If enough of us complain
maybe his head will be the next one on the chopping block.
This mental midget has already sold his soul for money, money, money. He's a real puke.

Maher and Newkirk
2008

Posted by: Judith, Freedom Fighter | September 27, 2007 05:37 PM

Finaly, reality TV! A chicken sandwich is made from(gasp)chicken and that chicken must be killed to make that sandwich, along with the dead tomatoe and lettuce and wheat.Modern times, I guess, that people don't mind paying someone else to kill the animal or vegatable but get sqeamish when they have to do it themselves.

Posted by: Mars | September 27, 2007 06:23 PM

As a child protection worker, the entire premise of this show is horrific to me. Children are being left with basically no supervision (yeah, there were adults there during the filming, but clearly they did not intervene when an appropriate caregiver would have done - one child had to be taken to hospital for poisoning when they accidentally drank bleach from an unmarked bottle that was within reach, and another one was burned when using the stove), and they are expected to act like adults. Did the producers of this show forget about how developed countries have abolished child labour?? I refuse to watch one second of the show, knowing what it is about (I was unfortunate enough to have caught a few previews while watching other shows). Based on the glimpses of what went on during the production of this show, I immediately pictured "The Lord of the Flies".

The show is bad enough for the above reasons, but when I learned that the children were exposed to the trauma of killing animals, I felt sick to my stomach. The CBS network is now just as bad as Fox with its increasingly disgusting "reality" shows.

I have already fired off an email to CBS, and have sent the alert to several friends.

Posted by: Michele | September 27, 2007 09:36 PM

Animal cruelty and child exploitation laws have mysteriously disappeared from the TV industry. Can anyone explain this to me???

I mean Survivor - WTF, unsuspecting island wildlife can just be harassed at will? Cripes.

Posted by: Maya | September 27, 2007 09:49 PM

Good one, CBS! Let's teach the children of America how to kill poor defenseless animals! That way when they see the kids on that show do it, they'll want to try it out on their pets or other animals! Boycott this televison station! It makes sense...that's all you see...BS!

Posted by: MeL | September 27, 2007 10:05 PM

Why encourage violence when none is necessary? I don't get it.

Posted by: Canaduck | September 28, 2007 02:18 AM

Les Moonves is a sick sick man.

Torturing children and animals for the almighty dollar.

Next he'll be airing snuff films, or filming gang rapes.

He had planned to make a miniseries sensationalizing and glorifying Hitler, but maybe that got stopped?

Even the farming community wouldn't torture kids like this.

Les Moonves has talked about his relatives that were slaughtered during the Holocaust.

I wish that Isaac Bashevis Singer could teach Les Moonves some dignity and compassion.

Posted by: kelly | September 28, 2007 03:06 AM

I would really like to see a game where his head is chopped off just like the chickens that he advises his TV kids to do and a sandwich made out of it. uugh....gory isn't it mr.moonves?

Posted by: Prasad Musty | September 28, 2007 06:37 AM

what a idiot!

I just hope that a chicken will chop his head off-see how he likes that!

cruel bastard!

and that show survivor sucks!
its about time they pulled that dud from the air!

Posted by: bekki kalk | September 28, 2007 06:38 AM

Mars, you're brain dead. Do you originate from Uranus?

It is alright to show violence towards animals by both adults and children on CBS but PETA ads are offensive?? Hypocrisy!

Posted by: Ana | September 28, 2007 08:53 AM

Dear Mars - HUH? What the heck are you talking about?
Yes, chicken has to be killed to make a chicken sandwich. That's the point.
On this site, people don't WANT to see chickens killed for your bloody sandwiches!
And the very idea of forcing a child to do so when he/she clearly doesn't want to do so is sick and perverted. It's one way to ensure that a child is vegan for life, but there are kinder, gentler ways to do that. Television has gotten WAY beyond appropriate boundaries, anyway, but when they film a child forced to kill an animal, that's obscene.

Posted by: Susannah S | September 28, 2007 09:25 AM

Funny...on last night's "Grey's Anatomy," a deer gets hit by a car (which causes a multi-car pile-up). A dad and son come in, the dad mainly to bring a severed arm from the accident assuming it was needed (it was), and the son keeps yelling "she's bleeding really bad! She's in the back of our truck, help!" Well, Izzie goes to discover "she" is the deer...Dad planned to "skin it and eat it." when they got home! Well, the son will have none of this, and later he's upset when dad explains that burgers are made from cows. It ended with the deer being saved and taken to a sanctuary to recover...but I'll bet dollars to donuts the little boy turned veg!

And THIS, my friends, is what GOOD television is! Okay, aside from all the bed-hopping on that show, which message would you rather have your kids see? Though I will hope that after the whole chicken-slaughter incident, maybe some of these kids will also go veg, now that they know where their chicken nuggets ACTUALLY came from.

Posted by: BullyDawg | September 28, 2007 10:20 AM

I see how traumatic of an experience this was and completely understand the horrific ramifications this is having on the American public airwaves. not having watched the show myself i can only say it appears to break several laws and am very relived that Regis on his show pointed out what it really was. crap! yet not being able to turn back time i hope the episode involving the chicken opened up the eyes of some adults and children, views and participants alike to show our side of animal crudity. would you eat your pet dog, cat, rabbit, chicken?

Posted by: Jennifer B. | September 28, 2007 10:26 AM

Mocking and killing of animals in attempt to boast ratings on T.V. is trully criminal! I hope this controversial show gets banned and honestly with enough negative gets sued!!

Posted by: Carla | September 28, 2007 10:32 AM

Les Moonves - should be shot to the Moon!!!!!!!!!

This earth is really filled up with filthy lowlifes! Has this ugly freak nothing else to do than teaching children how they should torture animals! Killing the childrens' instinct of compassion towards other living beings is one of the most horrible crimes an adult person can commit! Exactly because of people like him we got such a heartless 'civilization' on this planet! I deeply regret the existence of this beast!!!

Posted by: Old Spiderwoman | September 28, 2007 10:43 AM

With so much violence in the world today getting kids to kill chickens is sick and disgusting. Shame on CBS and on the greedy parents of these children.

Posted by: Nelly | September 28, 2007 10:59 AM

I agree with Mars. Showing this slaughter was the best thing to do--not showing it would have failed the chickens who died and the countless thousands who will be killed today in the US. It's a shame the kids did it, but I am glad CBS showed the slaughter, and the kids' horrified reactions. This did more to promote animal protection than to harm it.

Posted by: Dean Ween | September 28, 2007 11:59 AM

Network television has always catered to morons. Ninety seven percent of us morons are chicken eaters. I expect he isn't too worried about offending a three to five percent demographic. I think their are lots of reasons for not watching network television, but this isn't one of them.

Posted by: Christopher Cochran MD | September 28, 2007 12:25 PM

"Murderers ... very often start out by killing and torturing animals as kids," according to Robert K. Ressler, who developed profiles of serial killers for the Federal Bureau of Investigation.

Enough said...

Posted by: V. Soto | September 28, 2007 12:41 PM

I may not be a vegetarian but I am an animal rights activist and this is just insane. I've never seen the show Kid Nation and after reading this, I won't. Killing animals inhumanely is sick, but airing it on national television for everyone to watch is just plain deranged. And making CHILDREN do it is even worse. I can't imagine what kind of a twisted human being it took to come up with a story line like that. Makes me sick to my stomach.

Posted by: Meg | September 28, 2007 01:29 PM

what do you expect from a man who dumped his wife of many years for one of his employees? gross.

