U GOTTA STOP THERES NUTHIN AMUZING BOUT THAT

Posted by: nicole | October 9, 2008 04:39 PM

Leave poor Brett alone. He is just a redneck having a little fun and oh by the way-he ran the thing over not shot it-why don't you get your story straight before you write a nasty and untrue statement!

Posted by: MELISSA | October 9, 2008 05:09 PM

So, I am a coward because I hunt. I go and get my legal limit each year foe deer. I consume what I kill. God, Yes God, put animals on the earth for us to eat. We are Caniviors. That means we eat both plants and animals. I enjoy the taste of vension. I am a sportsman who is doing one of my free choices. I don't go around and complain about veg. eating nothing but salads. Maybe I should, I mean lets see how after a few false statements you feel about it. Now don't get wrong. I enjoy nature and looking at wildlife. But no one is going to tell me that killing a deer is going to send me to hell. Because it won't. What did your acenstors do in the 1800's? They killed animals for food. It's the same today. Beef, pork, chicken (I hate chicken), turkeys, and so forth are killed to be consumed and used for other products. Just like the sneakers or even work boots or the high heel boots/shoes you have on. Guess what!? Leather! From a Cow. But I don't go out and kill ever little creature out their. I have 10 cats, and love them. I protect Eagles and hawks and owls. Now what Favre did was not sportsmanship. He should be punished for that crap. Remember, a true hunter will eat what he kills. Favre and trophy hunters are not hunters, just igorant people. So, those people are cowards. But, never call any sportsman who does right by the hunt a coward.

Posted by: megawatts | October 9, 2008 06:51 PM

Wanted to add. I don't wear Camo or use high-power rifle. I wear flourscent organge 250+ sq ft and use a .30-.30 Winschester Modle 94 rifle.

Posted by: megawatts | October 9, 2008 06:54 PM

PLEASE BRETT, GIVE UP HUNTING GOD'S WONDERFUL ANIMALS!
THANKS!!

Posted by: JANICE M BURGI | October 9, 2008 07:51 PM

You know what I call people like Brett Favre? Hall of fame first ballot quarterback.
I will go so far to say that it is pretty crass, but I still find it amusing.
Please don't compare Brett Favre to Michael Vick ever again. Michael Vick assisted in numerous rapes and murders of defenseless dogs, and I'm quite sure Favre didn't need the sniper rifle.
To each his own.
Go NYJ

Posted by: Neville | October 9, 2008 08:11 PM

Truly hilarious. What is wrong with this guy? He needs some therapy.

Posted by: NT | October 9, 2008 10:59 PM

Stop killing innocent animals!

Posted by: Gillian boss | October 10, 2008 01:00 AM

He's total idiot! So much football bumps in the head destroyed his brain.

Only and only total pathetic fools are hunters.

Posted by: hue | October 10, 2008 01:05 AM

Not that you care, but ... Brett usually hunts witha bow, not "military grade hardware." And here in WI there are so many deer that they suffer horribly from chronic wasting disease if herds are not thinned enough by hunting.

Posted by: MM | October 10, 2008 01:31 AM

what is fun about killing living creaters. Please stop and think of the fear and pain you cost,

Posted by: Diny Straatman | October 10, 2008 03:14 AM

I find what you are doing and what you think of as funny.......is cruel and cowardly. Killing animals as a joke for your locker room is cruel and in bad taste. Please stop.

Posted by: Camille Cox | October 10, 2008 06:07 AM

Hunting is sick. The way people treat animals is a good indication of the type of person they are. Anyone who enjoys killing defenceless animals shows that they are cold, heartless and without compassion.

Posted by: Jozette Cairns | October 10, 2008 06:26 AM

Hey Brett,
is that the example you want to set for your fans? That it's cool to shoot defenseless creatures? Way to go, man... I thought you stood for fair play.

