Dec06
Eva Mendes Reveals All
Posted at 09:34 AM | Permalink
| 
Comments (101)
Eva Mendes—the gorgeous star of Training Day, Hitch, Once Upon a Time in Mexico, Ghost Rider, and most recently the brilliant We Own the Night featuring Mark Wahlberg and our old friend Joaquin Phoenix—is also the new face of our winter anti-fur campaign. Once you’ve had a long look at this stunning new anti-fur ad, take a deep breath and check out what Eva had to say when she sat down with us for this PETA Files exclusive interview about what led her to speak out about the cruel treatment of animals in the fur industry:
How did you come to get involved with helping animals? Did you have any animal companions growing up?
I love animals, but I hadn't had a pet since I was a kid. I recently got a dog and he's not only made me a happier girl—he's made me much more sympathetic to animal rights. I look at my beautiful dog and think, "Of course I'd never eat him or skin him for his fur, so why would I be okay with eating a cow or wearing a cheetah?" It's just not right. It's a contradiction.
Do you have any animals? Can you tell us about them?
I recently got the most beautiful dog in the world! He's the sweetest thing ever. He's fully trained and all his commands are in French. Too cute! So I'm learning French and he's learning Spanish!
What drew you to the idea of working with PETA on our "Rather Go Naked Than Wear Fur" Campaign?
I wasn't familiar with PETA early in my career. I remember having my first premiere in New York City and being so naive that I didn't have a coat with me. My stylist sent me a fur wrap for the evening and I ignorantly wore it.
PETA then wrote me a beautiful letter commenting on my less-than-educated choice. I was so impressed that I vowed to them and myself to never wear real fur on the red carpet or in my life again.
As a fashion icon in Hollywood, do you find that people put pressure on you to wear fur on the red carpet? If so, how do you handle that?
A lot of the high-end designers are unfortunately still big on fur, but I simply let them know that I won't wear it on the red carpet or for photo shoots. People are pretty respectful and don't try to pressure me to wear fur (smart for them … haha).
Can you tell us about the projects you are working on right now and also about your film We Own The Night?
We Own The Night is a crime thriller set in the late 1980s about two brothers on opposite sides of the law. I play the girlfriend of Joaquin Phoenix, a manager for a club involved with the Russian Mafia, whose brother (played by Mark Wahlberg) is a cop targeting the Mafia for drug involvement. It's a great cast, and it was such a thrill to play opposite actors like Joaquin, Mark, and Robert Duvall. I've also just finished filming The Women, which was very cool, and I’m just starting a really amazing project called The Spirit.
What issue involving animals is dearest to your heart? Also, you have a lot of fans out there which gives you a powerful platform to reach people and make a difference: What is your message to them about having compassion and getting active to help animals?
I'd say the closest animal rights issue to me right now is being anti-fur. I feel like in recent years, due to pop culture, fur has made a comeback. Some people still see wearing fur as glamorous and a sign of prosperity. Personally I think wearing a baby chinchilla says, "I'm ignorant," vs. saying "I'm a badass." I don't think you can force people to change their attitudes, but you can help to educate them and to lead by example. … There are way too many amazing faux fur options out there for people to still be wearing real fur. I want people to know that there are options; that killing a poor animal and wearing it isn't cool. But respecting all life forms is cool. Very cool.
TAGGED:
eva mendes naked ad
Comments
wow - peta and eva! this time i'm out of my sockets! my favorite actress in this beauuuuuuuuuuuutiful - stunning ad! i'm overflowing - sorry but i have some south italian roots and hence i have to show my temperament - but this is a real christmas surprise and surely joaquin poenix also moved a bit his magic wand!!!
Posted by: la montanara | December 6, 2007 11:42 AM
Congratulations - PETA - this babe is thousand times sexier than JLO - because she is FURFREE!
Posted by: Franceso Valle | December 6, 2007 12:11 PM
From Brit to Liza, Fur Flies for Femmes
Posted Dec 4th 2007 2:02PM by TMZ Staff
Filed under: Fashion Police, Critters
Looks like some celebs still aren't hiding from wearing a dead animal -- in the name of fashion.
Even as the anti-fur movement gets more vociferous, TMZ -- in just one weekend -- spotted Britney Spears, Liza Minnelli, Eve, Mary J. Blige, Sharon Stone and even Madonna fur-nished with all manner of fur-ish coats. We're told that Britney proudly took her shagerrific (and very real fur) coat at her birthday party in Bel Air.
PETA, as ever, took Liza to task for her outerwear, telling TMZ in a statement that it "hopes that Liza, who abstained from fur for years, gets back on the wagon of compassion." As for Sharon Stone, the anti-fur brigade was less charitable, saying, "Put your fur coat away, Sharon."
Reps for Eve, Sharon Stone, Liza and Madonna haven't yet gotten back to us about the provenance of their clients' coats.
One notable exception -- Sarah Jessica Parker, wearing a lovely Star Wars-esque fur coat, usually, we're told, wears fake fur.
KUDOS FOR THESE WOMEN WHO WILL NOT BACK DOWN TO YOUR IDIOTIC TH9NKING...PEOPLE HAVE BEEN WEARING FUR SINCE THE BEGINNING OF TIME...AND MIGHT I ADD EATING MEAT. THESE WOMEN LOOK GORGEOUS IN THESE FURS..I DO OWN A MINK COAT AND IT IS MY FAVORITE. I'D RATHER DONATE MONEY TO HUMAN LIFE INSTEAD OF SOME ANIMAL THAT WAS PUT ON THIS EARTH FOR FOOD...WVER HEAR OF THE CIRCLE OF LIFE. AND I BET HALF YOU PETA SAPS HAVE LEATHER BELTS, SHOES ETC.....TO SHARON, BRITNEY, MARY J BLIGE...YA LOOK HOT IN THOSE FURS..DONT LET THESE PATHETIC MORONS TELL YOU ANY DIFFERENT. THEY ARE JUST ANOTHER USELESS CHARITY THAT PUTS ANIMALS LIVES BEFORE HUMAN LIVES..PETA IS A BUNCH OF SELF SERVING IDIOTS...ASK THEM HOW MUCH OF THOSE DONATIONS GO TO THEIR SALARIES?
Posted by: RICK | December 6, 2007 12:17 PM
Interesting. They just showed her on TMZ shopping with Kate Hudson who was wearing a disgusting full length white fur coat. Wonder if Eva could try to influence her ignorant celebrity friends too? Also, they were saying how fur was making a comeback in Hollywood. I would love to see more pressure put on these celebrities. They showed Eva Longoria, Madonna, Kate Hudson and Sarah Jessica Parker. Also those hideous Olsen twins are still covering themselves in dead animals. Absolutely disgusting!!
