Welcome Guest Search | Active Topics | Members | Log In | Register

The ethics of wearing fur or animal skins Options · View
WellMadeMale
Posted: Thursday, November 04, 2010 3:21:53 PM

Rank: Constant Gardener

Joined: 9/30/2009
Posts: 10,471
Location: Cakeland, United States
This little fucker looks meaner than shit. I bet he'd eat your hand off if you tried to take his fur for a cap or coat.



Most intelligent people are introspective and doubt themselves while many fucktards are proudly over-confident. - a tip of the hat to Charles Bukowski
Dancing_Doll
Posted: Thursday, November 04, 2010 3:51:31 PM

Rank: Alpha Blonde
Moderator

Joined: 2/17/2010
Posts: 6,602
Location: Your dirty fantasy
WellMadeMale wrote:
This little fucker looks meaner than shit. I bet he'd eat your hand off if you tried to take his fur for a cap or coat.




I'd probably look pissed off too if I had a hand gripped around my neck like that.

Uhm... well, ok, in most circumstances I'd be pissed off... Whistle

WellMadeMale
Posted: Friday, November 05, 2010 9:36:21 AM

Rank: Constant Gardener

Joined: 9/30/2009
Posts: 10,471
Location: Cakeland, United States
You want to put a crunch on the demand for fur coats (in America) or elsewhere...just levy a huge sales tax on such items.

We already do this to cigarettes and booze. But those are staple items to many people too,
who willingly pay to continue on with their vices. Often cutting down on other things, like.....food. heheh


From The Washington Times - Jan 7, 2003 (found on another website - FreeRepublic)

Posted on Thursday, January 09, 2003 6:44:51 PM by NonValueAdded

"Most Americans celebrated as the ball fell in Times Square New Year's Eve.
But for auto dealers this new year is especially sweet. January 1 marked
the expiration of the federal luxury tax on cars, the last vestige of the destructive
luxury tax package in the infamous 1990 budget deal," the Wall Street Journal says.

"Starting in 1991, Washington levied a 10 percent tax on cars valued above $30,000,
boats above $100,000, jewelry and furs above $10,000 and private planes above $250,000.

Democrats like Ted Kennedy and then-Senate Majority Leader George Mitchell
crowed publicly about how the rich would finally be paying their fair share and privately
about convincing President George H.W. Bush to renounce his 'no new taxes' pledge,"
the newspaper said in an editorial.

"But it wasn't long before even those die-hard class warriors noticed they'd badly missed their mark.
The taxes took in $97 million less in their first year than had been projected —
for the simple reason that people were buying a lot fewer of these goods.

Boat building, a key industry in Messrs. Mitchell and Kennedy's home states of Maine and Massachusetts,
was particularly hard hit. Yacht retailers reported a 77 percent drop in sales that year, while
boat builders estimated layoffs at 25,000. With bipartisan support, all but the car tax was
repealed in 1993, and in 1996 Congress voted to phase that out too. January 1 was disappearance day.

"The end of any federal tax is such a rarity that it's well worth celebrating. And the luxury-tax lesson of economic damage is worth keeping in mind as politicians begin to wail that President Bush's new tax proposals aren't punitive enough on the rich."


Most intelligent people are introspective and doubt themselves while many fucktards are proudly over-confident. - a tip of the hat to Charles Bukowski
standingbear
Posted: Friday, November 05, 2010 11:04:56 AM

Rank: Forum Guru

Joined: 9/27/2010
Posts: 195
Location: the twilight zone
Being a leather wearing meat eater I don't feel entitled to much rage about fur wearing. Most mink is farm raised, like most beef, pork and chicken. I would hope that people would refrain from bear skins though.

"Happiness is doing it rotten your own way."Isaac Asimov (1994)
Magical_felix
Posted: Friday, November 05, 2010 4:47:32 PM

Rank: Wild at Heart

Joined: 4/3/2010
Posts: 5,341
Location: California
WellMadeMale wrote:
You want to put a crunch on the demand for fur coats (in America) or elsewhere...just levy a huge sales tax on such items.