Posted by: miss c | September 28, 2007 01:46 PM

Meg,

I don't necessarily agree that this is good television, as I haven't seen it, but chopping off a chickens head isn't torture. It seems like a very humane way to dispatch the bird as chickens are very difficult to eat while alive. Torturing a chicken would be fruitless because they are the most stupid animals I have ever come in contact with. They would have nothing to confess as they don't know anything to begin with... I think it's important that young people know where there food comes from. The vast majority of us eat chickens so, it seems like a valuable lesson, but I don't know about this show as I haven't seen it. But, from my experience as a child and of recent, this is a humane way to dispatch/kill a chicken.

Everybody have a great weekend!

Posted by: Christopher Cochran MD | September 28, 2007 02:18 PM

This show is stupid. No animal should be killed to help raise ratings. These people have crossed the line.

Posted by: Alice | September 28, 2007 02:36 PM

The incident on Kid Nation was ghastly. My nephew watched the show and was extremely upset.

Maybe it's satisfying to call for Moonves to get the same treatment as the chickens, but it doesn't further the cause or reduce the amount of violence in the world. It's a lot more complicated than "an eye for an eye."

When I was a child, an adult relative told me he brought me a bunny, then pulled out a dead, skinned carcass. He thought it was a great joke. I feel for the kids on the show who were traumatized as well as the kids who watched.

I hate that some people think this is good television and I am sad for the children who will grow up thinking this is an acceptable part of life.

Posted by: Karen | September 28, 2007 02:42 PM

"It is alright to show violence towards animals by both adults and children on CBS but PETA ads are offensive?? "

Maybe because death of animals for our survival is reality and PETA ads are fantasy.

"And the very idea of forcing a child to do so when he/she clearly doesn't want to do so is sick and perverted. "

Yep, forcing a child to do things against the childs will is perverted. That's why there's no school, homework,chores,tests and we let them play in traffic. Insert sarcasm here.

They get away with it because they have not broken any child labor or abuse laws no matter how much you desire it to be so.Ain't it a shame that the legal system doesn't back up your agenda.

Posted by: Mars | September 28, 2007 03:16 PM

CBS should be ashamed of themselves for exploiting young children and having them kill a defenseless animal for a ratings boost.

CBS has sunk low this time.

Hopefully, if more people complain about this, CBS will hopefully, pull this show off the air.

Posted by: Brandon Harris | September 28, 2007 03:22 PM

Yet airing naked ads and other ads for "shock" value is OK with you as long as it supports your agenda right?

Posted by: Mars | September 28, 2007 03:23 PM

Mars,
You sound like you fell off your rocker.
When you pick fruit and veggies, they come back and flourish bigger than ever.
When a farm animal is killed try burying one of his legs, all you will get is death and disease.
Enough said.

Posted by: Judith, Freedom Fighter | September 28, 2007 03:29 PM

Nobody forced any of those children to kill or eat the chickens.
If any of the children were on vegan diets, it was up to the parents to indicate that on their application to be on the show.

Posted by: Patricia | September 28, 2007 03:48 PM

I have just decided that enough is enough with this idiot! I always watched Survivor, Big Brother and other CBS shows but until this imbicile stops the animal cruelty, I will stop watching his network. I wonder how Bob Barker feels about this. He was the host of The Price Is Right for over 30 years on CBS led by this moron. Mr. Barker should speak up about the animal abuse on the network he has worked for. He is retired now and can speak up and should.

Posted by: Rex's mom | September 28, 2007 04:00 PM

Meg, you wrote "I may not be a vegetarian but I am an animal rights activist." I assume that you're in the process of transitioning to a vegetarian diet? Otherwise, your position seems a tad contradictory--and perhaps another viewing of "Meet your Meat" is in order....

Dr. Cochran: I'm just curious, have you viewed "Meet your Meat" yet? I think you can link to it on PETA's main site. It's only 13 minutes and can really provide an up-close perspective on the treatment of animals raised for human consumption.

Posted by: Doug | September 28, 2007 04:48 PM

I think all "reality shows" are worthless. This one is definitely the lowest.

These shows do nothing but dumb down the general public.

What happened to real entertainment. That's what TV was built for - to escape reality. I'm so grateful that there are still some quality programming left.

Why don't they do a reality show on the producers of these disasters. Put this loser on the front stage and leave the animals, the children and the rest of the general public alone.

Maybe do a reality show on viewers watching themselves watching TV. Then they would realize how much time they're watching it.

Maybe we should just turn off the TV and live life to its fullest, like it's our last day on earth.

With all that being said, "Reality Shows" must go!

I guess you can say, in this case, Les really is less.

EAS

Posted by: EAS | September 28, 2007 05:00 PM

kelley,
"He had planned to make a miniseries sensationalizing and glorifying Hitler, but maybe that got stopped?"

Why are you worried that it got stopped? Are you proud of Hitlers vegetarianism?

I find it difficult to believe anyone could compare the holocaust to the slaughter of animals for food. To do so is to demean those survivors, and particularly remaining loved ones. It's all about comprehension of whats happening, and the value of life. Yes, most living creatures want to live, but you are attempting to compare people who were dying alongside their families, being quite aware of the finality of death of themselves, children, spouses, friends and neighbours. FOR NO SANE REASON. No-one benefited, it was ideology taken to the extreme. Learn from it.

Posted by: rojo | September 28, 2007 06:09 PM

Interesting point that Mars makes, although a bit snide in its delivery.

Let's get real here, eating meat is at least done for substinance. If you think PETA disagrees, read the FAQ. They say themselves that they don't mind tribal folks killing animals for food.

Before you flip out though, keep in mind I'm not in any way condoning this sick show nor am I condoning factory farming.

I'm just saying, it's interesting that these kids are indeed made to see how their chickens died.

Having said that, I am a vegetraian and a veterinary nurse. I am absolutely appalled that these kids were encouraged to kill an animal.

As someone else pointed out, educating children should not involve traumatizing them. But I beleive that adults, like tribal folks, should all be required to kill the food they want to eat. That way they could really see what goes on.

Posted by: Maya | September 28, 2007 07:15 PM

Ever since a contestant on Survivor stabbed a poor little black piglet to death, then smeared the blood on his face as a "warrior" would do, I turned my back on the show Survivor and never looked at it again. I wrote to CBS and looked online to see if other's were outraged, but found nothing as far as protests or boycotting Survivor. That was many years ago, don't know if anyone remembers it, but the guy was a rich executive, and all I kept thinking was what a cowardly scumbag.
Now with Kid's Nation they are doing the same with children for ratings? What kind of parents would let their child on this type of show?

Posted by: Gina | September 28, 2007 10:09 PM

rojo:
the main problem is that people obviously don't know what 'holocaust' means: the exact translation is 'complete sacrifice'! so a holocaust is a holocaust - never mind who is the victim! a victim is always deplorable - be it an animal or a human! and every living being has the right for a respectful life and a respectful death!!! talking about 'holocaust' concerning animals doesn't 'demean' anybody but shows us that every living being has a capacity to suffer and is afraid from death and we have to respect all life! a person who just respects his own species is not really respecting the creation in itself and such ideologies are leading us to the total distruction of this planet - and that's what is happening exactly now!

Posted by: King Kobra | September 29, 2007 10:07 AM

Rojo, it's a myth that Hitler was a vegetarian.

Dione Lucas, a European chef, was an eyewitness to Hitler's meat-eating. In her Gourmet Cooking School Cookbook (1964), Lucas, drawing on her experiences as a hotel chef in Hamburg during the 1930s, remembered being called upon quite often to prepare Hitler's favorite dish, which was not a vegetarian one. "I do not mean to spoil your appetite for stuffed squab," she writes, "but you might be interested to know that it was a great favorite with Mr. Hitler, who dined at the hotel often."

