Right on Wimbledon!! Good job getting rid of a couple more nasty birds.

Posted by: joe blow | June 25, 2008 11:00 AM

I think "Capital Punishment" is slightly strong verbage for this incident. Maybe if this were a cat or a dog! Yeah Umbreallas would probably be nice but also keep in mind that they tried detering them with Hawks! How bright is a pigeon if it disregards a hawk? Do you really want that pigeon reproducing and bringing even dumber offspring into this world that may fly through a windshield killing a family? Feel free to supply the organization with tranquilizers and relocation services if you are that torn up about the pigeons, but regardless of how you feel about this situation, it was not the first resort! Let's evaluate our priorities!!!

Posted by: Brent | June 25, 2008 11:11 AM

All animals on the planet have been put here for our benefit and use. God himself ordered the killing of animals regularly for sacrifices. While we do have a responsibility to use animals for our benefit with caution, we still are in charge of them. God will judge who has been wrong in this regard not a bunch of vegetarians with an axe to grind. Where do you draw the line - maybe we should avoid killing flies, spiders, mosquitos, etc.

Posted by: Get Real | June 25, 2008 11:12 AM

It is also well documented that killing off "nusiance" wildlife just encourages more to move in, and the population often booms!

Birds hate streamers. They scare most birds away. With like, 5 minutes of effort people can easily find humane pigeon deterrent.

I'll see if I can find more, but in the meantime, watch what this clever pool owner did to keep pigeons away from his pool area!!!

http://gizmodo.com/gadgets/diy/homemade-pigeon-deterrent-keeps-flying-poop-machines-away-300644.php

Posted by: Maya, CVT | June 25, 2008 11:15 AM

i will never watch wimbeldon again.

Posted by: joey perez | June 25, 2008 11:30 AM

I can't even get through the first sentence of this article. Hunting is akin to dogfighting! And a bloodsport at that! I'm sure there's a logical argument to that one...?

Posted by: Mark | June 25, 2008 11:32 AM

I read on Yahoo news that the reason for killing the pigeons was because they were dive-bombing the tennis courts during matches, not pooping on restaurant tables. Either way, obviously, killing them was a horrible, evil thing to do, and i will certainly be petitioning. I just wondered about the actual reason for hiring marksmen to kill the poor things.

Posted by: Mackenzie | June 25, 2008 11:35 AM

I believe the shooting of the pigeons was a LAST RESORT. Pigeons aren't the cleanest animals to have poop on you. Should they stop the tournament so the pigeons can roost? I believe pigeons return to their preferred location, so would catching them and sending them off matter? I figured you would have the answer to my questions, as you are the only one knows what's best for the pigeons and all other animals, for that matter.

Posted by: Gretchen | June 25, 2008 11:45 AM

Please, Im all for protecting the animals, but when pigeons (which are dirty and a pest) are not able to be controlled by utilizing HAWKS as the primary deterrent, then I have no problem deploying secondary means. Life isnt all rainbows and butterflies people, find something else to cry about.

Posted by: Forgivingheart | June 25, 2008 11:54 AM

I am sure if I pooped on a PETA demonstration I would be jailed. I believe animals should be treated with respect but why should they have more protective rights rhan humans and plants.

Posted by: Rodney Wier | June 25, 2008 12:05 PM

You people should really focus on endangered species and such. Making a ruckus about a bird that is so common it actually is a nuisance bird in many areas only makes you look like nutcases who are trying to get your 15 minutes of fame. At least they tried Hawks and used marksmen. They could have just called in some farm boys with shotguns but they paid for the marksmen. Give them some credit, after all, they are pretty far down on the animal chain.

Posted by: The Dave | June 25, 2008 12:09 PM

I am all for the protection of animals, but if streamers are used as a deterent to keep pigeons away, would other birds be scared away as well? And if they are all scared away and everyone puts streamers everywhere, how many of them would die for not having a place to go? I say the few pigeons killed here doesn't make a differece to the millions of these disease carriers in the world. If you guys are so wanting to protect them, why don't you put food and shelters out at you house. Let me know what thousands of these birds look like taking shelter at your home is like, and then comment about saving them. This goes for every animal. You don't like the way they are being treated, which has been the same for a long time, why don't you take care of them then? I have already stopped eating certain meats because of how they are treated, but if you want me to stop[ eating meat all together, then who will take care of those animals? Will you? Can we keep the thousands of cowns, pigs, and chickens at your place too along with the pigeons, and let's throw in some rats too! If we are not going to use them for food, and clothing, and whatever else, then there will be no need to keep them around at all except as pets! Letting them roam free is stupid, we already have problems with animals roaming into streets now, I can't even imagine what it would be like if cows roamed free!

Posted by: ai3d | June 25, 2008 12:36 PM

Out of curiosity... When did the Peta Blogs become a regular hot spot for people to post messages PROMOTING animal cruelty?? .... There are more posts on this blog FOR the shooting of birds than those against.

Posted by: Jenny | June 25, 2008 12:42 PM

I think the approach by Wimbledon is a common sense approach and I support their decision. There are only about a gazillion pigeons so extinction is not an issue here!

Posted by: Mandaue Mactan | June 25, 2008 12:42 PM

Wow, not much support here, huh PETA? So much for animal respect! I can tell you as a wildlife rehabber that these birds were able to adapt to cities when most species perished from development.

Now crows, pigeons and squirrels are villified despite the fact that they can live in our competely unnatural, toxic, paved "ecosystem"

If a human survives in the jungle for 10 days, they are admired, even treated like a hero. But now these birds have managed to flourish in our over developed, industrialized world and we go out and destroy them.

These birds have just as much right to live as the pretty cardinals in our back yards. I can tell you as a wildlife rehabber that humans created the conditions where just a few species flourish and others die out - how is that the pigeon's fault?

Posted by: Maya, CVT | June 25, 2008 12:46 PM

It really is easy to point the finger at ppl. I am pretty sure that there is nobody on the planet that is perfect, so why judge ppl so strictly? Are you trying to say you are better? Well let me tell you, you can be better at something then someone else, but you can never be better then someone else, if you think that you are for any reason at all, then in reality you are a worse person than everyone!

Posted by: ai3d | June 25, 2008 12:47 PM

Sounds like PETA has lost it's direction... Pigeons? come on! what's next? Rats?

Posted by: Chad | June 25, 2008 12:56 PM

Whats is with humans killing animals like this. The human answer to animals who get in their way means death?
Come on people at Wimbledon, you can do much better than this!
These birds are just doing their thing.
If the Wimbledon people dont like the birds actions then they need to listen to Maya who knows and understands the birds and how to spook the birds away with out doing harm. And buy some umbrellas for heaven's sake Wimbledon whats wrong with you!
BOYCOTT Wimbledon UNTIL THEY STOP KILLING THE BIRDS!

Go Vegan and, save up to 100 farm animals per person each year!

Posted by: Holly | June 25, 2008 01:11 PM

Actually, Wimbledon admitted that they were mistaken initially regarging the hawks--in this case, their first call was to the sharpshooters, they did not try hawks first. In fact, hawks ALWAYS work b/c pigeons are bright animals who will stay away from hawks--every time.

