Eliza Dushku hunting animals

[Blondie Bear]

Okay. Let's look at this rationally. Everybody read these:
Humans are Omnivores -- The Vegetarian Resource Group
http://www.beyondveg.com/billings-t/comp-anat/comp-anat-1a.shtml
http://www.all-creatures.org/mhvs/nl-2003-wi-meat.html
Are Humans Omnivores? Is There a Such Thing as a True Omnivore?

And I mean thoroughly, not just going, "see that's exactly what I said!" and ignoring the stuff that isn't exactly what you said. Then everyone can discuss this like better-informed adults. (And, hey, if you want to read more stuff, go for it. Learning is awesome.)
[br][/br]
Edit:
[br][/br]
(Also, while reading those articles, don't forget to look at who wrote them and for what purpose. Be aware of any spin so you know how much is fact and how much is wishful thinking.)

 

[Highlander]

Good links Blondie, thanks

 

[Harm]

Really really aren't designed as herbivores. Most of the chart was vague Vegan propaganda. We are not herbivores. If we were herbivores we wouldn't be able to stomach meat, we wouldn't need for our food that isn't meat to be fortified (for example, if you didn't have alternatives for protein, or rice milk). Humans are omnivorous, that has no bearing on animal testing.

We weren't created to stomach meat, but because we have for so long we've evolved. And MSchett, I didn't really get that article, but just because it was written by a vegan doesn't really do anything for me. Alot of Blondie Bears' links said that there is proof that we as humans have ate meat for a very long time, but that does not prove that we are desinged as omnivores.

What about these links? ...oh wait, they're just vegan propaganda. You know I could say that about any of your links, but I don't.
http://www.stevepavlina.com/blog/2005/09/are-humans-carnivores-or-herbivores-2/
http://www.celestialhealing.net/physicalveg3.htm
http://wiki.answers.com/Q/Are_humans_omnivores_or_herbivores
http://www.goveg.com/naturalhumandiet_physiology.asp

And like Blondie said, please actually READ these.

 

[MSchett]

well now its kinda getting religous because if u believe in evolution then technically we were never designed and we would be omnivores because we have evolved into it and you get the other side

 

[Lou]

OOOOH, Religion AND Animal rights.......bye bye:Bolt:

 

[Highlander]

OOOOH, Religion AND Animal rights.......bye bye:Bolt:

Religion and Animal Rights... We talking burnt offerings or just Philosophical stuff? How far back do we go Sumerians, Egyptians, Babylon or Hebrew?

Oh I know, Cain and Able. Cain offered veggies and Able offered a lamb, God liked Able's and Cain killed him over it. You are right, this could get real ugly real fast.

Harm, you debate well beyond your years(at least as indicated by your profile). Your facts are clouded by ideology and agenda(not yours, but the agenda of PETA). As you get older you will figure out much that you thought was true turns out not to be. Next time PETA sends you an alert or whatever they call it, instead of taking it as gospel, see what research you can dig up on your own and make an informed decision.

 

[Harm]

Harm, you debate well beyond your years(at least as indicated by your profile). Your facts are clouded by ideology and agenda(not yours, but the agenda of PETA). As you get older you will figure out much that you thought was true turns out not to be. Next time PETA sends you an alert or whatever they call it, instead of taking it as gospel, see what research you can dig up on your own and make an informed decision.

Well thank you very much, but I do not just blindly follow PETA, I do my research, and a lot of those "alerts" I just ignore, haha. I also follow other animal rights groups, cok.net and more. I have actually made a lot of posts on the Peta board, saying basically what you just said, because there are a lot of blind followers. I support what PeTA represents, but I don't always support them. I have also experienced a lot of animal cruelty for my age and I think I have seen enough (at the moment) to judge what is the right thing to follow.

And fine, we didn't "evolve" we "changed". Hows that? :whistle:

On a non-meat meat basis, I'm going to a fur protest saturday! :cheering:

 

[Blondie Bear]

And like Blondie said, please actually READ these.

(I also said to be aware of spin. . . . 😉 Not saying your stuff is biased, but just about everyone who writes on this kind of thing has an agenda of some kind.)

 

[JCC]

We weren't created to stomach meat, but because we have for so long we've evolved. And MSchett, I didn't really get that article, but just because it was written by a vegan doesn't really do anything for me. Alot of Blondie Bears' links said that there is proof that we as humans have ate meat for a very long time, but that does not prove that we are desinged as omnivores.

Waaaaaaaaait, two things.

1. If we have evolved into omnivores, we are now omnivores, therefore any sort of preceding state of existence is worthless because our need now is flora AND fauna.

2. You expect us to believe that we were created as herbivores, despite the fact that there is no record of herbivorous humans, and the only reason why we don't accept it is because we've evolved on from that and therefore can't see it around us?

Hypothesis:

"Humans were created with wings, and tongues that danced and were packed with gunpowder. Of course we're evolved from that now."