He ate meat – just like Himmler, Goering, Adolf Eichmann, Joseph Stalin, Mao, Pol Pot, Attila the Hun, Idi Amin, Saddam Hussein, Harold Shipman, Timothy McVeigh, et cetera.

Posted by: Mike Quinoa | September 29, 2007 01:08 PM

"Mars,
You sound like you fell off your rocker.
When you pick fruit and veggies, they come back and flourish bigger than ever.
When a farm animal is killed try burying one of his legs, all you will get is death and disease.
Enough said."

Veggies do not grow back.A carrot harvested is just as dead as a cow and nothing dead,animal or vegetable can reproduce.

"They say themselves that they don't mind tribal folks killing animals for food."

Define what you are refering as "tribal".We are all tribal in one form or another.What difference does it make if a pygmy kills and eats an animal or if I kill and eat an animal?The result is the same.

Posted by: Mars | September 29, 2007 01:23 PM

"He ate meat – just like Himmler, Goering, Adolf Eichmann, Joseph Stalin, Mao, Pol Pot, Attila the Hun, Idi Amin, Saddam Hussein, Harold Shipman, Timothy McVeigh, et cetera.

And so did you.

Posted by: Mars | September 29, 2007 01:53 PM

as far as i know the following 'bad ones' were or are vegetarians: hitler, stalin, khomeini, arafat, polpot, fidel castro... conclusion: vegetarianism is not absolutely a sign of holiness but of intelligence!

good people are animal friends but not all animal friends are good people!

Posted by: ghostdog | September 29, 2007 02:17 PM

Hi Mars!

What I meant by "tribal" (and what PETA as well most likely meant) was groups of indigenous peoples living on remote islands or excessively isolated tracts of forest wherein commercialized sources of food are not readily available.

i.e. There is no "Stop and Shop" within many hecatres of the tribal group and the tribe does not own cars nor are there roads available to them.

In short, groups of native peoples who would most likely die without animal sources of protein.

But let's get honest here, Mars. What we're really arguing about is the treatment of animals. And I for one, although I'm an animal rights activist, don't think eating meat is inherently cruel as long as its done with respect and humility towards the earth and the animal.

I know many here disagree that there is a respectful way to raise chickens for food, but I do think that some rustic farms do have potential to give farm animals a decent life and to kill them quickly and humanely in the end.

Posted by: Maya | September 29, 2007 02:47 PM

I'm not so sure that there isn't some benefit to the slaughtering scene in Kid Nation. What other primetime network show dares to go there? I'm certain tens of thousands of people who watched the show, children and adults alike, will think twice about the practice next time they're in line at McDonald's or perusing the meat case at the market. Let's be real here. Why not tackle this issue on primetime? I'm tempted to applaud CBS for showing this. And I say this without a trace of irony, those two chickens that were slaughtered are martyrs. And the kids who objected and locked themselves in the coop are terrifically inspiring. What great conviction from a bunch of preteens. Hardly the brats were used to on TV.

Posted by: Anglo Menudo | September 29, 2007 03:00 PM

Hi to you as well Maya.

We are all native people. Not a one of us originated off planet, despite what some here seem to think.What is really meant is those people with less intelligence that have yet found a way to have a steady supply of food. That includes plant as well as animal food sources.Having the ability to plant a garden does not mean that animals become obsolete as a food source.I can argue the opposite that raising a cow for food makes vegetables obsolete and spares the plant, which is also a living being, the cruelty of factory farming.

As for the treatment of animals; they are animals and should be treated as such and not as humans.Why would or should an animal be treated better then even itself would if it could? Have you ever seen a chicken peck itself to death? They do. If a chicken gets hurt it will go nuts at the sight of blood and keep pecking at itself until it kills itself unless a human intervenes.If in a flock the other chickens will kill and eat it.

Posted by: Mars | September 29, 2007 05:29 PM

Of course there was a time when carnivory made sense for all people, and it still does for some. But many of us have ethical, moral, health, and environmental reasons for abstaining. And factory farming is just not sustainable - it won't work as a solution to feeding the 6 Billion people on earth now, let alone the 10 to 12 Billion that will try to be here 40 years from now.

BTW, meat consumption is a very small part of most "tribal" diets, which tend to be very diverse and highly vegetarian. The "natural" meat consumption for most nondeveloped societies is measured as a few pounds of meat per year, NOT the 222 pounds per person as we have in the US, not counting milk and eggs. The health consequences of so much meat are bringing down our entire health care system, if you haven't noticed.

But we must bring the lives and deaths of our food out into the open. Kids, adults, everybody who eats meat need to know what goes on when their meal was still alive. And yet, whenever PETA tries to show factory farm ads, they are rejected as being too graphic.

As for Survivor, the whole premise is pathetic BS from the start, and the stance toward animals has been medieval throughout. The only thing new here, IMO, is having kids do the killing.

Ango Menudo: Right on!

Posted by: The Good Steve | September 29, 2007 05:36 PM

I am a strong believer that if our children are exposed to violence against animals then they are predisposed to criminal activities later in life. A child who has learned that it is not ok to throw a stone at an innocent bird for his enjoyment will then find it unjust to cause another human being wrong.
This show has exposed these children to violence and are saying that it is OK.

If a child eats meat (which by the way is not a personal choice- he eats meat because his parents do, and he has no idea where that meat came from), those who have commented that the child is simply learning where his meat came from, i ask you this: would you send your child to a slaughter house? To those farms where they practice intensive farming? Where they will see animals being treated with disrespect, mutilated and being electrocuted, de-feathered, cut up while still alive? After all- this is simply where their meat comes from, right?????

Posted by: Nix | September 29, 2007 07:00 PM

mike, perhaps you should read some of the reichstag transcripts, and read up on the young lady he was trying to impress. I know you would prefer it to not be so.

Posted by: rojo | September 29, 2007 08:55 PM

I think some people are confused here. First of all kids should be taught how to become caring ,responsible and compassionate humane beings. As an educator I can tell you that psychologically at these ages , they do not understand the reality of killing a living being.And I gaurantee you all that those kids on some level have all be scarred psychologically for the rest of their lives. What the HELL is wrong with their parents???? This is also a form of child abuse. It's scary how kids are allowed to handle weapons of murder-such a an ax on this episode or a gun to hunt and kill, but and of course an older child did the killing( I guess the show felt it was important to model (weapon responsiblity). But they didn't think it was important to model caring and regard for all life. Someone commented that it was a humane way to kill a chicken, but that's not the point. The point is did any of us including the children present, need to witness the death of another being. I wonder how many takes and chickens it took to kill one . I think it's safe to say that there is no such thing as "one shot" as some murders/hunters like to boast and claim. I'd like to see this show and others that harm/kill animals off the air in "ONE SHOT" Let's see a show where kids are growing, thinking positively and using that awareness,to show kindness and care for animals. What Wonderful World this would be!!!!!!

Posted by: c | September 29, 2007 10:25 PM

I don't get it. This doesn't explain well to me.

Posted by: halo snipe | September 30, 2007 12:22 AM

Dear Mars,
There's a big difference between doing homework and killing a living, breathing being on network TV. I know you like to inspire controversy, an ability that I, for one, appreciate and encourage. I can only say that the premise of leaving kids to their own devices, and the behaviors I observed on "Kid Nation" would result in abuse and neglect allegations if this were anything but a TV show. And it may be useful (or not) for a child to know where his meat comes from, but that's not quite the same thing as requiring him to kill the animal himself when he doesn't want to. Again, this is abusive, both to the child and to the chicken. This is yet another of those moronic "reality" shows that should never have seen airtime, but they continue to proliferate, and this time animals and children suffer for our amusement.