Posted by: Anna | December 6, 2007 12:34 PM
Thank you Eva Mendes - you are a real shining star for all of us people and animals! You give us the most precious Christmas-gift: your loving heart - and Heaven shall never forget this great thing - neither shall i and when our days on this dark planet shall end and the eternal light appears i shall raise my hand and call your name!!!
Posted by: Zanoni | December 6, 2007 12:35 PM
OMG an actual popular babe other than Pamela, OMG, congrtas PETA, I'm lost for words.
Posted by: Sonny | December 6, 2007 01:12 PM
Eva,
Thank you for speaking out for the voiceless.
Your are a beautiful woman, with a beautiful heart and soul...
Posted by: Judith, Freedom Fighter for Animals | December 6, 2007 01:22 PM
Very interesting. It's hard to believe that people ever wear fur without realizing what it is and where it comes from, but this reminds us otherwise. Congrats to Eva for having figured it all out!
Posted by: Canaduck | December 6, 2007 01:22 PM
Rick
You must look like a sweet sissy in the skins of the other animals. You write comments indicating your ignorance and cruel nature. As far as PETA and their supporters being morons you haven't got an iota of my intelligence let alone my compassion for all sentient beings. Your comment simply indicated that you have not evolved from the state of being an amoeba. Overkill with the cap. letters. Fool!
Posted by: Ana | December 6, 2007 01:29 PM
Rick - your primitive blogging doesn't impress me at all! The ugly three - four women you mentioned are passée since a long long time ago and eva longoria is a victim: her dad always took her out for hunting when she was a child) and (by the way: you forgot jlo) and if you would be honest you would admit that they are the ugliest ones among the celebs - from the inner point of view i mean! but the inside is always showing the outside! haa! wrap yourself into your bloody furs and live in your sharon stone-cave until you rot - soused spasmodic splasher!
Posted by: Orcus | December 6, 2007 01:39 PM
She was gorgeous and hot in We Own the Night (that first scene! WOW!).
She is 1,000 times more beautiful for her compassionate heart.
Thank you Peta and thank you Eva!
(hey, what's up with that dude Rick, he seems angry. Poor pitiful thing...)
Posted by: Jaclyn | December 6, 2007 02:03 PM
rick:
those old hags - you can have them all! i got my shining stars and they are beautiful inside-out: eva mendes, alicia silverstone, christina applegate, joss stone, sady frost, pamela anderson, kim basinger, surya bonaly, joanna krupa, jenna jameson, maggie q, sophie monk - should i continue - you have nothing in your hands - shake your ****!
Posted by: dolphin girl | December 6, 2007 02:13 PM
Ok, just one more time... she is so cool!
Posted by: Jaclyn | December 6, 2007 02:24 PM
I wonder if Eva has any fur of her own. Shame she didn't turn around.
Posted by: Yo | December 6, 2007 02:36 PM
Rick, check out PETA's financial statement - they describe their range of salaries, and you will see just how "rich" these PETA staffers are (and I am sure they work more than 40 hours per week, because it is not just a job for them - they are devoted to helping animals and they do not expect to make money doing it). You will also see that only a very small fraction of their budget goes to salaries and other administrative costs.
I don't quite know how people could have been wearing fur "since the beginning of time", nor how animals could have been put on the earth for humans to eat, since there were dinosaurs and other animals on this earth hundreds of millions of years before humans ever existed.
You must be one of those psychopath types who don't care about the suffering these animals have to endure (or maybe you just have not bothered to watch the videos because you are too afraid that you might have to change your way of thinking).
Fur only looks good on the animals to whom it belongs. I don't even like the look of fake fur, because it still looks like someone is wearing a dead animal (though I would never actually oppose someone who chooses faux fur instead of real fur).
And I would not "bet" on anything if I were you Rick - the people on these blogs who are animal rights activists would never think of wearing a scrap of fur, leather, wool, silk or cashmere.
Way to go Eva - keep spreading the word!
Posted by: Michele | December 6, 2007 02:39 PM
That RICK character sounds like one hateful S.O.B. What a drag it must be to carry on in life with that kind of attitude!
Posted by: LA Vegan | December 6, 2007 03:12 PM
Here'a an idea: Let's send
these ignorant, callous, self-
indulgent, self-serving celebr
eties to the "nightmare" we
know to be the fur farms; then
force them to go through the
vile process the little animals go through. If only we
could really do it---Eva Mendes, and many other celebrities are a "gift" to
the animals.
Posted by: Pamela L. | December 6, 2007 03:36 PM
Dumbass Rick: I can't imagine wrinkled Sharon Stone, Madonna and MJ Blige naked - they have to hide their ugly things! ugly women are wearing fur because they have to hide much!!! That's it!
Posted by: Tony | December 6, 2007 04:52 PM
Rick,
Why ask PETA what their salaries are? You can look it up like anyone else.
PETA Prez Ingrid Newkirk drew 32K in 2005. For the amount of work she does, that ain't a whole hell of a lot.
Posted by: Mike Quinoa | December 6, 2007 04:52 PM
peta - maybe this shall not appear here - as you like:
a personal proposal: send 'the rather go naked' pictures of eva mendes and roselyn sanchez to eva longoria together with joaquin phoenix: i think she would do an anti-fur ad! i know that she is wearing fur but i'm sure that she is uninformed but she loves animals - has several dogs!
i have a good feeling!
Posted by: claudia | December 6, 2007 05:05 PM
THE TRUTH ABOUT HYPOCRICY DOESN'T WORK ON THIS ONE , HUH?
Posted by: STEVE | December 6, 2007 05:25 PM
SHOW HER FRONT SIDE AND I"LL NEVER WEAR FUR AGAIN
Posted by: j | December 6, 2007 06:09 PM
I am not pro fur.
But arent the faux options made out of petroleum?
Posted by: Caboose | December 6, 2007 06:28 PM
I totally applaud Eva for this campaign, but doesn't she wear leather? Cashmere?
Posted by: AC | December 6, 2007 07:31 PM
since you left out my 2 earlier blogs, lets try again:
eva mendes wore furs in WE OWN THE NIGHT " AND PETAPHILE CELEBRITY HEARTTHROB, JOAQUIN PHOENIX WORKED FOR A MAFIA LORD WHO ALSO WAS A FURRIER....
WHAT DOES THAT ALL MEAN:
THEY'S RATHER GO NAKED THAN WEAR FURS EXCEPT WHEN IT COMES TO GETTING PAID AND THEN, LIKE MOST OF YOUR CELEBRITY STABLE.... THEN DON'T GIVE A FUR ABOUT THE PETA AGENDA....
PETA= HYPOCRICY.....
Posted by: common sense steve | December 6, 2007 10:01 PM
I think Eva Mendes is absolutely beautiful in her ad! But her compassion is more astounding than her beauty.
