Eat A Tasty Animal for Peta Day

Wednesday March 15 is the 4th annual International Eat A Tasty Animal for PETA Day (or, IEATAPETA Day).

Anyone planning anything special? Im thinking it's a great day for ribs, but we'll have to see...

GBH

Hmm, I may have to call my buddy Dave up and meet at Sal y Carvao.

In my house, every day is International Eat A Tasty Animal for PETA Day. (Well, maybe not International.)

i'm not a vegetarian. in fact,i eat meat pretty much at every meal. and i'm not a PETA member. far from it.

but i find this thread pretty offensive. it's spiteful.

want to eat meat? great! do so because you want to. and talk about eating meat because you want to talk about it. but don't do it just to be spiteful and antagonize others for what they believe in.

that's lame.

So, can I have your veal chop?

elakin wrote:but i find this thread pretty offensive. it's spiteful.

want to eat meat? great! do so because you want to. and talk about eating meat because you want to talk about it. but don't do it just to be spiteful and antagonize others for what they believe in.

that's lame.

The first EATAPETA (link) seems to have been a reaction to specific, offensive PETA ad campaign(s).

Whether one finds the reaction offensive is arguable, but I doesn't seem like the spirit (at least the original spirit) was pure spite.

z

elakin wrote:i'm not a vegetarian. in fact,i eat meat pretty much at every meal. and i'm not a PETA member. far from it.

but i find this thread pretty offensive. it's spiteful.

want to eat meat? great! do so because you want to. and talk about eating meat because you want to talk about it. but don't do it just to be spiteful and antagonize others for what they believe in.

that's lame.

elakin, thank you for speaking up. I agree that there is no need to be spiteful or to ridicule others' values. I used to be a vegetarian (now I'm more like an observant Catholic on a Friday in Lent), but I never saw fit to deride others' choices to eat whatever they wanted.

People may feel that PETA is obnoxious or preachy and feel spiteful in turn, but then they're just lowering themselves to the same level. I find PETA pretty easy to ignore, myself.

My general sentiment is that the world would be a better place if we all cared a little less about what everyone else was doing.

Holly of Uptown wrote:

elakin wrote:i'm not a vegetarian. in fact,i eat meat pretty much at every meal. and i'm not a PETA member. far from it.

but i find this thread pretty offensive. it's spiteful.

want to eat meat? great! do so because you want to. and talk about eating meat because you want to talk about it. but don't do it just to be spiteful and antagonize others for what they believe in.

that's lame.

elakin, thank you for speaking up. I agree that there is no need to be spiteful or to ridicule others' values. I used to be a vegetarian (now I'm more like an observant Catholic on a Friday in Lent), but I never saw fit to deride others' choices to eat whatever they wanted.

People may feel that PETA is obnoxious or preachy and feel spiteful in turn, but then they're just lowering themselves to the same level. I find PETA pretty easy to ignore, myself.

My general sentiment is that the world would be a better place if we all cared a little less about what everyone else was doing.

Actually, I find PETA psychotically anti-human. So kudos to any venture that takes the piss.

Holly of Uptown wrote:People may feel that PETA is obnoxious or preachy and feel spiteful in turn, but then they're just lowering themselves to the same level.

Actually I feel that PETA actively supports terrorism. I don't mean when the goofballs throw red paint on people's fur coats (which is stupid . . . and spiteful in itself) but I mean actively supporting and encouraging acts of violence. Take that and couple it with their ad campaigns comparing meat eaters to nazis slaughtering Jews and you have a pretty nasty bunch, IMO. So if I choose to go out with some friends and celebrate all things meat (with tongue firmly planted in cheek) I really don't think I'm lowering myself to their level because, frankly, I just can't get that low. It's not being spiteful to vegans any more than going out for a cheese tasting is spiteful to the lactose-intolerant.