We already do this to cigarettes and booze. But those are staple items to many people too,
who willingly pay to continue on with their vices. Often cutting down on other things, like.....food. heheh


From The Washington Times - Jan 7, 2003 (found on another website - FreeRepublic)

Posted on Thursday, January 09, 2003 6:44:51 PM by NonValueAdded

"Most Americans celebrated as the ball fell in Times Square New Year's Eve.
But for auto dealers this new year is especially sweet. January 1 marked
the expiration of the federal luxury tax on cars, the last vestige of the destructive
luxury tax package in the infamous 1990 budget deal," the Wall Street Journal says.

"Starting in 1991, Washington levied a 10 percent tax on cars valued above $30,000,
boats above $100,000, jewelry and furs above $10,000 and private planes above $250,000.

Democrats like Ted Kennedy and then-Senate Majority Leader George Mitchell
crowed publicly about how the rich would finally be paying their fair share and privately
about convincing President George H.W. Bush to renounce his 'no new taxes' pledge,"
the newspaper said in an editorial.

"But it wasn't long before even those die-hard class warriors noticed they'd badly missed their mark.
The taxes took in $97 million less in their first year than had been projected —
for the simple reason that people were buying a lot fewer of these goods.

Boat building, a key industry in Messrs. Mitchell and Kennedy's home states of Maine and Massachusetts,
was particularly hard hit. Yacht retailers reported a 77 percent drop in sales that year, while
boat builders estimated layoffs at 25,000. With bipartisan support, all but the car tax was
repealed in 1993, and in 1996 Congress voted to phase that out too. January 1 was disappearance day.

"The end of any federal tax is such a rarity that it's well worth celebrating. And the luxury-tax lesson of economic damage is worth keeping in mind as politicians begin to wail that President Bush's new tax proposals aren't punitive enough on the rich."


I agree. Maybe they should put a heavy tax on new cars that are also gas gusslers... Did I really just agree with you WMM? Might be a first for me, most of your post sail way above my head...



Guest
Posted: Friday, November 05, 2010 6:42:16 PM

Rank: Lurker

Joined: 12/1/2006
Posts: 674,173
www.mediapeta.com/peta/PDF/companiesdotest.pdf


Blah, blah, blah, poor animals. If you have not used any one of the products named then wow, you are a stinky son-of-a-bitch. As for eating them, I was introduced, and pushed towards hunting/fishing since I was eight (8). However, I have canines, and love to use them. Don't care how the pig parts got to the store, there ain't nothing better than the smell of ribs cooking (off-heat) whilst I sip a cabernet.

I hate hunters now, and Ted Nugent. There is no reason to hunt/fish.

As for the dying for fashion. Ridiculous. It's like tattooing and piercing. Yes, other cultures did it, but it ain't your culture. Killing animals for fashion is absurd. I don't think it makes any woman sexier, my turn on is when a woman has nothing on, and i don't wear it, I'm a guy, and as for leather pants..i have a flat ass, so no on that one.

Furthermore, PETA can kiss my natural, non pelt/fur wearing bootay!
Guest
Posted: Friday, November 05, 2010 7:52:19 PM

Rank: Lurker

Joined: 12/1/2006
Posts: 674,173
It's not liking or disliking. I don't like Nugent cause of his financial status, he can afford same, yet argues to others the merits of hunting/fishing. Again, culture. What means predicates, shall and should be done. Getting back to the former question, no I don't find it sexy, and I don't wear it.

Also, you're telling me that the price of fishing, boat, tackle, lines, rod, gas for the boat, and beer equates to the price of fish at the supermarket.

Along the same lines, the price of ammunition, rifles/shotguns, gas to and from the place of hunting, and beer also equates to the price of pasta at the grocery store?