Posted by: Susannah S | September 30, 2007 10:30 AM

Mars,

You have no idea if I've ever eaten meat or not (I have), so don't speculate.

Maya,

What is the percentage of "rustic" farms versus factory farms? As always, the almighty dollar rules. There may be a few farms that can potentially raise humanely and slaughter on-site, but their numbers are miniscule. Is it not cruel to prematurely end an animal's life just because he/she has reached market weight? Also, it's a bit self-serving for us to be the arbiter of cruelty in the first place, since it is not upon us that the cruelty is being inflicted.

Ghostdog,

It sounds like you've been spending some time on the unintentionally hilarious vegetariansareevil website. Refs, please.

Posted by: Mike Quinoa | September 30, 2007 01:10 PM

Maybe killing chickens is a good thing as the kids will realise where KFC actually comes from.

Posted by: John Perry | September 30, 2007 06:45 PM

Animal rights activists who eat animals. Interesting concept....

The animals of the world need as many friendly voices as they can get--be they supporters of animal welfare only, or reformists, or animal rights advocates. There are many compassionate people who spend their working hours and volunteer time helping animals in many different ways, which is an admirable thing and deserves praise. But killing and eating an animal, I would argue, does not make one a defender of that animal's rights. Perhaps this is nitpicking, but people who have made sacrifices--and have not just gone to the extent of what's convenient--to defend all animals' rights may feel it an important and morally relevant distinction. For these people, it's not the ethical treatment of companion animals only that's important but the ethical treatment of ALL animals--regardless of that animal's utility to humans.

Meat-eaters who call themselves animal rights activists may sleep better at night, but their dietary choices are doing nothing for the billions of animals every year who are tortured and slaughtered merely for the taste of their flesh.

Posted by: Doug | September 30, 2007 11:40 PM

i agree totally with mars!!
If yall grew up in the south and i mean the real south then you would not be grossed out by the killin of chickens on tv. i mean grow up!! it is the cycle of life. things are born then they die. get over it.

Posted by: lisa | October 1, 2007 02:35 AM

Happy World Vegetarian Day to everyone! October 1!
Also this is Vegetarian awareness month. Enjoy everyone! Bring someone along into this way of life which brings peace to animals, health to us, and a better way of life for all.

Posted by: Holly | October 1, 2007 06:50 AM

" First of all kids should be taught how to become caring ,responsible and compassionate humane beings. "

So, every child brought up on a farm or a hunting household is uncaring,unresponsible and un compassionate? What a ridiculous thought and not backed up by a single fact.

"There's a big difference between doing homework and killing a living, breathing being on network TV. "

A plant is also a living,breathing being but I doubt you would oppose them showing a carrot being cruely yanked from the earth and beheaded and eaten while still alive.

"You have no idea if I've ever eaten meat or not (I have), so don't speculate"

Actualy I do. You have written here about your decision to go veg several times. That being so then you had to have eaten meat and meat products at one time.

Posted by: Mars | October 1, 2007 07:28 AM

Kids are our future.If they will be taught to kill animals in a most Devilish and Cruel sort of ways then a day might come when they wont hesitate to kill human being.This truely spoils the mental stability of a normal person.This might lead to the imbalance in a individual's personalily.I doubt these people believe in GOD or not! when we cannot give life to some body then we have No rights to kill anybody!!!

Posted by: Payel Sil | October 1, 2007 10:16 AM

Mars,

Touche. I'm glad you're paying such close attention. It's too bad you couldn't see my POV sometimes, but it seems your job not to.

Posted by: Mike Quinoa | October 1, 2007 12:00 PM

Children that learn that there is a difference between human life and animal/plant life grow up very well adjusted and have and do run this country. Those individuals that have developed the mentality that animal and human life are equal are the ones committing violent acts against both human and animal.

Posted by: Mars | October 1, 2007 12:54 PM

Yes I quit watching Survivor because of the animals, and when I saw the previews of Kid Nation voting on the chicken I didnt even watch the first one.
Instead of putting these "reality" shows on tv, there should be REALITY of videos of slaughterhouses, what animals go through, the mistreatment, beathing, infections, downed animals. Why dont they put on the honesty/ Oh yes the all glorious $$$$$$$$$$ I am glad I am vegetarian, keep eating meat everyone, cancer soon will be knocking at your door!

Posted by: Cyndi | October 1, 2007 01:30 PM

Mars, you know people who get "squeamish" from killing a vegetable? lol What kind of people do you hang out with? ;)

You are right about one thing though. A lot of people I knew say they would be vegetarian if they had to kill the animals themselves, because they just don't have it in their hearts to do it. That tells me that people should listen to their conscious and follow their hearts! Society makes it very easy not to, though, since eating meat is the norm. It's how you grew up, it's something that you were taught you need, it's what your friends eat, it's involved in celebrations, etc. Often the only one putting pressure on you to eat vegetarian or vegan is yourself. Although going vegetarian or vegan isn't that difficult, I admire the person who does either for moral reasons since it requires considering one's own actions critically and honestly (something that can be very uncomfortable) and pondering one's place in this world.

Posted by: Melissa | October 1, 2007 02:22 PM

As America has become more urbanized, people have become more disconnected from their foods, both plant and animal. I remember growing a huge garden in KC as a resident and having people walk by and have no idea what these plants in my garden were. I expect meat sources are the same. I grew up killing chickens, pigs, and cows. I never thought much of it. My grandmother would pluck a chicken off the ground and with a quick wrench of the neck the chicken was dispatched and soon on the table. I never once thought anything my grandmother did was cruel regarding these chickens, and I still don't, it's just what you do when you eat a chicken. For you to call my grandmother cruel is so preposterous it's funny. I haven't seen the show in question, but I wish they were able to connect these kids to where their vegetable foods come from as well. Regarding encouraging me to become a cruel or criminal adult, I don't think that has ever been proven. I imagine that children who are cruel to animals (torturing cats, for instance) have something missing to begin with. Always when slaughtering an animal, we do it in the quickest way possible because to not do so is cruelty. Obviously there are a lot of horrible things that horrible people do in private or in the meat industry. Those people do not define me or my family. Would I take my daughters to an abbatior? Sure, I already have, they were fascinated and
learned a lot.

Posted by: Christopher Cochran MD | October 1, 2007 03:11 PM

Mike, I'm with you completely.

I guess my point was just that, in the whole scheme of things, eating animals for food may not be ideal but if you take tribal groups, for example, then we can safely say that if it's done by humans for sustinance then it's not automatically evil.

DON'T GET ME WRONG - I've been a vegetarian for 20 plus years and my idea of a humane farm is light years from what really goes on. Very very few farmers would be able to live up to my personal standards.

HOWEVER I do deeply beleive that if humans completely, totally wiped out all forms of cruelty to animals, eating meat would not be completely inexcusable if done in a very careful and humane manner.

But that's in an ideal world. Ultimately I think a vegetarian diet is the best bet, however if someone lives an impeccable life towards animals, they have the right to eat cage-free animals from eco friendly farms with minimal guilt.

Posted by: Maya | October 1, 2007 03:18 PM

I was shocked that they killed the chickens. But the shows producers prompted the children to kill them which made me even more mad. The kids hadn't even thought to kill, until they were made to. I was pissed at the show in general. That poor girl who took care of the chickens was really upset too. The "council" totally strong armed her into thinking that the kids nation would fail if they didn't kill those chickens. And that Taylor kid...i just hope that my kids don't ever have friends like her.