And I'm hardly being spiteful as I am not going out looking for PETA members to whom I would "gloat" about just having eaten meat. I mean I wouldn't know a PETA member if I saw one. Unless, I guess, I was walking past Bloomie's or something while they were attacking fur coat wearers.

I don't have anything against vegetarians - I married one. I just don't think that PETA represents them, at least none I've ever known.

Just heard on the news that the 3rd cow in the past 27 months has tested positive for Mad Cow disease here in the U.S. Maybe this is nature's way of letting the animals "bite back."

And I'm hardly being spiteful...

well, if you frame it as "eating a tasty animal FOR PETA", then, yes, you are being spiteful.

as i said above, there are plenty of good reasons to eat meat. hell, you don't even need a reason. it's a free country. do what you want.

but doing it because you know PETA doesn't want you to is just plain spite. it smacks of a childish display of "you're not the boss of me."

Artemesia wrote:Just heard on the news that the 3rd cow in the past 27 months has tested positive for Mad Cow disease here in the U.S. Maybe this is nature's way of letting the animals "bite back."

So, is "nature" spiteful? I wonder what that cow might have done to deserve the disease? Do you really think diseases are nature's way of punishing certain human behaviors?

Bill/SFNM

elakin wrote:

And I'm hardly being spiteful...

well, if you frame it as "eating a tasty animal FOR PETA", then, yes, you are being spiteful.

as i said above, there are plenty of good reasons to eat meat. hell, you don't even need a reason. it's a free country. do what you want.

but doing it because you know PETA doesn't want you to is just plain spite. it smacks of a childish display of "you're not the boss of me."

Well I disagree - I see is at supporting vendors of products I like that are under attack. If the anti-foie gras crowd camps out in protest at, say, Tru and I then choose to visit Tru and specifically order foie gras and tell the staff I support their decision to serve it - am I being spiteful or supportive? If I organize a few friends to "Liver it up for foies gras" and make it an event, does that then make it spiteful? Remember, PETA started this by attacking purveyors and consumers of meat - I decline to buy into your position that responding to these attacks is being spiteful. However - I'm not going to have much trouble sleeping either way.

I plan on having an dry aged prime rib eye from Fox and Obel on Wednesday to celebrate.

For the record, I'm doing it solely out of spite. And I don't care what anyone thinks of me.

IMO, PETA are to vegetarians as Al Quaida are to Muslims. Fanatics. Same deal with ELF and environmentalists. They are the equivalent of religious fundamentalists. Dangerous, troubled individuals. I think it will have to be pork chops sauteed in duck fat for me tonight.

elakin wrote:

And I'm hardly being spiteful...

well, if you frame it as "eating a tasty animal FOR PETA", then, yes, you are being spiteful.

as i said above, there are plenty of good reasons to eat meat. hell, you don't even need a reason. it's a free country. do what you want.

but doing it because you know PETA doesn't want you to is just plain spite. it smacks of a childish display of "you're not the boss of me."

i thoughts thats what PETA stood for ? People Eating Tasty Animals.

have a cheeseburger and chill..you are taking this way personally IMO and i would do some research before choosing your battles..this is PETA in a nutshell..quote is form the Bird Dog and Retrevier News...

Peta Killing Dogs
In a July 2000 Associated Press story, reporter Matthew Barakat described government reports showing that PETA itself killed 1,325 -- or 63 percent -- of the dogs and cats entrusted to it in 1999. The state of Virginia expected those animals to be placed in adoptive homes. Only 386 of them ever were.
It's unknown whether PETA continues its "angel of death" role in killing defenseless animals, but the group's most recent IRS tax filing -- only a few weeks old -- shows that it spent $9,370 in May 2002 for a new walk-in freezer at its Norfolk headquarters. According to industry sources, that kind of money can buy a 10-by-15-foot freezer with 8-foot ceilings. And knowing PETA, it's safe to presume that this huge appliance isn't being used to store steaks or ice cream, but perhaps dogs to be slipped out after hours after be killed.
If you get a chance watch Penn & Tellers show Bullshit! on Showtime. They do a great job of unmasking this $17 million dollar a year terrorist organization.

deke rivers wrote:..this is PETA in a nutshell..quote is form the Bird Dog and Retrevier News...

