Nov02
PETA to Omelette Festival: Scramble Tofu, Not Eggs
Posted at 02:17 PM | Permalink
| 
Comments (103)
 |
I’ll let you know if we hear back from the organizers, but, uhm, don’t hold your breath. In the meantime, here is a news story about it, and here is Lisa’s letter.
*In addition to being utterly disgusting (eggs are, like, chicken periods, after all), eggs are a product of quite possibly the most abusive industry on the planet. Egg laying hens endure a nightmare that lasts about two years, during which time a large portion of each hen’s beak is cut off with a burning-hot blade, and they are shoved into tiny wire “battery” cages with five to 11 other hens. Even in the best scenario, each hen will spend the rest of her life crowded in a space about the size of a file drawer with four other hens, unable to lift even a single wing. Additionally, since male chicks are worthless to the egg industry, every year millions of them are tossed into trash bags to suffocate or are thrown into high-speed grinders called macerators while they are still alive. Sorry to be such a buzz kill here, but hey, that’s my job.
TAGGED:
giant omelette
Comments
Ok, I don't eat eggs, but really... Are eggs chicken periods??? It sounds disgusting, but I don't get it.
Posted by: Jaclyn | November 2, 2007 02:49 PM
I love tofu scramble--so delicious! I cannot remember the last time I ate an egg but I do remember that my stomach did not appreciate my ingestion of them. Yuk!
Poor chickens...5,000 eggs all equal misery. On Halloween nasty kids throw eggs at people and buildings; I always think of the misery and pain the poor chickens had endured and it makes me sad.
Posted by: Ana | November 2, 2007 03:47 PM
Calling eggs chicken periods makes about as much sense as calling almonds aborted fruit fetuses. I wish more people had more access to free range eggs as they are very nutritious. I am waiting for you guys to start calling all these faux foods soylent blue or red or even green. I expect some of you would rather eat people than other animals by what I gather by reading some of the posts on this blog. Good luck in your endeavors in Louisiana, though.
Posted by: Christopher Cochran MD | November 2, 2007 03:54 PM
Christopher,
Who is the good luck for? Who in Louisiana?
Posted by: Jaclyn | November 2, 2007 05:00 PM
Yes you're right , chickens lay eggs naturally but we don't have to eat them! Gone are the times of the free range hens. Thats why it's sad to hear people eating their eggs when they know full well of the misery behide it.
Posted by: Carla | November 2, 2007 05:09 PM
Christopher,
Sorry do disappoint you, but we don't eat people—don't want to develop kuru.
"The only man convicted of cannibalism in the United States was one Alfred Packer, who ate his four comrades when they were lost in the mountains."
Posted by: Mike Quinoa | November 2, 2007 05:36 PM
Free range is unfortunately a joke--free range chickens die early when they are no longer useful, have their beaks trimmed, and usually don't even live outside. Also, the males are useless just as in "conventional" eggs and are killed. Google "free range myth" to see what I mean. :(
Posted by: Canaduck | November 2, 2007 05:50 PM
Unless an egg is fertilized, it doesn't even have a chance of being a chicken.
Posted by: Alexis | November 2, 2007 05:53 PM
Yep, cannibalism is not illegal as such but there is the Donner Party and Dahmer to dispute that cannibalisn does occur in the U.S.. You can get Kuru from eating the brains of any animal not just humans.
Posted by Ana
" I always think of the misery and pain the poor chickens had endured and it makes me sad."
What misery and pain endured by chickens?Just because something looks uncomfortable to you does not mean it is to them.
Posted by: Mars | November 2, 2007 07:03 PM
Eggs may be chicken periods, but at least it only sounds disgusting. It does not taste disgusting.
Besides, quite a bit of mammals hunt eggs, so you don't have to be sorry to abuse the chicken. Other animals abuse chickens too.
Posted by: Ray-O | November 2, 2007 07:08 PM
Free range eggs are freely available in Australia, the consumer has the choice.
Why not keep a few chooks as pets instead of a dog or cat. Guilt free eggs.
Posted by: rojo | November 2, 2007 07:41 PM
yeah eggs are chicken period...its just like in humans, when a females egg isnt fertilized it passes out of her body along with the lining of the uterus since there is no baby to nourish...so when female chickens are separated from males none of the eggs are fertilized so the chicken passes out unfertilized eggs. its an egg just like in women. eggs come out of chicken vagina! grosss!
Posted by: samantha | November 2, 2007 09:36 PM
Okay...tofu? what about all those people with hidden soy allergies? those with egg allergies have that figured out..for the most part..
so quit trying to convert the world...not all your thoughts work for everyone..
and I for one...love my eggs!
oh yeah...and eat tofu too...but want everyone to be able to make life decisions for themselves...geez!
Posted by: Chris | November 2, 2007 09:41 PM
"Dr. education" never fails at making stupid, nonsensical comments, with his typical juvenile deliquent mentaltiy. Only a numb brain would say that he expects a/r's activists to eat humans, while he eats the body parts of dead animals.
Oh, wait, "dr. education" says the animals are "harvested." So I guess that classifies the dead animals' bodies along the lines of fruits and vegetables - which just happens to have blood, arteries/veins, muscles, nerves, and tendons.
Posted by: Ariel | November 2, 2007 09:53 PM
Curious on how you then justify Boca and Morning Star that use eggs in their products.
Posted by: Mars | November 2, 2007 09:58 PM
I eat free range egss, I dont see anything wrong with it.
Posted by: Jess | November 3, 2007 08:18 AM
Hmm. Because there's no such thing as cage-free, organic eggs, right guys? And I'm sorry, although I use tofu cutlets regularly when I cook, I still enjoy eggs and that picture of that tofu scramble turns my stomach more than the idea of "chicken periods".
Enough with the buzz kill, instead of trying to stop this festival all together, why not encourage more responsible egg production (cage-free or free-farmed etc.) You can have your eggs and eat 'em too.
Posted by: Steph | November 3, 2007 02:03 PM
"which just happens to have blood, arteries/veins, muscles, nerves, and tendons. "
And tasty ones at that!
