Found this article linked here: http://www.unboundedition.com/content/view/1676/50/

The PETA peeps have infiltrated for sure.

The true anti-hunter has passed the litmus test that one must take not be a hypocrite.
They are one that can take the pulpit with a true conviction and transparency in their total life and environment. They take no life of any sort in their daily survival or existence. They do not judge which life is worth saving and which may die for their needs. Their protection of “life” extends to all living creatures regardless of them being “in the wild” or on a farm. 

Example: If a preacher was to give a sermon on Sunday morning and then leave the church with his crack whores, we would call him a hypocrite.

They same applies to the anti-hunter or the one preaching against the taking of game animals.

Because one doesn?t hunt, does not mean they don?t kill. Removing oneself from the actual ?killing? process simply means they hire an assassin to do the killing for them. They pay someone else to ?kill? for them so they may remain ?pure?.

If one wears a belt made of leather, they are wrapped in the blood of their assassin?s work. If they have one pair of shoes made of animal skin, again they walk in blood all day. If they have a pet that eats pet food made with animal products, again they feed their babies the blood of their assassin?s work. What killer did they hire to make sure their cars and suv’s had seats made from the skin of an animal?

Removing yourself from the actual ?act? of the killing is merely a sign of the times. Our meat in the supermarket is packaged very carefully not to show blood on the wrapping. Never will you see a picture of a cow on the steak identifying the type of animal.
If we as a society were forced to view the actual killing of the animals that we “used”, our nation would come to a screeching halt. We are a “pure” nation that allows others to do our dirty work. 

One can also not ?pass the test? if they take any life at all.

Who is to judge which life has more importance? Is the beautiful tuna swimming free in the ocean any less a great creature than a deer in the woods? Is a chicken ?less? of a life than an elk because it is small? The pure ?life saver” takes no life at all. To them we give our utmost respect. They have made a total choice and conviction that holds true to any candling. To those that fail the test of the non-killer, we simply call them a hypocrite.

Before most of these criers attend their shallow meetings and protests, they make sure that their wallets get switched out so not to be leather. They wear only the proper shoes, while the others get hidden deep in the closet.

Once in a while some of these individuals try and through religion into the mix, saying that God would not want you to kill his creatures. If that is the case, then Jesus was a sinner. He participated in acts of murder. He told assassins to throw their nets on the other side of the boat to murder thousands of fish. When he fed the masses, he did so with a loaf of bread and murdered fish.

In Deuteronomy 14:4-5 the Scriptures state, ?These are the animals you may eat: the ox, the sheep, the goat, the deer, the gazelle, the roe deer, the wild goat, the ibex, the antelope and the mountain sheep.?  This text and others in the Bible make it clear that deer and various other types of wild animals were permissible to eat.  We also know that shortly after the great flood in Noah?s day God blessed Noah and his sons and then told them, ?Everything that lives and moves will be food for you.  Just as I gave you the green plants, I now give you everything? (Genesis 9:3).  God expanded the menu of permissible food from what it had been prior to the flood.

Not preaching, just responding to those that email us that feel they are God’s chosen disciples for the anti-hunting movement.

To those of you that pass the test; I give you my utmost respect and adoration. You may take the pulpit and shout as loud as you would like. To the others I simply say, ?ssssshhhhhhhhh.? Quiet please?  I’m hunting.

I couldnt agree more that there are animals being mistreated, but what is inhmane about the way they are slaughtered?  I went to the PETA website, what a bunch of Bull Shit, they make everything so dramatic.  The thing with PETA is that they try to personify animals and make people think animals have families like humans do.  Like they have a mommy and a daddy and they all need to live on a farm somewhere and live happily ever after, well that is not how it works in the animal kingdom.  You see they were testing those Tasers and stuff on those pigs and everyone from PETA is like “ they need to use humans instead of animals” well for all you PEAT fans out there why arent you guys taking the place of the animal.  If you all are so serious about saving animals why werent you guys the ones being tasered to save them pigs.  After all you guys do say they need to perform these test on humans anyway.  So why not PETA, take the plae animals for a while..  You will change your pathetic minds…