As a librarian, I don't really consider the Bird Dog and Retriever News (or Penn and Teller, for that matter) a reliable source for information on PETA. It would have an obvious bias, and hell, what about those poor birds?

Here's another angle from CHRISTIAN SCIENCE MONITOR
July 25, 2005, a rather respected source for news:

" 'One side is arguing for the ethical, philosophical concept that an animal deserves not to be euthanized just because at that particular moment it is unwanted," says Annette Rauch at the Cummings School of Veterinary Medicine at Tufts University. "But every shelter has limited space, so when they adopt no-kill, they fill up. That leads us to the next question: What happens to the animals that get turned away?' "

"PETA argues that while animals wait for homes or safe shelters tomorrow, they are suffering today. 'We can't in good conscience oppose euthanasia as a means of overpopulation control when the alternative is animals being chained, deprived of companionship and exercise,' says Daphna Nachminovitch, director of PETA's domestic animals issues and abuse department."

Title: Case of Cruelty, or Compassion?
Source: Christian Science Monitor
Author: Anna Levine-Gronningsater
Publication Date: July 25, 2005
Page Number: n.p.
Database: SIRS Researcher
Service: SIRS Knowledge Source <http://www.sirs.com>

Food Nut wrote:

deke rivers wrote:..this is PETA in a nutshell..quote is form the Bird Dog and Retrevier News...

As a librarian, I don't really consider the Bird and Retriever News (or Penn and Teller, for that matter) a reliable source for information on PETA. It would have an obvious bias.

Here's another angle from CHRISTIAN SCIENCE MONITOR
July 25, 2005, a rather respected source for news:

FN,

I am not disagreeing with you that Bird Dog and Retriever news might be biased on this topic, but are you saying that Christian Science Monitor is not biased even though they might be respected? Without even opening an issue I can probably name a few topics where they might be biased.

I believe that the actions of any organization reflect the group as a whole. If anyone wants to believe something it is their right. OTOH, I don't believe that anyone hase the right to shove their beliefs upon my shoulders.

Flip

Food Nut wrote:

deke rivers wrote:..this is PETA in a nutshell..quote is form the Bird Dog and Retrevier News...

As a librarian, I don't really consider the Bird and Retriever News (or Penn and Teller, for that matter) a reliable source for information on PETA. It would have an obvious bias.

Here's another angle from CHRISTIAN SCIENCE MONITOR
July 25, 2005, a rather respected source for news:

" 'One side is arguing for the ethical, philosophical concept that an animal deserves not to be euthanized just because at that particular moment it is unwanted," says Annette Rauch at the Cummings School of Veterinary Medicine at Tufts University. "But every shelter has limited space, so when they adopt no-kill, they fill up. That leads us to the next question: What happens to the animals that get turned away?' "

"PETA argues that while animals wait for homes or safe shelters tomorrow, they are suffering today. 'We can't in good conscience oppose euthanasia as a means of overpopulation control when the alternative is animals being chained, deprived of companionship and exercise,' says Daphna Nachminovitch, director of PETA's domestic animals issues and abuse department."

Title: Case of Cruelty, or Compassion?
Source: Christian Science Monitor
Author: Anna Levine-Gronningsater
Publication Date: July 25, 2005
Page Number: n.p.
Database: SIRS Researcher
Service: SIRS Knowledge Source <http://www.sirs.com>

not all shelters kill off unwanted animals..several rescues keep the animals until homes are found.
I know this for a fact firsthand
whether you consider my sources good or not the facts remain..and that story was published in several other more reputable publications as well..the bird dog was the first one that came to mind..you can always google and find a publication that meets your higher standards of press as a librarian
I stand by my opinon of Peta as nothing but fanatical and hypocritical extremists.
in the meantime ill be cooking my steak rare tonight

deke rivers wrote:

Food Nut wrote:

deke rivers wrote:..this is PETA in a nutshell..quote is form the Bird Dog and Retrevier News...