Posted by: Mars | November 3, 2007 03:50 PM
I am sure that most sensible people who read this blog and who really take the time to think about this issue will realize that the chickens do indeed have to endure misery and pain. Just because the chickens cannot "tell" us about it in our language does not mean it is not true. For instance, an infant cannot yet speak in a human language, but anyone with some sense of compassion "knows" when a baby is in pain or has been neglected and left in terrible conditions.
The concept of "cage-free" chickens is, as several bloggers have pointed out here, a complete joke. The egg industry, whose only interest is in making $$$, has come up with a way of marketing their eggs so that people will think these chickens were treated humanely. Well, they ARE NOT! Cage free does not mean they are wandering around a large yard with dirt to clean up their feathers, eating when they feel like it, and dropping eggs when they want. They are still fed growth hormones, they are still inside massive sheds, and are still crammed in by the thousands.
Oh, and other animals do not abuse chickens - Abuse is "harm by commission", and is a deliberate attempt to injure. Dogs, wolves and weasels are not just wandering around, looking for a nice, fat chicken to smack around for fun. Any non-human animal that eats (which does not mean ABUSES) another non-human is doing so out of survival and instinct. Humans absolutely have the ability to survive without eating any animals or animal by-products, and anyone who says otherwise is ignorant.
Posted by: Michele | November 3, 2007 04:27 PM
Egg > Tofu
What's wrong with eggs? (I'm fully aware of factory farming). Why not encourage Free Range farming instead of taking the easy way out? (Easy way: banning produce. Smarter way: RATATATATA.)
Posted by: Caboose | November 3, 2007 06:54 PM
Even though I'm a Vegan, I agree the problem is not eggs(although in excess it's a good way to look forward to triple bypass), but the way that they are farmed. A friend of mine eats eggs from Chickens that he takes extremely good care of, moreso than most pet owners. While I won't ever eat them again, it would be great if more people had this sort of respect for the way they gather their food.
P.S. Ironically, Soylent Green was Tofu dyed green. :D
Posted by: Chaske | November 3, 2007 07:12 PM
"Curious on how you then justify Boca and Morning Star that use eggs in their products."
Who is "you"? No moral vegan (and certainly not PETA) would justify eating non-vegan products. These products would, however, be recommended for vegetarians. (And they do have some vegan foods as well.)
It took me a long time to wean myself from Boca and Morningstar Farms non-vegan offerings in my transition to a vegan diet--a transition, incidentally, that took roughly twice as long as going from a meat-eater to a vegetarian. But there are enough vegan offerings out there to provide taste and variety--even for cooking-challenged bachelors....
Posted by: Doug | November 3, 2007 08:30 PM
I rescue chickens from the egg farms. Have seen the so called free range set up and it is just as disgusting as the others just no cages and the door is open, but still millions of chickens in a big shed when it is 40 degrees outside and the beaks are still cut etc, millions of roosters are still killed every year.
I will admit that I do eat the eggs that my chickens produce sometimes just because they leave them around. Some go to the local birds and reptiles and some even go to my dogs. Why waste them. I would rather give these poor chickens and home which is free ranging where ever they want to go on my property for the rest of their lives than see them at these farms any longer than they have too. I don't care if they produce eggs or not, like the ducks I have taken in as well.
Posted by: Me | November 3, 2007 09:53 PM
Its about the conditions the chicken endurs to provide easy eggs. Stuck in the cage, beaks cut short so they wont peck the chicken jammed next to them. Free range obviously is a good answer to the problem.
Posted by: LB | November 3, 2007 10:14 PM
I'm a little disappointed that in this day and age a period would be described as disgusting. They are, have or will be a regular occurance for half of the population. Having not had one I won't comment on whether it's disgusting for a woman, or not. But I wouldn't wish my daughters to have a pre-conceived idea that it was so, or something to be ashamed of. Some of the readers of this blog are quite young.
Posted by: rojo | November 3, 2007 10:31 PM
cousew its damned painful imagine having your top lip cut off and if your all like those chickens all run aroun happily together in grassy green field then your wrong so dont come on here ok
Posted by: alex | November 4, 2007 06:10 AM
For the record...
...Christopher's comments don't surprise me. You PETA guys are so radical that they'd expect you to eat humans rather than animals.
And why not? Humans aren't delicious, but animals are! Unlike tofu scramble...
Posted by: Ray-O | November 4, 2007 07:37 AM
"Curious on how you then justify Boca and Morning Star that use eggs in their products."
We don't. Those products are for lacto-ovo vegetarians, not vegans.
Being a vegetarian is far better than eating meat, but it's not as good as being a vegan.
Posted by: Laura | November 4, 2007 09:23 AM
i hate eggs anyway but even if i did like them i would never eat them
Posted by: daisy | November 4, 2007 10:29 AM
PETA=taking the easy and socialist way out.
Posted by: Caboose | November 4, 2007 12:36 PM
Mars
More stupid comments. It has already been documented by scientists that chickens do indeed suffer and feel pain. Mars, you might look uncomfortable being impaled but it doesn't mean you feel any pain. DUH! Maybe it is time for you to return to Uranus.
Posted by: Ana | November 4, 2007 02:08 PM
There is a VEGAN Boca Burger, the original one, and it is delicious. Look at the ingredients. Reading comprehension does wonders!
Ariel
Well said! Peace!
Posted by: Ana | November 4, 2007 02:12 PM
Laura
I agree.
Posted by: Ana | November 4, 2007 02:17 PM
It doesnt matter Laura
Posted by: Caboose | November 4, 2007 06:44 PM
"cousew its damned painful imagine having your top lip cut off "
Completely different. A chickens beak is made of the same material as your hair,fingernails and toenails.It hurts the chicken about as much as you getting a haircut or trimming your nails.Even your "free range" chickens need it done.
Posted by: Mars | November 4, 2007 07:01 PM
" Just because the chickens cannot "tell" us about it in our language does not mean it is not true. For instance, an infant cannot yet speak in a human language, but anyone with some sense of compassion "knows" when a baby is in pain or has been neglected and left in terrible conditions."
A human baby is not a chicken.We know what a human baby feels is uncomfortable because we have the same biology.
