Join Alkaline Trio, Against me!, and Silverstein in....

[animal_10ve]

signing a petition regarding experimentation on primates. Save #99, peta's new campaign, is trying to urge the government to end experimentation on primates.
"They’re identified by the last two digits of their I.D. numbers, tattooed across their chests. #99 was one of hundreds of monkeys who were taken from their homes in the wild and dosed with an experimental substance in a laboratory in Vienna, Virginia. He was the smallest and sickliest in the experiment—pale, emaciated, bald. Constantly hunched in the back of his cage, #99 was laughed at, called names, and refused treatment. Every day, he endured the same beatings, abuse, and experiments as all the others.
It’s too late for #99, but you can follow the lead of Alkaline Trio, Against Me!, and Silverstein and sign a petition to help other monkeys like him."

Check out the petition @:
http://www.peta2.com/outthere/o-save99.asp?c=stsave99

[AA-12]

Ugh, why even bother?

[peon]

petitions never work

[Aklerc]

PETA and petition in the same sentence is enough to know that I want no part in this.

[deathscreamingsheep]

I'm not following Silverstein's lead in anything.

[thedeadwalk!]

petitions never work
A petition got Gray Davis recalled.

[Jharaski]

Ok, then let them test on you instead.

[Chrizzle fo' Shizzle]

Yeah, let's stop medical testing on the animals most similar to us

Are you ****ing nuts?

[Atomic Rain]

:lol: at number 99

The purpose of animal testing isn't to ensure medicines aren't going to kill babies; no, it's to degrade animals by making fun of them.

[PerpetualBurn]

Do PETA understand basic economics? Do they realise just how valuable (in money, not medical contribution) the test data gained from these animals is? Animal testers don't want the animals dying mid-experiment from malnourishment or they'd ruin data that, if the experiment goes well, could lead to hundreds of millions of pounds.

[neal_672]

PETA members don't use any products tested on animals i'm sure :rolleyes:

Still though i agree that they should be kept humanely, but the fact they think animal testing is a means to simply abuse animals is, well, laughable...

[PerpetualBurn]

Animals for testing are usually kept in good conditions. As I said before, if the test subjects were dying of malnourishment and disease they would completely ruin the data collected. Most animals for vivisection are kept better than livestock.

[animal_10ve]

"Do PETA understand basic economics? Do they realise just how valuable (in money, not medical contribution) the test data gained from these animals is? Animal testers don't want the animals dying mid-experiment from malnourishment or they'd ruin data that, if the experiment goes well, could lead to hundreds of millions of pounds."

PETA realizes the PAIN, CREULTY, and SUFFERING the animals have to endure. they don't care about stupid "data" gained from torture, they care about the LIVES that were lost due to it.

[Aklerc]

"Do PETA understand basic economics? Do they realise just how valuable (in money, not medical contribution) the test data gained from these animals is? Animal testers don't want the animals dying mid-experiment from malnourishment or they'd ruin data that, if the experiment goes well, could lead to hundreds of millions of pounds."

PETA realizes the PAIN, CREULTY, and SUFFERING the animals have to endure. they don't care about stupid "data" gained from torture, they care about the LIVES that were lost due to it.
Ha.

[animal_10ve]

"Animals for testing are usually kept in good conditions. As I said before, if the test subjects were dying of malnourishment and disease they would completely ruin the data collected. Most animals for vivisection are kept better than livestock."

GOOD CONDITION?! O YA?! have u ever seen "testing 1, 2, 3"? if not, i think u should take a look....

http://www.peta2.com/feat/testing123/

[PerpetualBurn]

Moron.

Absolute moron.

The animals are usually in good conditions, otherwise the vivisectors would lose massive amounts of money.

Do you have a pet? Have you ever taken it to the vet? That's right. Every bloody goddam animal ever taken to a vet is saved by the accumulated knowledge and medical expertise acquired from testing on a much lesser number.

Vivisection SAVES the lives of even more animals.

[Ghostfire3]

"Animals for testing are usually kept in good conditions. As I said before, if the test subjects were dying of malnourishment and disease they would completely ruin the data collected. Most animals for vivisection are kept better than livestock."