Pigeons mate for life, share the responsibility of raising young, are amiable towards humans, and provide city dwellers with a unique opportunity to interact with wildlife. It is cruel and illegal to kill pigeons because they are considered to be inconvenient, and it is cruel not just to the pigeon who is killed, but also the animal’s mate and children. Shooting pigeons dead is no more acceptable than doing the same to dogs or cats, and we are glad to receive the club’s assurance that they will stop killing pigeons. The Club should still be prosecuted for cruelty to animals, since they broke the law and should be held accountable.

Posted by: Bruce | June 25, 2008 01:18 PM

Look I have sometimes have problems with PETA and their stances, and my main issue with this one is they are not reporting all the facts. Hawks were the first line of defense and for the most part work to deter pigeons from hanging around, and to not put that fact in your blog post is irresponsible and biased. Either report all the facts are don't say anything but the reason I can't always get behind you is because of when you pull stuff like that.

Posted by: Brandon | June 25, 2008 01:27 PM

Yeah, if you were to poop at a PETA demonstration, you'd be jailed, but not shot! And no; marksmen were not a first resort, but I don't think that trying one other thing calls for lethal action. And, let's face it, when the patio restaurant is the pigeon's personal restroom year-round until Wimbledon, you can't really expect that sort of behavior to be un-learnt. No, my heart will not bleed for the pigeons and I will not veto the most fantastic display of human athleticism in Tennis, but do I think it was inhumane? Most definitely. Uncalled-for? Absolutely. And I think it's for a jury to decide.

Oh, and The Dave-- What's Stupid is "Slippery Slope Logic." You know, where someone says, "If you let pigeons poop you may as well let cows roam the streets." Are you five? Good for you, cutting down on your meat intake, but everyone, we seem to have lost sight; the threat of extinction is not the issue. All of the made up religions and dogmas in the world, all of the pre-ordained nonsense that we can pull from between our buttcheeks does not bely one simple fact: no matter what your religion, every text states that we were put here to care for the animals, and not the other way around. We, as humans, do not have the right to tell animals where they can and can not--in this case--poop. All we can do is clean up and hope for the best.

Posted by: Graeme | June 25, 2008 01:48 PM

I hate all expedient killings of animals. The fish and wildlife people do that in California all the time, since they're simply too lazy to remove animals humanely.

Posted by: Steven | June 25, 2008 01:53 PM

First of all, if any of you HAVE been to Wimbledon, you'll notice a veritable dogfight over head every now and then, those are the Hawks doing their jobs, catching natural prey. Hawks are typically trained to NOT swoop down on crowded areas (like the media tent), hence they needed to devise another plan. You can't drop in poisonous agents like pellets because of the risk for human life (a no brainer and a let-down I'm sure for some of you). Umbrellas don't really do anything when pigeons descend en-mass to sources of food, because they've been conditioned by people like you to feed them or look for your scraps.
Lastly, measures DO need to be taken because pigeons are unclean; in fact, a friend of mine developed a nasty infection from a pigeon about a year ago.
See, the point is, it's rather hard to ally one's self to your argument on this one because so many in the world understand that pigeons are more or less useless animals completely reliant and environmentally conditioned by human habits. Wanna see a point realized? See if you can push through legislation on pigeon protection and see how far that goes, or better yet, sponsor a couple of pigeon aviaries and see who still loves pigeons after a couple of weeks maintaining the facility. Oh, and you can't cheat by having homeless and derelicts work there, no daft employees!

Posted by: kd135 | June 25, 2008 01:57 PM

I can not believ you would make a story out of this. PETA does much good. But with articles like this, you drive away many people. Pigeons are very dirty and unhealthy and they did take other steps first. Give me a break, this is why there is are as many people against PETA as for it. Lets get back to rality and concentrate on issues that are meaningful and not try to use high profile events to get our names in the paper.

Posted by: dustin | June 25, 2008 02:00 PM

i just say that pigeons are rats with wings that carry NUMEROUS diseases that cause MJOR health problems in children and adults. So yeah maybe shooting them was a last resort as the hawks did not work.... but come on they are ONLY pigeons the most disgusting animal next to ROACHES.

Posted by: Selena | June 25, 2008 02:01 PM

Right on, Holly and Bruce. I guess we now know what is the most villified animal on the planet. I'm glad to be aware of this now, so I can do something about it.

Hey everyone - do you want to know what is really the most disgusting animal on the planet? Humans.

Studies show that many Americans, including babies, now have up to 60 different industrial chemicals in our bloodstreams, including flame retardants, chemicals for plastics, medical devices, nail polish, nonstick frying pans and transformers for microwaves. I repeat: in our bloodstreams.

We have also created nuclear waste and have dumped human sewage into our water supplies.

Great work, us. Yeah, pigeons are SO disgusting.

Posted by: Maya, CVT | June 25, 2008 02:10 PM

This is totally incorrect, the birds were shot after hawks could not control the job effectively. Additionally, the birds were not "pooping" but rather diving into the fields as well. This goes to show PETA's lack of truth in their articles, although I do not agree with animal cruelty.

Posted by: Joe Kish | June 25, 2008 02:21 PM

Shooting pigeons? Acceptable in this situation. Why you ask?
First off, this article fails to mention the "dive bombing" of the pigeons onto contestants and spectators.
Of course it isn't going to post that, that would be one example of why this action is acceptable. By failing to mention this, they make a reader believe that the pigeons are doing nothing out of the ordinary that would provoke such extreme measures.
Umbrellas are mentioned as this writers only source of 'solution', which goes to show that this author has no concept of how to control, nor do they offer any rational or even, in this case, an intelligent solution to this problem.
This article is completely one sided, bias and fails to mention many other facts that should be taken into consideration such as;
Pigeons are swooping down at individuals. This action alone is enough to cause problems, especially in children and older adults.
Pigeons are landing on tables. (Which is the main arguement here) These tables are used by people for the purpose of eating, drinking, and activities of the like.
Anyone with any form of education is aware of the health hazzards that pigeon, as well as other animal waste poses. Histoplasmosis, Cryptococcosis, Psittacosis and Toxoplasmosis are just a few of the types of fungal infections that these animals can spread.
Again, pointing to children and the elderly who already have lowered immune systems, would you want to, or have a member of your family eat off these tables where this infectious material is present?
With this in mind, pigeon control, in my opinion, in any form, is acceptable. Pigeons, after all aren't exactly an endangered species.

Posted by: JP | June 25, 2008 02:26 PM

Responding specifically to Get Real and Brent:

You two really are candidates for the most Arrogant Human Being" award.

I can't help but imagine how you will treat a slow-learning child or a completely mentally challenged adult!

Who the hell do you think you are that you can pick and choose what life YOU deem valuable? Better watch your cocky steps!!!

"Anyone who has accustomed himself to regard the life of any living creature as worthless is in danger of arriving also at the idea of worthless human lives." Dr. Albert Schweitzer, Nobel Peace Prize winner.