Posted by: tina | December 7, 2007 03:23 AM
ONE WONDERS IF PETA WOULD HAVE TOLD "CAVEMEN" TO GO BARE RATHER THAN WEAR ANIMAL SKINS, THEIR ONLY SOURCE OF CLOTHING? I CHOOSE TO NOT WEAR FUR, BUT NOBODY HAS A RIGHT TO DEMAND PEOPLE CONFORM AND GIVE UP THEIR FREEDOM OF CHOICE! TO EACH HIS OR HER OWN!!!!
Posted by: KAT | December 7, 2007 07:48 AM
What is synthetic fur and many other forms of clothing made from. Sounds like Peta is in bed with the petrochemical industry. Better try harder folks, wild fur prices are as high as they have been in a decade.
Support free-range, pollution free, organic clothing sources and go trap a coyote!!
Posted by: Coon Slayer | December 7, 2007 10:43 AM
Awesome, totally awesome that this star is using her celebrity appeal to educate people about fur. Thank you!!!
Posted by: Debbie | December 7, 2007 11:14 AM
this RICK is maybe a man who works in the chinese fur farms, he doesn't have a good soul and I think when he dies he is going to hell.
Posted by: liliana | December 7, 2007 12:54 PM
common nonsense steve: your ill-twisted diffamations are just showing us once more who is the servant of the mafia boss: brain suppurating weirdo steve with his warped rotten mind!
Posted by: Don Quijote | December 7, 2007 01:49 PM
Kat makes a very good point. It is a freedom of choice and no one can be forced to not wear fur.
We have the freedom of choice with anything and everything in our lives. When making any type of decisions, people choose the best choices. With that in mind, why would you choose to wear fur KNOWING the cruelty involved behind it? Even if you like fur, you have the choice to not wear something that caused so much suffering to animals.
Why not make the better choice? It is so simple not to wear fur and it makes so much sense.
I can't believe that people actually fight for the right to wear the skin of an animal that was most likely skinned alive and that howeled in pain.
Posted by: Jaclyn | December 7, 2007 02:15 PM
If wearing fur were a matter of choice....did some one ask the animals skinned for the fur what their choice was? I'm pretty sure they would have chosen to hold onto it themselves.
Posted by: Marmo | December 7, 2007 03:57 PM
Fabulous. I love it when I see someone from the Spanish community speaking out and baring it all for our lovely animal friends.
We've all been duped into believing that it is OK to eat animals and to slaughter them for fur or use them for experiments, but the lies from HELL are now being exposed. Thank God.
Posted by: Kimberly | December 10, 2007 11:53 AM
hey don quijote, please get together with old spiderwoman and please learn a new language because i can't understand a friggin word you are saying.....
either way... please answer my allegation and stop trying to insult and degrade me because i take it as a major compliment from you manics....
and once again, lets put it out there.... when a celebrity states that she is against fur but wore them in a movie that just came out a month ago... what does that mean to you petaphiles?
Posted by: common sense steve | December 10, 2007 12:35 PM
common nonsense steve: you know too well what we are talking about: you are a dirty coward looser: do you understand it now? the same thing goes to the coon slayer: people like you have no honor and i don't give a fuck how i'm talking with scum like you - by the way i can also write nicely and in a very educated way - i'm the animalfriend - if the limited capacities of your brains permit to study the petafiles! go to fuck each other in hell you polluting jerks!
petaphile
Posted by: Old Spiderwoman | December 10, 2007 02:43 PM
This Rick person is an ass, and he should die a painful death. Take that bitch!
Posted by: Anny | December 10, 2007 03:07 PM
Steve,
If the movie came out a month ago it was actually shot quite a while back (post-production and all).
She may have been wearing fake fur, or she may have changed her mind on the matter in the meantime. People are allowed to do that you know.
Posted by: Mike Quinoa | December 10, 2007 03:49 PM
Common Sense Steve, you said, "when a celebrity states that she is against fur but wore them in a movie that just came out a month ago... what does that mean to you petaphiles?"
Um, it usually means A) the movie was filmed many, MANY months ago, probably before Ms. Mendes was made aware of the cruelty of the fur industry; B) the production's wardrobe dept. probably used faux fur, esp. since it doesn't cost as much, and C) it's a woman's prerogative to change her mind!
When I was a child I had a rabbit fur jacket and ate hamburgers. I was ignorant about the fur industry and factory farming. After I educated myself (and BTW, my research went WAY beyond PETA's website) I stopped eating meat and wearing fur. Am I a hypocrite because once upon a time I didn't know better?
Never mind, you probably won't answer this, anyway.
Posted by: BullyDawg | December 10, 2007 04:10 PM
I AM HAPPY TO HEAR ANOTHER PERSON IS FOLLOWING THERE BETTER INSTINCTS. GOD GAVE ANIMALS BEATING HEARTS, THE CAPACITY TO FEEL PAIN, THE CAPACITY TO BLEED, THE SENSE TO HAVE FEAR. TRUST IN GOD. MANY PEOPLE HAVE LOST GOD IN THERE LIVES AND WHAT SIN REALLY IS. PEOPLE CAN TRY TO JUSTIFY WHAT THEY DO AS RIGHT BECAUSE THEY FEAR WHAT THEY ARE DOING IS WRONG. IS IS MUCH EASIER TO DO THE WRONG THING THAN THE RIGHT THING. IF I WAS WEALTHY I WOULD DONATE EVERYTHING I HAD TO PETA. LET IT GO WERE THEY WANT IT TO. THE BOTTOM LINE IS COULD YOU GET EVA TO EVEN SPEAK TO YOU? I BET THEY DID NOT HAVE TO PAY HER A DIME. THEY ARE THE WORLDS LARGEST ANIMAL RESCUE ASSOCIATION DOING GODLY THINGS. THEY SHOULD BE COMPLETELY FUNDED THREW THE GOVERNMENT!!
ANY ANYONE WHO THINKS ANOTHER CREATURE ON EARTH SHOULD HAVE TO BE TORTURED FOR THEM TO LIVE ON EARTH HAS A LOT TO THINK ABOUT. COWARDS!
Posted by: michelle velez | December 10, 2007 04:20 PM
caboose said, arent the faux fur options made from petroleum?... and just how is petroleum an animal product?... maybe you and your bud al GorE should go hug a tree.. as for, coon slayer, get a feel for fur. stick your d**k in a wall socket..
Posted by: indycar01 | December 10, 2007 04:30 PM
Kat, I don't think that ANYONE in this day in age has to rely on fur coats to keep warm.
Rick, you are a low-down piece of crap. I feel very sorry for you. Animals were on this planet before humans were, so your logic doesn't make any sense.