GOOD CONDITION?! O YA?! have u ever seen "testing 1, 2, 3"? if not, i think u should take a look....

http://www.peta2.com/feat/testing123/

I knew you were going to post one of those stupid ****ing PETA propaganda videos.

[Pint of stella]

Any group, but the deeply hypocritical PETA. They have been responisble for the murder of some animals they save. They encourage violence and hire crack arsonists. For more info, look on wikipiedia's page on the group. Be prepared for the truth the group never tells the public. You can also see the groups hypocricy by typing in PETA+hypocrites or anything similar into google. They are truly a group of lying bastards.

[peon]

A petition got Gray Davis recalled.


oh, wow:rolleyes:

[PerpetualBurn]

The kind of video that shows really old footage or footage that led to prosecutions because shown method is illegal. Yeah, go PETA...

[animal_10ve]

Yeah, let's stop medical testing on the animals most similar to us

Are you ****ing nuts?

nope, but think about wat u just said. that point is wat i'm trying to make EXACTLY. so wat IF animal scientists started testing on US, huh? how would u feel then? oviously u think that's "****ing nuts", being tested on for things like juice, shampoo, and makeup, so how do u think the millions of animals who have DIED felt?!

[Jharaski]

"Do PETA understand basic economics? Do they realise just how valuable (in money, not medical contribution) the test data gained from these animals is? Animal testers don't want the animals dying mid-experiment from malnourishment or they'd ruin data that, if the experiment goes well, could lead to hundreds of millions of pounds."

PETA realizes the PAIN, CREULTY, and SUFFERING the animals have to endure. they don't care about stupid "data" gained from torture, they care about the LIVES that were lost due to it.
Retard. It is CRUEL to not test, because humans will go through PAIN and SUFFERING.

by the way. http://petakillsanimals.com

[animal_10ve]

u guys r just so self-centered....u don't think about other creatures on the earth. and u no wat that's called? SPECIEISM

[Atomic Rain]

:lol::lol::lol::lol:

I'm a TERRIBLE PERSON, but I can't deny I alughed and decided i'd had enough when i saw a cat with a parallel port in the back of its head on the video

HAHAHAHAHHA

These people seriously think animal testing involves hooking cat's brains up to quickbasic and making them jump on demand or something?

PETA proves it is not a worthwhile source FTW

They're gonna be telling us to shut down bonzai kitten enxt

[PerpetualBurn]

Since you've given up so quickly, and given your name, new account and stupid typing style, I'm almost certain that you're a gimmick. And not even a good one.

Somebody ban this muppet.

[Ghostfire3]

THANKS, I really didn't KNOW what SPECIEISM was CALLED. None of us are being self-centered, you're just over reacting.

[Jharaski]

u guys r just so self-centered....u don't think about other creatures on the earth. and u no wat that's called? SPECIEISM


Go donate yourself to medicine. Because you're a waste of oxygen.

[Atomic Rain]

u guys r just so self-centered....u don't think about other creatures on the earth. and u no wat that's called? SPECIEISM

:eek:

That one's deep.



Homo Sapiens are a superior species to 99% of other species

Whatya gonna do, call the karma police?

[Pint of stella]

u guys r just so self-centered....u don't think about other creatures on the earth. and u no wat that's called? SPECIEISM

Bollocks. Specieism is a ridiculous claim. That means that most animals on the planet are "speciesd". As many animals eat and kill each other. Specieism is just away to try and make meat eaters feel guilty. It really doesn't work. If you don't eat meat fine. Don't think your a saint and try and dictate to us what we should eat.

[neal_672]

u guys r just so self-centered....u don't think about other creatures on the earth. and u no wat that's called? SPECIEISM

Oh dear :lol:

Someone enable signatures now, i want that as my sig!

:lol: :lol: :lol:

This guy must be a troll? Surely?

[PerpetualBurn]

But these drugs can save so many human lives

Here's the thing though, ignoring humans completely, the number of animals saved because of vivisection far outweighs the number of animals tested on.