Posted by: Susan T | June 25, 2008 02:26 PM

Are you kidding me? Pigeons? I'm all for environmentalism and treating animals well, but face it, pigeons are out of control in most major cities in the world. I say, focus on real problems PETA.

Posted by: wandrews | June 25, 2008 02:38 PM

is this really happening?

i saw zoolander recently and i wanted it to be funny but it really, really wasn't, BUT i am making use of the only thing that made me laugh and referencing it way too often:

"i feel like like i'm taking crazy pills!"

Posted by: m | June 25, 2008 02:38 PM

murderous european freaks....and why are people on this website that dont believe in peta and their beliefs

Posted by: jamie litzner | June 25, 2008 02:38 PM

Whoa! PETA has gone off the deep end here. Pigeons...are you kidding me? I think that you should maybe boycott me too becuase the other day I used some bleach to clean my bathroom and I am sure that there were some eukaryotes and protozoa living in my bathroom somewhere. I mean c'mon afterall don't they have a right to reproduce and exist too? I am all for ethical animal treatment but we are talking about filthy disease ridden vermin here....esentially bacteria with wings. Get over it.

Posted by: Guido | June 25, 2008 02:41 PM

Arent there more important things to worry about then shooting 'flying rats' at a major sporting event, after all, we are talking about a few pigeons, not their extermination. Get a grip, how often and how many rats and mice do you think are killed daily in large cities, buildings, parks etc, for a more sanitary environment, and yet you still worry about a pesty bird.

Posted by: taylor | June 25, 2008 02:46 PM

OMG, just chill, and its not a "Blood Sport"...What if one of the birds crapped in one of your meals? Just leave them be right? Probably not, you would want ALL of your money back or possible sue them for not keeping the restaurant pest free.

Posted by: Danny | June 25, 2008 02:54 PM

These people who are commenting saying that PETA shouldn't care- "it's just a pigeon"- are ridiculous!

If you are aware at all of the amazing work that PETA does, then you would know that they seek out ethical treatment to ALL animals. Not just horses and dogs or the ones that most people think are "cute".

Is that pigeon any less important than a homeless cat? Just because of overpopulation? It is still a LIVING BEING that deserves to not be shot just because it's "in the way".

To everyone who disagrees, you should do some research to find out what a complex creature the pigeon is or spend some time with one- I'm sure you'd change your tune about them being "worthless".

Posted by: michelle | June 25, 2008 03:03 PM

“The hawks are our first line of deterrent, and by and large they do the job,” Wimbledon spokesman Johnny Perkins said.

“But unfortunately there were one or two areas where the hawks didn’t deter the pigeons, so it was deemed necessary to take a harder approach,” he explained.

So I'm not sure why some are so upset, the hawks were their first line of defense, the marksman came in when that didn't work. The pigeons were dive bombing and being a nuisance, in addition to "pooping". I agree with some of the others though, it almost seems like PETA is running out of things to protest and be upset about, and it seems that many jump the gun before reading the facts. I guess the story wouldn't have been as interesting had it been factual.

Posted by: Chris | June 25, 2008 03:06 PM

The problem I have is that they being PETA never tell the whole story, they just tell it from their point of view to get their agenda out. Wimbledon used Hawks which 99 out of 100 times work to get rid of Pigeons I know I used to raise Pigeons to race them in cross country homing Pigeon races. I lost several to Hawks, or they would show up at home with tallon marks on them. And yes they are a very dirty bird and not to bright. and no they do not mate for life if their mate dies they will move on to another mate. I have even had them mate with multiple partners in the same nests much like dolphins and whales do. I don't think Wimbledon went to far they should have had the sharpe shooters eat what they killed that or searved roast pigeon as a meal at the restaurant there. It is a good table fare if cooked right. At least the pigeons wouldn't have died in vain right.

Posted by: Chuck Robey | June 25, 2008 03:08 PM

Was there no other way to remove the pigeons? This seems so harsh. How can some of you call them pesty? rats with wings? Why are you on this website if you don't care enough about animals to do what you can to save them?

Posted by: Al | June 25, 2008 03:08 PM

I think there are more important things to worry about. For instance the babies that are killed every day by abortion. PETA needs to get a life! Man is to rule over the animals not be ruled by them. At least the birds died instantly, they could have slit their throats and thrown them into boiling water like kentucky fried chicken does.

Posted by: none ya | June 25, 2008 03:16 PM

there's outside stuff outside.

Posted by: m | June 25, 2008 03:46 PM

Wow, some people actually believe that pigeons were dive-bombing people; that's actually kind of funny. Of course, it's never happened, but I love the image.

Sadly, some bloke at Wimbledon made a very bad (and illegal) decison; it has been subsequently corrected, but the facts are: 1) no pigeons dive-bombed anyone--ever or anywhere; and 2) the hawks were not ineffective. Wimbledon now admits both points.

Cool stuff about pigeons here:
http://blog.peta.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2008/06/fun-facts-about-pigeons.pdf

Posted by: Bruce | June 25, 2008 04:09 PM

I could not agree more with PETA's actions! In Fact, I will never spend one-cent on any Professional Tennis Event, including commericals.
Not only because the hunters were called in; but also because the hawks are used. How about demanding Professional Tennis Events to use not harmful methods to chase the pegions away (like the ones posted here).
I find fault beyond just Wimbledon, because every sports' event, that is a part of a whole organization of teams in their sport and level, has a administrating organization. That administrating organization should have ban such inhumane practices (harmful methods to eliminate the wild animals from their events) through all Professional Tennis Events, years ago, to prevent such terrible publicity and financial lost.

Where is the petition to Wimbledon and The Administrating Organization for Professional Tennis?

Posted by: Jason 'Great White' (Shark-Animal Rights Person) | June 25, 2008 04:15 PM

It really is the height of arrogance when we say that it is our God-give right to shoot an animal just because it is swooping down and we're too lazy to try alternative deterrents.

Millions of pigeons are in parks and cities. Children and the elderly feed these animals all the time.

-- When is the last time you heard reports of the elderly or children coming down with psitticosis, cryptococcosis or toxoplasmosis from feeding pigeons? --

These diseases happen when these and other animals are kept in tiny, confined spaces such as pet stores or factory farms. Not in the open outdoors.

The endangered species argument is completely different than the animal welfare argument. Animal welfare says that each individual deserves to be treated humanely and with respect. This is different than an environmental argument.

So can anyone here please tell me, why is shooting a pigeon more acceptable than shooting a human?

Logical reasons only, please.

Posted by: Maya, CVT | June 25, 2008 04:16 PM

its a couple birds who the hell cares

Posted by: anon | June 25, 2008 04:18 PM

Graeme, I'm not going to ask you to marry me, but pretty damned close. Brilliant statement.

PETA ticks me off when they make fun of people, are snide or violent. But if they keep up the clever, nonoffensive campaigns, and they lose any member because of their protection of pigeons, I'd be happy to step in and become a lifetime member.

Important concept: every nonprofit organization has a mission statement. The mission statement rules over everything else. It is what an organization turns to each and every time they make a decision.

Protecting pigeons fits perfectly with PETA's mission statement. If people are so ignorant and clueless about the ornithological value of pigeons, I suggest going back to school and educating yourselves.