I really wish PETA would use celebs who are vegan for these anti-fur ads. I don't really care for a fur ad with Eva Mendes, who wears leather and eats meat, or Steve O, who used animals in his disgusting stunts as a form of sick entertainment on Jackass. I don't buy into that. Don't use celebs who wouldn't wear fur, but would have a crocodile bite them in the ass, or who wear cashmire and leather.
Posted by: Nicole | December 10, 2007 08:32 PM
Why not silk or cashmere? Guess you all have a part of Bush inside u.
Whatever, PETA=opinion
Posted by: Caboose | December 10, 2007 10:16 PM
You guys barely know what you're fighting against and you all have doublestandards when it comes to human, aswell as animalrights. It's damn pathetic and the latest articles and TV-shows really set all the stuff in perspective.
Posted by: Roe | December 11, 2007 04:42 AM
Why cant we see the boobs
Posted by: Bob | December 11, 2007 04:25 PM
God almighty, Eva do you have any clue what i would do to that azzzzzz ?
Posted by: Mikey Noodlez | December 11, 2007 04:40 PM
The comments from the animal haters/users/abusers/killers are really pathetic. Stick your hand or any limb in a trap and also see if being flayed alive feels good. Go for it! Let's see if you'd enjoy donating your skin while still alive. How about losing limbs crushed in a trap? Having fun yet being the one trapped??? Maybe you would enjoy anal electrocution or having your head stomped on?
Posted by: Ana | December 11, 2007 05:07 PM
She looks amazing, totally awesome!
Posted by: Keith | December 11, 2007 05:20 PM
OMG...I bet she never wore a pair of good sneakers
Posted by: Tina | December 11, 2007 05:57 PM
When I hear you caring about unborn children, perhaps I will start listening to you about fur. I won't be holding my breath.
Posted by: John | December 11, 2007 07:11 PM
PLEASE, PLEASE !!!
GROW UP CHILDREN. WHAT A SPOILED BUNCH OF CHILDREN THIS COUNTRY HAS RAISE. YOU HAVE NEVER HEAR THE WORD NO. GONE WITHOUT A MEAL. WHAT DO YOU KNOW ABOUT THE REAL WORLD. ANIMAL ARE HERE FOR US TO CONTROL, USE, WEAR AND YES DEAR ONES EAT. ARE YOU ALL SO SHALLOW THAT THIS GENERATION HAS NOTHING BETTER TO WORRY ABOUT. KILLING ANIMALS, GLOBAL WARMING, GLOBAL COOLING, PETA, GREEN POWER. I HAVE EVEN HEARD THAT PLANTS SCREAM WHEN THEY ARE HARVESTED. DON'T EAT ANYTHING THEN. HAVE YOUR YOGURTS, LATTE, HEALTH FOOD AND GO TO THE HEALTH SPA AND STOP THIS NONSENSE. GO BACK AND READ YOUR HISTORY ABOUT THE REAL PEOPLE THAT HAVE WALKED THIS WORLD. GET A CLUE.
FROM A RETIRED MILITARY, RANCHER, FATHER, GRANDFATHER AND SORRY YOU ALL WERE EVER BORN. YOU NEED SOMEONE TO WIPE YOUR RUNNY NOSES
Posted by: big Al | December 11, 2007 08:41 PM
indy
petroleum is far worse than any animal product.
Posted by: Caboose | December 11, 2007 09:01 PM
HEY BULLY DAWG, FIRST OFF, THEY DID USE REAL FURS BECAUSE FAKE FURS LOOK LIKE SHIT AND THERE WERE FURRIER NAMES GIVEN CREDIT AT THE END.... AND SECONDLY, YOUR RIGHT, EVERYONE HAS THE RIGHT TO CNAHGE THERE MIND WHICH IS THE USUAL WAY THAT PETA'S CELBRITY STABLE ACTS...
ONE DAY, THEY'RE AGAINST THIS OR THAT AND THEN THEY CHANGE THEIR MINDS BECAUSE THEY REALIZE LIKE 90% OF PETA MEMBERS, THEY CAN'T KEEP UP WITH THE RIDICULOUS AND PATHETIC AGENDA....
AND IF YOU CAN'T KEEP TO YOUR FULL AGENDA OF TOTAL NON-ANIMAL USE.... YOU HAVE NOTHING TO SAY TO ME AND THE WORLD....
Posted by: COMMON SENSE STEVE | December 11, 2007 09:02 PM
Kimberly
How aboiut we stop all experimental drug use on animals, and use humans. You FIRST!
Posted by: Ed | December 11, 2007 11:48 PM
I agree with Eva's stance, but please spare me the laudits for taking her clothes off. She has a nearly flawless body. If I looked anything like her, I'd appear nude everywhere I could. You want courage? Let's see Barbara Walters drop her drawers in defense of animals.
Posted by: Ed Muldoon | December 12, 2007 07:16 AM
I LOVE YOU EVA
Posted by: BİLGİN | December 12, 2007 10:48 AM
I LOVE YOU EVA
Posted by: BİLGİN | December 12, 2007 10:48 AM
Big Al,
If plants scream when they're harvested, then you had better quit eating meat, since the production of meat requires more plants to be used (for animal feed) than eating at source. A meat eater is responsible for far more herbicide than a vegetarian.
Ed,
Humans are first for drug testing. Animal testing has no reliable predictive value for humans. So while animal testing gives pharmaceutical companies a legal shield, humans die.
"Although some adverse drug reactions (ADR) are not very serious, others cause the death, hospitalization, or serious injury of more than 2 million people in the United States each year, including more than 100,000 fatalities. In fact, adverse drug reactions are one of the leading causes of death in the United States." (Lazarou J, Pomeranz BH, Corey PN. Incidence of adverse drug reactions in hospitalized patients: A meta-analysis of prospective studies. Journal of the American Medical Association Apr 15, 1998; 279: 1200 - 1205.)"
Posted by: Mike Quinoa | December 12, 2007 12:00 PM
john, what business, regarding unborn children, is it of yours?
Posted by: rojo | December 12, 2007 06:11 PM
Mike
have you heard of Best Management Practice?
Posted by: Caboose | December 12, 2007 07:40 PM
Non. Q'est-ce que c'est?
Posted by: Mike Quinoa | December 12, 2007 09:37 PM
John and Big Al, your statements have got to be some of the most ridiculous comments I have ever seen on these blogs!
John, according to your logic, you will continue to believe that it is okay to torture animals for so-called fashion, as long as you believe that we don't care about unborn children. Just how many of us have to care about unborn children before you will stop behaving like a stubborn 2 year old? 50%? 75%? 100%??? If you actually knew anything about animal rights, you would realize that most of us are involved in other causes and that our compassion is not limited to non-human animals.
Big Al, ??????????? I can barely figure out what the f*** you are trying to say. Since when does compassion for all beings and defending the planet mean we are "spoiled" and "shallow"?