Means and ways, means and ways.

Guest
Posted: Saturday, November 06, 2010 2:41:07 AM

Rank: Lurker

Joined: 12/1/2006
Posts: 674,173
"I don't think it makes any woman sexier, my turn on is when a woman has nothing on, and i don't wear it, I'm a guy, and as for leather pants..i have a flat ass, so no on that one."

Exactly.
Dancing_Doll
Posted: Saturday, November 06, 2010 2:10:29 PM

Rank: Alpha Blonde
Moderator

Joined: 2/17/2010
Posts: 6,602
Location: Your dirty fantasy
Magical_felix wrote:
WellMadeMale wrote:
You want to put a crunch on the demand for fur coats (in America) or elsewhere...just levy a huge sales tax on such items.

We already do this to cigarettes and booze. But those are staple items to many people too,
who willingly pay to continue on with their vices. Often cutting down on other things, like.....food. heheh


From The Washington Times - Jan 7, 2003 (found on another website - FreeRepublic)

Posted on Thursday, January 09, 2003 6:44:51 PM by NonValueAdded

"Most Americans celebrated as the ball fell in Times Square New Year's Eve.
But for auto dealers this new year is especially sweet. January 1 marked
the expiration of the federal luxury tax on cars, the last vestige of the destructive
luxury tax package in the infamous 1990 budget deal," the Wall Street Journal says.

"Starting in 1991, Washington levied a 10 percent tax on cars valued above $30,000,
boats above $100,000, jewelry and furs above $10,000 and private planes above $250,000.

Democrats like Ted Kennedy and then-Senate Majority Leader George Mitchell
crowed publicly about how the rich would finally be paying their fair share and privately
about convincing President George H.W. Bush to renounce his 'no new taxes' pledge,"
the newspaper said in an editorial.

"But it wasn't long before even those die-hard class warriors noticed they'd badly missed their mark.
The taxes took in $97 million less in their first year than had been projected —
for the simple reason that people were buying a lot fewer of these goods.

Boat building, a key industry in Messrs. Mitchell and Kennedy's home states of Maine and Massachusetts,
was particularly hard hit. Yacht retailers reported a 77 percent drop in sales that year, while
boat builders estimated layoffs at 25,000. With bipartisan support, all but the car tax was
repealed in 1993, and in 1996 Congress voted to phase that out too. January 1 was disappearance day.

"The end of any federal tax is such a rarity that it's well worth celebrating. And the luxury-tax lesson of economic damage is worth keeping in mind as politicians begin to wail that President Bush's new tax proposals aren't punitive enough on the rich."


I agree. Maybe they should put a heavy tax on new cars that are also gas gusslers... Did I really just agree with you WMM? Might be a first for me, most of your post sail way above my head...


I totally agree as well. Great ideas. I think it would definitely lessen the demand for these products. Nice one, WMM!

And as an additional benefit, the government would get extra money in taxes that they will surely put towards solving all those other critical world issues that MrNudiePants mentioned. There won't be any excuses now! thumbup

Ruthie
Posted: Saturday, November 06, 2010 4:39:02 PM

Rank: Story Verifier
Moderator

Joined: 10/21/2010
Posts: 2,698
Location: United States
I hate the idea of wearing fur, any kind of fur. I also hate the way animals are raised for furs and food. There is really no reason to wear fur anymore. Killing an animal just for it's skin just seems evil to me.
Guest
Posted: Saturday, November 06, 2010 5:20:35 PM

Rank: Lurker

Joined: 12/1/2006
Posts: 674,173
CoopsRuthie wrote:
I hate the idea of wearing fur, any kind of fur. I also hate the way animals are raised for furs and food. There is really no reason to wear fur anymore. Killing an animal just for it's skin just seems evil to me.


