Animal Rights Activists - Page 6

Click on this link to the PetPAC webpage:

http://www.petpac.net/

Here is a link to the AR opposition site:

http://www.petpacnonsense.com/

I am highly suspicious that MVF (our mole on this thread)is actually MWF, MIchael W. Fox--former Vice President of HSUS. Do a Google search for Michael W. Fox and see if you don't concur.

Don't be complacent and wait until January 2008 to see what happens to AB 1634 in California. Mandatory spay-neuter legislation is already affecting other parts of the country--most recently in counties of North Carolina.

With their campaigns of picketing and mass emails, PETA and HSUS is already making inroads by capitalizing on the Michael Vick case.  Through their increased activism, these organizations have "convinced" Reebok and Nike to suspend their lucrative contracts with Vick and the NFL.

It's not about Vick and cruelty to animals--its about creating an impetus through donations to fund the campaigns of the AR activists to enable them to achieve their hidden agendas.

Also visit the ASPCA website. This is not exactly a benign organizion either. They create a strong financial base though donations, an online store, the sale of pet insurance, etc.

Louise, as usual you have an excellent post. We must all be away of how we deal with the results of the Michael Vick (and similar) cases. Dogfighters are busted on a continual basis, but the information is usually kept on a local level. But in the case of a national sports star there is much media frenzy. Personally I know virtually nothing about any type of sport or how it is played, so until this happened I never heard of Michael Vick. If the (alleged) allegations are true the the American justice system must punish this (alleged) thug for his (alleged) heinous crimes. He is of course entitled to due process and we must let the courts use the laws that are already on the books to prosecute this case.

I personally believe there are very few, if any, people who post on this database that lack compassion for dogs or most other animals. I also believe that the animal rights organizations have a constitutional right to exist, and while I believe that the main two (2) organizations began as people banded at the grass roots level to propose federal legislation to protect animals from exploitation, they eventually attracted the lunatic fringe type and took them into the organization. Do these people support our curent right to own a dog? No. So, why would they support us using the dogs for sport?

I think that we Americans (me since 1981!) tend to allow ourselves to be swayed by the media frenzy during such publicised events as the impending legal issues surrounding Michael Vick, and that's when these animal rights groups strike. Ffirst at the public's genuine sympathy, and then once armed with donations from these unsuspecting people launch an all-out campaign to pass more laws that are essentially a redundancy of the current statutes but often with a bizzare twist.

Towards the end, my opinion is that regardless of how we feel he (Vick) should be punished, that we must allow Michael Vick due process of law, and press our justice system to enforce the current laws rather than allowing our legislative system to be pressured into enacting newer and more complex versions of the current laws. I cite a similar parallel here that occassionally gets much attention at a State level-should we enact laws to ban people from using cellular telephones while driving, or when they choose to do this and then drive in a wreckless or careless manner should they be charged under the current wreckless driving or careless driving statutes which are quite suficient in their degree of punishment? Do we really need more and/or redundant laws? I know, stop it Bob-you are beginning a rant.

If he (Vick) is guilty, remove from him all the recent excesses of privilege he has enjoyed and require him to toil for the remains of his working life at an animal shelter for a low wage. Could there be a worse punishment for what he has done?

Bob-O

Check out this: www.consumerfreedom.com/news_detail.cfm/headline/3420. First, the HSUS is asking for contibutions to care for the dogs seized from Vick--now, it wants to have them destroyed.

Don't forget that HSUS is being investigated for the contributions it collected for the many poor animal displaced by Hurricane Katrina. Seems that these funds have not been used for the purposes given to the public.

thank you BOB-O.  i was loosing faith in the american peopole all together until you posted.  i like the way you think for the most part. you didn't go screamming he's guilty. although the evidence against him seems overwhelming. you stated that these are alleged crimes and if he's guilty then give him the punishment the law says he deserves. you even stae that we americans tend to allow ourselves to be swayed by the media frenzy.  i tried to point this out in another thread and was jumped. you also stated we need to "press our justice system to enforce the current laws rather than allowing our legislative system to be pressured into enacting newer and more complex versions of the current laws." i couldn't agree with you more.

but here's where you loose me.  instead of wanting him, if found guilty, to be given the punishment that the law demands you want him to be removed from his recent excesses of privilege (the lifestyle he's worked for) and make him toil  the rest of his working life in a dog shelter.  now that's asking the legal system to go above and beyond what's on the books for said crime. so are you pressuring here? LOL. i know what you mean though sometimes you wish you could tailor every punishment to what would hit home to the idividual that commited a crime the most.

   "Feelings "  the shepherd,  lying down with the leather and the food.., and drink....a neat picture...

I really learned alot on this board. I am a vegetarian, and I am strictly against animal cruelty. At one time I supported PETA, but finding out what I did today, I have changed my views.

I don't eat meat. But I wear leather, wool, etc. I think it is almost necessary to slaughter animals like cows, pigs, and chickens. Frankly, I never had a problem with it. But seeing the way in which it is done is completely sickening. If slaughterhouses put in a bit more money to fund humane housing and killing, I would eat meat myself.

I believe we do need to find an ethical, humane way to control animal population. I do believe in spaying and neutering. But for a pet dog. Not a dog you are going to work, breed, and train. That's a different story. To me, by doing that, you are strengthening the breed, not increasing the "unwanted" dog population. A good working dog would be wanted by someone, i'm sure.\

Those are my views,

                         Emily.

Good for you Emily.  I am sure that most of the well meaning people who support PETA would do as you have done once they take the time to find out what PETA is really all about.  That's why PETA hides their true agenda.

This is PETA's position on all dog breeders, not just the puppy millers:

http://peta.org/campaigns/ar-responsiblebreeders.asp?c=weekly_enews

Micky