lIONS IN AFRICA DONT RAISE ANIMALS KILL THEM IN SLAUGHTER HOUSES IN INHUMAIN WAYS AND THEN SELL THEM TO MAKE MONEY.SO THAT THE OTHER ANIMALS CAN GO HOME AND GRILL UP SOME MEAT AND HAVE NO IDEA WHAT ACTUALY HAPPENED TO THAT ANIMAL. YA SURE THEY KILL OTHER ANIMALS BUT THAT ANIMAL THAT THEY KILL FEEDS EVERYONE SOME ANIMAL EVEN EATS EVEN THE BONES.WE JUST PICK WHAT WE LIKE THEN THROW THE REST AWAY.WE DONT NEED TO KILL TO SURVIVE WE HAVE PLENTY OF OTHER RESORCES.PEOPLE WHO PUT DOWN VEGITARIANS AND VEGANS SHOULDNT, THATS THEIR CHOICE AND THEIR LIFE NOT YOURS YOU CAN EAT,SLAUGHTER AND BUTCHER ALL U WANT ITS YOUR CHOICE.PETA IS JUST TRYING TO GET THE WORD OUT ON HOW EXACTLY THESE ANIMALS ARE TREATED AND KILLED.

There have been thousands of humans saved from medicines that were first experimented on animals.  Who cares if a few rats die to save human lives.

sure, mabe animal are here to be eaten. but your missing the point. these animals are tortured to the point of death, a slow one for that matter. when hunting,it is supposed to be quick and painless, also lions are doing what nature intended them to do. we as humans are using animal to test man made products! which is fucked up

I understand that you would like to stop the cruelty towards animals, but when you bring up the hunting aspect of it you dont know what you are talking about.  Animals are here for us to eat, they arent here for any other reason than to be eaten.  I dont see you guys from PETA talking to the lions over in Africa who kill everyday and by no means is it a quick death.  So if the lions are able to eat other animals why cant I?

Once again i am amazed by the things they find to promote senseless cruelty upon animals.  as for penn and teller they are uneducated comedians who make fun of the beliefs that torturing and testing on animals is i too wish they would test on humans or actually the humans that are currently doing testing see how much they enjoy being tasered or being skinned alive or having your head bashed in while your conscience that would be a nice reverse pschology play on the punishers to be the punished . sunshine stevens point, wi

I enjoy eating the animals I kill.  It’s not just about the killing aspect of the hunt.  There is more to it than just shooting an animal.  I understand that you guys with peta are working toward what you feel to be a good cause.  But even if they outlaw hunting, it is always going to be around. If hunting is outlawed they arent going to stop anybody from hutning.  Hunting will always be around.  Atleast now hunting is only designated to certain times of the year but if it were to be outlawed people would hunt year round.  Hunting will always be part of my life and my kids life, there is nothing anybody can do to change that.........

P.E.T.A. - People Eating Tasty Animals?
I highly recommend everyone watch an episode of Penn & Teller’s Bullshit! series on HBO, where they focused on PETA. Bottom line, PETA is full of BS. I love animals, but until they let us test medicines and weapons on death-row inmates, I am all for survival of the fittest. My final point is this, would you PETA supporters rather be tasered, or turned into the bacon I will be eating for breakfast tomorrow? All things considered, a taser test pig is probably happy not to be sitting in pieces in a cooler.

If PETA is “misrepresenting” the facts, how come Covance Laboratories doesn’t want footage revealed that involves their animal testing tactics?  Answer:  they don’t want the public to see how their sadistic technicians torture and torment animals.  Inducing a disease on a healthy, unwilling animal doesn’t do squat to help humans.  I don’t have the exact anatomy or physical makeup of a rat.

Check your sources, please, before lauding PETA.

UK Says Animal Rights Activists Misrepresented Claims

By: Guest: Dennis Avery on Apr 04, 2006

In a stunning defeat for the animal rights movement, Britain’s Advertising Standards Authority ruled in March that People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals (PETA) misrepresented both animal test and the science behind animal experiments.

