Animal rights group Peta has despatched a brace of near-naked operatives to Arizona in a bid to lure Prince Harry away from the delights of meat. The less-than-covert insertion of the pair of barely covered activists will cause yet more distraction for right royal playboy and his retinue, as Harry attempts to complete his …
It's wrong to exploit any animal, unless it's a bird... apparently.
Exploitation of vegetables is wrong!
So much cruelty in the world... Vegetables harm no one, so leave them in peace.
We People for the Ethical Treatment of Vegetables join with PETA in demanding that it all be stopped.
If they don't...
eat meat then what use are?
They could do with a bit of meat on them.
You missed a trick there...
I was wondering how long it would take for someone to post that they looked as if they could do with some meat 'in' them (innuendo intended).
RE: Richard Wharram
They do look a bit undernourished, probably their diet making them look so tired. Maybe they sent two vegans in order to match the "work-rate" of one omniverous lady! Me, I'd steer clear - experience has led me to notice that veggie girls are much more likley to break wind during times of exercise.....
Standard put-down to PETA/nanny types - Hitler was a veggie and a teetotaler.
Only in the last couple years, at the recommendation of his doctor for his gastrointestinal problems. He was not morally against it, and probably wished he could have both.
As Drew Hastings said, they are a gassy bunch, it's no wonder they don't smoke.
Way to go PETA
It's cretinous publicity seeking stunts like this that ensure you'd never be mistaken for a legitimate animal welfare organisation.
It's apparently O.K. if the only pigs are sexist ones.
You don't need that placard to make ME do anything.
Unfortunately I'm more like Harry Plinkett.
Those girls would eat my sausage!
I am up for any form of them being cruel to me!
Im afraid as they are vegan the cheese would be off limits.
People Eat Tasty Animals
The on one the left is a lady-boy
This all goes to show the very important purpose that PETA has - to gather complete morons together so we can ignore them in bulk.
Those two, vegans?
There's no way those two are vegans - clear skin, bright eyes. Vegans are sallow, skinny, unhealthy looking mush-eaters.
if Harry thinks those two are worth tapping up, then he will be unable to complete his pilot's training as his vision is clearly not up to the job.
while i'm not usualy a partaker in the ojectification of the fairer sex, if you put yourself on display like a piece of meat, you have to accept that you will be treated like a piece of meat.
not sure if that is supposed to be vaguely ironic. what with this being Peta an'all.
How about "spice up your life *and* continue to eat meat"?
If God didn't intend us to eat Animals Why did He make then out of Meat?
same as humans ;) Eat you grandmother and stop whining :p
Please stop giving PETA news coverage that they don't deserve (what with them being a bunch of puppy and kitten murdering hypocrites) and maybe they'll go and die quietly in the woods.
My youngest has firm views...
...he refers to PETA as "kitten murdering bastards".
They're not great at finding homes for unwanted pets apparently. So they kill them instead.
Interesting reading on that subject here: http://www.petakillsanimals.com/
A question for PETA:
If we were all to give up eating meat, waht would happen to all the cows/pigs/sheep/goats, etc.?
If we aren't going to eat them, then there really is very little benefit to keeping them, so they will become extinct, or end up as zoo animals, it's not like most domesticated animals would do very well in the wild. Way to go tree-huggers.
Now, I know what you are thinking, we could still keep them for milk. The problem there is that to produce milk, the animals (I will use cattle as the example here), need to be kept pregnant most of the time. This isn't really much of a problem in terms of female offspring, the issue is what to do with the male offspring. At the moment, these are mostly made into tasty steaks. It would simply not be economical to raise large numbers of large aggressive, sexually frustrated animals simply to let them die of old age, not to mention the disastrous effect this would have on land usage, run-off pollution, etc. etc.
Still, never mine eh, PETA, keep up the cognitive dissonance...
I think you're missing the point of veganism which is not not use ANY animal by-product. Milk is a no-no.
I also think you're missing the point of PETA which is to put humans interest firmly behind that of other animals. Therefore 'the point' of animals doesn't come into it.
As we all know, before humans came along all animals lived happily together in perfect harmony.
hence the call for veganism
As vegans they wouldn't use any kind of animal product, which includes dairy and eggs plus, I presume, wool and obviously leather. Oh, and the majority of vaccines on the market as they are egg based. And you can say goodbye to all your cats & dogs as they are carnivorous pets and can't survive on a vegan diet. Oh what a fun world that would be.
Now there's an idea for Pedigree petfoods.
Whiskas PETA activist flavour. Contains 80% real PETA activist, chopped into bite-sized morsels and coated with a thick gravy.
If veganism means NO animal by-products
How does one ensure that the oil going into your car or (even indirectly) powering your home is solely from plant-based sources?
What? They don't do that? If you're going to set an absolute at least stick to it, but not with animal-based glue, obviously .
oh dear... the 'what would happen to all the animals' is so low level. It's like you're eating them for their own good.
Using your logic of car oil/fuel. I trust you have no problem eating dogs from the RSPCA, Kittens? or humans?