Posted by: Michele | December 12, 2007 11:16 PM
Wow, some of the comments on here are ridiculous. Well gee golly, if a rancher's defendin' 'is right ta use dem animals, he must be right, yeeehaw! Of course you're going to defend a practice that makes you money, old cod. This isn't 1805 anymore, even though I'm sure you reminisce about your twenties often...anyway, to those criticizing those that aren't veg but don't wear fur I honestly believe every little thing helps. We should be encouraging people to help in little ways because ultimately it serve the cause of the animals' better than imposing an all-or-nothing mandate.
And for your information YES I am vegan and don't wear leather, wool, fur nor buy ANY products tested on animals this includes taking prescription meds so there some people can do it all, I guess ;)
Posted by: Ally | December 13, 2007 10:33 PM
Eva is so awesome! I knew there was something about her I liked! What a compassionate, humble, and cool woman! I hope those Olsen twins, Lopez, Hilton (to name a few), learn a thing or two about respecting ALL innocent little animals, like Eva has.
Posted by: Brigitte | December 13, 2007 11:34 PM
One of my cats is purring right here and i love his fur because he is alive and i am petting him; i cant understand why people are so envious they take this softness from animals to wear it.
Posted by: clara | December 14, 2007 04:15 AM
Eva,
May your kindness come back to you a million times over. For all the voiceless animals you are helping, thank you, thank you, thank you. Please remember why you have given up fur and meat and do not ever go back to it. You are one beautiful person!
Posted by: Natalie | December 14, 2007 06:36 AM
Eva, u not only proved to me that u have the body but u only have the heart. u r beatifull inside out ... i've always thaught ur hot but now i know ur also smart. i respect u so much now.. hopefully ur celebrity friends will c what ur doing here and have the heart to follow ur steps. hopefully everybody that have the power to lead will do the same s u did...
Posted by: saide | December 14, 2007 02:44 PM
Eva--you are stunningly beautiful and so admirable for your love and support of animals. Thank you so, so much!
Posted by: vanessa | December 14, 2007 03:17 PM
To the question of petroleum...yes fur IS made out of petroleum, but so is 80% of ALL products made in the world. Look at the coke bottles and water bottles you're holding. Petrol-based polyphenol plastics. How do you think your food gets to your local grocerie store? by trucks that used petroleum based fuels.
thats why we are doing research on alternative fuels so that way we can reduce our dependece on using petroleum based fuels in our everyday lives. I am TOO and environmentalist and animal rights activist and honestly i have done hundreds of HOURS of research on all these topics. The best thing for our bodies and the environment is to eat LOWEST on the food chain (yes that means plants but if you don't want to make the switch that also means shell fish and crustaceans) and to support SUSTAINABLE resources like shopping at farmers markets as much as you can, supporting permaculture, growing your own garden, supporting alternative fuels and alternative transportation.
I had stated that the best thing for our bodies is eat lowest on the food chain earlier. It is best to be vegan and vegetarian because we recieve more ENERGY and NUTRIENTS than the typical meat eater. It also reduces LAND ENERGY and WATER USE to be vegan and vegetarian and this is why:
Have you heard of something called a trophic level? the basic definition of trohpic level is level of energy that is and can be used. The concept of Trophic levels is how much energy is consumed or lost by the organism through each trophic level. There are basically 2-3 trophic levels. 2 for vegetarians, 3 for ominvores (people who eat meat and veggies for all you illiterates)
The LARGEST and basic concept of the trophic level is that when moving from each trophic level 90% of the energy recieved is lost when going to the next trophic level. that means whenever something eats something else, 10% of the energy in the food is absorbed. if this sounds confusing listen to this basic example to help you out:
Lets say the sun emmited 10,000 calories of energy(these are imaginary numbers to just give you the understanding). The plant then abosorbs that 10,000 calories. plants are the 1st trophic level. Next, the cow eats the plant, but since only 10% of energy is absorbed because the plant uses 90% the cow only recieves 1,000 calories. The cow is the 2nd trophic level. When the Humyn eats the cow, only 10% of the COW'S energy is gained because it used 90% of what IT had initially recieved from the plant...so the human recieves 100 calories. This is the trophic cycle of an Omnivore.
If you were vegetarian or vegan you would replace yourself with the cow so you would recieve 1,000 calories of energy insted of 100. It is not hard to tell that vegetarians have more energy than omnivores because vegetarians are recieving 10 times more energy than people who eat meat. thats why meat eaters need to eat more to receive the same amount of energy as vegetarians. The only problem is when they eat more, not only are they trying to make up for the energy lost, they are also consuming more food per volume and consuming more bad things for your body like saturated fats etc. etc.
thats one of the reasons why it is hard to find very obese vegetarians and vegans. they are getting the same amount of energy with out all the fat and drawbacks. thats why the majority of americans who are obese also eat meat like steak and burgers etc. thats also why the obese epidemic rose about the same time as fast food places because the majority of the cheap food that is made (cheap in price and quality) is meat and animal products. (however, i'm not saying there aren't any obese vegetarians)
Not only is being vegetarian and vegan better for our bodies, it's better for LAND and WATER. Raising cattle and other animal vastly degrades land. Not only do raising animals degrade land but we also need more land use to increase production of cattle. This means people are destroying ecosystems that by any means NEED to be preserved for OUR survival. People are destroying the amazon to make space for cattle, U.S. old growth forests are down to the final 8% etc. As for water, it's simple. You need water for the animals to drink. So not only are do you need water for the AGRICULTURE to feed the animals, you also need to INCREASE water use for the animals to drink themselves. It's basically common sense.
