er ok so there just protecting animals...

What is so -blam'd- up about PETA:

1. They do not want anyone keeping pets in their houses for protection, preferring that the people in question let them go free into the wild.
2. They do not want anyone killing animals for meat. (This means no hamburgers, pork chops, etc.)
3. They are upset at the police for using dogs to sniff out hidden drug caches.
4. Controversial pamphlets for kids, including "Your Daddy KILLS Animals!"
5. They do not want us to go fishing for recreation.
6. PETA is against the No-Kill Movement and euthanizes the majority of animals that are given to them.
7. They (theoretically) seek to reduce our freedoms because of the 6 reasons stated above, and thus deserve a Plasma Rifle blast to the face.

MechMaster, signing off.

They're hardly 'terrorists'. They are, however, annoyances who overblow lots of things and spew ridiculous ideas as 'alternatives'.

The Earth Liberation Front, however...




-- Edited by Dragon Wing at 17:58, 2008-03-16

techfan979 wrote:

---

But I do think ideally, mankind should stop hunting and eating meat, we can live perfectly healthy as vegetarians and get our protein from other things. If we dismantle our live-stock and use the resources and space for agriculture we should be able to produce enough food.

Considering we get our population down to a sane number. (Earth was not meant to support 6,6 billion humans.)

---

You're absolutely right, by the way. The only possible solution to world hunger is for all of us to go vegetarian. (Now I just have to get off meat).

Another obvious solution to world hunger, of course, is to somehow make all the 3rd world countries to chill out with their population growth. This would be tricky, too.

I am aware of this. 'Tricky' was just a convenient word to use at the time, shush.

-- Edited by Dragon Wing at 23:05, 2008-03-16