Posted by: Sonja | October 10, 2008 07:38 AM

Hey Bret...keep shooting footballs, not animals...Thanks!

Posted by: Ed | October 10, 2008 08:15 AM

Brett,
I am a big Jets fan but you could of thought of something better to do. I am a big animal fan also and have to say not a fan of hunting. That(food) has been supplied by companies so it's not necessary to hunt for what you eat.

Posted by: Ter | October 10, 2008 09:26 AM

Melissa,

If what you say is true, that "God, Yes God, put animals on the earth for us to eat", then explain the whole "Thou shalt not KILL" thing to me. Is there a sub-Commandment that says "...unless you're hungry, or feel the need to justify the murders you're committing so your conscience will quiet down a little"?

As for "We are Caniviors. That means we eat both plants and animals.", it looks like you might need to spend less time murdering innocent animals and more time in the dictionary. A CARNIVORE, by the way, is a "meat-eater". An OMNIVORE is what you're trying to describe.

It's not a "sport" unless both sides know the rules and are equally-advantaged. I'm not sure the deer have been briefed that they're participating in this so-called "sport", and when last I checked, humans have ALL the advantages...

Next time, try wrestling the deer to death. Make it a fair(er) fight.

Posted by: Keith | October 10, 2008 10:33 AM

Disgusting! I have changed my mind about him-he is a redneck!

Posted by: K Pow | October 10, 2008 11:15 AM

This is in response to Melissa's comment. If you go www.nj.com and read the article there is NO mention of Brett hitting the animal with his vehicle. Maybe you should get your story straight.

**the title of the article is "Brett Favre pulls gross prank in New York Jets' locker room"

Posted by: Jennifer | October 10, 2008 11:44 AM

Megawatts,

That is a very interesting statement you made. However, I have a few corrections to point out.
#1. God DID NOT put animals on this earth so that we could consume them. In the begining man ate only plants to survive, as instructed by God. It wasnt until after the great flood that God said they had the choice to eat the flesh of animals. Im an Athiest... the fact that I know this, and you dont, seeming how you beleive in God, concerns me.
#2. I beg to differ that my shoes are made of leather. In this day in age, there is a vast amount of materials to make cruetly free shoes. Such as the ones I am wearing... Which happen to be high heals. So dont assume that everyone chooses to wear the skin of a dead animal.

For both the points I make... I CHOOSE to not eat flesh and I CHOOSE to not wear their skin. Its about the choices we now have. We dont have to be our barbarian ancestors.

Posted by: Jenny | October 10, 2008 12:34 PM

Sorry, One more point...

Canivores = ONLY meat
Herbivores = ONLY plants
OMNIVORES = both.

Posted by: Jenny | October 10, 2008 12:38 PM

Brett, Brett, Brett. What happened to you? You were so admired on our beloved Packer team. Seems you're falling apart now. Time to fall onto the sidelines, my friend. And leave the poor, defenseless animals alone.

Posted by: MS | October 10, 2008 01:14 PM

hey mega(idiot)watts, god put animals on this earth for us to eat?.. your joking right, (idiot!) you probably go around telling people the world is flat.., you should change your s.n. to butthead!, OUR SPECIES DID NOT EVOLVE AS CARNIVORES, (pcrm.org) the long, intricate, winding human digestive tract is ill-suited to digesting and expelling flesh food which is QUICKLY DECOMPOSED. among many other PHYSIOLOGICAL DIFFERENCES, we have NO claws for tearing flesh, but rather an opposable thumb and dexterous fingers that evolved FOR picking fruit, leaves, berries, ECT, and our weak jaws bear NO resemblance to those of carnivores, VEGAN BY DESIGN!.. coronary arteries branch from the aorta to bring oxygen to the heart muscle itself. cholesterol from ANIMAL SOURCES gradually impregnates the inside walls of the coronary arteries, and layers of cellular material and calcium follow until the artery is clogged, HEART ATTACK, this blockage also occurs in the arteries to the brain. when they close off, part of the brain dies. A STROKE, ..cutting them (arteries) with a scissor at autopsy makes a DISTINCT CRUNCHING SOUND, NO SPECIES PAST INFANCY DRINKS MILK, excessive dietery protein (also milk) not only depletes the bodys calcium, it also OVERLOADS and damages the kidneys, ..your favorite charity must be. the flat earth society, no wonder you are into football and hunting your brain dead.