[-1up!-]

u guys r just so self-centered....u don't think about other creatures on the earth. and u no wat that's called? SPECIEISM

Yes, and the very best way to sensitize people to animal cruelty is to make them feel exaggeratedly guilty about something they can hardly control.

No. You're an idiot, stfu and leave.

[guitrguy]

I'm in PETA.......

People Eating Tasty Animals


Seriously, if there is no testing on chimps or other animals what are we supposed to test on, that is within ethical standards?

[Jharaski]

I'm in PETA.......

People Eating Tasty Animals


Seriously, if there is no testing on chimps or other animals what are we supposed to test on, that is within ethical standards?

Die?

[Danish]

u guys r just so self-centered....u don't think about other creatures on the earth. and u no wat that's called? SPECIEISM

Seeing as no one else will even give you the opportunity to take part in a decent conversation (that is, if you want one), I will.

Ultimately, I reject the arguments of people like Peter Singer. Rights, I would argue, should only be extended to entities with consciousness and self-awareness. The only known species that can claim these qualities are humans.

This isn't to say we should discount cruelty to animals. Quite the opposite: any progressive society recognizes all suffering and aims to reduce it as much as possible, both for animals and humans. But to grant animals rights normally reserved for humans (ie. the right to life) would be totally unnecessary and, ultimately, impossible. People need to eat. Likewise, limited animal testing is necessary to protect human life. I think if you searched out some peer-reviewed research on the subject (not the PETA website), you would find that scientific testing on primates and other larger mammals is very limited.

ps: If you're going to respond to this (and I hope you do), please don't use leetspeak.

[animal_10ve]

Any group, but the deeply hypocritical PETA. They have been responisble for the murder of some animals they save. They encourage violence and hire crack arsonists. For more info, look on wikipiedia's page on the group. Be prepared for the truth the group never tells the public. You can also see the groups hypocricy by typing in PETA+hypocrites or anything similar into google. They are truly a group of lying bastards.

uh ok u need to know something about WIKIPEDIA:
wikipedia is a public site where anyone, i mean ANYONE, can access. aliens, gnomes, goats, trees, watever, can edit it's text. and same thing w/ google. you think EVERY webbi that saids something bad about PETA is true? well i can just make a webbi RIGHT NOW that devotes itself to destroying PETA and still be a vegan! you can't trust web sites just like that...
PETA is an INTERNATIONAL organization that has taken huge steps to what it believes in. They have set campaigns against the government, preached, and changed billions of minds. i think i'd agree and listen to someone like them more than a stupid who-knows-what website

[Jharaski]

uh ok u need to know something about WIKIPEDIA:
wikipedia is a public site where anyone, i mean ANYONE, can access. aliens, gnomes, goats, trees, watever, can edit it's text. and same thing w/ google. you think EVERY webbi that saids something bad about PETA is true? well i can just make a webbi RIGHT NOW that devotes itself to destroying PETA and still be a vegan! you can't trust web sites just like that...
PETA is an INTERNATIONAL organization that has taken huge steps to what it believes in. They have set campaigns against the government, preached, and changed billions of minds. i think i'd agree and listen to someone like them more than a stupid who-knows-what website

They list their sources, you know. Explain what they need a walk in freezer for. And if they're against using animals ALTOGETHER (pets, seeing eye dogs, curing aids) why does one of their top execs use insulin? Actually they're a corporation. Not an organization.

[neal_672]

uh ok u need to know something about WIKIPEDIA:
wikipedia is a public site where anyone, i mean ANYONE, can access. aliens, gnomes, goats, trees, watever, can edit it's text. and same thing w/ google. you think EVERY webbi that saids something bad about PETA is true? well i can just make a webbi RIGHT NOW that devotes itself to destroying PETA and still be a vegan! you can't trust web sites just like that...
PETA is an INTERNATIONAL organization that has taken huge steps to what it believes in. They have set campaigns against the government, preached, and changed billions of minds. i think i'd agree and listen to someone like them more than a stupid who-knows-what website

The fact that a website is from the public domain does not mean that it can be discounted purely on that fact. Show me some evidence that what PETA are doing is right. And i mean some reasonable evidence.

