PETA versus Tanooki wearing Mario

[j_factor]

I think the real question that needs to be asked is, how does PETA feel about the Frog Suit???

How does PETA feel about furries? And would they feel different about Mario if he was one?

[buzz_n64]

How does PETA feel about furries? And would they feel different about Mario if he was one?

Dorkly Bits: Mario is a Furry
http://www.dorkly.com/video/26035/do...rio-is-a-furry

[j_factor]

Dorkly Bits: Mario is a Furry
http://www.dorkly.com/video/26035/do...rio-is-a-furry

...Are you a bot?

[buzz_n64]

...Are you a bot?

Oh crap. Didn't realize you had an embedded link, and to the same video. LMAO!

[Sunnyvale]

Yes because there is no gain in giving away free food. You do realize what they do with food they can't sell right? It gets tossed on a landfill or used as manure because it's cheaper to dispose of it than to ship it to starving people.

Lack of food/resources isn't why people are starving. It's because we f'cking let them.

Back to what I said a few posts ago... The 'fat cats' will donate what they can afford to. Again, if food was plentiful to the point of being worthless, would people still starve? So to save the suffering of some chickens, we need to take the rich and make their money the poor's...
No thanks.

While technically, yes, insects are in the Animalia Kingdom, when people are talking about "animals" colloquially, they're typically talking about vertebrates (mammals, birds, reptiles, amphibians, and fish), rather than invertebrates. So, personally, all of your insect examples are irrelevant to my conversation. Your one vertebrate example, constricting snakes, go along with my statement just fine. They're still aiming for the quickest death they can get, and they're doing the best with the abilities of their bodies. I mean, what else can they do with no arms, legs, or venom?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CPznM...eature=related

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OUPhR...eature=related

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jq6hI...eature=related

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sqrTh...eature=related

Ad Infitum

People just like to be judgmental and tell other people what to do. Like "How dare you care about how animals are treated when... blah blah blah?" More like how dare you try to enforce what I can and can't care about? The whole "this cause is more important than that cause" mentality is complete and utter BS. If you follow that train of thought, then I guess we shouldn't care at all about homeless and hungry people in America too because people in other countries have it so much worse, right? C'mon. These are ALL issues that deserve attention. There's no reason why someone can't care about the needless suffering of ALL life. Everybody could take a lesson from Saint Francis.

I have no issue with how you feel, it's what you do with those feelings I take issue with. I actually applaud the humanitarian feelings you and Amon Re and others feel. However, if it is going to make it more expensive to feed my kids, to hell with your philosophy. I have every right to feel this 'cause' is a joke, a waste of human resources. Again, when all of the human issues are solved, I'll start worrying about the poor chickens.

To me, to worry about another species while your own has such serious troubles (that are directly related, but eh, I'm tired of trying to teach business here) is no different than a person who can't feed their family giving to a charity or a church. That is irresponsible.

[Amon_Re]

You are truly out of touch with reality.
Perhaps you speak cat?
If so you should ask one if they would prefer to be 'put to sleep' in a shelter or be declawed and stay with the same loving family. Besides, what purpose do their claws serve when they are indoor cat's?

I'm not the only one who considers declawing cats cruel, it's illegal in Europe and Australia and Israel. Declawing a cat involves amputation of the last bone in it's toes.

Not only is it cruel mutilation it also causes stress to the animal. Cats use their claws for more then scratching, they use it to grasp things, digging (even in litter boxes) running, climbing,...

You could draw an analogy with humans, you don't need your toes to live, but you sure wouldn't want to chop those off now would you?

Again, declawing a cat is a lazy way of evading your responsibility. If you can't live with the fact that cats have claws, then don't f'cking get a cat!

I've had cats all my life, my parents had cats all their lives and my sister who just had her fourth kid also has cats, we never declawed a cat (nor had to get rid of cats even though not all cats are as friendly as one would like). Cats don't go about attacking kids not even aggressive ones, they rather go sit somewhere out of reach of the objects that annoy them (dogs, kids, ...)