Disprove it without harming your own statement.

 

[Highlander]

You are basing your opinions on an ideology that is inaccurate at best. On the subject of Euthanazia you cannot even see the double talk PETA is doing, they take in unwanted pets purportedly to find them homes yet "Humanely" kill 85% of those they take in while local shelters have much lower rates of Euthanasia.

Quotes

These organizations are not Animals Rights so much as they are anti-Human.

Fur is not bad in fact it is environmentally friendly, the best insulator wet or dry, more durable as a fabric than synthetics, and it is renewable.

 

[JCC]

I don't agree with the fur trade. Fake fur is cheaper, more consistent of production and easier to maintain, and that's ignoring the fact that they club animals to death and skin them.

 

[Lou]

white avenger agrees: Actually, domestic fur bearing animals are either gassed or killed in a vacuum chamber, the same as most modern animal control departments do unclaimed dogs and cats. It's cheaper and cleaner. But no less unpleasant.

I know that wasn't meant to be funny, but if you were a big dork like me you'd have read......
Actually, domestic fur bearing animals are either gassed or killed in a vacuum CLEANER, the same as most modern animal control departments do unclaimed dogs and cats. It's cheaper and cleaner. But no less unpleasant.

And thinking, I'll say death by vaccum cleaner would be an unpleasant way to die!
In fact, simply the visual of chasing bunnies around a large room with a Hoover is both unpleasant and oddly amusing.

 

[Harm]

Okay, well then how come all "other" omnivores and carnivores can simply catch their prey and eat it on spot, but we have to sanatize it, cook it, make sure it has no illnesses, etc. Because we weren't meant to take it in. We have worked our way around it and called ourselves "omnivores" because we enjoy tasty animal flesh. Meat isn't exactly good for us either, I mean aside from the protein which can be found from other sources, what does it do for us? Hm..rots in our colon?

People trying to get healthier or lose weight often take meat out of the picture.

Actually, domestic fur bearing animals are either gassed or killed in a vacuum chamber, the same as most modern animal control departments do unclaimed dogs and cats. It's cheaper and cleaner. But no less unpleasant.

Yes, a lot of them are just electrocuted, stomped on, or strangled, not even completley killing them.

Fur is not bad in fact it is environmentally friendly, the best insulator wet or dry, more durable as a fabric than synthetics, and it is renewable.

Oh, so that makes it ok. It makes it ok that most animals are concious while they are being skinned? It makes the conditions they live in before this ok?

 

[white avenger]

white avenger agrees: Actually, domestic fur bearing animals are either gassed or killed in a vacuum chamber, the same as most modern animal control departments do unclaimed dogs and cats. It's cheaper and cleaner. But no less unpleasant.


I know that wasn't meant to be funny, but if you were a big dork like me you'd have read......
Actually, domestic fur bearing animals are either gassed or killed in a vacuum CLEANER, the same as most modern animal control departments do unclaimed dogs and cats. It's cheaper and cleaner. But no less unpleasant.

And thinking, I'll say death by vaccum cleaner would be an unpleasant way to die!
In fact, simply the visual of chasing bunnies around a large room with a Hoover is both unpleasant and oddly amusing.


Yes, a lot of them are just electrocuted, stomped on, or strangled, not even completley killing them.





I wasn't trying to project comedy into the discussion, merely pointing out that animals killed for their fur are always killed (I hate the word "euthanize," it just seems like a way to avoid what is actually being done) in such a way as to completely preserve the fur. Beating, shooting, stomping, electrocuting, and strangling damage it. As for fur itself, I fully agree that the dictates of fashion alone is no excuse to take an animal's life. The same goes for exotic leather used in coats, boots, belts, and lord knows what else.


But hasn't this whole discussion lost sight completely of the original question of what our feelings about Eliza for hunting in the first place? I know that I'm not a moderator, and lord knows that I get off on tangents probably a lot more often than most folks here, but the ethics of hunting in and of itself, whether we are carnivores, omnivores, herbivores or stevedores, and whether or not Aunt Bessie's mink coat is or isn't immoral shouldn't really be direct considerations as to whether we think more or less of Eliza for killing a legal game animal under legal circumstances with a legal weapon.

 

[Rowan Hawthorn]

Okay, well then how come all "other" omnivores and carnivores can simply catch their prey and eat it on spot, but we have to sanatize it, cook it, make sure it has no illnesses, etc. Because we weren't meant to take it in.

No, because we're trying to avoid the same kind of things that kill lots of wild carnivores - you know, those creatures that are "supposed" to eat meat? Lions, tigers, and bears (oh, my) may be more resistant to some strains of bacteria and germs than we are, but they're still susceptible to all of the above to one degree or another. (We could eat meats in much less appetizing states than we normally do. But, then, our lifespan might be back down to the same kind of average as, oh, say, those lions, tigers, and bears...)