Posted by: Allison | October 1, 2007 03:43 PM

Rojo,

Frankly, Hitler's dietary choices couldn't matter to me less. Naturally, there are going to be some vegetarians who are bad people, just as there are going to be vegetarians who are philanthropists. And the same is true of omnivores. Remember, there are many vegetarians who couldn't care less about animal welfare.

What I object to is the anti-veg, pro-meat movement trying to get mileage out of triviality, and their attempt to foist guilt by association.

Hmm...let's see, Hitler was also male, had a mustache, was born in Europe, etc. Does that mean you want to lay a guilt trip on every mustachioed European man?

Posted by: Mike Quinoa | October 1, 2007 04:04 PM

" It's too bad you couldn't see my POV sometimes,"

I do see your point of view. The difference is I'm not the one forcing that point of view on others.Those on this side really couldn't care less if you eat meat or not and we would let you make the choice and only shine some light on the lies you've been told.Your side is the one forcibly making others do what you want them to do against their will.We are freedom, you are anti-freedom.

"Mars, you know people who get "squeamish" from killing a vegetable? "

You mean a person shouldn't be sqeamish about killing a living being?Maybe because you've been taught that killing something that cannot speak for itself is OK.Since you don't get sqeamish over the killing of your food then why would I be sqeamish over the killing of my food?

Posted by: Mars | October 1, 2007 04:59 PM

Sad sad sad, Not only did they not have teachers or parents on set they had them KILL?!?! What's next should these TV executes send our children to war and film that too? Or maybe a show about how to raise a serial killer?
We as humans are regressing not advancing. Sad sad sad.
-LKN

Posted by: Ms. Leslie K Nelson | October 1, 2007 05:45 PM

Mars said, "Those individuals that have developed the mentality that animal and human life are equal are the ones committing violent acts against both human and animal."

Whoa! What is that supposed to mean and where did you come up with it? Where's your verification and evidence for that whole post? It's completely nonsensical. And Doc Cochran accused us of not being fact-based. Sheesh!

Posted by: Mike Quinoa | October 1, 2007 06:43 PM

comment to Halo Snipe, what is it that's not explained well to you? I dont know how much more "explainable " I can be. Did anyone else not understand my comments that I made on 9/29/07 blog?

Posted by: c. | October 1, 2007 07:22 PM

Doug, (9-30-07)
Your comments were excellent! (as always)
As REAL a/r's activists, we know that defining ourselves as a/r's activists is not a matter of "pick and choose" beliefs in order to accommodate ourselves, instead of prioritizing the animals in all areas.

Moving along with another interesting concept:
"things are born and then they die." per lisa, 10-01-07. (anti-activist)
I wonder how a "thing" can be born and then die.
"Thing" is a non-living object - never has lived, does not live, never will live, therefore, "it" could not have been born and then die.
Aside from living grass, trees, flowers, etc., which are not born - living beings, such as human animals and the animals, are born and then die. But in between those natural occasions, that doesn't give the right to kill.
For the most part, other than those unfortunate people who commit suicide, all animals - human and non-human - have an intense desire to live, to survive, despite being in the most atrocious or life-threathening situations.
It is unconscienable for anyone to think they have the right to kill living, feeling beings - the animals - to deny he/she/them of their right to live.

Posted by: Ariel | October 2, 2007 11:01 AM

Mars,

Re: The killing of plants...

Plants...

1) Have no evolutionary reason to perceive pain since they cannot locomote away from it.
2) Even if they can perceive pain, plants are actually consumed indirectly in far greater numbers by meat-eaters, since the animals they eat generally consume vast amounts of plant food. And meat-eaters eat plants as well as meat . About the only thing in a traditional hamburger that is not plant-based is the meat patty itself.
3) Are not always harmed in the process of harvesting, e.g. many fruits.
4) Often are about to die anyway at the end of a growing season, which is when they are usually harvested (e.g. prior to the onset of winter and a killing frost).

Posted by: Mike Quinoa | October 2, 2007 02:11 PM

Dear Mr. Faux Dr.
Let me get this straight,
Your Grandmother killed animals, you kill animals and your daughters are "FASCINATED" by the death of innocent animals.
I rest my case.
If I were you, thank Buddha I am not, I would watch my back, for children such as yours could be lethal.
How very sad.
Best of luck....

Posted by: Judith, Freedom Fighter | October 2, 2007 03:32 PM

Mars said, "Your side is the one forcibly making others do what you want them to do against their will.We are freedom, you are anti-freedom."

You are here of your own freewill, are you not? And since when has anyone ever prevented you from following your dietary choices? If you feel a point of view is being forced on you, why stay?

Spin, spin, spin...

Posted by: Mike Quinoa | October 2, 2007 08:11 PM

know its getting sad,you guys would have 1000% more fans if you didnt take everthing overboard

Posted by: john | October 2, 2007 08:51 PM

john, we got YOUR attention, didn't we?

The wonderful people at PETA and other animal rights organizations learned a long time ago that they just did not get very far by asking nicely (yes, there have been some companies and individuals who have made changes that help animals after having been approached gently by PETA and others, however these are the minority of situations unfortunately).

Controversy gets attention, and PETA has had some great, controversial campaigns that get people really thinking and talking about the issues.

I think that the animal rights movement has the right to go "overboard", given the billions and billions of animals who are needlessly tortured and killed every year by humans.

It is absolutely disgusting that television networks get to profit from their pathetic shows. I have to wonder though, about the viewing public who gets sucked into these "reality" shows. Are they so bored with their own lives that they have to imagine that this crap is real?

Posted by: Michele | October 2, 2007 11:19 PM

Comment back to Payel Sil. First off, do not twist what I said in my 9/29/07 blog comment. (I'm assuming you were referring to my comment when you quoted "first of all children should learn to be caring, responsible and compassionate human beings").Do some research and you will find that kids who learn to use guns at an early age and go out to kill animals, are the kids most likely to take guns to school to kill whoever for whatever reason. So, yes there is proof that kids who grow up hunting, grow up to see killing as a way to dominate and win.And therefore, have less regard for life. And why did you bring up farm animals? are you saying it's okay for a child to see an animal slaughtered? FYI there was an episode ( I think it was on discovery channel or national geographic) a couple years ago, about the killing of animals for trophies etc. and one murderer actually took his five year old son with him hunting and he commented that his son was "excited" to see the trail of blood that was from the unfortunate creature that he shot. Tell me then, what are the odds that this child will grow up compassionate and caring? Afterall, at the age of five he got excited over blood from a wounded animal ? So agian, this child probably can't READ yet because he's only five--but he KNOWS how to KILL.

Posted by: c. | October 3, 2007 12:41 AM

mike you miss my point, hitlers dietry habits don't interest me either, I just don't get the logic behind people(not you) claiming einstein to be a vegetarian(he was for a couple of years)and how good that is, yet denying hitler was one. As if either proves anything.

Posted by: rojo | October 3, 2007 07:24 AM

Mike;

1)Since when has locomotion been evidence of any being feeling or having the ability to feel pain? It's every bit probable that plants do feel pain, just not in the same way or perception that we do.Just like animals.

2)Yep, I'm a vegan. I just like my veggies in meat form as well.That hamburger patty more then likely is more plant then animal if bought from a store.

3)Fruits are baby plants, killed before they can develop.

4)Animals will die anyway as well.

"And since when has anyone ever prevented you from following your dietary choices? "

Ever heard of PETA?

"I think that the animal rights movement has the right to go "overboard", "

No more then anybody else does within the law.