If you can't accept that cats have claws and that you might get scratched (be it while playing with a cat or something else) then you shouldn't f'king own one!

Our cat just died, he was 17, he was declawed. For good reason also.

There is NEVER a good reason to declaw a cat just like there is NEVER a good reason to chop of your own toes.

I could debunk pretty much all your views, as you don't seem to grasp particular concepts as well as other folks responding in this thread who are Pro-animal welfare. But I won't bother.

And I have a perpetual motion device but I won't show it to you guys *rolls eyes*. Face it, the only reason why we don't take care of animals (be it life stock or pets) is because we're too f'cking lazy & greedy.

[Amon_Re]

Back to what I said a few posts ago... The 'fat cats' will donate what they can afford to.

Again, if food was plentiful to the point of being worthless, would people still starve? So to save the suffering of some chickens, we need to take the rich and make their money the poor's...
No thanks.

Look into overproduction of food & subsidies of farming. You'd be amazed how much food is voluntarily destroyed because it's cheaper then actually using it to feed the poor.

I have no issue with how you feel, it's what you do with those feelings I take issue with. I actually applaud the humanitarian feelings you and Amon Re and others feel. However, if it is going to make it more expensive to feed my kids, to hell with your philosophy.

The thing is, it doesn't make it more expensive to feed your kids, it might at worst mean you have to give them a more balanced diet, but that too is a good thing.

I have every right to feel this 'cause' is a joke, a waste of human resources. Again, when all of the human issues are solved, I'll start worrying about the poor chickens.

There is no profit in solving 'all human issues' hence you will never see it come to pass. Like has been said many times already: We have the means and resources to feed the whole world population but we chose not to.

It's like the (pointless) argument of capitalism vs socialism. You don't need to pick one or the other, you can take the best of both.

To me, to worry about another species while your own has such serious troubles (that are directly related, but eh, I'm tired of trying to teach business here) is no different than a person who can't feed their family giving to a charity or a church. That is irresponsible.

They are not directly related as there is food aplenty and most of it is actually healthy (compared McDonalds/KFC just about anything is healthy). Do some googling about the overproduction of food please.

[j_factor]

Again, if food was plentiful to the point of being worthless, would people still starve?

Yes, since that's pretty much the case already. We live in a world where feeding the homeless can get you arrested. Food is plentiful to the point that huge amounts are wasted every day, while people still starve. Groups like Food Not Bombs wouldn't exist if this weren't the case. They would have no cause.

So to save the suffering of some chickens, we need to take the rich and make their money the poor's...
No thanks.

I have no issue with how you feel, it's what you do with those feelings I take issue with. I actually applaud the humanitarian feelings you and Amon Re and others feel. However, if it is going to make it more expensive to feed my kids, to hell with your philosophy.

Taken together, these two statements are kind of ironic. The price of meat is kept artificially low by taxpayer-funded government subsidies. So you say "no thanks" to taking from the rich, except you're already taking from the rich, and to discontinue doing that would make it more expensive to feed your kids, and to hell with that.

I have every right to feel this 'cause' is a joke, a waste of human resources. Again, when all of the human issues are solved, I'll start worrying about the poor chickens.

It's not just about the poor chickens. Better farming practices (and/or de-emphasizing meat consumption) are in humanity's own best interests. There is a good reason why you and I can't just waltz into a drug store and buy amoxicillin -- bacteria evolves. Yet requiring a prescription hasn't come close to addressing the problem thanks to the meat industry. Now it's only a matter of time before we're fucked.

[Buyatari]

I'm not the only one who considers declawing cats cruel, it's illegal in Europe and Australia and Israel. Declawing a cat involves amputation of the last bone in it's toes.

Not only is it cruel mutilation it also causes stress to the animal. Cats use their claws for more then scratching, they use it to grasp things, digging (even in litter boxes) running, climbing,...

You could draw an analogy with humans, you don't need your toes to live, but you sure wouldn't want to chop those off now would you?