Posted by: Maya, CVT | June 25, 2008 04:44 PM

I've managed to read approx. the first 20 posts and am amazed. I even went back to the top of the page to make sure it was actually the PETA website I was reading!!!!

Why are people reading an animal welfare site to say 'it's ONLY a pigeon. Who cares?'

If you don't have a genuine interest in animal welfare then please post on your other accomodating sites that promote animal slaughter!

Posted by: Debster | June 25, 2008 05:05 PM

i play tennis and i'm so dissapointed that these players are so selfish. can people get anymore selfish?...i don't think so.
Pigeons are beautiful intelligent birds. not "rats with wings"...they are NOT VERMAN....there are no such things as verman. all animals are here for the ecosystem. and are definetly not bothersome.

Posted by: Candace | June 25, 2008 06:04 PM

Lots of good thinking people here, I love what michelle said, he is so right!
Maya is a wild life rescue person she understands birds very well and should be listened to carefully.
And lots of other intelligent people who realize that these birds are a part of our world and have a right to be alive and not harmed.
Protect the birds PETA!!!!

Go Vegan and save up to 100 farm animals per person each year!

Posted by: Holly | June 25, 2008 06:33 PM

Pigeons were pooping, that's true. Did PETA happen to consider the fact WHERE they were doing this? People's food. I'm all for 'save the earth', but really, who are we going to save the earth for? Pigeons? No, for humans. If there were even a remote chance that killing a few pigeons would diminish or put a dent in their population, there might be a case here.

“Since the use of marksmen to kill pigeons appears to have been carried out as a first, rather than a last resort, and not out of a concern for public health, but rather because the animals were deemed inconvenient by players, you appear to be in clear violation of the law,” PETA vice-president Bruce Friedrich said.

The above quote has several faults within it. Firstly, hawks were used as a deterrent. This means that the marksmen were NOT used as a first rather than last resort. The Hawks kept the pigeons away from the players, so the accusation that pigeons were killed because of player inconveniences is also false. Having bird feces in food is most certainly a public health hazard.

Just as a note: They APPEAR to be in CLEAR violation of the law? Can the spokesman get any more passive and uncertain?

Posted by: Desian | June 25, 2008 06:34 PM

I was made aware today that a marksman was called in to shoot a pigeon that posed a moderate threat to the Field Art installation by Anthony Gormley currently on show in St Helens as part of the Liverpool City of Culture year. This could have easily been avoided as the bird could have been encouraged to fly out of numerous open windows, and whats even more disturbing is the possibility that this bird may have brooding chicks that may also die as a result. Sorry I cant leave my deatails as I a volunteer for the Arts Council and my position would be at risk etc- i am sure you understand

Life, however insignificant is more important than Art, and sport for that matter!

Posted by: annon | June 25, 2008 06:55 PM

Hi Desian ;)

It may be that the pigeons were pooing in the food, but humans are intelligent enough to then not eat the food. The pigeons truly don't know any better. This area was part of their habitat.

No human will die if they have to buy another plate of food, although some people nowadays act as though they will die if they don't get pretty much everything they want.

Humans are by far the most destructive force on the Earth, so I don't buy the idea that pigeons don't belong here. The reason they are overpopulated is because we killed off all their natural predators.

I understand why someone would want to kill a predator who attacks people, having aggressive cats destroyed, and in some cases, killing animals for food.

But in this case, it's simple. Get up and walk away, eat somewhere else. An animal's life is at stake, for goodness sake.

How cruel and selfish can we be?

Posted by: Maya, CVT | June 25, 2008 07:04 PM

Can someone please answer me the more use human life has over animal life in 2008?

Posted by: Debster | June 25, 2008 07:30 PM

love is forever stay together!

Posted by: Alex | June 25, 2008 08:09 PM

maybe I should kill all birds because one broke my 2nd floor wwindow the other morning flying into it.

first off, I could careless about some rich people playing tennnis making millions a year and complaining about a bird which has just as much right on this planet as I do. Humans devestate this earth and as a result we kill and kill again. atlease have a good reason like birds were killing people by hitting their windshield when driving, but not a fricking tennis match. my god we as humans can be so pathetic at times.

just because the first attempt with raptors failed does that mean your last effort or should I say 2nd effort is the last.
the point peta is making is there are more ways to stop this pathetic fued over innocent birds regardless of whether you think they stink. maybe they think you stink.

Posted by: chris | June 25, 2008 08:24 PM

jenny:you're right 100 pct! this blog has become a first class animal haters site and these blog owners are nuts! we animal protectors know that we are not a majority but to put on here all the animal hating shit is more than i can swallow! it's ridiculous and shows our weakness once more! for nuts like these blog owners and other 'avid animal protectors' we are turning around in the void since i can remember, so almost 50 years now! i already dismissed before but came back once more time to confirm your statement! i'm disappointed but this whole attitude here confirms once more that the big failure of animal rights movements comes out of these same associations basing their actions on headless strategies and attitudes!
i salute you: and know i am ex
old spiderwoman
animalfriend
la montanara
santino roccaforte
little drummer boy
little big woman
many others
and last but not least
the minstrel!

here i revealed to you my secret blogging names fighting on all the battlefields - but you are too stupid and ignorant to understand what i meant with this strategy! some little help to enlightenment: a minority must appear strong and not weak in front of an illimited bunch of rascals and jerks! this has nothing to do with the fact that everyone has the right to speak but we know exactly what the animal hater is telling again and again and again and repeating the same shit page after page - page after page! do you think that i'm an idiot to answer every day to the same bullshit remarks that animals are made to be exploited, that christ ate meat and that man is made in god's image hence has the right to abuse and shoot and torture and hunt and eliminate every other form of life and that animals are the cause of green house gases and so on and on and on! stupid folks here - indeed! at least jack had some humor and spirit! that was it - you can post it or not but i think now you prefer the posts of the antibloggers - good riddance!

Posted by: ex peta member | June 25, 2008 08:42 PM

Its ok to shoot ducks but not pigeons. Pigeons help in eradicating rap music so they must be saved.

Posted by: QP | June 25, 2008 09:18 PM

I really do not understand why some of these commenters are here. Please go back to a more appropriate site. I deal with enough human arrogance on a daily basis.

Pigeons are not "disease ridden vermin". Humans have a complete intolerance of any wildness that causes them "inconvenience". Pigeons are highly social and intuitive. They come in a beautiful variety of colors that can rival any tropical parrot.People seem to forget that pigeons are DOVES. A symbol of purity and goodness. Pigeons and doves make up the family Columbidae. Type pigeon or dove into wikipedia and you will see how misunderstood these birds are.We need to stop killing other beings when their interests simply differ from ours.

Posted by: Annalena | June 25, 2008 09:32 PM

JOE BLOW (cough):

"Let's evaluate our priorities"? IT'S TENNIS FOR GOD'S SAKE.

It's humorous, many of you advocating this cruelty are bringing up such archaic statements. Please, something original.

It's pointless to debate this issue with the opposition on this Board.