Thought not.... ;)
If you're going to set an absolute at least stick to it ;)
Once you go down the 'no animal products of any sort' route
You start raising other questions such as:
At what point is it acceptable to kill an animal?
Is it never at all?
Is it in self defense, for example if about to be eaten by a grizzly bear?
What about parasites? it is morally bad to take anthelmithic drugs to expel and kill intestinal worms? If so, where do you draw the line between 'bad' and 'good' animals? if you don;t draw the line here, what about microscopic single celled animals? Whya re they somehow more special than other non-animal single celled organisms? Whay are these more 'special' than plants? Do we somehow instead draw a criterion based upon some notion of consciousness? Yes, a pig is arguably conscious, and a dinflagellate is arguably not but there is no sharp delineated cut-off somewhere in the middle.
I have yet to meet a vegetarian / vegan who can answer the above questions with a meaningful answer. I usually get a response along the lines of 'so it's okay to eat people then?'
Before humans came along
There were no such things as the domestic cow, pig, chicken, sheep, and all the other selectively bred 'food resources' we've raped our environment to exploit.
It's not that difficult to answer
There is a world of difference between killing animals when necessary, or simply by want of them sharing the same space with you (eg. bacteria), and ruthlessly exploiting whole breeds of animals purely for our own ends, much to the detriment of their own.
Go down to Bernard Matthew's nearest 'processing plant', have a look round, and then consider how much the chickens there are getting out of the whole being eaten thing...
Please define 'ruthlessly exploiting'.
Is it ruthless and exploitative to raise and nurture and animal that would not otherwise exist so that it can be consumed as food? If i eat a steak from an organically raised cow, is it ruthless that that animal has been given a good life, and exploitative that it has been killed (resonably humanely) in order for me to eat it? You might say yes, I disagree. By that definition, it is ruthless and exploitative to grow a carrot then skin and boil it alive. I woudl remind you that those 'whole breeds' would not exist were it not for the initial domestication of their species for food.
There is also a world of difference between raising animals for food and factory farming. Personally, I disagree with raising animals in an environment where they are under constant distress, such as the factory farming of hens, or keeping veal calves in crates. I see it as perfectly natural to kill and eat an animal. Cannibalism is frowned upon, as this doesn't make evolutionary sense, and can cause diseases (e.g. kuru). Eating cats and dogs is equally frowned upon as they are pets, therefore you have an emotional attachment to you, and they are also not nutritionally suitable for human food (unlike pigs, which can also make good pets but are considered a food animal).
I have no problem with people meking a personal choice to be vegetarian or vegan, but I do not think that they are 'correct' in doing so, and find the suggestion that they are somehow ethically superior for making that choice both illogical and offensive.
That is because we use to hunt them down and kill them to eat them. We still do here in the United States. Wild game is delicious. However, I have to go to work in an urban jungle so luckly, the farmers farm meat animals for me.
Cows (or indeed all mammals) do not need to be "kept pregnant" to produce milk. They have to be pregnant to start, then they can continue indefinitely (see gross youtube vid of lady who breastfeeds the kids until they are 8). As long as you milk them every day, the milk will continue being produced.
It's on the interwebs...
... so it must be true.
Have you ever seen wolves attack an animal? Yeesh. I've seen a half-eaten bison calf, still alive (barely) after a wolf attack when I was elk hunting, and as cruel as industrial farming may be, they aren't THAT cruel.
Sorry, I still get nightmares and cold sweats about that calf. And as I said, I'm a hunter, I've cleaned and dressed animals.
" It would simply not be economical to raise large numbers of large aggressive, sexually frustrated animals simply to let them die of old age, not to mention the disastrous effect this would have on land usage, run-off pollution, etc. etc."
By that token we'd better nuke most of south London then.
Are you aware of the though experiment in which a completely non-sentient creature is produced which produces eggs and meat? All this thing needs is a source of energy (food), and it will produce eggs and regenerate sections of it that are removed. Is it still unethical to eat the products?
Would the sci-fi staple of vat-grown meat (commenced only by stimulating cells to divide) still be offensive? If so, why?
'May I urge you to consider my liver?' asked the animal,
'it must be very rich and tender by now, I've been force-feeding
myself for months.'
My old man has been veg for 60yrs and he's a big, bold, bright, c**t aged 78. Fit as a butchers dog too.
Vegetarian Butcher's Dog?
That is all. My brane broke.
A more interesting question
His grandfather is a c**t?
"His grandfather is a c**t?"
That's it. Nothing but meat in my diet from now on.
So where are the naked girls then? I only see girls in bikini's......must try harder.
no beef curtains for you, ....
- Xmas Round-up Ghosts of Christmas Past: Ten tech treats from yesteryear
- Analysis Microsoft's licence riddles give Linux and pals a free ride to virtual domination
- Review Hey Linux newbie: If you've never had a taste, try perfect Petra ... mmm, smells like Mint 16
- I KNOW how to SAVE Microsoft. Give Windows 8 away for FREE – analyst
- Special Report How Britain could have invented the iPhone: And how the Quangocracy cocked it up