Posted by: Mars | October 3, 2007 07:33 AM

Maya,

Thanks for your comments. I realize humans are opportunistic eaters. Still, studies indicate that veg or near-veg societies seem to enjoy the greatest health and longevity. There maybe a biological reason why killing animals repulses some of us. Clearly, in North America, our diet, among other things, causes a whole raft of health problems. But, I know what you mean. Every improvement is a small step in the right direction.

Posted by: Mike Quinoa | October 3, 2007 10:54 AM

Judith,

I am so very sorry you feel that way. I hope what ever deep seeded anger that burns inside you someday is quenched. I doubt that it will, though. I respect and admire your commitment to cause, but I am disappointed in your close minded point of view. I hope someday you are better able to understand people with different backgrounds and beliefs without bigotry.
I assure you I have physically and emotionally healthy children, but I do appreciate your concern.
All the best.

Posted by: Christopher Cochran MD | October 3, 2007 12:33 PM

Lisa,

Please stop speaking for everyone who grew up in the south. You could be quite an embarrassment for some who DID grow up in the "real" south. I just have to ask, would that mean there is a fake south?

Posted by: sherri | October 3, 2007 05:24 PM

Comment to Mars- not Payel Sil. First off, do not twist what I said in my 9/29/07 blog comment. (I'm assuming you were referring to my comment when you quoted "first of all children should learn to be caring, responsible and compassionate human beings").Do some research and you will find that kids who learn to use guns at an early age and go out to kill animals, are the kids most likely to take guns to school to kill whoever for whatever reason. So, yes there is proof that kids who grow up hunting, grow up to see killing as a way to dominate and win.And therefore, have less regard for life. And why did you bring up farm animals? are you saying it's okay for a child to see an animal slaughtered? FYI there was an episode ( I think it was on discovery channel or national geographic) a couple years ago, about the killing of animals for trophies etc. and one murderer actually took his five year old son with him hunting and he commented that his son was "excited" to see the trail of blood that was from the unfortunate creature that he shot. Tell me then, what are the odds that this child will grow up compassionate and caring? Afterall, at the age of five he got excited over blood from a wounded animal ? So agian, this child probably can't READ yet because he's only five--but he KNOWS how to KILL.

Posted by: c | October 3, 2007 07:08 PM

HEY CYNDI, you can eat meat and not get cancer (Really just abnormal cells) at the same time. It's called CONTROL!

Posted by: halo snipe | October 3, 2007 07:21 PM

Mars,

Locomotion - It's called the avoidance of pain. That's from my high school biology. Let's say plants do feel pain equally to animals. By eating meat you cause more plant suffering (not even mentioning deforestation for cattle grazing) than by eating the plants directly. It seems some people have a lot of difficulty grasping this concept.

So PETA has stopped you from making your own dietary choices? Let me guess, you were heading for the butcher shop and one of the Lettuce Ladies sucker punched you. Please don't claim you're being victimized. That's total BS and you know it.

"Fruits are baby plants, killed before they can develop."

That's right they are (potentially), but the parent plant need not be killed to obtain nourishment. Try hacking off the leg of a lamb and see what happens to its owner.

Sorry to burst your bubble, but when you eat part of an animal, you are eating what's called "meat". If you dispute this, take it up with your butcher, but don't be surprised if he looks at you if you're from another planet. (Don't forget what happened to the Martians in "The War Of The Worlds" written by H. G. Wells, a vegetarian)

Yeah, we all know we're going to die. That doesn't give us the right to willfully shorten the life of another creature (or our own).

Posted by: Mike Quinoa | October 3, 2007 08:43 PM

" Try hacking off the leg of a lamb and see what happens to its owner."

Try hacking of the limb of your fruit tree and see what happens. Similar results.

"That's right they are (potentially), but the parent plant need not be killed to obtain nourishment."

So, if a cow aborts a calf then it's OK to eat the calf or to take the unborn calf from the womb and eat it since the parent survives?

"Locomotion - It's called the avoidance of pain."

No, locomotion is movement without regard as to the reason why.So if the dog doesn't run away it's not feeling pain?

"").Do some research and you will find that kids who learn to use guns at an early age and go out to kill animals, are the kids most likely to take guns to school to kill whoever for whatever reason. "

Not true. Most school shootings, though in rural areas but not all, are committed by those that do not hunt or have harmed anything,human or animal, in their past.

" So agian, this child probably can't READ yet because he's only five--but he KNOWS how to KILL. "

Also untrue. If you watch a construction crew build a house does that make you capable of doing so? Not hardly.My child starting reading at 3 and hunts. Funny, she hasn't killed anyone yet. Maybe because she understands there is a difference between animal and human life that seems lost on you and all murders.

"Yeah, we all know we're going to die. That doesn't give us the right to willfully shorten the life of another creature (or our own)."

Including the living beings called plants? Or do you conviently overlook the fact that plants are living creatures that you kill before their time.

Posted by: Mars | October 4, 2007 07:36 AM

Mike Q, there is really no point in wasting your succinct, informative comments on certain people on these blogs. They will never listen to you or others, because they are not ready to do so. They will always manage to respond with some ridiculous or circular argument, hoping for a response.

I have decided (with the encouragement of Ana and Ariel - thanks!) to re-focus, and basically ignore these people. There are certainly individuals reading these blogs who are receptive to the information provided by PETA and its supporters, so that should be our focus (besides encouraging each other in our efforts to help animals).

Posted by: Michele | October 4, 2007 04:31 PM

I know you love to set up straw men and knock them down. You're not going to win this one. As an omnivore, you kill far more plants than I do. So, I'm guilty of killing plants. Well, you're guilty many times over, AND you kill animals as well. Can you not comprehend this?

And a plant is a "creature" (a living organism characterized by voluntary movement)?

You said, "Try hacking of the limb of your fruit tree and see what happens. "

Have you never heard of pruning? Does your lawn die when you cut the grass?

Nobody ever said that veg*ns never kill a living thing. But they do try to pursue the path of least harm. So don't try to justify the amount of suffering you create with the comparatively miniscule amount veg*ns are responsible for.

Posted by: Mike Quinoa | October 4, 2007 06:33 PM

Michele,

Thanks for all your excellent posts. I understand completely what you're saying. We seem to debate the same issues ad nauseam.

The problem perhaps is there are probably a lot of people new to the PETA Files, animal rights and vegetarianism every day. Apart from the obvious and plentiful flamebaiters, if we don't challenge and disprove anti-AR statements, someone new to the site may accept these statements as fact. It wouldn't surprise me that a lot of the "anti" posts are from animal industry shills. We are here for the love of animals, they are here for...?

Also, I do think it helps to refine and solidify our own fact-base and beliefs by doing the necessary research to debunk their statements. And since they seem to recycle the same tired old arguments, maybe to save time we should just copy and paste our previous rebuttals.

Posted by: Mike Quinoa | October 5, 2007 11:15 AM

Does a sheep die from being sheared? If you lose an arm does it mean you die?

Hack the leg off a lamb and the lamb will continue to grow just like a tree and just like a tree the limb dies.

" So don't try to justify the amount of suffering you create with the comparatively miniscule amount veg*ns are responsible for."

Now let's see you prove that statement. You like asking for proof so let's see yours.

Posted by: Mars | October 5, 2007 02:48 PM

Mike, I agree with what you are saying about readers other than those who recycle their "arguments". But as a parent of an 11 year old, the "discussions" we animal rights people keep trying to have with these close-minded people remind me very much of trying to have a rational discussion with a child. The biggest difference is that as my son gets older, the more receptive he is to my statements to him (not that he would ever admit that, or let me see directly that he agrees or plans on following through with what I have asked!). The close-minded individuals here are adults who do not seem capable of growing.