Posted by Michele;
"Dogs, wolves and weasels are not just wandering around, looking for a nice, fat chicken to smack around for fun"
On the contrary, they do.Get either one in your chicken pen and you can expect every chicken to be killed with most not eaten.A domestic cat is the worst for killing for play though.
Posted by: Mars | November 4, 2007 07:08 PM
Please don't jump down my throat as I'm only asking a question, but if you take the pain and misery of the industry out of the equation, ie, if you kept your own pet chickens in the garden and treated them really kindly, wouldn't eating eggs be ok if you wanted to? After all, eggs aren't a life until they're fertilised, and if you only keep hens without cockerels, they were never going to be anyway! I am Vegetarian, not a vegan, but I am interested in this issue. Thank you.
Posted by: Daz | November 5, 2007 05:06 AM
" Reading comprehension does wonders!"
Sure does. Now go reread your "healthy" ingredients and you'll find all is not healthy.
Posted by: Mars | November 5, 2007 08:41 AM
Well Mars, since you think that non-human animals are similar enough for animal testing results to be applicable to humans, then why would you (conveniently) think that they are different enough when it comes to their reaction to pain?
Posted by: Michele | November 5, 2007 09:22 AM
Mars
According to you anything vegans eat is unhealthy. The only thing unhealthy is your limited ability in comprehending the morality of veganism and your lack of compassion for beings other than a human. I will have to qualify which humans; if you had any compassion for animal rights advocates you'd desist in writing such blatantly stupid comments that are an eyesore. Your comments insult our intelligence and the intelligence of other creatures.
Posted by: Ana | November 5, 2007 01:08 PM
1. In reference to my previous comment stating meat has blood, arteries/veins, muscle, nerves, the space cadet (MARS) responded: "And tasty ones at that."
Then the space cadet in its post 11-5-07,8:41am, re: veggie burgers: "Now go reread your "healthy" ingredients and you'll find all is not healthy." Is the space cadet on a health kick now?
Anyway, obviously in its desperation to make any kind of moot point, the space cadet will put its foot in its own mouth by overlooking the fact that meat is not healthy due to being a highly contributing factor to arterial and heart-related illnesses - AND eating meat is the closest description to being a cannibal. (And since I have written on heart-related diseases from meat several times in great length, the space cadet not only proves its lack of reading comprehension, but also lacks reading retention ability.)
2.Well, at least us a/r's activists received a compliment from Ray-O. Yes, we are "radicals," because the word "radical" stems from the Greek word, meaning, to get to the bottom of things with the TRUTH, where otherwise the way of society's thinking is the out-moded, irrational, and/or harmful norm. Among only two from a VERY long list who were considered "radicals" were Martin Luther King, Jr., and Mahatma Ghandi. So we are in good company, and we thank Ray-o for the compliment! : )
Posted by: Ariel | November 5, 2007 03:28 PM
Hi, Daz!
Please don't ever have any reluctance for asking an intelligent question to a/r's activists. In fact, we welcome intelligent questions.
Going by what you say, no, there is no problem with that, and some vegetarians do eat eggs and food products that contain eggs. Vegans are people who choose not to consume eggs and any animal-related food products.
As a/r's activists, our issues are with the intolerable conditions and the suffering that the hens endure in order for their eggs to be obtained.
Posted by: Ariel | November 5, 2007 03:52 PM
As far as Boca is concerned, they do produce vegan products you just have to be aware of whether are not the product you buy is vegan.
From their site:
Which BOCA® Foods products are vegan, or free of animal-derived ingredients?
The following BOCA products in our Mainstream line are now desginated vegan: Chili, Vegan Burger, Roasted Garlic Burger, Roasted Onion Burger, Chik'n Nuggets, Chik'n Patties, Spicy Chik'n Patties, and Ground Burger. For the Roasted Garlic Burger and Chik'n Nuggets and Patties, we've recently removed egg, milk, and dairy ingredients to make them vegan. To ensure that the package you have is vegan, we recommend that you check the ingredient line to ensure that egg, milk and dairy ingredients aren't listed. In our line made with no artificial preservatives or flavors, both the BOCA Vegan Burger and BOCA Ground Burger are vegan.
Posted by: mark | November 5, 2007 04:43 PM
Daz, that is a very good question, and Ariel summed it up just fine.
I read a great book last year that I would recommend for you. It's called "The Pig Who Sang to the Moon", and it's about the emotional lives of farm animals. This is one of those books that captures one's interest right away - I could barely put it down once I got started. Very poignant, funny, sad, all in one book.
Posted by: Michele | November 5, 2007 05:12 PM
Mars said, "You can get Kuru from eating the brains of any animal not just humans."
So what are those other animals you can get it from?
Posted by: Mike Quinoa | November 5, 2007 05:33 PM
"According to you anything vegans eat is unhealthy. "
Nope. As you say, go find that post. Anything, meat or vegetable that is processed is for the most part unhealthy and atleast full of chemical preservatives.
As for the Boca supporters; A little hypocritical to say one group is "bad" for using eggs and yet another group it is OK.I didn't post a thing about Boca being vegan but the fact that the Boca company does use eggs and milk in their products.If you posted that they should ban using eggs at this event then you should also stop buying Boca and Morning Star products for the same reason.
"Anyway, obviously in its desperation to make any kind of moot point, the space cadet will put its foot in its own mouth by overlooking the fact that meat is not healthy due to being a highly contributing factor to arterial and heart-related illnesses "
And as I've posted before, vegans die of the same diseases. I have no problem understanding that I will not live forever and don't count my life as good simply based on years lived. Fact is Ariel, by your own posts, I'll probaly outlive you and am healthier as well.
Mike Q;
"So what are those other animals you can get it from?"
From what I read, any of them. Using your own wikipedia source even it states there may have been an outbreak do to a group eating squirrel brains.
Asked by ariel;
"Is the space cadet on a health kick now?"
Always have been and,as my MD states, I'll live to be 100 if I don't get run over by a truck first.Being vegan does not equate to being healthy based solely on that.Sitting on you butt all day eating a salad is no more healthy living then sitting on your butt eating a steak.
Posted by: Mars | November 5, 2007 07:17 PM
Seriously guys, not everyone sees the world the way you do. Stop trying to make this a vegetarian country, it won't happen. I can assure you. I like meat. You don't have to. Just don't try to take away my right to enjoy meat. I'd also like to point out that meat isn't the only cause of obesity in America, just in case you think you'd be doing us all a favor by making us vegetarians.
