This is a placeholder text
Group text
by Two Moons on 27 October 2011 - 03:10
Does Peta really believe Whales are covered in our Constitution?
Seems they are taking this to court on those grounds.
I dunno, what do you think?
Seems they are taking this to court on those grounds.
I dunno, what do you think?
by judron55 on 27 October 2011 - 14:10
Peta....is a piece of crap....
by Two Moons on 28 October 2011 - 18:10
Agreed,
I thought this might stir some debate but now I see how ridiculous it is.
My problem is the cost to the tax payer for such nonsense.
If anything this should show the error of direction in PETA.
Moons.
I thought this might stir some debate but now I see how ridiculous it is.
My problem is the cost to the tax payer for such nonsense.
If anything this should show the error of direction in PETA.
Moons.
by beetree on 29 October 2011 - 00:10
I think it is worthwhile to consider, especially if we plan to genetically alter whales with the human genome, or any animal for that matter. Then perhaps the slavery angle will have real teeth. GMO animals containing the human gene should have rights, don't you think? The way it stands now, they are just property. Has the time finally come for the top of the food chain to be responsible for everything below them? Does it take a gene splice, for it all to make sense?
by Two Moons on 29 October 2011 - 04:10
I think a lot of things have gotten out of hand, nothing new.
by SitasMom on 08 November 2011 - 22:11
to peta everything is a "people"
fish people
kitten people
puppy people
whale people
worm people
LOL
by GSDtravels on 09 November 2011 - 09:11
You forgot fly people! Vincent Price would not be too happy about that!
by Two Moons on 09 November 2011 - 17:11
Short people,
oops, that was Randy Newman not PETA.
Moons.
oops, that was Randy Newman not PETA.
Moons.
Contact information Disclaimer Privacy Statement Copyright Information Terms of Service Cookie policy ↑ Back to top