Posted by: EVA | June 25, 2008 09:55 PM

Get Real
I find your name rather ironic. Plenty of people do not base their lives directly on the old testament and with good reason.I suppose God put womenfolk here for the use of men as well( reproduction tools and stoning)according to the old testament. Animals are here for their own ends not ours.

Some interesting info on Pigeons:
http://www.nypost.com/seven/06132008/news/regionalnews/the_squab_squad_115331.htm

Disease:
http://www.purebredpigeon.com/avianflu.htm

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/sites/entrez?Db=pubmed&Cmd=ShowDetailView&TermToSearch=8883790&ordinalpos=10&itool=EntrezSystem2.PEntrez.Pubmed.Pubmed_ResultsPanel.Pubmed_RVDocSum

Awesome pro pigeon group:
http://www.savethepigeons.org/

Posted by: Annalena | June 25, 2008 09:59 PM

u r nasty,WE bought pigeons 2 da uk.WE breed em hundreds of years ago 4 pigeon pie.humans interfered again,i hope they poop on tables maybe people will let animals be,or move da tables.jesus ate only fish on special occasions.god intended us to be vegetarian only giving us meat after the flood because vegetation was dead.the old testemant DIET isnt relevant 2 modern christianity its 4 dat time.

Posted by: Claire | June 25, 2008 10:06 PM

I think it's odd that so many people think that it's okay to kill animals just because those animals are deemed a nusiance. If one's life were in danger then, yes, by all means defend one's self. I would say to those people who think it's okay to shoot helpless pigeons because they're a nuisance: I hope you aren't ever old or infirm, or pooping where you "shouldn't" because someone might just find you a nuisance.

Posted by: Gren | June 25, 2008 10:47 PM

Didn't the Wembledon officials used hawks to scare the pegions? If so then wembladon officials did not break the law in using marksmen to kill them.

Posted by: tony makauskas | June 25, 2008 11:14 PM

God why all the hate toward pigeons, just because they are so numerous? They are very docile and social. Why shoot them. just have umbrellas or other protective gears around the dining areas

Posted by: Roxanne | June 25, 2008 11:49 PM

Gosh, why do people even bother to post comments on PETA if they are FOR animal cruelty. PETA - u guys rock and Im gunna work 4 u one day. All animals desurve to LIVE on this plantet and dont forget- we are animals. What ever happened to look after your fellow man- well in this case animal. GO PETA- meat is murder!!:)

Posted by: Rory | June 26, 2008 05:20 AM

Why come on here if you're FOR the killing of innocent animals?!! It seems very strange! That is unless you WANT us all to come on to your hunting pages and promote animal-kindess? When I've tried that in the past, you all seemed to get a bit unhappy!

Posted by: Daryl | June 26, 2008 06:42 AM

who are we to decide that a pidgeons life is worth less than any other animals life. killing inocent animals for a stupid reason like sport!!! and who says god even exists!! and by the way "get real" how do we know there is even a god? how can u say that he wants us to kill! i'm sure he would find a game of tennis much more important than the fragile life of one of his creations! You get real!!!

Posted by: nicole | June 26, 2008 07:12 AM

Having read most of the posts on this blog I honestly do not understand why people visit this sight other than passing 'care' or even an argument.
If you are behind a major cause such as cruelty to nonhumans then please read and expand your mind and empathy a little more.
'Animals where put on this earth to use by us, we are in charge, where would they all go if we didn't eat them?'....Good lord, as it points out in many PETA lists of FACTS Animals are bread for the purpose of slaughter for food, clothes etc, If we stopped breeding them for agonising death there would not be as many.
God also gave us 'dominion' over the animals...such as we have 'dominion' over our children...we should protect and regard both as such, it is our reponsibility, God has 'dominion' over us but a loving god would not rip us from our parents to eat our flesh and wear our tortured skin....Jesus Christ was a vegetarian by the way.

Someone else also pointed out that if they pooped on a PETA demonstration they would be arrested so why protect pigeons from it? Firstly arrest and shot in the face are very different levels of punishment Im sure you will agree, Im not suggesting Pigeons have the same rights as humans...political right or right to speak is useless for instance to them but they have a right to life as we do, Im sure they value it as much as you value yours. A pigeon may not have the mental capacity you and I have therefore it will poo where it wants but neither does your dog or a chronically menatlly retarded human but we shouldn't shoot them in the face should we?

There is actually so many holes in some of your comments I have to stop typing as I maty exceed the limit but Im sure you get the message if not, please buy some more braincells with your next Big Mac and read a book before you comment.

Posted by: Rusty | June 26, 2008 08:37 AM

What is wrong with some of you people writing on here like "Who cares about the birds" or "Way to go Wimbledon" Don't even come on this website if you are heartless and could care less about God's creatures that were definitely here before you were! I could give a rat's ass about you humans that are ignorant, uneducated animal haters!

Posted by: Kay | June 26, 2008 09:30 AM

I am against animal cruelty andi think that Animals and Humans should have equal rights. As a vegetarian and a supporter for PETA I think that if the people who dont agree with my beliefs were treated like these animals are for ONE DAY they would think twice about what theyre saying!!HOW YOU LIKE THEM APPLES!!!!!

And you know what?????
Why dont you starve them and shoot them as well so they could shut their mouths!
Cause they dont know what theyre saying.......they havent seen how theyre treated. As for the pigeon shootings Wimbleton could rot in HELL FOR ALL I CARE!

Posted by: Alejandra | June 26, 2008 09:50 AM

They carry no more diseases than foxes,but shooting foxes is cruel,its all the same.And god made us vegies at first,-only allowing us too eat meat after the flood.Because vegetation was distroyed,and animals were preserved on the ark.Jesus ate only fish on special occasions.How ignorant to think animals were put here to be exploited.You cant love animals and hate pigeons,your hypocrites.

Posted by: Claire | June 26, 2008 10:36 AM

In response to CVT.

You failed to mention histoplasmosis which was previsouly mentioned.
This fungus spore is also a part of pigeon waste

During a histoplasmosis outbreak in 2001, 523 people (439 of them were students) met a laboratory-confirmed case definition of histoplasmosis following the rototilling of a 10-foot by 45-foot area of soil within a high school’s courtyard. Spore-contaminated air entered a wing of the school most likely through open windows that faced the courtyard and heating, ventilating, and air-conditioning systems that had fresh air intakes in the courtyard.

Do your research before asking when the last case of any outbreak was.

Posted by: JR | June 26, 2008 11:45 AM

Ok, all you people posting on how much you HATE pigeons.....you need to get a hobby and find another post. Leave this site to those of us who DO happen to like pigeons.

Thanks PETA for caring!

Posted by: Beth B. | June 26, 2008 11:47 AM

JR, that is a very poor example for this discussion. The visitors at Wimbledon would not be exposed to this disease due to the absence of tilling.

It sounds like you're reaching for a way to justify the shooting of these pigeons. Try again.