Thanks for your time,
Emily
Posted by: Emily | November 5, 2007 08:32 PM
The best thing to do is to eat in moderation. Some produce, some greens. Plus excercize, a healty social(not Socialist) life, and being able to reason.
Posted by: Caboose (neutral, blue army. Blood Gulch Outpost Alpha) | November 5, 2007 10:11 PM
I've heard that those male chicks that are grinded up in the macerators are fed back to the female chickens as food in some places! That is just sick and wrong!
If you eat eggs, than you are supporting all this.
Posted by: Violet | November 5, 2007 10:47 PM
what will you, PeTA, eat if scientists one day discover plants can think and feel?
Posted by: Somethingtothinkabout | November 6, 2007 03:27 AM
"Main Entry: 1rad·i·cal
Pronunciation: rad-i-kl
Function: adjective
Etymology: Middle English radical "relating to a root," from Latin radicalis (same meaning), from earlier radic-, radix "root" --related to ERADICATE, RADISH
1 : of, relating to, or proceeding from a root
2 a : departing sharply from the usual or ordinary : EXTREME b : of or relating to radicals in politics
- rad·i·cal·ly /-k(-)l/ adverb
- rad·i·cal·ness noun
Word History Our word radical was formed from the Latin adjective radicalis, which simply meant "of or relating to a root." The Latin word radix meant "root." This meaning was kept when the word radicalis came into English as radical, but new senses developed too. Since a root is at the bottom of something, radical came to describe what is at the base or beginning, in other words, what is "basic, fundamental." Later, radical was used to describe something that was extremely different from the usual. Then, as a noun radical came to be applied to a person who wants to make extreme or "radical" changes in the government or in society. In mathematics, a radical sign indicates a root of a number. The words radish and eradicate also come from the Latin radix."
"Arising from or going to a root or source; basic: proposed a radical solution to the problem.
Departing markedly from the usual or customary; extreme: radical opinions on education.
Favoring or effecting fundamental or revolutionary changes in current practices, conditions, or institutions: radical political views.
Linguistics. Of or being a root: a radical form.
Botany. Arising from the root or its crown: radical leaves.
Slang. Excellent; wonderful.
n.
One who advocates fundamental or revolutionary changes in current practices, conditions, or institutions: radicals seeking to overthrow the social order.
Mathematics. The root of a quantity as indicated by the radical sign.
(Symbol R) An atom or a group of atoms with at least one unpaired electron.
Linguistics. "
As usual, Ariels definition has a radical flaw.
Posted by: Mars | November 6, 2007 09:01 AM
Jesus Christ has also been described as being radical. I am keeping very good company.
People seeking changes were also described as radicals: suffragists, suffragettes, abolitionists and the list goes on.
Posted by: Ana | November 6, 2007 01:03 PM
Thank you again, space cadet (MARS), for going out of your way to prove me right on several aspects -too numerous to mention- relating to the word "radical," especially for "relating to the root" and "extremely different from the usual," ie, the acceptable norm of society's out-moded way of thinking, even though it be wrong.
And as always, your reading comprehension dysfunction came through. Take notice that I wrote the word "radical" STEMS from the Greek word (meaning: it was "borrowed" from the ancient Latin language - just as much as it is was "borrowed" or STEMS from the ancient Hebrews, as well as it is "borrowed" in many multi-languages throughout the world today - as we ourselves "borrow" it in the English language. Therefore, I did not write "originated." Now, perhaps you would want to look into the Latin word that would describe you "ad nauseum."
And perhaps you would also like to take the time to quote me (with time and date) as to another one of your bizarre claims: "As usual, Ariels definition has a radical flaw." (for as far as I understand, my definition of "radical" was right on target!) : )
Posted by: Ariel | November 6, 2007 01:56 PM
Somethingtothinkabout,
You may not be aware of this, but meat-eaters are responsible for way more "herbicide" than vegetarians or vegans.
First, people that eat meat also eat their fair share of plants.
Secondly, vast amounts of plant food are grown specifically to feed meat animals, and while ratios vary, it takes multiple pounds of plant food to create a single pound of meat.
Posted by: Mike Quinoa | November 6, 2007 04:41 PM
Mars said, "You can get Kuru from eating the brains of any animal not just humans."
So what are those other animals you can get it from?
Just give me ONE example. After all, YOU are the one that wrote it/made it up.
Posted by: Mike Quinoa | November 6, 2007 04:44 PM
Thank you again, space cadet (MARS), for going out of your way to prove me right on several aspects -defintions too numerous to mention- relating to the word "radical," but especially for "relating to the root" (of a situation), and "extremely different from the usual," et al, the acceptable norm of society's out-moded way of thinking, even though it be wrong, such as with slavery.
Btw, I wrote "STEMS" (meaning a wider concept by the Greeks), not "originates" (to mean one Latin word, "root.") FYI, the ancient Hebrews and other multi-lingual societies -past and present- expanded on the Latin meaning of "root" as you will see with your very own attempts to prove me wrong.
Now, perhaps you would also like to take the time to quote me (with time and date) as to ANOTHER one of your bizarre claims: "As usual, Ariels definition has a radical flaw." (for as far as I understand, my definition of "radical" was right on target!) : )
And that's nice that you THINK that you are going to out live me. But at least my life would be one of quality or having some value meaning: speaking out against cruelty, cruelty to animals, and having respect for ALL living beings and our environment. Now go look up the words "cruelty," "respect," and "living beings" AND "killer," hunter Mars.
Posted by: Ariel | November 6, 2007 04:51 PM
I wouldn't doubt that "Emily" will not come back to read this since most nay-sayers like to drop off comments and run. However, IF "Emily" were to read this, then I would like her ask her: Seriously, WHO is MAKING you or anyone become a vegetarian? We present the FACTS - the decision is up to the person.
On the other hand, we could ask: why have we been inundated, bombarded, and brain-washed by the meat and dairy industries into believing that animal-related foods are totally healthy for us - while the medical profession constantly deals with MORE than obesity, but with arterial and heart-related conditions whereby the above "totally healthy" foods are a MAIN contributing factor?