Posted by: indycar01 | October 10, 2008 02:50 PM

GO JENNIFER!!!!!

Posted by: Amy | October 10, 2008 03:10 PM

hey, megaidiotwaats, about them sneakers, boots, belts, ect.. never heard of, synthetic.. (as in synthetic motor oil) man made products?.... so, why dont you crawl back into your cave. and bang your head on some rocks and watch your FoOtBaLl.

Posted by: indycar01 | October 10, 2008 03:16 PM

Hunting is not a sport. It would be if the deer was given a gun (or a bow, scope, etc.) At least if you hunt, eat the animal...killing for killing's sake is simply wrong.
To comment on a previous posters statement that animals were put on the earth to be eaten-- well this person obviously has never taken a HUMAN ANATOMY class. Our digestive system is much closer to a vegetarian's than a carnivore. Animals that only eat meat (Cats for example) have around 5 feet of small intestine. Contrast that with humans who can have up to 35 feet of intestine. Longer intestines= better suited to a veggie diet.
People like Farve need to grow up. Animals do experience pain, fear, and happiness. Humans should learn to respect the animals we share the earth with.

Posted by: Cathleen Plaza | October 10, 2008 03:43 PM

Jenny,
I find it hard to believe that a person who doesn't believe in God is giving lessons on morality.
Why do you care so much. When you die, acording to you, thats it. What do you have to worry about?
If you don't believe in God, then why should I care about a creature that has no soul?

Posted by: Kurt K | October 10, 2008 03:44 PM

On Thanksgiving Day several years ago I watched a buck run frantically out of the woods. He stopped at a fence and spun around and around for several seconds because he was in such a state of panic. I realized he was being hunted. I will never forget that look of agonizing fear and dread. Question: Unless one had to hunt to survive why would anyone put a defenseless animal through this torture?

Posted by: sarah | October 10, 2008 05:07 PM

i'd like to reply to megawatts,
i believe you have mixed up omnivores and carnivores. carnivores are strictly meat eaters. if i were you i would get MY facts straight before i answer anybody's comment. in the past, people would respect animals and give thanks to them. in the present on the other hand, we torture the animals before and while we slaughter them and don't even acknowledge the fact that they were forced to give their lives up just so that their meat would be consumed by people (including arrogant obnoxious people like you) who remain at the top of the food chain because of our smartness. if we're so smart, why don't we respect animals? I acknowledge the fact that you consume your kill and i admire that. but what about all the other people who kill animals for "sport"? do they get fun out of putting animals into a state of panic and terror? with them (the animals) knowing that they will be killed soon by someone who is at an unfair advantage with their guns and such? i would like everyone to think about what i have written and react your own way to it. i don't care if you have something nasty to say to me. all i care about is how the animals are treated and that they die in peace, not with their necks slit open like the unfortunate animals in slaughter houses. i hope you realize that you have been outsmarted by a 13 year old :P

Posted by: mapem | October 10, 2008 05:37 PM

Kurt K,

I understand where you are coming from. But for me its not the "after life" that I am worried about. Its not their "souls" i am worried about. What I AM worried about is the pain and the suffering that they fear in THIS LIFE (the only life in my opinion). Now, if I were a beliver.. IT WOULD STILL BE THE SAME THING!. They are still living breathing animals that deserve to live and die decently... Soul or no Soul.

Posted by: Jenny | October 10, 2008 05:47 PM

Wooh Go Brett! and to think I lost some respect for you this year when you signed up with the jets!