As a librarian, I don't really consider the Bird and Retriever News (or Penn and Teller, for that matter) a reliable source for information on PETA. It would have an obvious bias.

..you can always google and find a publication that meets your higher standards of press as a librarian
I stand by my opinon of Peta as nothing but fanatical and hypocritical extremists.
in the meantime ill be cooking my steak rare tonight

Well that is where librarians and many others differ...google would not be my first choice in locating information on a highly debated topic.

I don't deny you your right to eat your steak, I'll be having a burger at Sweets and Savories...but I think I'm going to skip the foie gras on it (just a personal preference).

I would argue that not all members of PETA are "fanatical and hypocritical extemists".

I am saying the CHRISTIAN SCIENCE MONITOR offers a balanced article on the topic being debated. If anyone wants a full copy of the article pm. I offer the quotes from the article on the PETA side because of the attack on the PETA position regarding euthanasia of animals.

Whether or not I agree with PETA's position or Deke is irrelevant...or at least as a librarian, that is the way it's supposed to be.

Food Nut wrote:

deke rivers wrote:

Food Nut wrote:

deke rivers wrote:..this is PETA in a nutshell..quote is form the Bird Dog and Retrevier News...

As a librarian, I don't really consider the Bird and Retriever News (or Penn and Teller, for that matter) a reliable source for information on PETA. It would have an obvious bias.

..you can always google and find a publication that meets your higher standards of press as a librarian
I stand by my opinon of Peta as nothing but fanatical and hypocritical extremists.
in the meantime ill be cooking my steak rare tonight

Well that is where librarians and many others differ...google would not be my first choice in locating information on a highly debated topic.

I don't deny you your right to eat your steak, I'll be having a burger at Sweets and Savories...but I think I'm going to skip the foie gras on it (just a personal preference).

I would argue that not all members of PETA are "fanatical and hypocritical extemists".

I am saying the CHRISTIAN SCIENCE MONITOR offers a balanced article on the topic being debated. If anyone wants a full copy of the article pm. I offer the quotes from the article on the PETA side because of the attack on the PETA position regarding euthanasia of animals.

Whether or not I agree with PETA's position or Deke is irrelevant...or at least as a librarian, that is the way it's supposed to be.

Im not quite sure what being a librarian has to do with any of us but you seem to want to keep reminding us of that irrelevant fact.
But in any event no thanks on the full article..Christian Science Monitor would not be my first choice as an IT technician to read about the issue at hand either..too many big words in it that I may not understand..

PETA has the money to run a no-kill shelter, why don't they? If I were a PETA member I might be a little disappointed that my donations were going to pay for billboards of Pamela Anderson instead of, you know, treating animals ethically.

While several dozen shelters in Virginia have adopted a no-kill philosophy, PETA has not. It sounds lovely if you're naive," Newkirk said. "We could become a no-kill shelter immediately. It means we wouldn't do as much work."

There is no debate over whether or not PETA has euthanized animals. They admit it. Ingrid Newkirk, president of PETA, effectively bragged about killing hundreds of animals when she worked at a shelter in the 1970s, saying "In the end, I'd go to work early, before anyone got there, and I would just kill the animals myself, because I couldn't stand to let them go through that. I must have killed a thousand of them, sometimes dozens every day. Some of those people would take pleasure in making them suffer. Driving home every night, I would cry just thinking about it."

Truly admirable. "I wanted to protect it so much, I killed it."

The bigger problem with PETA is that Ingrid Newkirk has such close ties to the Animal Liberation Front (including writing a fawning book about the organization), which is perhaps more troubling.

I don't think people here are passing judgment about PETA members as a whole, since all types of people with a wide variety of opinions are members. Rather, they're expressing distaste with the organization.