Posted by: Maya, CVT | June 26, 2008 12:23 PM

People, come on. It is not that we don't like pigeons. Pigeons swoop down right next to some of us while in the park, sitting out on a break from work, etc. We are not speaking of these pigeons. We are speaking of the pigeons that would not be deterred by other means, in a place that was heavily populated and distracting to people who were trying to get their "work" done. Yes, tennis players were working.Do we not all get rid of things that are deterrents to us. Those pigeons are multiplied 100 times over in every major city in the U.S. Let's get "fired up" about issues that are so much more important. I believe we all love animals in their own way.

Posted by: Gretchen | June 26, 2008 01:13 PM

From ESPN.com:

WIMBLEDON, England -- The pigeons around the All England Club are safe -- for now.

Wimbledon organizers came under fire from animal rights groups for using marksmen to eradicate some pesky pigeons Sunday, but they have pledged to use only two hawks to keep the birds away for the remainder of the tournament.

Wimbledon organizers said the extreme pest control response had only been deemed necessary because pigeons were creating a health risk around the players' lawn and a restaurant.

"The hawks are our first line of deterrent, and by and large they do the job," Wimbledon spokesman Johnny Perkins said Tuesday.

"But unfortunately there were one or two areas where the hawks didn't deter the pigeons, so it was deemed necessary to take a harder approach," he explained.

The decision to call in the marksmen was condemned as "cruel and illegal behavior" by People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals, which complained to the tournament organizers and the police.

"Since the use of marksmen to kill pigeons appears to have been carried out as a first, rather than a last, resort and not out of a concern for public health but rather because the animals were deemed inconvenient by players, you appear to be in clear violation of the law," PETA vice president Bruce Friedrich said.

Information from The Associated Press and Reuters was used in this report.

Posted by: Tabitha | June 26, 2008 03:16 PM

So glad to hear they changed their minds on this issue. :)

I still say that humans are the real vermin. We hold ourselves above all other life--which is one thing. We then use that as an excuse to destroy everything that gets in our way, which is something else entirely. We push everything out of our way to make space for more filthy, polluting humans. We deny ourselves a connection with nature, preferring to make ourselves seperate from all other life and therefore from ourselves. In short, we pave paradise, destroy the habitat of countless animals (leaving them homeless and desperate) and then destroy them for daring to venture into our perfect cities, despite the fact that they simply have nowhere else to go.

This could end with a massive extinction (either of animals, or of the human race--most likely BOTH) or with a massive tidal shift in the way our culture works and the way we live our lives.

Posted by: Rachel A | June 26, 2008 03:48 PM

i am a big fan of wimbledon and tennis, but this has really shocked me. many is the time where spectators and players alike have been amused by the sight of a pigeon walking round the court or generally distracting people. but this takes me back many, many years, to be brief, i worked for a large company & we used to have a pet pigeon who would sit on our window sill & be fed with seed. one day all the pigeons had disappeared & it eventually came out that they had all been destroyed, because they were "pests". i'm glad to say the company went down, but pigeons are here to stay. all animals and humans are put on this earth for a reason. i loathe and deteste wasps, but they were put here for a reason. so lay off pigeons, they may be regarded as flying rats(not my opinion i hasten to add) but even rats( i have kept rats as pets so there !!) are also on this earth for a reason. there are a few humans that are a waste of space and no earthly use to anyone, but we wouldnt dream of destroying them would we ??

Posted by: diane | June 26, 2008 06:37 PM

CVT

I posted that in response to your state about when the last outbreak of any fungal spore infection was last noted, read what I write, not what you interpret.
Tilling is not the only method that this fugus could be transmitted, in this case though that was how it happened. This can be transmitted by any disturbing of material that contains the spore. Raking, or even a leaf blower can have the same effect.

Lastly, no where in my post did I state shooting them was an acceptable solution.
My post was to show the health hazzards that all creatures can pose if we, as a society, do not learn acceptable methods of co-existing with all creatures.

Posted by: JR | June 26, 2008 11:11 PM

I wasn't going to post anything on this topic because frankly I don't care. Its none of my concern. However, I will respond to Rusty! Rusty, you tell us to read before you comment on this post, yet you claim Jesus is a vegitarian. Name the passage! That is all I ask of you. If is says literally "Jesus ate nothing but plants", I will convert tomorrow. I don't want a vague refernce, I want the Book and the chapter in the bible!

Posted by: Kurt K | June 27, 2008 11:08 AM

How can you say PETA lost it's direction? They were never an endangered species organization--PETA says you should not exploit or harm ANY animal for human benefit.

Posted by: Meg | June 27, 2008 11:26 AM

Read the words carefully please. Read and learn...

Was Christ a Vegetarian?

"I require mercy, not sacrifice" (Matthew 9:13 & 12:7)

This is a significant message when we remember that in the context in which this was said meat eating was commonly considered part of these sacrifices. Sacrificial offerings often entailed meat consumption and a strict reading of Leviticus 17: implies that, indeed, all meat consumption necessitated a sacrifice. Also, the noted confrontation of Jesus in the Temple suggests that he was not at all pleased by the desecration of the Temple by the money changers AND by "those who were selling oxen and sheep and pigeons" (John 2:14-15) since these animals were being sold for sacrifice before being eaten.

No Unequivocal Biblical Reference to Christ Eating or Buying Meat

Consider the verse where it is said that Jesus' disciples "were gone away unto the city to buy meat" (John 4:8). This translation from the King James version has been misunderstood as meaning literally "meat". In fact, the Greek word for "meat" from which the James translation based its choice for this word, simply meant nutrition in the generic sense. Hence, the Revised Standard Version now simply translates this same passage as "his disciples had gone away into the city to buy food".

Regenstein notes that nowhere in the New Testament is Jesus depicted as eating meat and "if the Last Supper was a Passover meal -- as many believe -- there is, interestingly, no mention of the traditional lamb dish".

Did Christ at Least Eat Fish? (e.g., Luke 24:43)

Note that on the two occasions where he is said to have eaten fish, these were after his death and resurrection. Also, we should maybe keep in mind that fish was a well known mystical symbol among these early Christians. The Greek word for fish (Ichthys) was used as an acronym whose initials in Greek stood for "Jesus Christ, Son of God, Savior". Given how the early Christians employed the term, there is therefore good historical evidence for the argument that all of the "fish stories" that managed to get into the gospels were intended to be taken symbolically rather than literally.

Biblical Breaks and Contradictions

We should not forget that the Bible is not complete and its many inconsistencies require thoughtful interpretation. For instance, we have the contradiction between Genesis 1:29-30 with Genesis 9:2-3. Some scholars interpret the first prescription for vegetarianism as the preferred diet, and suggest that it was only after God became grievously disappointed with human sin and flooded the earth did the second provision become permitted, and not without qualification (and maybe only as an expedient for the situation). To take another example, the New Testament makes repeated attacks on meat offered to pagan idols (Acts 15:20; Revelation 2:14), but Paul gives assurances that eating such flesh is all right if no one is offended (Corinthians 10:14-33). Paul, then, would seem to be contradicting Christ.