Posted by: Jim | October 11, 2008 05:15 AM

I'm actually impressed. I brought this to PETA's attention so they opened a blog on it. The whole thing is disgusting, such a waste of life. Such a sick demented prank.

Posted by: April | October 11, 2008 11:37 AM

Idiots, everyone who thinks Brett did wrong. Ok, so the prank was in bad taste, but don't go picking on him because he used a dead animal for it. Your suggestions and hatred towards him will do NOTHING in the long run. He's a celebrity and they ALWAYS have the upper hand.

Posted by: Hiza | October 11, 2008 03:38 PM

For Melissa:
In Genisis, the Bible says that God "breathed into the nostrils the breath of life and man became a living being"
So if on earth we all carry God's breath of life, (God's breath is the Holy Ghost).
Then why should something so God given die at the hands of another instead of dying in it's natural course of life that God has already planned, even in the everafter.

Posted by: Mary | October 11, 2008 08:21 PM

Kurt K,

One does not need to believe in god or the bible to teach morality. One could EASILY argue that some utilize their belief in god and the bible to justify immoral behavior, such as "Joe Six Pack" beating up a gay male and spouting off some intelligent statement about "Not Adam and Steve" while he represses his own latent homosexual thoughts.

Posted by: Derek, MD | October 11, 2008 08:28 PM

how rediculos. this really makes me realize that some people are cruel and heartless. I dont get why people say that god put animals on this earth so we could eat them . SO NOT TRUE!!!! god put them on here so we could adore them and and have conpanions. i also dont get why people say if our ancestors ate animals so we should to. the only reason our ancestors ate animals was to live. everone could live without eating animals. they didnt have what kinds of food we have now. also they didnt put the animals in so much pain as people do now.

Posted by: Natil | October 11, 2008 10:32 PM

Derek,
I understand that you don't need to believe to be a moral person.
I was trying figure out how one could care so much about others when they believe there are no consequences or rewards after death. I wasn't saying if you are atheist you are automatically a immoral person.
Also, the teachings of Christ, which I believe in, really can't be misinterpreted in anyway. The old testament can, but not so much the new.
I don't know where the second part of your comment came from, but good luck with that.

Posted by: Kurt K | October 12, 2008 10:14 PM

Kurt K
Aside from the fact that there is growing evidence that there is a biological basis to morality, atheists (myself included) don't need a belief in an eternal reward/punishment to do the right thing. Atheism and ethics are not mutually exclusive.
I also find it an impoverished ethical position to hold that only humans are ensouled beings and on that basis to justify not caring for animals. If, on your account, only humans gain eternal life, ought we not care that animals are treated well in this their only life? It seems the ultimate in selfishness to condone mistreatment of animals here, while believing that only humans make it to heaven.

Posted by: lynda downie | October 12, 2008 11:55 PM

Lynda,
I aggree that we need to protect the animals that are being treated badly. I don't like the nonsensical abuse of animals for no particualar reason. Maaning, I don't like when people abuse animals just for entertainment only.
However, I don't equate slaughtering animals for food as abuse. I know the process looks ugly, but that can be expected.
Just because I eat meat, doesnt mean I enjoy killing animals and watching the act of killing. If I had to kill an animal to eat, I wouln't have a problem.

Posted by: Kurt K | October 13, 2008 10:10 AM

THIS DOES NOT NEED TO HAPPEN,IT SHOULD NOT HAPPEN,
IT NEEDS TO BE AGAINST THE LAW!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
(IS IN SOME STATES,BUT NOT ALL~YET!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!)
HOPFULLY SOME DAY IT WILL BE,SOME DAY SOON, ONE STATE AT A TIME!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Posted by: Tucker | October 14, 2008 03:36 PM

Kurt K
So, if I understand you, your sense of entitlement to the bodies of animals is based on your belief that only humans have a soul. Your appetite for flesh is more important than the suffering of the animals whose dead bodies you eat. Don't you find that moral position expressly anthropocentric and more than a little self-serving?