We have been hyped by the meat and dairy industries for the almighty dollar. (see the "CCF" who promotes their hype.) Meanwhile, PeTA's educational FACTS are for FREE.
And may I add that those industries are VERY influential in our govt. with their "sweetheart" deals through contributing for campaign funding. Therefore, they actually sway our bills into laws for their benefit $$$$$$ ONLY.
**************
And to "Somethingtothinkabout,"
Please do some REALISTIC thinking: in order for plants to think and feel, "they" would have to have a brain that re-acts from a central nervous system, a spinal cord, and nerve endings that would relate. Plants have none, and never will.
Posted by: Ariel | November 6, 2007 06:09 PM
Why are hypocritical meat-eaters on a PETA website? Just a question.
Posted by: kim | November 6, 2007 06:27 PM
i hate eggs i cant believe people would eat them y? that is just wrong like cheas i mean a cow gave her calf up so some stingy person can eat it.
Posted by: jon samson | November 6, 2007 07:40 PM
OK Ariel;
"Greek word, meaning, to get to the bottom of things with the TRUTH, "
1. Not a "greek" word.
2. Nothing defines it as "truth".In fact it can be just the opposite.
Posted by: Mars | November 6, 2007 09:10 PM
Wow, all this bickering and crossfire for eggs and tofu. :|
Posted by: Caboose (neutral, blue army. Blood Gulch Outpost Alpha) | November 6, 2007 09:26 PM
Rojo wrote: "I'm a little disappointed that in this day and age a period would be described as disgusting. They are, have or will be a regular occurance for half of the population. Having not had one I won't comment on whether it's disgusting for a woman, or not. But I wouldn't wish my daughters to have a pre-conceived idea that it was so, or something to be ashamed of."
Hey buddy, would you eat your daughter's period? NO - because that'd be disgusting. It's not gross that chickens lay eggs - it's just gross to want to consume that egg. really filthy gross.
- jojo
Posted by: jojo | November 6, 2007 10:05 PM
Latin is obsolete!
Posted by: Caboose (neutral, blue army. Blood Gulch Outpost Alpha) | November 7, 2007 06:23 AM
"Jesus Christ has also been described as being radical."
Only by satanic humanists.The radical ones are those that oppose Gods plans and design.
Posted by: Mars | November 7, 2007 07:19 AM
My advice to you is that if your "plants can think and feel" is to go back to your MD and get a change of meds because obviously they are not working. And if you're religious, FYI, in the book of Genesis, God exclaimed that the humans would eat what the plants/trees bear (fruit/vegetables). Your point is moot and ridiculous.
Posted by: Ana | November 7, 2007 08:56 AM
mars: it's people like you who oppose God's plans and design - but you are such a fanatic that you don't even recognize it!
Posted by: nana | November 7, 2007 01:24 PM
Humanists were not religious. Yes, Christ was considered radical in that he changed so many things including what Jews believed.
You really are an idiot but you probably had your brain squashed in one your traps.
Posted by: Ana | November 7, 2007 01:29 PM
Post 11-6-07, 9:10 pm:
And once again, Mars reading comprehension disorder kicks in.
1. I have studied some languages to a very small extent compared to the vast amount of education that studying them has to offer. I am not about to further explain Latin (formally studied for 2 years), nor the Greek interpretations/elaborations re-posted 11-6-07, 4:51pm, since Mars can't even comprehend English.
2. IF Mars appears to see both sides of a definition in its point #2, then why is Mars so stubbornly one-sided against learning about a/r's beliefs?
Mars post, 11-7-07, 7:19 am, in reference to addressing another a/r's activists' comment that "Jesus Christ has also been described as being a radical." (which is true.) Quoted response from the space cadet: "Only by satanic humanists." That is very ambiguous statement in relationship to time, yet a VERY derogatory comment that would heavily imply the Jewish people of His time who did not accept His (radical) teachings, were "satanic" OR anyone else who says it thereafter as being "satanic."
Next sentence, same post: "The radical ones are those who oppose Gods plan and design." Is that to imply that J.C. -a Teacher who presented radical changes in spiritual and earthly beliefs- went against God's plans and designs?
May I suggest that Mars read and absorb and CORRECTLY interpret the first Book of Genesis. (suggestion: before reading, learn the foundation of Genesis)
So one may ask a fair question: how does this relate to animal rights?
Answer: MARS will make any kind of outbursts and unproven claims and false accusations just to try to be abrasive against the animal rights' movement.
(to clarify: I use "it" in referring to Mars because he/she has not even so much as revealed a gender after months and months of posting daily, and it gets quite cumbersome to keep writing "he/she," "his/her")
Posted by: Ariel | November 7, 2007 01:44 PM
kim,
Thanks for your question.
I don't know what post(s) you are referring to, but I think you might be referring to the anti-a/r's activists, who frequently comment on here. So that would make it confusing since they don't explicitly identify themselves as being anti. Did I understand your question correctly; and if so, is my response helpful in answering your question?
Posted by: Ariel | November 7, 2007 03:24 PM
Mars:
"As for the Boca supporters; A little hypocritical to say one group is "bad" for using eggs and yet another group it is OK.I didn't post a thing about Boca being vegan but the fact that the Boca company does use eggs and milk in their products.If you posted that they should ban using eggs at this event then you should also stop buying Boca and Morning Star products for the same reason."
I'm surprised no one has answered this yet.
We buy Boca and Morning Star products for two reasons.
1: It is almost impossible to eat food produced solely by vegan companies or individuals.
2: By buying vegan products from these companies, we are letting them know that there is a demand for them and encouraging them to make more. This equates to less focus on nonvegan products and more focus on vegan products. And so, we are helping phase out nonvegan products from these companies' product lines.
Posted by: Laura | November 7, 2007 03:50 PM
What would happen to the ruminants if the whole world went vegan? Where would they go since we wouldnt need them? And the land suitable for them is almost always occupied and will be due to human overpopulation!
Posted by: Caboose (neutral, blue army. Blood Gulch Outpost Alpha) | November 7, 2007 04:06 PM
" Yes, Christ was considered radical in that he changed so many things including what Jews believed."