PETA had claimed that “nearly 3 million sensitive animals—monkeys, rabbits, mice and others—are killed in the UK each year in painful experiments” and that “animal experiments are crude and unreliable.”

The Advertising Standards Authority ruled that laboratory animals may suffer some stress, but PETA had not offered evidence that nearly 3 million animals died “as a result of painful experiments.”

In fact, researchers using animals follow elaborate protocols to minimize the number of animal experiments needed, and also reduce any suffering by the animals.

ASA ruled that PETA’s description of scientists riding a taxpayer-funded “gravy train” was unfair. Scientists say animal experiments represent one of the best ways to verify the safety of new vaccines and medications that protect people, their pets, and other domestic animals.

ASA also ruled that PETA had shown evidence of differences between humans and animal physiologies; but, “the implication that physiological differences rendered the results of animal experiments crude or inapplicable to humans was misleading.”

Researchers have long conceded that non-human animals are not perfect substitutes for humans, but are important protections prior to necessary human testing.

The ASA ordered PETA to stop making the misleading claims and rewrite its publications.

Simon Festing of Britain’s Research Defense Society said, “This ruling demonstrates how animal rights activists attempt to raise funds through deceiving the public about the medical benefits of animal research.” Festing noted that PETA’s annual budget for opposing animal research was more than $28 million per year.

Yvonne Taylor of PETA accused the British advertising standards body of being “old fashioned.”

Last December, the ASA ruled that the leaflets of another animal rights group, Europeans for Medical Progress, were also misleading. The group irrationally accused animal researchers of holding back the treatment of childhood leukemia and cures for cancer. ASA concluded that the accusations were untrue.

The underlying problem here seems to be that animal rights issue-zealots are dedicated to eliminating animals from human society, for reasons we can only guess at. To turn public opinion, they’ve too often made false accusations of animal abuse against medical researchers, farmers, and circuses.

The animal rights activists are making false claims in America, too.

PETA claims, for example, that farmers routinely mistreat their birds and animals. However, mistreated birds and animals don’t yield much meat, milk or eggs, so the vast majority of farmers are extremely careful of their welfare. PETA, on the other hand, routinely kills pets brought to its animal “shelter” rather than finding them new homes.

PETA claims confinement rearing of hogs and poultry is inhumane, but the indoor creatures are protected from winter cold and summer hear, just like people who live in apartments!  Their death losses are lower, and there’s less cannibalism among the birds.

PETA even ran one campaign on college campuses, urging students to “Drink beer, not milk.” The campaign erroneously told teenage girls that drinking milk would weaken their bones. In fact, health authorities say that consuming dairy products during a young woman’s growing years is one of the best ways to prevent osteoporosis in later life.

America, unfortunately, has no advertising standards board to guard us against the misrepresentations of activist zealots.

DENNIS T. AVERY is a senior fellow for Hudson Institute in Washington, DC and the Director for Global Food Issues ( http://www.cgfi.org ).  He was formerly a senior analyst for the Department of State.  Readers may write him at Post Office Box 202, Churchville, VA 24421.

ω ω ω ω ω ω ω ω

By: Guest: Dennis Avery on Apr 04, 2006 | Email | Profile Permalink

Email This Article to someone.

The items below only apply to non-columnist opeds:

Author: Dennis Avery Email: cgfi at rica dot net

I am offended that PETA has a voice on this website.  They use sensational and extreme tactics to gain funding from a public that believes they care about animals, when many they “rescue” they end up killing.  I believe nothing they say or write.

LR

Animal testing is a disgusting form of animal cruelty. What crime did the innocent animal commit to result in being tasered? Absolutely nothing. Our ability to be cruel doesn’t mean that we should be. How people can torture innocent lives just because they don’t speak our language, can’t fight back, and are “different”, is extremely disturbing. Everyone is different, but that isn’t a reason to treat others this way. Everyone is an individual, and everyone deserves to be free from unneccessary pain and suffering, no matter their species.

These experiments are disgusting. Taser yourself if you must, or find a volunteer, but leave the innocent and unwilling victims alone!