Now, to you people who are trying to justify eating meat and wearing fur and personal choice. Let me tell you this. it is PROVEN 100% that the animals who are suffering tedious hours of pain and torture DID NOT ASK or have a CHOICE in their fate. They were subjected to oppression and subjugation because of a "belief" that has been imposed by things like monotheistic religions heirarchy etc. that humyns are "superior" to animals. (i use the y in humyn because of personal sexist/oppressive belief's)
You cannot find arguementative evidence that we are "superior" to animals because the word superior is in fact oppionation as to what is better than what. We use to think that we were superior because we had a physical language, that was until we found that apes could speak between one another and could learn sign language. We use to think that we were the only species that used tools, that was until we learned that different primates used sticks for termites and ants or that otters used rocks to crack the shells of crabs urchins. We used to think that animals didn't feel pain, that was until we found out that animals also had central nervous systems and chordate nerves connected to brains that NOT ONLY had pain receptors but also sections that controlled emotions. We used to think that we were superior because we built societies and had a system of monetary trade, that was until we found that apes had and controlled their own society, termites built "heirarchy's" in lavish mounds with billions of "citizens", that many animals traveled in packs and groups as a nomadic society...then again we also used to think that we were more superior than people of other colored skin and different cultures. This was the arguement created by creationists after darwin's theory of evolutionism which is quite IRONIC because Darwin himself was a believer in god and DID NOT intend for Social Darwinism to apply to humans or even be created. Social Darwinism was created by Southern U.S. scientists to justify racist and slave biased views. Nowadays it is used by creationists to "justify" that Darwin was racist and therefor encourage the public that evolution doesn't exist. This isn't a very strong arguement because Darwin was neither racist nor did he create Social Darwinism. Darwin himself stated, "No one who has attended to the breeding of domestic animals will doubt that this must be highly injurious to the race of man. It is surprising how soon a want of care, or care wrongly directed, leads to the degeneration of a domestic race; but excepting in the case of man himself, hardly any one is so ignorant as to allow his worst animals to breed." (research the table of Social Darwinism created by the southern U.S. scientist Herbert Spencer)
Do the research. If you'd like more info on vegetarianism, veganism, and environmental impacts and social issues of ALL factors of life resoond to this post and either include your email or ask for my email
p.s. to all you people who try to make yourselves sound to strong and arguemntative by saying words like "you little tree huggers" etc, it doesn't make you look good. it just makes you look like an imbiscle. And if you don't understand what a word is, don't try to make youself look good by blatantly saying "go understand a new language because i can't understand a friggin' word you are saying". Not only does it make you look bad, but it also makes you sound uneducated. Do us a favor and go back to 8th grade.
and to all you skeptics going on about the movie that Eva played in where she wore "fur"...it was faux. do some research first. the credits to the fur companies in the movies was to use their information, not their products. Cheers!
-Mike xvx
Posted by: xMIKEx | December 14, 2007 05:57 PM
mike... you have no clue what you are talking about because they were real furs ( among all the other crap you were throwing out there)...,, face the facts and truth....call the movie company and they will tell you the truth if you can handle it... and speaking about not handling the truth,,,, i sent a website link of eva ( I am a phony peta celebrity mouthpiece) mendes wearing fur recently except our webmaster doesn't have the balls to print the truth....... lets try it again
http://deceiver.com/2007/12/07/eva-mendes-doesnt-wear-fur-except-when-she-does/
Posted by: steve | December 14, 2007 09:40 PM
Steve, if you had bothered to actually read the entry, you would have noticed that Eva talks about how she used to wear fur, and then had a change of heart:
"I wasn't familiar with PETA early in my career. I remember having my first premiere in New York City and being so naive that I didn't have a coat with me. My stylist sent me a fur wrap for the evening and I ignorantly wore it.
PETA then wrote me a beautiful letter commenting on my less-than-educated choice. I was so impressed that I vowed to them and myself to never wear real fur on the red carpet or in my life again."
It's fine for you to comment with a contrary opinion, but please do try to read the whole entry before looking for something to contradict it.
-Jack
Posted by: Jack | December 15, 2007 12:08 AM
xMikex - those are some excellent comments! I especially liked how you described the issue of humans believing they are superior to non-human animals.
My favourite way of pointing out how humans are so "superior" is to remind others that it is humans who have been responsible for wars, pollution, global warming, murders, rapes, oppression, abuse, etc, etc. Wow, pretty superior, eh?
Posted by: Michele | December 15, 2007 12:42 AM
steve...would you like to tell me what i am "wrong" about? specially about the "random crap"?
cuz i can guarantee you that my info is true. these are topics that i have been studying for at least 3 years very tentatively so i would like to hear your input and factual references as to what i am "wrong" about.
Posted by: xMIKEx | December 15, 2007 01:13 AM
dear jack.... thank you for printing my entrys and i do appreciate your fairness most of the time and i knows that you really must have a hard time printing anything i have to say...
i did read the entry, and i did read the website with eva wearing fur just recently and the problem i have with peta's celebrity stable is that they are so hypocritical and fickle and that they do change their minds every ten seconds or so...
and beleive it or not, i do appreciate the passion that you, peta and your bloggers have for helping and protecting animals...
its just that i live in the real world where freedom of choice rings supreme.. i love animals but if it was a question of my dog and my wife and kids, there would be no contest...
i object to peta and other animal groups forcing their agenda down the world's throat ( and stop confusing your mean spirited publicity stunts with educating the masses) i wear leather, eat meat, chicken and fish etc... if that makes me an incredible bastard, then so be it which means the majority of the world are bastards...
peta will never change my mind on any of the above because i do not feel being cursed out, ridiculed, and being exposed to mean spirited and or over the top publicity stunts when dealing with people's lives and businesses will never succeed...
i keep my campaign up on your blog to remind some of your middle of the road admirers
that there are 2 and 3 sides to every story and peta does not have the single truth in all of this and that when an organization has well over a 60 million dollar budget...that animal rights extremism is big business...
happy holidays to all...
Posted by: steve | December 15, 2007 07:48 AM
xmikex, a word to the wise- if you are going to call people imbeciles, at least spell it properly.
"we recieve more ENERGY and NUTRIENTS than the typical meat eater"
Really? how do you then reconcile with your other statement about obese vegies being hard to find(yes I guess it could be being that they are a minority group).
The only problem with trophic conversion efficiency is that I'm not fond of grass. In fact I don't think I could ingest enough grass per day to survive . But that might just be me.
Posted by: rojo | December 15, 2007 10:41 AM
Mike
Oh so animals drink oil to grow their fur?
Lot of bias coming out of you.
Actually, a herbivore has to eat more to receive the same nutrients than a balanced omnivore.
Now tell me, what is FAUX fur made up of?
I'm sure you use petroldmum products too.
Posted by: Caboose | December 15, 2007 11:42 AM
This comment is for RICK...
A human being's digestive system isn't made for meat. And by the way...the main reason people wore fur for thousands of years is that there were no other alternatives. Once people learned how to make warm clothing out of textiles the fur industry began to decline and now is on the brink of extinction. I wonder what you would think if someone wore your mother's skin on their bodies to keep warm. Seeing your comments, you would probably skin her yourself and eat the meat off her carcass.
Posted by: Matt | December 15, 2007 06:58 PM
Yet why does PETA lash out at some people, while others just get a letter? PETA is like Jack Thompson, who goes after one game, but is oblivious to a more violent one.
Posted by: Caboose | December 16, 2007 11:23 PM
steve...
who died and made you watchman, you righteous wannabe?!!
is speaking on behalf of the so called majority suppose to give credence to your incessant L-A-M-E-pugnacious sentiments?!
by the way... if you are determined to ignore the rampant, abject abuse,
and cruelty towards animals so be it. but it's obvious that you're not impressing
or changing anyone's mind here, or haven't you noticed?!!
by the way...
it was those so called "over the top" peta antics that got MY attention!