Posted by: lynda downie | October 16, 2008 07:07 PM

Lynda,
Again, we have different views on what is acceptable and what is not. Animals for food, to me is acceptable. Torturing animals for some sick pleasure is not. I don't like the fur industries.
Animals are on this earth to serve a purpose. Whatever that maybe is up to the individual.
Also, I am not the biggest fan of a vegitarian diet, not because I disagree with it but rather I don't enjoy it.
Don't tell me to eat meat substitutes either, that is about as far from being natural as you can get. Plants do not grow to taste like fillet minot.
Do you really think animals should have the same rights as humans?
I don't.
Do you think it is a sin to eat meat? If so, what kind of a sin? Mortal or forgivable?

Posted by: Kurt K | October 17, 2008 11:21 AM

Brett Favre... I implore you to STOP hunting now.Hunting and killing animals is no different than animal testing and animal cruelty. Your actions are not acceptable to me and others and I believe it is time for you to change your ideas about God's Creatures.

Posted by: Deborah Griffin | October 18, 2008 10:58 PM

Kurt
I think all sentient beings should be granted rights based on their ind'l needs ( a position called moral individualism). Obviously animals don't need a right to vote, drive a car, or go to university. And neither do some humans. But anyone (human and non-human) who feels pain should be granted the right to be protected from unnecessary pain. To exclude animals is arbitrary and morally indefensible.
I don't base my ethical position on sin (moral or venial) but on 2 main principles. The 1st is "Consider others as yourselves" originally formulated by Buddha, Confucius and adopted by Jesus 5 C later-The Golden Rule. Animals are included as 'others' for me. 2nd is "To thine ownself be true" from the Bard of Avon-Wm Shakespeare.
Finally, it's not about the taste of flesh, it's about justice. Just because an animal can't say "Keep your hands off me!" doesn't mean you're not violating her rights. You are.

Posted by: lynda downie | October 19, 2008 10:58 PM

how did this turn in to a hunting debate? he put a dead animal in a bag and put the bag into a teammates locker. the animal was a sqirrel that he had hit on the road. proffessional atheletes are definately a different breed of people, just dont judge people. who are you to judge?

Posted by: kyle | October 21, 2008 01:23 PM

Replying to those against hunting, most hunting is in fact a good thing, it controls the population which in most areas especially with deer is too large. Thousands are killed or mortally wounded and then left to die on highways by nonhunters. I'm not saying killing animals is the right thing to do because in most cases it's not, but just give hunters some credit.

Posted by: craig | October 21, 2008 10:43 PM

Lynda,
I understand what you are saying. I really do. However, it seems to me that you are offering a double standard. At least in my opinion.
I know this is always brought up and shot down and then brought up again. But, if animals have rights to life, and it is bad for humans to kill them because we are violating their rights. Should carnivorous animals be held accountable for violating the rights of their prey? Why are they different?
I know you will say they need to eat meat and we don't, but what is the difference if they kill an animal or we kill an animal. If the dead animal is used for food what is the difference.
You see, it seems to me the world, just only recently, within the past 60years was capapble of becoming vegitarian. There is noway before then the world could survive off of a vegan diet alone. Soy and corn are not natrually occuring plants, at least not in the quantity we need.
My point is, this country wouldn't be what it is today without meat. The settlers on the frontier would not have survived if they had to rely on vegitables and fruits for food. Indians ate buffalo, deer and other plains animals for survival and they respected the animals. But they still understood they needed to eat them.
Just a thought.
And by the way, I am against all the bad stuff that happens in stockyards and slaughterhouses. That stuff needs to stop, but I still believe we need meat.

Posted by: Kurt K | October 22, 2008 10:35 AM

Kurt
Obligate carnivores have the choice to eat other animals or die. Your choice to eat other animals is based on preference not survival. There's an important difference between necessity and preference.
If that's a double standard (and I don't think it is), it's warranted.