Secondly, just because PETA are an international organisation does not mean they are correct in what they are doing either. God help us if PETA had really turned billions of people into people like them...

[animal_10ve]

Seeing as no one else will even give you the opportunity to take part in a decent conversation (that is, if you want one), I will.

Ultimately, I reject the arguments of people like Peter Singer. Rights, I would argue, should only be extended to entities with consciousness and self-awareness. The only known species that can claim these qualities are humans.

This isn't to say we should discount cruelty to animals. Quite the opposite: any progressive society recognizes all suffering and aims to reduce it as much as possible, both for animals and humans. But to grant animals rights normally reserved for humans (ie. the right to life) would be totally unnecessary and, ultimately, impossible. People need to eat. Likewise, limited animal testing is necessary to protect human life. I think if you searched out some peer-reviewed research on the subject (not the PETA website), you would find that scientific testing on primates and other larger mammals is very limited.

of course ppl need to eat! that's ovious. but there's more to food than meat, right? there's veges, fruits, and even billions of alternatives to meat.
wait.... ur saying that animals don't have "consciousness and self-awareness"??! whf?! no consciousness?! that's just the stupidest thing i've ever heard! so ur saying that if you stab your dog in the foot he/she won't feel anything? or if you whack a cat with a mallet he/she will just walk away, as if nothing happened?!

[guitrguy]

uh ok u need to know something about WIKIPEDIA:
wikipedia is a public site where anyone, i mean ANYONE, can access. aliens, gnomes, goats, trees, watever, can edit it's text. and same thing w/ google. you think EVERY webbi that saids something bad about PETA is true? well i can just make a webbi RIGHT NOW that devotes itself to destroying PETA and still be a vegan! you can't trust web sites just like that...
:lol:
PETA is an INTERNATIONAL organization that has taken huge steps to what it believes in. They have set campaigns against the government, preached, and changed billions of minds. i think i'd agree and listen to someone like them more than a stupid who-knows-what website
:lol: again You need to check your numbers.

I did have a great Blackened Salmon for dinner.

[Jharaski]

of course ppl need to eat! that's ovious. but there's more to food than meat, right? there's veges, fruits, and even billions of alternatives to meat.
wait.... ur saying that animals don't have "consciousness and self-awareness"??! whf?! no consciousness?! that's just the stupidest thing i've ever heard! so ur saying that if you stab your dog in the foot he/she won't feel anything? or if you whack a cat with a mallet he/she will just walk away, as if nothing happened?!

Holy hell. You're sure doing a good job proving your mental incapacity.


Consciousness is not the same thing as the ability to feel pain of being jabbed in the eye. It's the ability to THINK "oh wow that hurts" and flee, rather than flee out of instinct.

[Pint of stella]

uh ok u need to know something about WIKIPEDIA:
wikipedia is a public site where anyone, i mean ANYONE, can access. aliens, gnomes, goats, trees, watever, can edit it's text. and same thing w/ google. you think EVERY webbi that saids something bad about PETA is true? well i can just make a webbi RIGHT NOW that devotes itself to destroying PETA and still be a vegan! you can't trust web sites just like that...
PETA is an INTERNATIONAL organization that has taken huge steps to what it believes in. They have set campaigns against the government, preached, and changed billions of minds. i think i'd agree and listen to someone like them more than a stupid who-knows-what website


I'd rather listen to John Prescott while he beats my tongue wafer thin with a golf club. Whilst singing My Heart Will Go On. And then finally preforms Shakespears' McBeth, in an ill-fitting goose costume. PETA are well known for propaganda. The only source that mentions them in good light is the ones they write themselves. Ironic wouldn't you say? Taken steps to what they believe in? Telling its followers to use violence. Some members even murder people and some of the animals they save. Great steps. Changing minds? Brainwashing more like. Exploiting vulnerable people and trying to change people's minds with a single video. There is a thing called organic meat. They suck and the other websites are much more reliable. 65% of people, world wide, would have died without medical testing on animals. Frankly I'd rather listen to someone farting then PETA.