And their belief was the radical ones not Jesus' beliefs.Restoring order from radicals is not being radical.
""Jesus Christ has also been described as being a radical." (which is true."
Jesus being called a radical may be true but the truth is He was not except by the viewpoint of the satanist radicals that rebelled against God in the first place.Of course your being on the satanist side you would then have that radical Jesus viewpoint as He opposed what you do.
" so much as revealed a gender after months and months of posting daily, and it gets quite cumbersome to keep writing "he/she," "his/her")"
And yet Ariel is the only one stupid enough to write he/she. Everybody else just posts what they feel is correct since gender doesn't matter.
Posted by: Mars | November 7, 2007 09:04 PM
jojo, well mate the "gross" part about a human period is the blood and tissue expeled from the body, the egg is so miniscule you would get much eating out of it if even you tried.
Posted by: rojo | November 8, 2007 02:21 AM
Mike Q;
"Just give me ONE example. After all, YOU are the one that wrote it/made it up."
I did.
Didn't know you where/are a cannibal living in New Guinea.
Posted by: Mars | November 8, 2007 07:56 AM
MARS,
Why do you insist on being wrong day after day, no matter what a/r's activist you are addressing? Are you imbalanced or just have a sadistic need to make a fool out of yourself?
I'd like to maintain the focus of this site as being for what it is intended: ANIMAL RIGHTS'
However, after these BIZARRE claims that you made, I will not be addressing anything other than animal issues. Understood?
The Pharisees, the Scribes, and any other person who strictly followed the Jewish beliefs in Jesus' time were traditionalists - not radicals.
I don't perceive you to be a Theologian by any stretch of the imagination, so I would say you don't have a clue what you're talking about otherwise, especially since you don't have a clue about anything else that you rant about. In fact, I'm inclined to think you are a compulsive liar.
And you are SO desperate because you couldn't prove any of my so-called claims that you concocted, that now you have to go so low to accuse me of being on the side of satan. You are really a despicable being, who doesn't deserve an ounce of respect - and definitely not worthy of being on this respectable blog site.
And no, Ariel is not stupid to use any unknown gender to assume. You are just so cowardly, that you are afraid to even reveal your gender. So I will continue to refer to you as "it."
Posted by: Ariel | November 8, 2007 11:15 AM
Mars said, "You can get Kuru from eating the brains of any animal not just humans." So what are those OTHER (=non-human) animals you can get it from?
Can't come up with one? I didn't think you could. Why don't you research before you post?
Posted by: Mike Quinoa | November 8, 2007 04:46 PM
Mars, the first thing I wonder is why you consider veg*anism to be a Satanic attribute.
I am an atheist, but I am educated enough on the topic of Christianity that I wonder how killing and abusing animals is the less morally and Biblically correct thing to do, especially in a day and age when it is quite possible to live healthfully without doing so.
I am of the opinion that Jesus, in modern times, would definitely be a vegan. If he showed such compassion for humanity, he would certainly do the same for animals.
Another question I have to everyone is this: Why the direct attacks? On both sides, you are far more likely to make your point effectively if you exercise restraint. Meat-eaters, you'll make yourselves look like the cold, ignorant caricatures you are often portrayed as. Veggie folk, you'll make yourselves look like the stereotypical crazy PETA hippies. Let's show them our intelligence.
Posted by: Laura | November 8, 2007 07:36 PM
Would you not, by your definition, then call the angel Lucifer, who rebelled and is an extremist, a radical. Those that go against Gods plan are the radical ones not those destined to restore it.Of course, like I posted, those that are on the radical satans side would view Jesus as radical for opposing that view.
"The Pharisees, the Scribes, and any other person who strictly followed the Jewish beliefs in Jesus' time were traditionalists - not radicals."
If you really read your Bible you would know that Jesus opposed SOME of these groups not all and Jesus was taught by them, to an extent. Many of those groups had fallen to thinking they where the ones that got to make radical rules against what the Bible said even allowing money changers in the Temples.
"And no, Ariel is not stupid to use any unknown gender to assume. You are just so cowardly, that you are afraid to even reveal your gender. So I will continue to refer to you as "it."
Fine with me.Yes, she was stupid for posting he/she with every statement and the only one hung up on gender. Seems everyone else chose what ever gender they wanted and went with that. Unlike her, I don't find being refered to either gender as an insult so either one or nuetral will work.All your really looking for is more info for your hate hence why you post "space cadet" instead of Mars.
Posted by: Mars | November 8, 2007 09:05 PM
Mike Q;
Kuru in our society goes by the names of mad cow disease, chronic wasting disease and C-J disease or if misdiagnosed,althiemers.
Posted by: Mars | November 8, 2007 09:09 PM
Ariel
Are you going to refer to me as "it" too? ;(
Im trying not to be as arrogant as Mr. space cadet with my arguments, if you want to call them that :P.
Posted by: Caboose (neutral, blue army. Blood Gulch Outpost Alpha) | November 8, 2007 10:08 PM
Ariel-
It was kind of a rhetorical questions as well as sarcastic...but that's okay. I just get annoyed but people saying that they love animals, but still eat them (not only in this blog but in others as well).
Mars- You stated that beaks are made of the same thing as fingernails & hair...uh, COMPLETELY FALSE. The outside, yes, is made of keratin, then BONE, and in the very inside BLOOD VESSELS and NERVES. Yeah...just like a haircut. If your going to spew out "facts" could you possibly EDUCATE yourself first?
Posted by: Kim | November 8, 2007 10:22 PM
BTW Ariel-
THANK YOU for continually posting, I really enjoy reading them. You sound very intelligent (unlike others) and I love having a strong women stand with me on important issues. Love ya & keep it up!! :)
Posted by: Kim | November 8, 2007 10:28 PM
Where is there evidence that Kuru has been spread from animals to humans? I see that scientists have injected Kuru into animals and they did indeed contract it. I am just curious as to whether you have a url discussing the animal to human transmission.
Posted by: Elle | November 9, 2007 02:14 AM
Mars said, "Kuru in our society goes by the names of mad cow disease, chronic wasting disease and C-J disease or if misdiagnosed,althiemers."