Posted by: lynda downie | October 26, 2008 11:53 PM

I have never seen so much crap in all my life. Such righteous people who can not spell a four letter word. And all you talking about'' hunting isn't right, hunting and eating meat are not natural''. Your sick ideas about deer having guns and hunters having some how, a lack of manhood. Hunting is a thing not of blood lust as some call it but a passion, a deep desire. I'll tell you about something you will never ever expierence. Something that is color blind and knows nothing of boy or girl, old or young.The blood pumping thing that smacks you in the chest when a deer suddenly steps into a clearing, in range. When anything, a turkey, a squirrel, anything gives you a legal opportunity, it is not kill,kill,kill. You stop and worry to yourself, should I do this thing? Yes or No? When you pull the trigger and see you were true to aim, a sudden happiness, a sense of success grabs you. Then, out of nowhere, sadness. Sadness that you took a life, a life that God made and you took. You give a thanks to God, to the animal, and you know you can't let this go to waste. That's something that will never be taken out of a human's system. Its like an old coon hunter's saying: You can take the dog out of the hunt, but you can't take the hunt out of the dog.

Posted by: Redbone | October 30, 2008 12:40 AM

Redbone
"The blood pumping thing that smacks you in the chest..."

It's a shame that your need for an adrenalin rush can only be met by contemplating and doing violence to another animal.
The courageous among us, who put themselves at risk to rescue and defend animals, experience the same heart-pounding rush. But joy is their reward, not sadness at having destroyed another's life.

Posted by: lynda downie | October 31, 2008 02:00 AM

Lynda,
But you are saying that it is okay to kill an animal if it is out of necessity, correct?
Bears don't have to eat meat to surrvive, they can eat nuts and berries. But, sometimes they will kill animals for food. That is a preference isn't? Even hippos will eat meat from time to time, they don't need to but they do.
How is that different?
Of course I eat meat out of preference, but I also eat it to stay alive. That is my choice, it comes natural to me.

Posted by: Kurt K | October 31, 2008 12:24 PM

Kurt

1st the moral issue:
Considering you think animals are inferior to humans, it's odd that you justify your flesh eating by appeal to the behaviour of omnivores (such as bears), whose moral code reflects their particular adaptation needs.

2nd the necessity issue:
Do you really think your indulgence in animal flesh is comparable to the omnivores whose habitat and resources are being seriously depleted and threatened?

Posted by: lynda downie | November 1, 2008 10:52 PM

Dear writer,
I loved how you compared hunting to a lopsided football game, oh yeah, except for the fact that you are totally off. Nice try though. See, animals are given traits that help them evade predators, but in your analogy, you gave the naked football team no advantage. For example, deer have a great sense of sound and smell, and they can be extremely quiet while moving. But a human's advantage is his intelligence, we have a great physical disadvantage. So using camouflage, which is illegal in a lot of states anyways, isn't that much of an advantage. As for the high power rifle, most hunters don't use a very high powered rifle, but you wouldn't know that, because you are ignorant, and very judgmental as well, but you have every right to be, because all hunters are redneck cowards that love torturing animals, right? You don't know what you're talking about.

Posted by: Jon | November 3, 2008 11:28 PM

Even in a fair game, both sides know they're playing.

Posted by: lynda downie | November 4, 2008 11:58 PM

Not only is he hideous looking but he is a person who lacks a soul (conscience) who I believe will pay for his sinful ways as all hunters and those who hurt other living being unecessarily will do in the afterlife!
I feel sorry for him because he and other hunters like him have no idea what they are in for!

Posted by: Sandy | February 12, 2009 06:17 AM

Brett...
Please stop hunting Brett,shoot hoops and not animals!!

Posted by: Wm.Clark Drew II | April 28, 2009 05:31 PM