Posted by: 007 | December 17, 2007 01:23 PM
...hey 007, have a martini for me, shaken, not stirred for the holidays but make sure there are no animal products used.. and lets drink to lame and pugnacious comments.... you do quite well with them yourself!
and mike....
once again... you are dead wrong about using fake furs in the movie, we own the night,....they WERE REAL! and once Again, call the movie company and compare your well thought out, 3 year old research...
Posted by: steve | December 17, 2007 03:43 PM
and Mike
You did all that in 3 fucking years? Lots of food and power(electricity used)
Posted by: Caboose | December 17, 2007 04:24 PM
steve!
says WHOM?! YOUM?!!
oh wow! how predicatably typical of a contentious troll to mirror an intelligent observation in lieu of an original thought of his own to attack obvious truth!
Posted by: Anonymous | December 17, 2007 09:47 PM
children there is no reason to be angry ... the animals that are raised to be Fur, live much longer lives than their wild counter parts. they are raised in moderate temperatures. Fed the best food. medical treatment as needed. allowed to breed. You think a lap dog has it made. just make me a Mink ohhh and the fur is soooo soft.
Posted by: George | December 18, 2007 01:26 AM
note: signed in as anonymous in error re 12/17/07 9:47pm post
Posted by: 007 | December 18, 2007 01:23 PM
George, I'm sure the animals raised for fur are so happy to be anally electrocuted after they have been fed a wonderful diet and have lived longer than their counterparts in the wild - I think most people would agree that a shorter life is preferable to a longer one in captivity, in a filthy cage where they can barely move, where they are so deprived of their basic needs that they demonstrate severe psychological problems, where they are going to end up being electrocuted or skinned alive.
Have you WATCHED the videos??? I doubt it - most pro-fur people are too afraid to see what is really happening out there...
Posted by: Michele | December 18, 2007 02:47 PM
Helping animals and humans is is not mutually exclusive. People against animal rights activists think that we are crazy people who only care about animals. The majority of us will be more inclined to help human and environmental organizations than most people who walk around with the belief that humans have the right to do whatever they want to animals. These type of people are usually the ones who are more likely to be hateful towards people not like them and to be apathetic to the social issues are world is facing.
Steve,
I can obviously tell you haven't met many animal rights activists in real life. Most of us don't go around and "push these ideas down people's throat". Since I've become vegeterian, I've never sat down in front of someone eating a steak and told them what a stupid idea they are making and yet I constantly get comments just because people notice my plate doesn't have a piece of meat.
Posted by: jack | December 18, 2007 07:08 PM
I live on a dairy and we treat our cows excellent. If our cows were out on their own, they would be helpless. Other animals eat other animals and in a sense we are mammals which makes us a type of animal. So are you going to make a wolf or a lion become a vegetarian? We have the same right as them to eat whatever we want. In the Bible, God commanded the Israelites to make sacrifices of animals, by killing them. Is what God says bad? On the Dairy, we give our cows the best possible feed, we keep our large, spaicous corrals clean, we treat them for diseases they may have, we milk them, then when they are old or have bad legs and are living in great pain, we let them die. Our cows on my dairy are happy. When i'm old and dying, i want to die.
Posted by: Farmer | December 18, 2007 07:39 PM
George,
Can you supply some longevity numbers regarding animals raised for fur versus wild animals?
Thanks.
Posted by: Mike Quinoa | December 18, 2007 08:17 PM
michele... why is that you and all of your fellow petaphiles swear by everything that peta does, says and produces....
peta's budget with well over 60 million dollars needs to produce the best propaganda they can to maintain that lofty dollar figure...
so what makes you think that peta does not edit and play around with all of their videos to get the maximum emotion out of their petaphiles and of course.... to increase that always expanding budget....
and for the holidays, instead of peta trying to make people who use animal products their enemies and trying to close up their businesses, just maybe they should spend some of their $$$$ ont he actual animals.... open up more shelters , etc... in other words,,,how about putting their $$$ where their mouths are.....
Posted by: common sense steve | December 19, 2007 08:14 AM
Okay not-so-common sense steve, then watch "Earthlings", which did not come from PETA. It has some wonderful shots of foxes in filthy cages before they are killed for their fur. Go to YouTube as well, because there are plenty of individuals (without much $$$) who have managed to sneak into various facilities to capture the horrors of what is really happening to animals.
Also, I have told you before to look at PETA's financial statement, to show just how little of their money goes to salary and other admin costs. A HUGE proportion of their budget goes directly to their campaigns and saving animals.
Do you honestly think that these animals are roaming freely around, living a nice life, until their "owner" comes along, gently picking them up, one at a time, and lovingly injecting them with euthanizing drugs? These BUSINESSES, that are "for profit" (unlike PETA - go check out the definition of NON-profit), and they would never make money operating the way you seem to think they do. They cram as many animals they can in the smallest amount of space, they do not spend money on keeping these "living" quarters clean, and they kill them as fast as they can, to sell as many of the pelts as possible.
I am not sure how the scene with the raccoon dog being skinned alive could have been edited!
If things were not really happening the way the videos demonstrate, then how come the only way the public can see inside slaughterhouses, labs, factory farms, etc, is through undercover video????
If things were really fine for these animals, these businesses would having nothing to hide.
I do not need to blindly believe what PETA says to understand this - it is truly "common sense" (unlike you).
Posted by: Michele | December 19, 2007 03:50 PM
Oh my lord I spelled imbecile wrong. Someone called the National Guard. Seriously I spelt a word wrong after writing a 3 page response. If you're trying to combat my knowledge because of ONE FRIGGIN' WORD then you must really have nothing better to do with your time
And yes we DO receive more energy and nutrients. The reason why there ARE obese vegetarians and vegans is because the majority of them became obese when they were omnivores...before they converted to vegetarianism and veganism.
And grass? C’mon now don't try to make yourself look like a smart-ass and an idiot. Who said you have to eat grass? Trophic conversions apply to ALL vegetables you fuckin retard. And yes you can ingest enough VEGETABLES per day to survive. We all do it. Maybe you just consider yourself weak.
And Caboose..."Oh so animals drink oil to grow their fur?" What the fuck? Does that even make any sense? I can assure you that the majority of people who read that statement must think you are a complete idiot just trying to make yourself sound educated by "twisting the words" so to speak. The point that I was trying to make was that people should not try to justify wearing real fur by saying faux uses petroleum based products because EVERYONE uses petrol based products. Yes I use them too. It’s almost impossible not to until we are fully immersed in alternative fuel consumption.
And yeah there is lots of bias coming out of me but I have learned to back all of my statements with proven fact. FACT. Therefore, if the truth/fact cannot be ignored then it really isn't very biased as much as it is true now is it?