Animals aren't just raised and used for food and fur.
Do you or anyone else here, use shampoo or conditioner? How about soap, toothpaste or body lotion? And of course no one takes the train so they have no use for train brakes. No one takes roadways so there's no need for the cellular concrete that uses bone dust to make it. I'm also sure no one here eats low fat foods or cheesecake or chocolate mousse. We don't paint our houses or use sandpaper on them. Modern men and women don't eat off of fine bone china either. I'm also sure no lives have been saved from using animal parts in hearts or lungs. No one here drinks beer or wine either or shoots guns that use bullets. And god forbid anyone want to use renewable energy or the pig by product that makes the fuel.


I don't think many people have a clue what they use in their everyday lives that is made from animals. Not just a fur coat or leather belt or shoes or purses and jackets.
Dancing_Doll
Posted: Saturday, November 06, 2010 5:50:40 PM

Rank: Alpha Blonde
Moderator

Joined: 2/17/2010
Posts: 6,602
Location: Your dirty fantasy
chefkathleen wrote:
CoopsRuthie wrote:
I hate the idea of wearing fur, any kind of fur. I also hate the way animals are raised for furs and food. There is really no reason to wear fur anymore. Killing an animal just for it's skin just seems evil to me.


Animals aren't just raised and used for food and fur.
Do you or anyone else here, use shampoo or conditioner? How about soap, toothpaste or body lotion? And of course no one takes the train so they have no use for train brakes. No one takes roadways so there's no need for the cellular concrete that uses bone dust to make it. I'm also sure no one here eats low fat foods or cheesecake or chocolate mousse. We don't paint our houses or use sandpaper on them. Modern men and women don't eat off of fine bone china either. I'm also sure no lives have been saved from using animal parts in hearts or lungs. No one here drinks beer or wine either or shoots guns that use bullets. And god forbid anyone want to use renewable energy or the pig by product that makes the fuel.


I don't think many people have a clue what they use in their everyday lives that is made from animals. Not just a fur coat or leather belt or shoes or purses and jackets.



I actually go out of my way to buy cruelty-free products, but that's just me. I think the point being made here is to minimize unnecessary cruelty. I see fur for fashion as unnecessary because of the inhumane practices used on the fur farms, the environmental damage created by lax farm practices and the fact that these animals are being used only for their fur. The majority of carcasses go straight to the landfill sites. I don't see how that can possibly be justified.

The meat industry tends make greater use of animal byproducts, and they go into many of the products you mentioned. But the fur industry is just for fur. And it's just for fashion. A fashion statement that can easily be made using faux fur and which requires 15 times less energy than it takes to create an actual real fur coat.

This is an interesting read for anyone that's interested in more info: Fur Farm Report





Ruthie
Posted: Saturday, November 06, 2010 8:13:17 PM

Rank: Story Verifier
Moderator

Joined: 10/21/2010
Posts: 2,698
Location: United States
chefkathleen wrote:
CoopsRuthie wrote:
I hate the idea of wearing fur, any kind of fur. I also hate the way animals are raised for furs and food. There is really no reason to wear fur anymore. Killing an animal just for it's skin just seems evil to me.


Animals aren't just raised and used for food and fur.
Do you or anyone else here, use shampoo or conditioner? How about soap, toothpaste or body lotion? And of course no one takes the train so they have no use for train brakes. No one takes roadways so there's no need for the cellular concrete that uses bone dust to make it. I'm also sure no one here eats low fat foods or cheesecake or chocolate mousse. We don't paint our houses or use sandpaper on them. Modern men and women don't eat off of fine bone china either. I'm also sure no lives have been saved from using animal parts in hearts or lungs. No one here drinks beer or wine either or shoots guns that use bullets. And god forbid anyone want to use renewable energy or the pig by product that makes the fuel.


I don't think many people have a clue what they use in their everyday lives that is made from animals. Not just a fur coat or leather belt or shoes or purses and jackets.


