BibleForums Christian Message Board
General Category => In General => Topic started by: Sojourner on February 07, 2024, 09:50:26 PM
-
The animal rights activist organization has urged Kansas-based amusement company Chance Rides to cease production and sales of animal themed rides because it "celebrates exploitation".
"Children learn through play, and teaching them to have respect and compassion for all living, feeling beings can help create a more just and merciful world," PETA President Ingrid Newkirk said in a press release.
Advocating for the humane treatment of animals is one thing, but seeing exploitation in a merry-go-round is tilting at windmills.
https://www.foxnews.com/us/peta-targets-kansas-merry-go-round-maker-animal-themed-carousels
-
(https://i.kym-cdn.com/photos/images/newsfeed/001/223/999/ebc.png)
-
Amen!
-
People
Eating
Tasty
Animals
-
(https://img.ifunny.co/images/4d8ef289ffae2a67c23df58b489ceaf7aba67fe6f1cca22b871d72820c992fa7_1.webp)
-
Are you guilty of specieism? Use these verbiage alternatives, and you too can be politically correct:
(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/Esq8TRxU4AA5Pjj?format=jpg&name=small)
-
And here all along I thought I was a sloth. It turns out that I'm just lazy!
-
It's a shame they didn't include an alternative for the times I want to call someone a 9-banded armadillo.
-
I guess saying someone is crazy as a loon or a bed bug is a no-no, as well, huh? I certainly wouldn't wanna be branded a "speciesist".
-
I'm also puzzled why "pig" is replaced with "repulsive". I usually use the term to indicate someone is greedy.
-
I guess it could be either, depending on the context. Then you have your "male chauvinist" variety. (Not sure how the pig is dragged into that one).
How about "happy as a lark?" Maybe that one's exempt because it doesn't malign the lark.
-
I'm also puzzled why "pig" is replaced with "repulsive". I usually use the term to indicate someone is greedy.
Yeah, I didn't get the correlation between a snake and being a jerk. If I call someone a snake, I'm thinking more along the lines of being deceitful, unscrupulous or untrustworthy.
Speciesism is yet another addition to the bag of "isms" and "phobias' that liberals use to bludgeon people with political correctness. We have racism, sexism, colorism, tokenism, ageism, ableism, elitism, homophobia, transphobia, xenophobia, Islamophobia, and fatphobia. There's even atheophobia, discrimination against atheists. Anyone can be a victim of society nowadays -- except able-bodied, caucasion, heterosexual Christian males.
-
I guess it could be either, depending on the context. Then you have your "male chauvinist" variety. (Not sure how the pig is dragged into that one).
How about "happy as a lark?" Maybe that one's exempt because it doesn't malign the lark.
I wonder if skunks are known for their consumption of excessive quantities of alcohol. If not then phrases like "drunk as a skunk" are also inappropriate.
-
More fearless, in-your-face speciesism:
Drink like a fish
Multiply like rabbits
Blind as a bat
Like a deer in the headlights
-
More fearless, in-your-face speciesism:
Drink like a fish
Multiply like rabbits
Blind as a bat
Like a deer in the headlights
I wonder why we are so specifically concerned about animals. If someone is described as begin "as thin as a rake", why do we get to use a rake as a comparison without repercussions if it's not OK to say someone is "as fat as a pig"?
Do these issues only apply if something is deemed negative in some way? Saying someone is "as fat as a pig" is likely to be an insult but saying they are "as strong as an ox" is probably a compliment. Is it OK to refer to positive attributes of an animal? If so, does the skunk's stench count as a positive or a negative attribute - although the smell is unpleasant it is used as a deterrent with a view to keeping the skunk alive for longer, and so is presumably a good thing from the perspective of the skunk even if it's less good from the perspective of whatever got sprayed.
-
More fearless, in-your-face speciesism:
Drink like a fish
Multiply like rabbits
Blind as a bat
Like a deer in the headlights
I wonder why we are so specifically concerned about animals. If someone is described as begin "as thin as a rake", why do we get to use a rake as a comparison without repercussions if it's not OK to say someone is "as fat as a pig"?
Do these issues only apply if something is deemed negative in some way? Saying someone is "as fat as a pig" is likely to be an insult but saying they are "as strong as an ox" is probably a compliment. Is it OK to refer to positive attributes of an animal? If so, does the skunk's stench count as a positive or a negative attribute - although the smell is unpleasant it is used as a deterrent with a view to keeping the skunk alive for longer, and so is presumably a good thing from the perspective of the skunk even if it's less good from the perspective of whatever got sprayed.
We're talking about PETA, which is extreme in its advocacy of animals and hypersensitive to any matter related to them they perceive as offensive. I mean the lead-in to this thread concerns the organization trying to shut down the manufacture and sale of merry-go-rounds because in their minds it perpetuates the exploitation of horses. They're upset over the perceived exploitation of inanimate objects on a kid's ride, for Pete's sake. So I'm not surprised they're offended by a correlation between animals and negative characteristics. fanaticism leaves little room for rational thinking.
-
I wonder why we are so specifically concerned about animals. If someone is described as begin "as thin as a rake", why do we get to use a rake as a comparison without repercussions
Maybe it's not that thing you gather leaves with?
The Rake is a monster in the online horror fiction genre, creepypasta. It is depicted as an unusually tall, hairless, pale, humanoid creature who generally crouches or crawls on all fours.
???
-
Biden isn't that tall...
-
PETA was in the news a while back when they were responsible for taking a family dog off a porch and euthanizing it a few days later. They did come back later and apologized to the dog's owners, (gifting them a fruit basket to make up for it). It's not like the organization could deny what happened, since a surveillance camera recorded a PETA van backing up to the porch and a woman exiting the van and stealing the dog. PETA settled out of court for $49,000 dollars, which is a lot better than a basket of fruit.
-
PETA was in the news a while back when they were responsible for taking a family dog off a porch and euthanizing it a few days later.
What horrible people. Killing someone's pet dog in the name of good.
They are the living incarnation of the CS Lewis quote-
Of all tyrannies, a tyranny sincerely exercised for the good of its victims may be the most oppressive. It would be better to live under robber barons than under omnipotent moral busybodies. The robber baron's cruelty may sometimes sleep, his cupidity may at some point be satiated; but those who torment us for our own good will torment us without end for they do so with the approval of their own conscience.
-
I'm not a fan of the Huffington Post, but they did a good piece on the dog-napping, as well as opening up about PETA's questionable tactics, ethical ambivalence, and the vast numbers of healthy animals the organization kills each year.
https://www.huffpost.com/entry/peta-steals-and-kills-lit_b_6156196
-
PETA: "We're here to save animals by killing them!"
-
PETA: "We're here to save animals by killing them!"
Kind of reminds me of Planned Parenthood. In both cases, killing is a large part of services rendered.
-
Kind of reminds me of Planned Parenthood. In both cases, killing is a large part of services rendered.
Oof. Brutal. Also, true.