We have worked our way around it and called ourselves "omnivores" because we enjoy tasty animal flesh. Meat isn't exactly good for us either, I mean aside from the protein which can be found from other sources, what does it do for us? Hm..rots in our colon?

It's called digestion, for chrissake - exactly the same thing that it does in those carnivores' digestive system. The same thing that lettuce does in ours or a rabbit's. I'd ask what the friggin' hell they're teaching kids in school these days, but I'm afraid I already know...

 

[Harm]

No, because we're trying to avoid the same kind of things that kill lots of wild carnivores - you know, those creatures that are "supposed" to eat meat? Lions, tigers, and bears (oh, my) may be more resistant to some strains of bacteria and germs than we are, but they're still susceptible to all of the above to one degree or another. (We could eat meats in much less appetizing states than we normally do. But, then, our lifespan might be back down to the same kind of average as, oh, say, those lions, tigers, and bears...)

This is how they are supposed to eat meat. It's natural, it's what they do. We obviously weren't designed to, because of all of the evidence I've already given, and because of the fact that our bodies can't take in raw meat. It's NO because we choose not to get the illnesses, it's because we just can't do it.

It's called digestion, for chrissake - exactly the same thing that it does in those carnivores' digestive system. The same thing that lettuce does in ours or a rabbit's. I'd ask what the friggin' hell they're teaching kids in school these days, but I'm afraid I already know...

Yeah, a digestive system, like ours, a herbivore's digestive system. Oh and PS. Calm Doooooown.

 

[Rowan Hawthorn]

This is how they are supposed to eat meat. It's natural, it's what they do. We obviously weren't designed to, because of all of the evidence I've already given,

Okay, let me get this straight: If we get sick from bacteria and disease in the meat we eat, it's because we're not supposed to eat it, but if a lion gets sick from bacteria and disease in the meat (s)he eats, it's because that's how (s)he is supposed to eat...
Wow. It all seems so... so... logical now. Or, y'know, not.
All of that "evidence" is nothing more than dreamtalk. There's no "obviously" to it, because it's a fable made up to support a point of view that has nothing else going for it.

and because of the fact that our bodies can't take in raw meat.

And if that were an actual fact, you might have a point. But the fact is that we can (and do, all over the world.) Other than modern "civilized" customs, there's no particular reason to cook meats beyond precautions against parasites.

It's NO because we choose not to get the illnesses, it's because we just can't do it.

There are several thousand generations of people whose history proves you and your sources wrong. Sorry. Close your eyes real tight and wish as hard as you want, reality isn't going away. Well, not for the rest of us...

Yeah, a digestive system, like ours, a herbivore's digestive system.

Oh, you mean the multiple-chambered stomachs as in ruminants, or the simple stomach with complex colon as in non-ruminants? Since humans have neither of those, I think you need to do some genuine research on digestive systems. Here's a start for you:

http://www.vivo.colostate.edu/hbooks/pathphys/digestion/herbivores/index.html

Oh and PS. Calm Doooooown.

I am calm. I'm faced with willful ignorance, and I call it like I see it, but I'm perfectly calm.

 

[Harm]

Okay, let me get this straight: If we get sick from bacteria and disease in the meat we eat, it's because we're not supposed to eat it, but if a lion gets sick from bacteria and disease in the meat (s)he eats, it's because that's how (s)he is supposed to eat...
Wow. It all seems so... so... logical now. Or, y'know, not.
All of that "evidence" is nothing more than dreamtalk. There's no "obviously" to it, because it's a fable made up to support a point of view that has nothing else going for it.

I don't think you understood what I was saying. Lions are ment to digest and eat things that way. We aren't.
And yes, people do eat raw meat. Where we ment to? no. I've done my research on this stuff already from both sides. I'm pretty convinced.

 

[Rowan Hawthorn]

I don't think you understood what I was saying. Lions are ment to digest and eat things that way.

And yet, they can still get sick from the same things that we do...
Lions are carnivores; virtually all of their nourishment comes from raw meat, and they've adapted that way. Herbivores get virtually all of their nourishment from plant matter, and they've adapted that way. If you think we're herbivores, try eating the same variety of raw, uncooked plant materials that real herbivores do - or, on second thought, don't. I don't want to be responsible for you.

We're in the middle: adapted to subsist on plant and animal sources. Claims to the contrary are nonsense, not worth the paper they were scribbled out on.

We aren't.And yes, people do eat raw meat. Where we ment to? no. I've done my research on this stuff already from both sides. I'm pretty convinced.

It's easy to be convinced when you start out that way. If this is the results of your "research", sorry to say I don't think much of it.

 

[Highlander]

I don't think you understood what I was saying. Lions are ment to digest and eat things that way. We aren't.
And yes, people do eat raw meat. Where we ment to? no. I've done my research on this stuff already from both sides. I'm pretty convinced.

I've eaten raw meat in limited quantites for over 30 years, never had a sickness because of it either... in fact sometimes I feel better.