Examples of Early Christians

Not a few Christian scholars have concluded vegetarianism to be the more consistent ethic with respect to the spirit of Christ's teachings. For example, we have the Ebionites, Athanasius, and Arius. Of the early church fathers we have Clement of Alexandria, Origen, Tertullian, Heronymus, Boniface, St. Jerome, and John Chrysostom. Clement wrote, "It is far better to be happy than to have your bodies act as graveyards for animals. Accordingly, the apostle Matthew partook of seeds, nuts and vegetables, without flesh". One of the earliest Christian documents is the `Clementine Homiles', a second-century work purportedly based on the teachings of St. Peter. Homily XII states, "The unnatural eating of flesh meats is as polluting as the heathen worship of devils, with its sacrifices and its impure feasts, through participation in it a man becomes a fellow eater with devils". Many of the monasteries both in ancient times to the present practiced vegetarianism. For instance, Basilius the Great's order, Boniface's order, Trappists monks, etc. Also, we have the examples provided by the stories around some saints like Hubertus, Aegidius and Francis of Assisi.

Indirect Historical Evidence

Knowledge about how the Essenes, the Nazoreans and Ebionites lived suggests that Christ was probably a vegetarian. The Essenes were Jews who were remarkably similar to the early Christians as evinced in their deemphasis upon property and wealth, their communalism and in their rejection of animal sacrifices. The first Christians were known as the Nazoreans (not to be confused with Nazarenes), and the Ebionites were a direct offshoot from them. All three groups were vegetarian which is suggestive of the central role such a practice once played in Early Christianity.

Paul's need to constantly deal with these vegetarians is also evidence of how prevalent they were and not a few fellow Christians, it would seem, took issue with Paul. Paul, if he is consistent with his words, would have been vegetarian (Corinthians 8:13), notwithstanding his opposition to the Ebionites. According to Clement of Alexandria, Matthew was a vegetarian. Clementine `Homiles' and `Recognitions' claim that Peter was also a vegetarian. Both Hegisuppus and Augustin testify that the first head of the church in Jerusalem after the death of Christ, namely Christ's brother James the Just, was a vegetarian and raised as one! If Jesus's parents raised James as vegetarian then it would be likely that Jesus was also so raised.

Conclusion

Given the above points, it is reasonable to believe that vegetarianism would be consistent with, if not mandated by, the spirit of early Christianity, a spirit that advocated kindness, mercy, non-violence and showed disdain towards wealth and extravagance. Meat eating would hardly have been considered the way of the humility, non-extravagance and love for all of God's creation. Hence, the orthodox early church father, Christian Hieronymous, could not but be compelled to conclude:

The eating of animal meat was unknown up to the big flood, but since the flood they have pushed the strings and stinking juices of animal meat into our mouths, just as they threw quails in front of the grumbling sensual people in the desert. Jesus Christ, who appeared when the time had been fulfilled, has again joined the end with the beginning, so that it is no longer allowed for us to eat animal meat.

Postscript: What Happened After Christ?
Maybe an even more important question than that of whether or not Christ was a vegetarian, was why Christianity later abandoned its vegetarian roots. Steven Rosen in his book, Food for the Spirit, 1987, argues:

The early Christian fathers adhered to a meatless regime...many early Christian groups supported the meatless way of life. In fact, the writings of the early Church indicate that meat eating was not officially allowed until the 4th century, when the Emperor Constantine decided that his version of Christianity would be the version for everyone. A meat eating interpretation of the Bible became the official creed of the Roman Empire, and vegetarian Christians had to practice in secret or risk being put to death for heresy. It is said that Constantine used to pour molten lead down the their throats if they were captured.

Ironic indeed that pagan Rome here would have this longstanding influence upon Christianity.
In any case, I think we can all be thankful that it is a lot easier today to be a vegetarian. The occasional rudeness and social disapproval a vegetarian must tolerate is a pretty small inconvenience in comparison to Constantine's way of dealing with vegetarians.

To cite another sad example: in southern France a group of Albigensian vegetarians (a Cartharist religious group) were put to death by hanging in 1052 because they refused to kill a chicken!
http://www.ivu.org/history/christian/christ_veg.html

Go Vegan, save up to 100 of Gods creatures per year per person, save your health, and our Earth.

