Hi kh. I am not reading that article again but suggest:
1. Animals learn from experience and from each other.
2. That they do not think is an arrogant statement, the existence of thought in animals has not been falsified.
3. Infliction of pain on animals is resisted by the animal, to call this instinctive rather than thinking is tendacious. The same pseudo logic can be (has been) applied to humans of other races or cultures.
4. Self awareness in some animals has been shown. eg. recognizing their own images in a mirror.
5. Basing the right to life etc. on thinking can be an excuse for cruelty, a better word is sentience -an awareness of life.
Points above have just been invented by me and should be taken with care especially by those who want a UN animal rights commission with wide ranging powers. (!)
Side thought-
There is a woman, Temple Grandin, who designs abattoirs. She has shown that cruelty in the use of animals for food can be much reduced.

lucky, if you have the time, which arguments do you find weak?

lol

Yes. Thanks for the link. Some of those arguments are weak but the case against PETA is sound.

"I do not care for ribeye, I like the fillet part of a porterhouse"

As does my wife, must be a 'girl' thing.

gblaze,
PETA does much more than talk. They are criminals, sometimes violent criminals. check out the article I posted to Lucky.
I do not care for ribeye, I like the fillet part of a porterhouse. ;)

I assume you are speaking of PETA lucky.
The organization does not deserve serious consideration considering its actions, which often are criminal in nature. The destruction of property, the interruption of commerce, trespassing on private property, thug behavior.
Here is a good article on point:
http://www.aynrand.org/site/PageServer?p...

Aspirations mean nothing. Actions do. PETA talks a good game but it's obvious they have nothing to back it up.

Now back to my medium rare Ribeye with sauteed mushrooms.

Pardon- a serious reply.
Hello bobdanby. My dinner today was vegetarian as is usual. Was yours?
I oppose mis-treatment of animals. I contribute to various animal welfare groups.
What I detest is posturing by the moral bankrupts who actually do more harm than good.

lol

I'll let you know what I find and you can decide if you want to try it lol.

Thank you, I'm here all week.

Good answer :)

http://instantrimshot.com/classic/?sound...

The Eudaimonia Altruistic Pita.

You too?
I swear, I order it so much that the local deli is going to make it a regular item on the menu and name it after me!

I have read his other posts.
I am comfortable with my conclusions about them and about my purposefully self-identified right-leaning sensibilities, I stick by both.
Thank you for your opinion.

Will there be stew tomorrow?

I like my baby seal heart/souls of the poor pitas covered with a liberal amount of tree hugger gravy. Delish!

To be fair he didn't say you were right wing you put that there yourself haha. And don't criticize someone for jumping to conclusions and then do the same.

You are nut-jobs. PETA does more than any other group to end the mis-treatment of animals. It is hilarious that you all sit condemning a group that so clearly has higher aspirations than most people do. What did you eat for dinner?

Woah. High aspirations doesn't mean anything. I could aspire to be Hitler, that's pretty high, but you wouldn't praise me. Could you please please please inform me on why we should care about the mis treatment of animals? Even from a leftist point of view it would be better to take care of the homeless in Africa than animals. I'm going to kill an animal tonight because you commented here.

To you I'm just an evil right-wing nut-job.
So what does it matter what I ate?
You'd be more comfortable sticking to your ridiculous preconceptions that I eat baby seal hearts with a heaping side of souls of the poor (stuffed in a pita, of course.).

Venison. You?

good one