't either many years ago - but i do now.
in friendship,
prad
Originally posted by chancremechanicBy all means stir the pot. For the record I am a Baptist. But I am one who values love over all and what I frequently notice is that the more the doctrine/dogma and the "higher the steeple", the further one leaves the essential values of loving all, even those we don't quite understand.
Kirksey, what denomination are you affiliated with?...as a minister, how do you explain the Bible's stand on homosexuality. I'm not trying to stir the pot; I'm just curious about your religious philosophy/ideals...🙂
Jesus had absolutely nothing to say about homosexuality. But he had plenty to say about those who don't love. No distinction from Jesus on this. We are all accountable. Period. Now Paul made references to "unnatural acts." The context of his writings about this , I believe, were meant to address a form of pediophile slavery that was common in the time. I don't think he was writing about mutually consenting adults. Some may disagree with me and that is fine. But the problem of the time was abuse of young boys who were held as slaves. All perfectly legal in that time.
I think it is important to weight the context and the time of what is written in the Bible. There are many things in there that we just don't do anymore. For example. If you have a rebellious child, and who wasn't rebellious at some time, you take them out to the gates of the city and stone them. Guess what? It worked. But I don't know anyone advocating that this side of the Taliban. And there are many other examples of this.
One thing that I deeply believe is that churches have a long way to go in providing forums for people of differing views, religions, pursuations, etc, to come together and LISTEN to one another.
OK, end of sermon. Thanks for asking. Kirk
Originally posted by dylDyl, you quoted me out of context. I never said that two Homosexuals could not marry. I don't care if they get married or not. I just don't have to accept it. I said that I shouldn't have to be forced to accept Harry and Peter as legitimate spouses. I won't forcibly stop a Gay wedding...not my business. At the same time, I don't want a militant vegan cursing me for wearing a leather coat, but if he wants to protest peacefully on the street corner without obstructing normal human activity, by all means have at it...I serve my country so people of differing opinions can protest peacefully. Cheers
You may be in the middle ground in the US (I wouldn't know), but you would be considered far right here.
The majority of people these days don't celebrate Christmas for its religious aspect. In fact from what I've read it was actually a pagan tradition long before Christianity adopted it in an attempt (successful, obviously) to stamp out the old meaning. ...[text shortened]... atter, yet perhaps you can see how it may come off as a tad hypocritical compared to the former.
Man, I just spent probably 15 minutes posting in this thread, what with my awesome communication skills (sarcasm) and then I lost my connection! So I still want to post but I'll be brief.
I didn't know just how awful animals are treated until Pradft's turkey day post. But I read it, got a little grossed out, and went and ate my turkey anyway. I don't see the point in animal rights activism. The human population is going to continue to grow, and society is not going to change. We live in a lazy, overweight, hurried, and wasteful society (U.S.) Please don't take offense, I am just as guilty as the next person. We want fast food at a cheap price, and then throw half of it away when we're done.
In my opinion, nothing is going to change until our society changes the way we eat, and the way we breed- and that is not going to change, no matter how hard activists fight. It's sad, but it's the world we live in. And I think it's sadder to know there are millions upon millions of starving people throughtout the world tonight, while the well fed have thrown tons of leftovers into the garbage.
Not all I wanted to say, but it's the jist of it.