Posted by: Holly | June 27, 2008 12:56 PM

VEGETARIAN QUOTES IN THE BIBLE ... A PARTIAL LIST
Methusaleh: The longest lived man in Bible was a vegetarian and achieved 969 years.
Proverbs 20: 23 Be not among the winebibbers nor the riotous eaters of animal flesh.
* Matthew 23: 25-27 What did Jesus call those who eat animals? The King James translates it as `whited sepulchres`. The Greek word translated is sarcophagi (flesh) phagi eaters.
Genesis 1: 29 Behold I have given you herb yielding seed. To you it shall be for food. http://www.matthewscully.com
* Genesis 9: 4-5 Flesh shall ye not eat. http://www.all-creatures.org
Jesus: Feed The Hungry (With 6 billion people in God`s world, we must now choose His food systems: Fruit orchards yield 450,000 lbs. per acre. Slaughterhouses yield 100 to 1000 lbs. an acre. http://www.acorn.net.cob-web.org:8888/fruitarian
* Daniel 1: Daniel was a vegetarian for 10 days in the king`s prison. http://www.jesusveg.com
* Isaiah 65: The lion shall lie down with the lamb.. they shall not hurt nor destroy in all my holy mountain for the earth shall be full of the knowledge of the Lord. http://www.hacres.com
* Jeremiah 10: Passage against purchasing butchered Christmas trees
* Psalm 104: God made the whale to frolic in the sea (not to be slaughtered by the US, JAPAN, NORWAY and ICELAND govts.) http://www.embassy.gov
Isaiah 66: 3: He that slays an ox is as he that slays a man.
* Acts 15: Do not eat the flesh of strangled animals. http://groups.msn.com.cob-web.org:8888/christianveg
* Peter`s Vision of animals in a cage, said Peter himself, related to reaching out to the Gentile world, not seeing Gentiles as unclean. http://groups.msn.com.cob-web.org:8888/catholicveg
* Acts 18: 18 Paul says that he has taken a private vow. Many scholars believe it was the same vow taken by Samson.. a promise to God not to eat the flesh of innocent animals nor to cut his hair.
* The 5th Angel of Revelation: Harm no green living plant.
* Isaiah 42: Break not the bruised reed.
* Jesus: Whatsoever you have done to these the least of My brethren you have done unto Me.
* Corinthians l If meat makes my brother stumble I shall never again eat meat.
* Exodus 16: 31 The desert manna was like coriander seed. (This was stated by Dr.Reginald Cherry MD on the Trinity Broadcast Network).
* Proverbs 12:10 The righteous one is concerned for his beast.
* Ezekiel 3 and 4: My body has never been contaminated by animal flesh.
*Isaiah 66: 17
* Leviticus 3: 17 commands to eat no animal fat or animal blood Many Jewish vegetarians such as Dr Richard Schwartz of Staten Island believe that it is impossible to drain all the blood out of tiny capillaries.
* Leviticus 11: prohibits the eating of the flesh of rabbits, pigs, shellfish such as lobsters (coprophagous or waste eaters whose consumption of human waste on the Atlantic seaboard is the 2nd annual cause of hepatitis). http://www.egroups.com.cob-web.org:8888/messages/fishesrights http://groups.msn.com.cob-web.org:8888/madfish9
* Leviticus: I will set my face against them that eat blood. http://www.meatout.com
* Judges 13: The breaking of the Nazarite vow (no flesh.. no hair cutting) was the cause of Samson`s downfall. http://www.jewishveg.com
* Job 12: 8 Speak to the earth and she will teach thee (of patience, nurturing, unconditional love, freely giving to all) http://www.compassionatespirit.com
* Exodus 20: 13 Thou Shalt Not Kill (This is not asterisked in the Bible... Later translations such as New King James diluted King James to "Thou Shalt Not Murder" http://www.ivu.org.cob-web.org:8888/recipes
Genesis 6: Noah was commanded by God to provide vegetarian food for the animals on the ark. Lions were given milk. http://www.vegweb.com.cob-web.org:8888/food
Hosea 2:28: I will make for you that day a covenant with the animals.
Jesus: My father`s House is a House of Prayer. You have made it a den of thieves and butchers (where animal sacrifice occurred). The original Greek word for plunderer was rendered `thief` by translators. (the Greek gemousin osteon nekronis translated as `full of dead men`s bones` when it is in actuality `full of dead bones`. Interpretations divide. The Spirit Unites. May The Holy Spirit Overshadow Us All and All Creation. May differences of opinion, Holy Spirit, be to us as pleasing as the apple tree`s making crimson apples while the vine makes royal purple grapes. The Nazarite diet is described in Numbers.
Deuteronomy 5: Thou Shalt Not Kill (later versions than the King James translate this as Thou Shalt Not Murder)
Exodus 20: 13 Thou Shalt Not Kill brought down the mountain literally Lo Tirtzach ... (this is nonkilling, not nonmurder) The Biblical command "Thou Shalt Not Kill" which J J Price cites as a reason to change diet ... is not asterisked "to include humans only". The Biblical command "Thou Shalt Not Steal" which Kathy Kurtz cites can be related to not purloining the eggs from chickens nor the milk from mother cows whose calves are then butchered for veal.
Genesis 6: Noah was commanded by God to provide vegetarian food in the ark for people and animals. (The lions drank the milk of cows.)
Genesis 9: 4-5 Flesh shall yet not eat. And surely your blood I will require at the hands of beasts. (God forgive us all and help us all to change.)
Hosea 2:28: I will make for you that day a covenant with the wild animals. I will abolish the bow, the sword, and war from the land. I will make you lie down in safety. Isaiah: Isaiah is the prophet who more than any other forecasts the birth of Jesus. He is also the prophet with the most references to nonviolence and universal respect for life. Jesus quotes Isaiah`s "I delight not in your blood sacrifices" as He drives the animal killers out of the temple. Jesus refers to the vegetarian Isaiah more than to any other.
Isaiah: 1: 11: I delight not in the blood of bullocks or of lambs or of he goats (whereas Isaiah 66 involves not eating pigs ... and Isaiah 65 involves not eating any living thing) (In some Bible translations the word `blood` has been removed.) (In others it is "I delight not in thy blood sacrifices.")
Isaiah 42: He shall break not the bruised reed. Isaiah 59: We moan sadly like doves.
Isaiah 65: The wolf shall lie down with the lamb.. they shall not hurt nor destroy in all my holy mountain for the earth shall be full of the knowledge of the Lord. Many other passages of Isaiah speak of noneating of animals.
Isaiah 66: 3 He who slays an ox is as he that slays a man. (Another translation: He who kills a bull is as he who kills a man.)
Job 5: You will be in league with the stones of the field and the beasts of the field shall be at peace with you.
Job 12: 8 Speak to the earth and she will teach thee (of patience, humility, forgiveness, universal nurturing)
http://www.vegetablekillers.net/forums/veg-food/33960-vegetarian-quotes-in-the-christian-bible.html

Go Vegan save up to 100 farm animals per person per year, save your health and our earth...

Posted by: Holly | June 27, 2008 01:13 PM

To all you no-life omnivores in favor of killing animals: Go away! You're wrong. Your religion is wrong and your culture is wrong. EVERY SINGLE LIFE IS SPECIAL. PERIOD. So go on blabbering about killing birds and stomping spiders while proving to the truly comassionate how ignorant and evil you really are. And go away!

Posted by: Ken | June 27, 2008 01:16 PM

I love this quote...

Clement wrote, "It is far better to be happy than to have your bodies act as graveyards for animals.

Go Vegan save up to 100 of Gods creatures per person per year, save your health and our earth...

Posted by: Holly | June 27, 2008 02:29 PM

JR, you are putting words into my mouth. Please read my comments carefully before you comment on them!

Here is my original comment, cut and pasted:

" When is the last time you heard reports of the elderly or children coming down with psitticosis, cryptococcosis or toxoplasmosis from feeding pigeons? --"

You then changed the subject by mentioning a completely different disease, and then by saying I asked about fungal spores.

Please don't put words into my mouth again. I don't appreciate it.

Posted by: Maya, CVT | June 27, 2008 03:00 PM

Ken, I agree with your views, but I don't think we should un-welcome people who don't agree with PETA.

We can all slap ourselves on the back and preach to the converted all day long, but that won't change attitudes.

It's our job and our responsibility to protect animals through education. Let's not push away that chance.

I personally am glad to see the opposing view here.

;)

Posted by: Maya, CVT | June 27, 2008 03:06 PM

Thanks Maya for your response. It's interesting that omnivores would spend their time cruising around PETA's website waiting for a chance to defend cruelty to animals. I'm not sure if these types just love a good argument or are do it for a living.

Posted by: Ken | June 27, 2008 04:24 PM

It's impossible to know, isn't it, Ken? I mean, I'm sure some people are just here to be jerks, but some seem very intelligent and are fun to have a discussion with.

I usually judge by the spelling (or lack thereof) LOL

Posted by: Maya, CVT | June 27, 2008 06:47 PM

Actually, Ken, I don't like being a jerk.

HOWEVER....it is the only way for me to have MY voice heard.

HAS to be a two way street or else nothing gets done, right?

Posted by: Tabitha | June 30, 2008 11:37 AM

Pigeons are in abundance, this is true. So shooting them won't threaten them in regards to extinction, this is true.

Taking the above theory into consideration. Lots of animals = okay to kill them. Would that mean it would be okay to wipe out a few humans here and there, heck we are the worlds greatest 'inconvenience' and 'pest'. Of course it wouldn't.

I'm all for removing an inconvenience, but did anyone ever think that by shooting a pigeon another one will simply take it's place hence not fixing the problem. The best solution for everyone involved, both humans and animals, is deterants. Everyone wins.

As for people like ai3d who seem to wonder how on earth we would ever look after all the surplus abused animals in the world if we stopped such exterminations, aminals tests, eating meat etc. We don't eat meat, they don't breed 'meat' animals. We don't test on animals they won't breed test animals. We eliminate nesting sites and deter 'pests' they don't breed..I'm a logical person - it makes sense.

Posted by: Fawn | July 3, 2008 09:18 PM