No it doesn't. It is a TSE, yes, but also denotes a specific TSE.
Posted by: Mike Quinoa | November 9, 2007 03:54 PM
Mars said, "Kuru in our society goes by the names of mad cow disease, chronic wasting disease and C-J disease or if misdiagnosed,althiemers."
No it doesn't. It is a TSE, yes, but also denotes a specific TSE.
The fact remains, you were unable to support your quote.
Posted by: Mike Quinoa | November 9, 2007 03:55 PM
Hi, Kim!
I appreciate you getting back to me. As you know, I wasn't too clear as to you were referring with your question because - as you also probably might know - there are newcomers on here, who may find it very confusing as to who are making the comments: a/ra's or the anti's, so I try to clear it up.
But I understand what you meant now. And I TOTALLY agree with you about their hypocrisy. It doesn't even make sense for anyone to make a broad statement by saying they "love" animals, and then turn right around and enjoy eating animals, who go through a lifetime of a misery before being mericlessly slaughtered.
Oh I am DEFINITELY a strong person with strong convictions. I won't back down to anybody's continued nonsense about a/r's, but I will not "entertain" their juvenile delinquent stupidity either. They are up against a LOT more with me than they realize and will ever know.
I am glad to know that you are a strong person also. Take care!
Posted by: Ariel | November 9, 2007 04:27 PM
Hi Ariel:
IT cannot understand our explanations about Christ being radical. He was so radical many of his followers and co-religionists called Him a blasphemer and refused to accept His teachings. No more eye for an eye, forgiveness replaces that; only one wife; He spoke to women (in that period not the norm), He elevated the status of women (through his Mother) and He gave only Two commanments: Love God and Love your neighbor. Radical! He changed the world; Jesus' ultimate message was one of peace. And so will we Ariel, Mike, Michele, Vestagirl et al by spreading the message of Peace to ALL BEINGS!!! Now you are the socialist and I am "on the satinist side" ( I think IT meant satanic) LOL!!!Great posts!! Keep fighting the good fight! :)
Posted by: Ana | November 9, 2007 05:39 PM
Kim, educate yourself.Beaks are made of the same material as your fingernails and just like your fingernails the nerves you say exist are located in the flesh not the beak or nail itself.Trimming a chickens beak to prevent pecking is no different then trimming your nails.
Mike Q;
"No it doesn't. It is a TSE, yes, but also denotes a specific TSE."
Yes it does.Kuru is the name given by a specific group to the same or similar diseases we give a different name.All are the spongiform prion and can be had by eating meat of any effected animal but eating the brain where the disease is more abundant causes the better chance of getting the disease.Interesting to note that you posted fear of catching Kuru yet I doubt you are of the Fore People of New Guinea so your chances of catching it are as you post,zero.Your chances of having or catching our form of the same disease does exist. So why would you post a fear of catching a disease you know you could not get as such? You fear catching C-J,mad cow, chronic wasting disease that can come from eating any effected animal.
Asked by Laura;
"Mars, the first thing I wonder is why you consider veg*anism to be a Satanic attribute."
Where did I post that?
Posted by: Mars | November 9, 2007 09:56 PM
Can anybody answer my quesion?
Posted by: Caboose (neutral, blue army. Blood Gulch Outpost Alpha) | November 9, 2007 10:57 PM
"He gave only Two commanments: Love God and Love your neighbor."
Partial statements as typical from Ana.
Jesus said;
Love God and keep His Commandments and love your nieghbor as God loves you.Not exactly radical thinking unless viewed from the original radical satans viewpoint.Others have noted that you don't mention the fact that by your own definition satan is also a radical so he is part of those that call themselves radical as well.
Posted by: Mars | November 11, 2007 02:09 AM
Mars said, "You can get Kuru from eating the brains of any animal not just humans."
So what are those other animals you can get it from? Name one.
Just a simple question which you don't seem to be able to answer.
Posted by: Mike Quinoa | November 11, 2007 10:42 AM
Religion has no place in any of these arguments... On either side... The Bible condones animal sacrifices in the Old Testament. In the New Testament, many references are made to eating meat, such as the slaughter of the fatted calf for the prodigal son. Paul also makes many references to eating meat and the right to do so, as long as it does not hurt your brothers faith. He also states the same for those who do not eat meat. Both sides have their right to their choice.
But one thing I don't get is how can you say that meat-eaters go against gods plan? Our bodies are made to eat meat. Our teeth are made to tear meat. god put the animals on the earth to serve man, not as equals. Read the creation story.
And of course there is nowhere in the Bible I can think of that would say those that choose not to eat meat are wrong either.
As I've said in another post, I am not a Christian. I do not believe in organized religion (I am a deist), however, if you are going to use religion in your arguments, know what you are saying.
And as for the issue in this blog, I see nothing wrong with eating eggs, just as I see nothing wrong with eating meat. There is something wrong with the way a large portion of the chickens are raised, but eating locally raised free range chicken eggs is usually not a bad idea.
Posted by: Tim R | November 11, 2007 01:11 PM
Ana
Actually, It's now Communist.
Posted by: Caboose (anti Combine. Go Gordon Freeman) | November 11, 2007 06:24 PM
As usual, MARS is WRONG AGAIN in ITS post (11-9-07,9:56pm) responding to Kim's post (11-8-07,9:22pm). When the space cadet, MARS, tells anyone to "educate themselves first," IT should take ITS own advice first. Kim's only "fault" was giving MARS too much credit for having common sense, without her feeling she needed to explain every little detail - as I also found that is what MARS requires, due to ITS lack of plain old common sense.
Contrary to MARS, trimmming the beaks of chickens is NOT "no different than trimming your nails.
Without refererring to any source: it is common sense to know that animals, as well as human animals, have bodies that are STRUCTURED for their needs and purposes as is. Any mutilation or deletion of the body's structure causes a hindrance for the body to function to its fullest capabilities.
Referring to a source:
Briefly, trimming chicken's beaks -or debeaking - is a VERY painful process, which also GREATLY diminishes the function of the beak/beak area for the chickens to eat, drink, and preen. (gosh, that sounds like my broader description, only in detail)
source: United Poultry Concerns
www.upc-online.org/debeaking/ota.html
(please note that it is an UNbiased source)
Therefore, Kim is correct that underneath, there is blood vessels, nerves, bone - and I'll add: a central nervous system to the brain from those nerves in order to feel PAIN.
