I chose 'yes' to the last question. My main issue isn't a big one, really - I wanted a scale from 0 - 10 on the first question, so I could choose an answer in the dead center of the scale. I know of PETA, but don't know much, and don't have a real opinion.
I chose an 8 on the last question - the logic being that a 10 stated a preference for censorship, which I don't think is ever a good idea. These sort of tatics puzzle and disgust me ... and I don't really see how they are going to win PETA many friends. It's more likely that they will just make enemies with them.
Yeah, but we don't need censorship laws to control this. All it takes is for mothers targeted by the PETA idiots to sue them for slander. Handing a child a leaflet that says "Mommy kills animals" and "Ask your mommy how many dead animals she killed to make her fur clothes", and shows a picture of Mommy gleefully hacking up a still-living bunny, certainly ought to qualify. It's false and malicious (why else would you set out to frighten a small child?).
And the anti-fishing one is no better; when it says, "He's hooked on killing", that's obviously false in most cases.
Oh, and neither of them are properly targeted. Some of them will be dropped on the street and picked up by other kids who don't understand that their mommies aren't the ones the comic is talking about. (Plus, of course, most of the anti-fur ones will be handed to kids of women wearing fake fur-there's no way to tell, in the dark, when people are rushing into the theatre to get out of the cold. PETA would probably respond with the usual line about fake fur meaning
( ... )
Re: CensorshippatsmorDecember 4 2005, 07:34:45 UTC
I didn't mean I expected or wanted censorship -- what I meant to say was that I wanted the 1 and 10 values to be as sharply opposed as possible... the far extreme ends of the spectra, leaving lots of room in the middle for differing views...
Another interesting point about PETA is its track record for euthenizing companion animals that it "rescued" in and around Norfolk, Virginia. Now, I could make the argument that it is less cruel than abandoning them out in the country to starve or worse but the numbers shown by the records are astounding. The following website is not impartial by any means but the numbers have been verified. http://www.petakillsanimals.com/ Mike
Comments 15
Reply
Reply
(The comment has been removed)
Reply
Reply
Reply
I chose an 8 on the last question - the logic being that a 10 stated a preference for censorship, which I don't think is ever a good idea. These sort of tatics puzzle and disgust me ... and I don't really see how they are going to win PETA many friends. It's more likely that they will just make enemies with them.
Reply
Re: Censorship. Exactly why I chose the ends of that question the way I did.
Reply
And the anti-fishing one is no better; when it says, "He's hooked on killing", that's obviously false in most cases.
Oh, and neither of them are properly targeted. Some of them will be dropped on the street and picked up by other kids who don't understand that their mommies aren't the ones the comic is talking about. (Plus, of course, most of the anti-fur ones will be handed to kids of women wearing fake fur-there's no way to tell, in the dark, when people are rushing into the theatre to get out of the cold. PETA would probably respond with the usual line about fake fur meaning ( ... )
Reply
Reply
Reply
Reply
(The comment has been removed)
(Hey, good morning!)
Reply
Leave a comment