I propose that we ignore the comments made by the usual trouble makers, and for the sake of new readers and those who might be on the fence about the issues, we make general comments, such as "so-and-so's statements are false/specious/misleading. Check out PETA's (or other relevant source) section located at [insert link here] for information about [insert issue here]". Any thoughts? The copying and pasting also sounds good for responding to comments by newer readers.

Posted by: Michele | October 6, 2007 09:41 AM

By the way, I am heading out on my honeymoon today (yay!) and probably will not have access to the internet - I think I might go into PETAfiles withdrawal! I look forward to catching up on the new topics when I get back next week.

Posted by: Michele | October 6, 2007 09:44 AM

As far as I know, there are only hospitals for human animals and non-human animals to alleviate their pain, suffering, infections, and sutures for open wounds and amputations. As far as I know, certain infections can become systemic and cause death if not treated.
Has anybody out there ever come across a hospital and meds for trees?

Posted by: Ariel | October 6, 2007 09:45 AM

Mars,

I've already beat you at this argument.
The proof is on your plate in front of you.

Plants are consumed indirectly in far greater numbers by meat-eaters, since the animals they eat generally consume vast amounts of plant food. And meat-eaters eat plants as well as animals. This means you kill more plants in the process of eating animals. Thus, you are responsible for more suffering by plants and animals than the amount of suffering created by a solely plant-eating vegan.

By the way, I'm still waiting for a response from you on your statement, "Those individuals that have developed the mentality that animal and human life are equal are the ones committing violent acts against both human and animal."
Give me some proof of that doozy.

Posted by: Mike Quinoa | October 6, 2007 04:37 PM

Ariel, there are plenty of meds for trees and the doctors are called Arborists.I suppose the name "tree surgeon" is conviently unknown to you.

Posted by: Mars | October 6, 2007 04:54 PM

Hi, Mike and Michele! : )

(I see that Michele will be away for a while and not be reading this)
I started to write to both of you last eve., but somehow couldn't get it across what I wanted to say in the way that I wanted to say it - because of certain peering eyes. On second thought, they can't understand what they read anyway, so what's the difference, right? : )

Anyway, Mike, I understand and agree with your comments for the reasons you gave, and I'm not out to knock any activist's approach. (of course you know neither did Michele) Your comments certainly are "succinct and informative." And I REALLY like your idea about cut and paste for the "ad nauseums." (but the reason why they are ad nauseums - as we know - is because they don't read things anyway)

When I attempted to write to both of you last eve., ironically I used the same description about the same old usual "ad nauseums" as did Michele in her last post: "trouble-makers."
That's why I came to my conclusion to ignore them on a personal one-to-one basis because they really only want attention (with their nonsense) no matter who they are, and they don't deserve to have such attention because it's not fair to the animals and to the dignity of a/r's activism.
So then I figured a compromise to the situation: only to make open statements, which would refute them (and is easy enough); and at the same time, decent newcomers will be reading educational comments about a/r's, which - I think - wouldn't come across as us being "argumentative" with the nuts, who are a waste of time.
As always, Mike and Michele, you are dynamic!

Posted by: Ariel | October 6, 2007 08:12 PM

I'll try posting again:

Mars,

I've already beat you at this argument.
The proof is on your plate in front of you.

Plants are consumed indirectly in far greater numbers by meat-eaters, since the animals they eat generally consume vast amounts of plant food. And meat-eaters eat plants as well as animals. This means you kill more plants in the process of eating animals. Thus, you are responsible for more suffering by plants and animals than the amount of suffering created by a solely plant-eating vegan.

By the way, I'm still waiting for a response from you on your statement, "Those individuals that have developed the mentality that animal and human life are equal are the ones committing violent acts against both human and animal."
Give me some proof of that doozy.

Posted by: Mike Quinoa | October 8, 2007 02:37 PM

Read your own posts and those you group with Mike Q. It is your bunch that harps the "if a person harms animals then they will harm humans" statements.

Posted by: Mars | October 9, 2007 07:15 AM

Hi Ariel,

Thanks for all your great posts.

Maybe the balance of this issue can be struck based on the intent of the writer. Some are obviously just flamebaiters attempting to agitate, and should generally be ignored. Others may feel they are presenting a legitimate counterpoint to standard AR beliefs.

I think the latter group should be addressed, partly because they may in fact have an open and variable mind on the subject, and partly because it helps us refine and solidify our own beliefs. In that regard, "antis" can actually help strengthen our knowledge base and resolve.

Anyway, I think it's the type of thing we just have to play by ear.

Cheers!

Posted by: Mike Quinoa | October 9, 2007 11:02 AM

Airel, that's a great question about trees, and I may as well speak about this since I'm now studying conservation and as a vegeterian I've heard the "plant suffering" comments SO many times, as I'm sure you have also.

First of all, yes there are people who care for trees, not "doctors" per say but biologists who worry about the diseases (usually from invasive species) that kill entire tree species.

The American elm and chestnut trees are doing very poorly in New England; almost extinct. There are biologists who are racing to find cures for diseases that are now killing beeches, pines and birch trees. We may lose them too.

We shouldn't think of the tree issue from a standpoint of causing the tree pain, but from a standpoint of trees being part of the lifeblood of the planet.

Each tree species contributes to every living thing in the ecosystem, and I give you my professional guarantee, if there were no trees, we would all be gone very quickly.

We should be able to use plants and trees, but in a sustinable way.

Posted by: Maya | October 9, 2007 01:29 PM

Not only does Kid Nation depict violance towards animals but violance and abuse towards children. How bad do their parents need money ? aparantly bad enough to subject their off spring to discomfort,stress and pain.On top of it all we have exploited animals enough in this country. CBS thinks we are a bunch of uneducated violent blood eating morans!

Posted by: Kim | October 10, 2007 12:25 PM

Mars,
You are so incorrect about kids and guns. You really need to do some serious research. You act like you know everything and it seems to me that all you like to do is argue -just to argue. You seem to always have to be right. Well, heres's a news flash, nobody is right all the time- including you. You have grossly ingnored the point I was trying to make and the meaning of what I was saying. You say your child is three, reads and kills? That's very interesting to me being that a gun,bow and arrow ewhat ever murder weapon etc.,seems to be pretty heavy for a child to lift-especially a 3 year old. I think you need to be honest here. What books can she read on her own? I would like to know being that I'm a reading specialist. It's sad that you believe teaching kids to Murder is okay. Does anyone else agree with what I've said ? I think Mars needs some help here.

Posted by: c. | October 11, 2007 07:24 PM

Mars,
You are so incorrect about kids and guns. You really need to do some serious research. You act like you know everything and it seems to me that all you like to do is argue -just to argue. You seem to always have to be right. Well, heres's a news flash, nobody is right all the time- including you. You have grossly ingnored the point I was trying to make and the meaning of what I was saying. You say your child is three, reads and kills? That's very interesting to me being that a gun,bow and arrow ewhat ever murder weapon etc.,seems to be pretty heavy for a child to lift-especially a 3 year old. I think you need to be honest here. What books can she read on her own? I would like to know being that I'm a reading specialist. It's sad that you believe teaching kids to Murder is okay. Does anyone else agree with what I've said ? I think Mars needs some help here.

Posted by: c. | October 11, 2007 07:25 PM

Animals feel pain and fear in much the same way we do. We share status as "sentient" beings.