[Chrizzle fo' Shizzle]

PETA also opposes the keeping of animals as pets and the use of seeing eye dogs for the blind.

Without animal testing, there is no medical research whatsoever

[PerpetualBurn]

Now the no pets thing is absolutely insane. My pets are well cared for and well loved. I can't imagine how anyone could argue that anything about the way I treat them is wrong.

[guitrguy]

Now the no pets thing is absolutely insane. My pets are well cared for and well loved. I can't imagine how anyone could argue that anything about the way I treat them is wrong.
Same here. My family and I take great care of our dogs.

[-1up!-]

The "no animal cruelty!" cause is a step out of humanity. I never imagined I'd say that, but it is TOO idealist to want animals and humans to stand on the same scale. Humans are animals and we need to eat. We're on top of the food chain, and that is a fact which no petition or scientific study could ever change. My body likes meat: it is an instictive taste for that substance. It is the way nature intended me to be. You can't weasel that liking for meat out of a human body, just like you can't make a homosexual into a heterosexual, whatever fundies may preach.

Ultimately, no matter how many billions of "alternatives" there exist to meat, the taste of meat > those billions of alternatives.

[Jharaski]

Same here. My family and I take great care of our dogs.

I'd love to hear their argument that a dog would be better off in the wild than being taken care of by people... food, treatment for illnesses, and companions.

[Chrizzle fo' Shizzle]

Now the no pets thing is absolutely insane. My pets are well cared for and well loved. I can't imagine how anyone could argue that anything about the way I treat them is wrong.

They support "total animal liberation", which would involve releasing any and all animals from "captivity" and letting them roam free

Second time I've linked (http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-7562800910863882593&q=penn+and+teller) to Penn and Teller today

[Danish]

of course ppl need to eat! that's ovious. but there's more to food than meat, right? there's veges, fruits, and even billions of alternatives to meat.
wait.... ur saying that animals don't have "consciousness and self-awareness"??! whf?! no consciousness?! that's just the stupidest thing i've ever heard! so ur saying that if you stab your dog in the foot he/she won't feel anything? or if you whack a cat with a mallet he/she will just walk away, as if nothing happened?!

Ok, I see you didn't even read what I wrote. First, I'm pretty sure it's impossible to have an intellectual conversation in leetspeak, so don't use it.

Second, while it is true that there are many things to eat besides meat (in fact, things we have to eat), there are two problems with your assertion that animal protein is unnecessary. First of all, farming of all sorts can cause serious injury and death to animals. Modern, large-scale farm impliments such as combines and bailers are bound to kill thousands of small species in a single field. As such, it is impossible to farm enough to feed everyone without killing animals. Second, humans, as omnivores, need to eat animal protein. Our bodies aren't capable of synthesizing all of the amino-acids it needs and they must be consumed in diet. Alternatives, like nuts and soy, can't replace these aminos.

The only species on earth with self-awareness and consciousness is ours. We are the only species with a sense of self, an awareness of our own existence. This ability is provided by our brains which, as similiar as primate brains might be, are completely unique in nature. Yes, an animal feels pain when it is injured, but so do bacteria. Should we outlaw anti-biotics? Surely not.

And a word about Wikipedia. Yes, you are correct that it is open-source, but a peer-reviewed study done in England found that Wikipedia, believe it or not, is more accurate than Encyclopaedia Britannica. Usually I won't use it as an academic source, but as a quick reference it is easily as good as Encarta or any other traditional source.

Also, have you actually read Peter Singer or any other animal rights theorists, or just the PETA website?

[Danish]

Now the no pets thing is absolutely insane. My pets are well cared for and well loved. I can't imagine how anyone could argue that anything about the way I treat them is wrong.

The same argument was made for slavery...

[Jharaski]

Ok, I see you didn't even read what I wrote. First, I'm pretty sure it's impossible to have an intellectual conversation in leetspeak, so don't use it.