The question wasn't about soap, toothpaste or body lotion. It wasn't about using animals for food or wine or beer. It was about fur. I think wearing fur, especially of an animal just trapped or raised for it's fur, is unconscionable. There is no reason for it. There are plenty of substitutes for fur to keep us warm. There is no need to kill an animal for it's fur except for vanity. If you can think of one, let me know.
Guest
Posted: Sunday, November 07, 2010 9:59:12 AM

Rank: Lurker

Joined: 12/1/2006
Posts: 674,173
chefkathleen wrote:

Animals aren't just raised and used for food and fur.
Do you or anyone else here, use shampoo or conditioner? How about soap, toothpaste or body lotion? And of course no one takes the train so they have no use for train brakes. No one takes roadways so there's no need for the cellular concrete that uses bone dust to make it. I'm also sure no one here eats low fat foods or cheesecake or chocolate mousse. We don't paint our houses or use sandpaper on them. Modern men and women don't eat off of fine bone china either. I'm also sure no lives have been saved from using animal parts in hearts or lungs. No one here drinks beer or wine either or shoots guns that use bullets. And god forbid anyone want to use renewable energy or the pig by product that makes the fuel.


I don't think many people have a clue what they use in their everyday lives that is made from animals. Not just a fur coat or leather belt or shoes or purses and jackets.



Dancing_Doll wrote:
I actually go out of my way to buy cruelty-free products, but that's just me. I think the point being made here is to minimize unnecessary cruelty. I see fur for fashion as unnecessary because of the inhumane practices used on the fur farms, the environmental damage created by lax farm practices and the fact that these animals are being used only for their fur. The majority of carcasses go straight to the landfill sites. I don't see how that can possibly be justified.

The meat industry tends make greater use of animal byproducts, and they go into many of the products you mentioned. But the fur industry is just for fur. And it's just for fashion. A fashion statement that can easily be made using faux fur and which requires 15 times less energy than it takes to create an actual real fur coat.



None of the products I mentioned are made by any cruel methods at all. And they go into all of the products I mentioned. The point of the question was about wearing animal fur and someone else said it was mean to kill animals for food. We not only kill them for food and fur but for these other products as well. If you believe the peta people then most of the livestock market treats their animals inhumanely and yet you still use all or some of the products that I mentioned. Actually, I find it hard to believe that if that sugar daddy you spoke about in another thread, at least I think it was you, dropped a $50,000.00 chinchilla fur coat on your back that you tell him to take it back cause it was cruel to wear fur. But, that's just my opinion.
Guest
Posted: Sunday, November 07, 2010 10:02:05 AM

Rank: Lurker

Joined: 12/1/2006
Posts: 674,173
CoopsRuthie wrote:
chefkathleen wrote:
CoopsRuthie wrote:
I hate the idea of wearing fur, any kind of fur. I also hate the way animals are raised for furs and food. There is really no reason to wear fur anymore. Killing an animal just for it's skin just seems evil to me.


Animals aren't just raised and used for food and fur.
Do you or anyone else here, use shampoo or conditioner? How about soap, toothpaste or body lotion? And of course no one takes the train so they have no use for train brakes. No one takes roadways so there's no need for the cellular concrete that uses bone dust to make it. I'm also sure no one here eats low fat foods or cheesecake or chocolate mousse. We don't paint our houses or use sandpaper on them. Modern men and women don't eat off of fine bone china either. I'm also sure no lives have been saved from using animal parts in hearts or lungs. No one here drinks beer or wine either or shoots guns that use bullets. And god forbid anyone want to use renewable energy or the pig by product that makes the fuel.


I don't think many people have a clue what they use in their everyday lives that is made from animals. Not just a fur coat or leather belt or shoes or purses and jackets.


The question wasn't about soap, toothpaste or body lotion. It wasn't about using animals for food or wine or beer. It was about fur. I think wearing fur, especially of an animal just trapped or raised for it's fur, is unconscionable. There is no reason for it. There are plenty of substitutes for fur to keep us warm. There is no need to kill an animal for it's fur except for vanity. If you can think of one, let me know.