Posted by: Corndog | October 12, 2007 06:51 PM

2nd attempt to post

Mars,
"What's lost on YOU " is a realizing that there are MINIMAL differences between us and the four legged MAMMALS. You seem to like to twist things and seem to like to argue just to argue.You can't be right all the time . No one can. You grossly missed the point/message of what I was saying and you really do need to do research on kids/guns and killing. Hunting is murder whether or not you want to admit it.But it is. Simply put: animal is alive ,person takes weapon, person shoots animal. Animal is dead. There's no excuse for it. It's sad that you taught your daughter how to kill things. You say your daughter learned how to read at 3. What books could she read on her own at this age ? I'm a Reading Specialist and I'm curious to know. Oh, by the way, the parents of some of those kids who went on killing sprees at their schools were shocked when the incidents happened ,because they thought that their kids knew "the difference between human and animal life" as you put it. You really need some help here. Does anyone else care to comment. Just jump right in!

Posted by: c. | October 12, 2007 10:28 PM

People need to realize that it is only our ARROGANCE that makes us as human beings, think and justify the killing/murder of animals .

Posted by: c. | October 13, 2007 08:24 PM

There are no 5 year olds in Kid Nation.

Posted by: halo snipe | October 14, 2007 01:38 AM

c
Well I haven't heard of it. I searched Wikipedia and now I know what it is. It' s weird it didn't mention this. Wiki always tells both sides.

Posted by: halo snipe | October 14, 2007 10:05 PM

What about Veggie Survivor? Contestants would have to learn about indigenous veg and how to prepare it, ways to make shelters, clothing, etc. such as weaving and so forth. Makes more sense then the shows they do now. (I heard there was a Survivor China. How do the producers expect people to take a show seriously about being 'stranded' in one of the most populous nations on earth anyway?)

Posted by: Kala | October 19, 2007 04:48 PM

Yeah Michele, a wonderful world where they raid a lab, kill all the workers, and save ONE f*cking rabbit that is freed, and killed and eaten by a fox. Don't believe me, search anti PETA, and look for more dirt o n PETA. Warning, truth may cause confusion and delay!

Posted by: halo snipe | October 20, 2007 01:33 AM

Halo Snipe, I'm not sure what you were referring to in your comment about wikpedia? Can you clarify? Both sides to /of what?

Posted by: c. | October 20, 2007 09:43 PM

Second attempt to post,
Halo Snipe, I'm not sure what your comment about wikpedia is referring to? Please clarify.

Posted by: c | October 22, 2007 07:36 PM

3rd attempt to post, comment to Halo Snipe, I'm not sure what your referring to in your comment to my last blog. Please clarify.

Posted by: c. | October 23, 2007 07:54 PM

4th attempt to post,comment to Halo Snipe, I don't know what you are referring to about wikpedia. Please clarify.

Posted by: c. | October 24, 2007 04:40 PM

C.
Sorry that I didn't respond earlier. Well on Wiki, you get pros and cons, like an article on firearms. On the Kid Nation Wiki article, I never saw anything pertaining to this. Really all it was was a brief synopsis, and list of episodes.

Posted by: Mr. Chief | October 25, 2007 12:05 AM

From Wiki:
Initial reception

Ahead of its premiere, the show proved to be the most controversial of the upcoming fall 2007 season, even though the only actual footage seen was a four-minute promo running on televison and the Web.[20] In previewing the series, CBS eschewed television critics, instead holding screenings at schools in at least seven large cities.[21] Variety columnist Brian Lowry wrote that "Kid Nation is only the latest program to use kids as fodder for fun and profit, which doesn't make the trend any less disturbing."[22] William Coleman, a professor of pediatrics at the University of North Carolina, argued that the younger children, ages 8 to 12, might not be able to deal with the stress, yet could be enticed to participate by the potential fame or be pressured to do so by a parent.[23]

Speaking before an audience of television reviewers, producer Tom Forman acknowledged that Kid Nation would inevitably share some elements with William Golding's novel Lord of the Flies, which depicted planewrecked children without adult supervision. But adults were present off-camera during the Kid Nation production, including cameramen, producers, a medic, and a child psychologist, although all interacted with the children as little as possible. Participants also missed a month of school, but Forman suggested that such real-world tasks as preparing a group breakfast, doing hard physical chores like fetching water, and making group decisions constituted an educational experience in its own right. All participants were cleared by a team of psychologists, any child could elect to go home, and some did.[3] Robert Butterworth, a child psychologist in Los Angeles, wondered if comparable professional care was given after the production had wrapped.[23]

Posted by: Kala | October 26, 2007 12:45 PM

Mars,
Please stop posting stupid crap where you aren't welcome! And before you go asking for anyone to prove the cruelty sheep suffer under when sheared, perhaps you should do some research.

www.savethesheep.com

And get out of here, would you??!!

Posted by: SoupKitchen | October 31, 2007 06:43 PM

Mars,
Please stop posting stupid crap where you aren't welcome! And before you go asking for anyone to prove the cruelty sheep suffer under when sheared, perhaps you should do some research.

www.savethesheep.com

And get out of here, would you??!!

Posted by: SoupKitchen | October 31, 2007 06:43 PM

Mr Chief,
No problem. I put what I said because from watchng shows like Dateline, 60 Minutes etc. , when there have been some school shootings,they had said that some of these kids learned how to use a gun and hunt- I can't remember which show it was -this was a few years ago but,one boy at the age of eight for example,started hunting "responsibly" with his grandfather. They also interviewed a child psychologist who gave his opinion on guns and kids. Just like serial killers who start with animals, there are research studies on this subject too.No, I'm not callig these kids serial killers by the way.

Posted by: c. | November 2, 2007 08:33 PM

Mr Chief,
No problem. I put what I said because from watchng shows like Dateline, 60 Minutes etc. when there have been some school shootings,they had said that some of these kids learned how to use a gun and hunt- I can't remember which show it was -this was a few years ago but,one boy at the age of eight for example,started hunting "responsibly" with his grandfather. They also interviewed a child psychologist who gave his opinion on guns and kids. Just like serial killers who start with animals, there are research studies on this subject too.No, I'm not callig these kids serial killers by the way.

Posted by: c. | November 2, 2007 08:34 PM

Thanks Kala.

But I was saying that I didnt see anything about a chicken.

Posted by: Caboose | November 4, 2007 12:04 AM

"That's very interesting to me being that a gun,bow and arrow ewhat ever murder weapon etc.,seems to be pretty heavy for a child to lift-especially a 3 year old. "

Shows how little you know of the subject.Look up the gun models called Cricket and Chipmunk.

"Davey Crickett Specifications


Caliber: .22 Short, Long or Long Rifle standard or high velocity.

Action: Manual cocking single shot bolt action with a machined low scope bolt handle.

Trigger Pull: 2 1/2 lbs. (approx.)

Safety: Rebounding firing pin blocked automatically to prevent accidental discharge.

Length of Pull: 11 1/2 inches.

Sights: Rear peep sight fully adjustable for windage and elevation. Front ramp with post.
Drilled and tapped for scope.

Stock: High luster finished Walnut, composite, or laminate hardwood with western style or synthetic composite stock - NEW with internal safety lock

Barrel Length: 16 1/8 inches.

Finish: Blued barrel and receiver or stainless barrel.

Length: 30 inches overall.

Weight: 2 1/2 lbs. (approx.)

"What books could she read on her own at this age ? "

War and Peace

Anarchists cookbook

Posted by: Mars | November 21, 2007 05:21 PM

fucking bastard

i hope you rot in hell, les moonves (you too mars)

boycott CBS!

Posted by: clara | February 10, 2008 02:15 AM