Again, declawing a cat is a lazy way of evading your responsibility. If you can't live with the fact that cats have claws, then don't f'cking get a cat!

I've had cats all my life, my parents had cats all their lives and my sister who just had her fourth kid also has cats, we never declawed a cat (nor had to get rid of cats even though not all cats are as friendly as one would like). Cats don't go about attacking kids not even aggressive ones, they rather go sit somewhere out of reach of the objects that annoy them (dogs, kids, ...)

If you can't accept that cats have claws and that you might get scratched (be it while playing with a cat or something else) then you shouldn't f'king own one!



There is NEVER a good reason to declaw a cat just like there is NEVER a good reason to chop of your own toes.



And I have a perpetual motion device but I won't show it to you guys *rolls eyes*. Face it, the only reason why we don't take care of animals (be it life stock or pets) is because we're too f'cking lazy & greedy.

There are more cats in the world than there are people to care for them. Every year many are destroyed. It is better that a cat be destroyed than for someone who is lazy to adopt one and have it declawed?

Also many people rent and it is part of the lease. It may be hard to find a place to stay that a pet owner can afford. I know because I own rental property and I am not a huge fan of pets. A landlord can not afford to assume that a pet owner will be responsible.

Of course people have children that they can not afford to take care of properly as well. People want what they want and do the best that they can with what they have so long as it is not too much work to do so. Most are not willing to change lifelong existing habits to accommodate the things they have, children and pets included.

[Amon_Re]

There are more cats in the world than there are people to care for them. Every year many are destroyed. It is better that a cat be destroyed than for someone who is lazy to adopt one and have it declawed?

Nice fallacy you got going there mate. "Oh they're going to die anyway so we might as well take one in and chop of it's toes". People who think it's OK to declaw a cat shouldn't be allowed to own cats. It's as simple as that.

Also many people rent and it is part of the lease. It may be hard to find a place to stay that a pet owner can afford. I know because I own rental property and I am not a huge fan of pets. A landlord can not afford to assume that a pet owner will be responsible.

If you can't keep a pet in your apartment without mutilating it, then don't f'cking own one.

Of course people have children that they can not afford to take care of properly as well. People want what they want and do the best that they can with what they have so long as it is not too much work to do so. Most are not willing to change lifelong existing habits to accommodate the things they have, children and pets included.

If you're unwilling or unable to take responsibility be it for a pet or a kid or even a f'cking plant, then don't get those things.

[The Shawn]

I'm not the only one who considers declawing cats cruel, it's illegal in Europe and Australia and Israel. Declawing a cat involves amputation of the last bone in it's toes.

Not only is it cruel mutilation it also causes stress to the animal. Cats use their claws for more then scratching, they use it to grasp things, digging (even in litter boxes) running, climbing,...

You could draw an analogy with humans, you don't need your toes to live, but you sure wouldn't want to chop those off now would you?

Again, declawing a cat is a lazy way of evading your responsibility. If you can't live with the fact that cats have claws, then don't f'cking get a cat!

I've had cats all my life, my parents had cats all their lives and my sister who just had her fourth kid also has cats, we never declawed a cat (nor had to get rid of cats even though not all cats are as friendly as one would like). Cats don't go about attacking kids not even aggressive ones, they rather go sit somewhere out of reach of the objects that annoy them (dogs, kids, ...)

If you can't accept that cats have claws and that you might get scratched (be it while playing with a cat or something else) then you shouldn't f'king own one!



There is NEVER a good reason to declaw a cat just like there is NEVER a good reason to chop of your own toes.



And I have a perpetual motion device but I won't show it to you guys *rolls eyes*. Face it, the only reason why we don't take care of animals (be it life stock or pets) is because we're too f'cking lazy & greedy.

Oh posh!


This cat got along just fine. He still thought he had claws and would still 'Sharpen' his 'toes' on the scratching post and grab things with them. And I don't recall ever seeing any difference in his paws then the other 2 cats as far as 'Chopping off his toes ' went. He walked and played just fine.