You also mentioned that it, animals, were used for food and you "hate" it. I merely pointed out that they're used for much more things than just food and fur. Everyday things that you and other people use.
Dancing_Doll
Posted: Sunday, November 07, 2010 10:15:56 AM

Rank: Alpha Blonde
Moderator

Joined: 2/17/2010
Posts: 6,602
Location: Your dirty fantasy
chefkathleen wrote:


chefkathleen wrote:
Dancing_Doll wrote:

Animals aren't just raised and used for food and fur.
Do you or anyone else here, use shampoo or conditioner? How about soap, toothpaste or body lotion? And of course no one takes the train so they have no use for train brakes. No one takes roadways so there's no need for the cellular concrete that uses bone dust to make it. I'm also sure no one here eats low fat foods or cheesecake or chocolate mousse. We don't paint our houses or use sandpaper on them. Modern men and women don't eat off of fine bone china either. I'm also sure no lives have been saved from using animal parts in hearts or lungs. No one here drinks beer or wine either or shoots guns that use bullets. And god forbid anyone want to use renewable energy or the pig by product that makes the fuel.


I don't think many people have a clue what they use in their everyday lives that is made from animals. Not just a fur coat or leather belt or shoes or purses and jackets.



I actually go out of my way to buy cruelty-free products, but that's just me. I think the point being made here is to minimize unnecessary cruelty. I see fur for fashion as unnecessary because of the inhumane practices used on the fur farms, the environmental damage created by lax farm practices and the fact that these animals are being used only for their fur. The majority of carcasses go straight to the landfill sites. I don't see how that can possibly be justified.

The meat industry tends make greater use of animal byproducts, and they go into many of the products you mentioned. But the fur industry is just for fur. And it's just for fashion. A fashion statement that can easily be made using faux fur and which requires 15 times less energy than it takes to create an actual real fur coat.



None of the products I mentioned are made by any cruel methods at all. And they go into all of the products I mentioned. The point of the question was about wearing animal fur and someone else said it was mean to kill animals for food. We not only kill them for food and fur but for these other products as well. If you believe the peta people then most of the livestock market treats their animals inhumanely and yet you still use all or some of the products that I mentioned. Actually, I find it hard to believe that if that sugar daddy you spoke about in another thread, at least I think it was you, dropped a $50,000.00 chinchilla fur coat on your back that you tell him to take it back cause it was cruel to wear fur. But, that's just my opinion.



Here's the thing... animals are going to be killed for food. As I said, I don't have an issue with this. I do have an issue with livestock markets treating their animals inhumanely, but that's just my objection with it. I don't eat a lot of meat, and when I do, I try to be cognizant of where it comes from. But eating animals for food and skinning animals for fur and chucking the carcasses into landfills are two entirely different things. There are tighter regulations around the meat industry because human beings are ingesting the meat. There are very loose regulations in the fur industry because nobody gives a damn how it all happens, as long as a pretty fur is able to be skinned off their backs. No regulations = extremely inhumane practices. So, I'm first and foremost about regulations. Secondly I am about limiting cruelty that is unnecessary. Fur for fashion in unnecessary.

AND... "sugar daddy"?? Sorry, I've never had one, nor anything even vaguely close to it. That scene is not me. I have also never worn fur, nor would I accept a gift of one, even if it cost $50K... I know you find it "hard to believe" (since you don't know me), and it is so much fun to project and judge people, but rest assured I practice what I preach.

LadyX
Posted: Sunday, November 07, 2010 10:27:52 AM

Rank: Artistic Tart
Moderator

Joined: 9/25/2009
Posts: 4,813
chefkathleen wrote:
Actually, I find it hard to believe that if that sugar daddy you spoke about in another thread, at least I think it was you, dropped a $50,000.00 chinchilla fur coat on your back that you tell him to take it back cause it was cruel to wear fur. But, that's just my opinion.