Second, while it is true that there are many things to eat besides meat (in fact, things we have to eat), there are two problems with your assertion that animal protein is unnecessary. First of all, farming of all sorts can cause serious injury and death to animals. Modern, large-scale farm impliments such as combines and bailers are bound to kill thousands of small species in a single field. As such, it is impossible to farm enough to feed everyone without killing animals. Second, humans, as omnivores, need to eat animal protein. Our bodies aren't capable of synthesizing all of the amino-acids it needs and they must be consumed in diet. Alternatives, like nuts and soy, can't replace these aminos.

The only species on earth with self-awareness and consciousness is ours. We are the only species with a sense of self, an awareness of our own existence. This ability is provided by our brains which, as similiar as primate brains might be, are completely unique in nature. Yes, an animal feels pain when it is injured, but so do bacteria. Should we outlaw anti-biotics? Surely not.

And a word about Wikipedia. Yes, you are correct that it is open-source, but a peer-reviewed study done in England found that Wikipedia, believe it or not, is more accurate than Encyclopaedia Britannica. Usually I won't use it as an academic source, but as a quick reference it is easily as good as Encarta or any other traditional source.


ITT - Jester and Danish completely agree for the first time

[Danish]

ITT - Jester and Danish completely agree for the first time

Perhaps, but I don't just discount animal liberation theory. I think it's a valid theory and I think there is some value in it. However, I philosophically disagree with a number of their assertions.

[Jharaski]

The same argument was made for slavery...

We don't make our pets work (unless you count fetching the paper)

Pets develop bonds with their owners, unless abused, and wouldn't want to leave. This was almost never the case with slaves.

Perhaps, but I don't just discount animal liberation theory. I think it's a valid theory and I think there is some value in it. However, I philosophically disagree with a number of their assertions.

Same really.

[Danish]

Slaves were capable of surviving in society. If I released my 7 year old dog and told her to roam free and find food, she'd be dead very quickly. The two aren't even remotely analagous.

You're right. I have to remind myself that my dog has absolutely no ability to live on its own when I start feeling guilty.

[PerpetualBurn]

The same argument was made for slavery...

Well when my cat starts boycotting the bus I'll reconsider.

[guitrguy]

Perhaps, but I don't just discount animal liberation theory. I think it's a valid theory and I think there is some value in it. However, I philosophically disagree with a number of their assertions.
Could you link me to the theory? I think it could only work if the species were phased back into the wild.

[griftadan]

**** that, we should be doing more of this.

[Chrizzle fo' Shizzle]

Wait... more petitions or more testing on primates?

[guitrguy]

How about a petition for more testing on primates.

[Chrizzle fo' Shizzle]

Sounds good to me, so long as none of them are anybody I know

[Jharaski]

Or how about we kidnap environmentalists and test on them instead. I'm sure they'd much prefer that anyway. I knew a girl who said if she was attacked by an animal, she'd try to get away, but would do nothing to endanger the animal even if it meant her dying. I also knew a girl who said she'd shoot me before shooting a dog or throwing a newt off of a cliff. I asked her though.

[Chrizzle fo' Shizzle]

You should have thrown a badger at her

[Jharaski]

You should have thrown a badger at her

Fortunately I know neither of them in person.

[Shell]

Or how about we kidnap environmentalists and test on them instead. I'm sure they'd much prefer that anyway. I knew a girl who said if she was attacked by an animal, she'd try to get away, but would do nothing to endanger the animal even if it meant her dying. I also knew a girl who said she'd shoot me before shooting a dog or throwing a newt off of a cliff. I asked her though.


Excellent idea....
Let's start a petition.

[Pint of stella]

Haha. We should include members of PETA on it to.

[Surtr]

SAVE the MONKEYS!


/Doesn't sign petition

[Kickflip_Burrito]

You should have thrown a badger at her
Or open Lois Griffin's top and let that crazed raccoon jump out and cling to her face.

[Jharaski]

Or open Lois Griffin's top and let that crazed raccoon jump out and cling to her face.
You would like to see that wouldn't you? Giggity giggity giggity.