If you chop off a human's toes they would have a problem walking I suspect, with balance being an issue.

Your general argument is reaaallllllly stretching here.

On a side note, we are having our newest cat declawed after Christmas when I can afford it,I'm diabetic and can't have my legs used as scrating posts also he's murdering $3000 worth of new carpet and the people who own the house (Well....us) said it's either that or to take him back to the crazy woman who runs some kind of stray animal shelter out of her HOUSE.

When we got him he needed 2 operations and has a chronic cough because he was almost frozen to death and had bad untreated lung infections. Not to mention ear mites and fleas.

I'll ask him which he would prefer Yes?




But whatever.

[Amon_Re]

Oh posh!

This cat got along just fine. He still thought he had claws and would still 'Sharpen' his 'toes' on the scratching post and grab things with them. And I don't recall ever seeing any difference in his paws then the other 2 cats as far as 'Chopping off his toes ' went. He walked and played just fine.

There is a reason it's forbidden in 24 countries. You figure it out.

If you chop off a human's toes they would have a problem walking I suspect, with balance being an issue.

Your general argument is reaaallllllly stretching here.

What? You don't think cats use their claws for running or jumping or anything else? The simple fact is that you are amputating parts of their paws for no valid reason whatsoever.

On a side note, we are having our newest cat declawed after Christmas when I can afford it,I'm diabetic and can't have my legs used as scrating posts also he's murdering $3000 worth of new carpet and the people who own the house (Well....us) said it's either that or to take him back to the crazy woman who runs some kind of stray animal shelter out of her HOUSE.

Oh boohoohoo, your poor poor carpet.

When we got him he needed 2 operations and has a chronic cough because he was almost frozen to death and had bad untreated lung infections. Not to mention ear mites and fleas.

And this justifies mutilating him.... how?

[The Shawn]

Well, if it's any consolation, if you lived here and scratched the fuck out of my legs and destroyed things with your fingernails I'd have your nails dug out too.

Also if you're going to quote me please quote the whole post without leaving out key arguments or reasons.


This will be my last response to you, it's obvious your trolling.

[skaar]

This will be my last response to you, it's obvious your trolling.

You mean "you're"

[The Shawn]

You mean "you're"

Gah!
.....

[tom]

Putting a carpet before the life of an animal is totally wrong and you shouldn't be allowed to have animals, not to mention children.

[The Shawn]

Putting a carpet before the life of an animal is totally wrong and you shouldn't be allowed to have animals, not to mention children.

I'll tell my kids next time they spill something on it.

[j_factor]

PETA: It was meant to be tongue-in-cheek.

[Kitsune Sniper]

And by that they mean "We're scared shitless that Nintendo will sue our asses off so by saying it was satire our ass is covered."

[Amon_Re]

Well, if it's any consolation, if you lived here and scratched the fuck out of my legs and destroyed things with your fingernails I'd have your nails dug out too.

Oh boohoohoo you poor thing. It's amazing that we here in Europe cope with cats without having them declawed, we must have super skin and indestructible furniture.

Or maybe, just maybe, we actually take responsibility and know what the hell we're doing when we're keeping cats.

You know, I have leather seats here without any scratch mark from any cat despite the fact that my cats do sleep in there. They have a little pillow on the seats where they sleep on, they have 3 scratch posts and one little rug they can use to scratch on.

Get of your lazy ass and take responsibility.

Also if you're going to quote me please quote the whole post without leaving out key arguments or reasons.

Wait, the following is a key argument or reason?!

I'll ask him which he would prefer Yes?

But whatever.

Gee, I thought it was just you being sarcastic. I mean, really, that's a key argument?

This will be my last response to you, it's obvious your trolling.

Maybe I'm not making my arguments as well as I should since English isn't my native tongue, but I'm definitely not trolling. I'm serious. Declawing a cat is mutilating a cat, and I'm not alone in this little old world who thinks this way, after all declawing is forbidden in over twenty countries.