Okay Caboose, I’ll tell you, yeah faux fur is made of petrol products. Boo-fuckin-hoo so are the packages you open, glass you look through, plastic you touch, the asphalt you walk on, the clothes wear (unless organic cotton and/or hemp), the food harvested by mechanical machines etc. etc. I'm not saying wearing faux fur doesn't use ANY energy...it just uses LESS energy. Less because you don't use the same amount of energy used to feed the animals, transport animals, transport the fur (especially cross country) etc. etc. I thought even simple minded people such as yourself could figure that out. And as far as emissions go, producing faux fur doesn't produce even 1/325,000,000th as much air particulate pollution as much as lets say production of clothing, polyesters, polyphenol plastic water bottles etc.
And yes I DEFINITELY use petroleum based products.
And yeah I’ve done research for over 3 years. Oh my god I used food and electricity. Jesus christ it's impossible not to. and it's going to have to stay that way until we are fully immersed in sustainable and/or alternative means of producing energy. don't try to shoot me down because I used these products, not only do you make yourself look like a senile smart ass but you also make yourself sound uneducated because you lack the knowledge that we ALL use these products...yes, global polution, oil dependency and varous greenhouse gas emissions ARE still a problem but we haven't completely solved that now have we?
Posted by: xMikex | December 19, 2007 04:25 PM
xmikex, it not just that you spelled it extremely badly, it was the irony of it all. Enjoy.
I will still contest whether or not a vegetarian receives MORE energy and nutrients over a meat lover, without supplements anyway. Maybe you are forgeting that meat eaters consume plant products too, shock-horror.
You've pretty much proved it by saying obese vegans/vegetarians "became obese when they were omnivores." To make it simpler for you, obesity is by and large a symptom of too many calories. Calories are a measure of energy.
Well XmikeX my point on grass seems to have completely eluded you. I'll break it down for you. 30% of the worlds available land, if I remember correctly, is used for grazing. Lets consider that this land is generally unsuitable for arable farming comprising of steep, stony, swampy or of poor climatic conditions. It is therefore obvious that the trophic levels towards the human diet are irrelevant under these conditions. We do not eat grass. More importantly we can't live of it.
I made an important distinction about GRASS, not vegetables. In fact I'm more than certain I did not mention vegetables at all.
I'll shed a tear that you think I'm a moron and retard. . How could you say such a thing so near Christmas!
Posted by: rojo | December 21, 2007 07:35 AM
Eva Mendes and Jennifer Lopez, two Puerto Ricans with a big beautiful butt at opposite sides of this issue of fur. What a big build up of a pay-per-view catfight would this be.
Posted by: Steve | December 22, 2007 12:34 AM
I just wanted to say to Steve that your not wrong about Peta not focusing on humans but don't forget that you are speaking to a animal rights website. As for the example that you gave about who comes first to you your wife, kids or your dog you need to put in perspective that maybe some people will never have kids, husbands, wives or parents so maybe an animal is closer to some people and thats why we should respect every living being. I know that its not easy to be a vegan if you weren't raised a vegan but you should try it and see if it works for you and if not just do your best. Don't take any of the hurtful comments to heart and think that these people hate you. They are just passionate about what they believe and they love animals don't forget that being a vegan is a positive life style. For all the vegans we need to keep in mind that most living beings on this earth are not vegan due to the way they were raised or sometimes just simply ignorance. We also need to respect everyone because its really easy to become a fanatic and separate yourself
from others who don't have the same believes as you. There is nothing worst than a cult be an individual. We all need to help each other to make this amazing, fun, crazy and polluted world a better and safer place to live. By posing naked is not gonna save anything go and do something productive!
Ps:I'm not trying to upset anyone so please go easy on me and i do think that Eva is an amazing person regardless of this add.
Posted by: Kuzmi | December 22, 2007 05:45 AM
DAAAAMN....She is so hot, she has really turned this right winger around, I am going to send my PETA donation in as soon as I am done eating my steak!!!!
Posted by: chip | January 7, 2008 06:50 PM
First of all I know I am a little late on this issue, but I'm going to write anyway. To xMikex, you write such an intelligent arguement, but then degrade yourself with cursing. Isn't it kind of hypocritical to call yourself intelligent and some one else an idiot, when your speaking like an idiot. I agree that animals should not be brutally murdered for fur, but I do not agree that animals are equal to humans. I am a Christian and I beleive that the LORD (and if you want someone to respect you be respectful to them, always capitalize GOD, HE is the Almighty) put man in charge of all things on Earth. We should not be cruel to animals that is not what HE put us here for, but HE did put them here for us to use for our needs (i.e. food, farming, etc.). The arguement that people have been wearing fur since the beginning of time is not a good one, we used to drive cars that got two miles a gallon and only went 35 mph, but over time we have evolved, the same with fur. The only way anyone is going to get anything solved is if we speak to eachother with respect and dignity, being cruel to one another is no different than being cruel to an animal. And to those that say physical cruelty is different, there have been many proven psychological studies that show that emotional abuse is just as damaging if not more than physical abuse. Thank you for reading. GOD bless.
Posted by: six | January 29, 2008 06:43 PM
nobody wants to see fur on a girl like that anyways, we want curves so lose the fur if you want to be sexy like Eva
Posted by: steven | February 3, 2008 01:37 PM
I couldn't help but notice the chastisement toward the individual who said that animals were put on earth to serve human purpose. In typical liberal fashion, the animal worshipers scramble for fallacies to shore up their argument. One person says that animals were here before humans, so animals can't have been put here for our purpose. Another invokes God to his side, and says that we have evolved to a higher standard of morality. Animal worshipers, please, can you at least get your arguments in sync? These two are so incompatible it isn't even funny. I wonder if carnivores debate whether humans were put here for their purpose, or whether they have evolved past eating other animals. Hmmm. You wackos just never consider the fact that humans, being simply omnivores, are yet another factor in the food chain. I'll stop eating animals when they stop eating each other and when plants earn the right to life. Your petty arguments are so ridiculous! Try Biology for a change, instead of liberal politics.
Posted by: Michael Sanchez | February 22, 2008 06:35 PM
Dear Eva, You are one gorges women and I think your sexy.You have a beutiful hart. I love you a lot. Good Luck with everything. P.S. Maybe you could let me see your Boobs? Hope this didnt afend you ok, ok see you later in the new magazines. Thank you for listening.
Posted by: Bryan | April 11, 2008 11:18 AM
ROCKET FROM THE MOVIE COLORS.
Posted by: gus gank | April 21, 2008 08:41 PM
Drop dead gorgeous and a big heart. Eva sweetie I love every inch of you! Dedicated bachelor but if anybody could make me change, it's you lady!
Posted by: CaptainRogers![[TypeKey Profile Page]](http://blog.peta.org/nav-commenters.gif)
| May 10, 2008 12:48 AM