My question is, how does PETA feel about giving domesticated omnivorous pets all-vegetarian diets. They advocate vegetarianism for humans, why not for the family dog? In fact, quite a few PETA staff do feed their pets all-vegetarian diets.

Neither species, of course, is built for vegetarianism.

deke rivers wrote:Im not quite sure what being a librarian has to do with any of us but you seem to want to keep reminding us of that irrelevant fact.
But in any event no thanks on the full article..Christian Science Monitor would not be my first choice as an IT technician to read about the issue at hand either..too many big words in it that I may not understand..

Sounds like maybe it is time for you to eat the cheeseburger and chill, and not take the debate so personally, as you suggested to another poster above. You also suggested we do some more research, which one clearly can do with ease.
Your opinion is as valid as the next person. I don't deny your right to have it.
Now, as Gary or another moderator might say,

"Let's eat!"

Food Nut wrote:

deke rivers wrote:Im not quite sure what being a librarian has to do with any of us but you seem to want to keep reminding us of that irrelevant fact.
But in any event no thanks on the full article..Christian Science Monitor would not be my first choice as an IT technician to read about the issue at hand either..too many big words in it that I may not understand..

Sounds like maybe it is time for you to eat the cheeseburger and chill, and not take the debate so personally, as you suggested to another poster above. You also suggested we do some more research, which one clearly can do with ease.
Your opinion is as valid as the next person. I don't deny your right to have it.
Now, as Gary or another moderator might say,

"Let's eat!"

believe me i was not taking anything personal..strictly an attempt at sarcastic humor to point out the irrelevance of anyones chosen occupation in regards to the facts at hand. I guess it di not come across as I had planned. I do stand by my comments. You further bring up more irrelevancies by posting about what Gary would say..very strange..but im done. Ill eat and Peta will continue to kill.........

have a cheeseburger and chill..you are taking this way personally IMO and i would do some research before choosing your battles..

heh. coincidentally, i just finished eating a cheeseburger with bacon and blue cheese right before reading your silly post.

as far as taking this personally, i'm not. listen, i'm a professional chef and have no qualms whatsoever about eating meat in any form. i'm against the stupid foie gras law as well. this isn't personal.

but as a lover of food and all things culinary, i think it's really too bad to see people posting spiteful stuff like we've seen in this topic. steak should be served with sel gris or maitre d'hotel butter, not a side of bile and animosity. that's not good for the digestion.

seriously, folks. if you don't like PETA, i can understand why, but why waste your energy with silly garbage like this?

have a cheeseburger or a steak because it tastes good and you enjoy it, not because you think someone's trying to tell you not to do it.

and i say that not because i'm "taking it personally," but simply because i i love food.

You further bring up more irrelevancies by posting about what Gary would say..very strange..but im done. Ill eat and Peta will continue to kill

Not only would Gary say lets eat, he'd suggest going for middle eastern and ordering peta pockets

elakin wrote:seriously, folks. if you don't like PETA, i can understand why, but why waste your energy with silly garbage like this?

Yeah, it may not precisely be spiteful but it reminds me of those "buy nothing" days. You do no shopping one day and make up for it the rest of the week, i.e. do pretty much what you normally do and get the warm fuzzies about it. Now, if people who normally don't eat meat eat it on the 15th, I'll sit up and take notice.

deke rivers wrote:not all shelters kill off unwanted animals..several rescues keep the animals until homes are found.

Here's a plug for a nonprofit, no-kill animal shelter I know well -- family members run it: Puppyland Humane Society in West Bend, Wis. (north of Milwaukee). Despite the name, they have cats as well as dogs (also birds, the occasional ferret and whatever else comes their way). When they get overfull, they do everything possible to place animals (including taking them home). Only very sick animals are ever euthanized. If anyone has a few dollars to spare for animal rescue, they could use some support.

For PETA day I plan on eating a librarian.

-ramon