I think you're making an assumption based on the wrong person, unless you took that wine bar nonsense literally...but surely you didn't.

Now, I on the other hand.... evil4


...would accept a chinchilla coat, then the question would be do I fish for the receipt so I can return it for other things that I actually want, or risk feeling guilty and/or getting a bucket of paint dropped on me. But that's all hypothetical. I don't have a sugar daddy currently (sadly) anyway.
Dancing_Doll
Posted: Sunday, November 07, 2010 10:37:02 AM

Rank: Alpha Blonde
Moderator

Joined: 2/17/2010
Posts: 6,602
Location: Your dirty fantasy
LadyX wrote:
chefkathleen wrote:
Actually, I find it hard to believe that if that sugar daddy you spoke about in another thread, at least I think it was you, dropped a $50,000.00 chinchilla fur coat on your back that you tell him to take it back cause it was cruel to wear fur. But, that's just my opinion.


I think you're making an assumption based on the wrong person, unless you took that wine bar nonsense literally...but surely you didn't.


Ah yes, the now defunct Wine Bar thread. I thought it was obvious that we were all playing it up, but this might be a good opportunity to add the disclaimer that I also don't own a gold helicopter, a 1 million dollar diamond bikini, nor am I the director of the Lush Performing Arts Theatre... in real life, anyway.

I guess some people might have needed the added clarification on that.

And Xuani, don't keep the chinchilla... you gotta return it for cash. A gold helicopter would be way cooler... glasses8

MrNudiePants
Posted: Sunday, November 07, 2010 10:47:23 AM

Rank: Forum Guru

Joined: 8/10/2009
Posts: 2,211
Location: United States
Dancing_Doll wrote:
LadyX wrote:
chefkathleen wrote:
Actually, I find it hard to believe that if that sugar daddy you spoke about in another thread, at least I think it was you, dropped a $50,000.00 chinchilla fur coat on your back that you tell him to take it back cause it was cruel to wear fur. But, that's just my opinion.


I think you're making an assumption based on the wrong person, unless you took that wine bar nonsense literally...but surely you didn't.


Ah yes, the now defunct Wine Bar thread. I thought it was obvious that we were all playing it up, but this might be a good opportunity to add the disclaimer that I also don't own a gold helicopter, a 1 million dollar diamond bikini, nor am I the director of the Lush Performing Arts Theatre... in real life, anyway.

I guess some people might have needed the added clarification on that.

And Xuani, don't keep the chinchilla... you gotta return it for cash. A gold helicopter would be way cooler... glasses8


A gold helicopter would be way too heavy to get off the ground. It WOULD be way cool though...

And I'd give a week's wages to see Ash in that bikini... (RAWR!)
MrNudiePants
Posted: Sunday, November 07, 2010 10:50:36 AM

Rank: Forum Guru

Joined: 8/10/2009
Posts: 2,211
Location: United States
LadyX wrote:
chefkathleen wrote:
Actually, I find it hard to believe that if that sugar daddy you spoke about in another thread, at least I think it was you, dropped a $50,000.00 chinchilla fur coat on your back that you tell him to take it back cause it was cruel to wear fur. But, that's just my opinion.


I think you're making an assumption based on the wrong person, unless you took that wine bar nonsense literally...but surely you didn't.

Now, I on the other hand.... evil4


...would accept a chinchilla coat, then the question would be do I fish for the receipt so I can return it for other things that I actually want, or risk feeling guilty and/or getting a bucket of paint dropped on me. But that's all hypothetical. I don't have a sugar daddy currently (sadly) anyway.