Posted by: Ariel | November 11, 2007 08:52 PM
Can I get an answer for my ruminants question?
Posted by: Caboose (neutral, blue army. Blood Gulch Outpost Alpha) | November 12, 2007 05:19 PM
Tim R.,
Well since religion has no place in these argruments, and since we're not going to talk about it, then I won't say anything about the "O.T. and animal sacrifices," and I won't say anything about "Paul," and I won't say anything about the "creaton story," (Genesis) saying that God gave human animals the fruit and grains of the land to eat. And I won't say that animals were given the grasses of the land.
And I won't say that God refused to accept animal sacrifices in the O.T.: "I hate, despise your festivals...Even though you offer Me your burnt offerings...of well-being of your fatted animals. I will not look upon you..." Amos 5-21:24
And I won't say that the books of the Bible are not particularly in order when Ezekeil 3-4 said: "My body has never be DEFILED by eating flesh."
And I won't say that God put animals on this earth to co-habitat with mankind, not for them to be served on a plate.
But I will say that we were out teeth were not meant to eat meat because we do not have long canine teeth to tear apart meat as do the animals. Knives (for dining) and forks were not invented until approx. the past past century and a half. And I will also so say that eating meat causes arterio and heart related diseases. Therefore, mankind was not to eat meat because - coming right down to it - it is detrimental to mankind's health.
Posted by: Ariel | November 12, 2007 07:15 PM
And as usual Ariel, you are very much wrong and posting junk isn't helping you.
"which also GREATLY diminishes the function of the beak/beak area for the chickens to eat, drink, and preen."
Now explain to us why removing 1/3 of a chickens upper beak makes it unable to do those things or "diminishes" it's capability to do so.The only thing it diminishes is the chickens ability to peck itself or other chickens to death.
Posted by: Mars | November 13, 2007 08:26 AM
What's the matter, MARS, afraid of the UNbiased TRUTH or is your reading comprehension dysfunction hindering your diminished capability to be educated?
Go to the UNbiased website that I posted in my last post and have someone with reading comprehension explain it to you:
www.upc-online.org/debeaking/ota.html
Posted by: Ariel | November 13, 2007 11:42 AM
Mars
Jesus was radical. The Jews only kept to themselves loved only their co-religionists. Jesus also angrily decried animal sacrifices. I think the only satanist is you especially since you use that word so much. Crawl back into hell, fool. Your comments are ludicrous and have gotten really old just like your cut and paste projects. Blah, blah...so much nonsense.
Posted by: Ana | November 13, 2007 03:59 PM
As I said Ariel, I admitted that there were arguments for the other side, but I did not know them as well. Thank you for finding them.
However, knives and forks are not necessities. They are luxuries. Our teeth do quite well at tearing meat when it is in our mouth, knives and forks make the bites smaller and more civilized. And meat is not unhealthy for you if you eat it in smaller amounts. We are meant to be omnivores, with a variety of a diet... Meat is unhealthy for this society not because we are eating meat, but because we eat it in excess, just as we eat everything in excess.
Posted by: Tim R | November 13, 2007 08:52 PM
Hi, Ana,
I just want to let you know (in case I never get the chance) that history has always been one of my very favorite subjects, BUT ironically, was never particularly good at it in high school (well, the tests anyway) : )
Anyway, I love to watch the History Ch. and any other channels that have documentaries about history - and I learn more on that than I did in school - which was over a 100 years ago! : )
I find it strange, that some "facts" I learned in high school, are suddenly different. I guess that's because more real facts come to the surface over the years, and more "secrets" become revealed. I would really like to have a conversation with you about history, well, actually, learn from you. But since this is an a/r's blog site, then it wouldn't be acceptable. Anyway, I think it's REALLY interesting how historical events come into focus with a/r's activism - such as with slavery, the holocaust, etc.
Just another thought: I've always been fascinated with the theory of "time travel" ---going back in time to visit certain eras. I was watching a documentary about that one time, and physicists explained that "time travel" would not be feasible until a time machine has been invented, and ONLY from the moment the "key" is turned on, would it be possible to go back, but only from the point it was turned on. They also said that IF it were possible to go back in historic times, we wouldn't be able to change anything because something would occur or get in our way to to prevent us from making any changes. Interesting.
And Ana, I'm sure YOU have really, really done a LOT more for a/r's activism than I could ever have done. I give you all the credit in the world. It has been my GREAT pleasure to have been in contact with you - a very, very rare and admirable person...take care, and the best to you always! Keep up the good fight! : )
Posted by: Ariel | November 13, 2007 09:05 PM
Ariel
Meat only causes those problems when eaten in excess. We have incisors, to help us with our meat. Molars for the greens, or to mash food up. Candy and other sweets are MUCH worse than meat.
Posted by: Caboose (Combine Slayer) | November 14, 2007 05:55 PM
As this "argument" (which is truly not an argument, but fact) continues ad nauseum, ad infinitum -primitive to evolution -mankind does NOT have fangs to tear apart meat. Each species of animal -including human animal- is orally equipped with the accommodated means for chewing or consuming food.
Take a look at each species and what they eat: for example, most fish do not have teeth, therefore, they eat kelp. Birds do not have teeth, therefore, they eat seeds. Cows (no fangs) eat grains. The rodent family eats the types of foods that they can gnaw to keep their teeth from continually growing to great length, ie, carrots, nuts, etc.
Predators eat prey (meat), because they are naturally equipped with fangs and pointed incisiors to kill and properly chew their prey. Domestically speaking, dogs (omnivores/carnivors) and cats (carnivores)-continued from evolution- fangs and pointed incisors that are functional for the purpose of properly chewing meat. The human animal does neither fangs, nor sharply pointed incisors. No scientfic studies needed: the proof is in anyone's acknowledged vision of nature's habits.
And what parameters (re: meat)- defines "excess"? "Excess" varies with each individual. What is considered too little for some, is too much for others.
Posted by: Ariel | November 19, 2007 10:36 AM