When I hit the Lottery, Babe, you can have all the chinchilla coats a gold helicopter can carry... icon_biggrin
Guest
Posted: Sunday, November 07, 2010 11:10:30 AM

Rank: Lurker

Joined: 12/1/2006
Posts: 674,173
LadyX wrote:
chefkathleen wrote:
Actually, I find it hard to believe that if that sugar daddy you spoke about in another thread, at least I think it was you, dropped a $50,000.00 chinchilla fur coat on your back that you tell him to take it back cause it was cruel to wear fur. But, that's just my opinion.


I think you're making an assumption based on the wrong person, unless you took that wine bar nonsense literally...but surely you didn't.

Now, I on the other hand.... evil4


...would accept a chinchilla coat, then the question would be do I fish for the receipt so I can return it for other things that I actually want, or risk feeling guilty and/or getting a bucket of paint dropped on me. But that's all hypothetical. I don't have a sugar daddy currently (sadly) anyway.


You crack me up. happy8 I've seen some of those "rich bitches" in Texas wearing their furs. No one threw paint on them. I'm betting they wouldn't on you either. Don't look for the receipt just tell the SD what you want and he'll get it for you. 3601 I think SDs are a wonderful thing.
Bunny12
Posted: Sunday, November 07, 2010 12:54:59 PM

Rank: Forum Guru

Joined: 9/2/2009
Posts: 1,008
Location: My own little world, United States
All this silly snide bickering aside I'd like to know what any of you have done to help animals in general? I have been doing rabbit rescue occasionally for years one of my current pet bunnies is a rescue rabbit and looks like I have another one on the way soon. I also contributed 3 pickup truck loads of supplies to a caravan going to the Baton Rouge LA SPCA for hurricane Katrina stranded animals which consisted of cages, Bales of straw bedding and many large sacks of feed not just for cats and dogs but for horses, goats, rabbits and hamsters too! I invested some of my own money and collected donations anywhere I could from local merchants. You can bitch all your want but what have you done??? Boo hoo!

Bunny12


Bunny Rabbits cute and fuzzy they want to love you but they have razor sharp teeth - don't piss them off!
Dancing_Doll
Posted: Sunday, November 07, 2010 3:58:38 PM

Rank: Alpha Blonde
Moderator

Joined: 2/17/2010
Posts: 6,602
Location: Your dirty fantasy
Bunny12 wrote:
All this silly snide bickering aside I'd like to know what any of you have done to help animals in general? I have been doing rabbit rescue occasionally for years one of my current pet bunnies is a rescue rabbit and looks like I have another one on the way soon. I also contributed 3 pickup truck loads of supplies to a caravan going to the Baton Rouge LA SPCA for hurricane Katrina stranded animals which consisted of cages, Bales of straw bedding and many large sacks of feed not just for cats and dogs but for horses, goats, rabbits and hamsters too! I invested some of my own money and collected donations anywhere I could from local merchants. You can bitch all your want but what have you done??? Boo hoo!


Well done Bunny! I'll name a few things... I started out by donating my allowance money to the Canadian Wildlife Federation since the time I was around 11 yrs old, I volunteered my time at an animal shelter for four years, I've donated supplies (eg. food, crates, blankets etc), and I've put in monetary donations to a number of of other organizations including Greenpeace, WWF, OSPCA and my local humane society. Last year a particularly horrific case of abuse was identified in the media and they were seeking donations for the dog's medical bills, and I donated money to that as well. I've also written letters to politicians (both locally and internationally), and signed countless petitions. I've reported cases of animal cruelty, and followed up on them, including confronting the owners themselves. I don't wear fur, but I wouldn't throw paint on someone that did. I don't consider myself a rabid activist in the true sense of what that word implies today... but I'm more of a concerned citizen that tries to be ethical about my decisions and do what I can when I have time/money to spare. Hopefully that was enough violin music to justify my 'bitching'... icon_smile

SweetPenny
Posted: Sunday, November 07, 2010 6:04:43 PM

Rank: Forum Guru

Joined: 6/15/2010
Posts: 1,274
Location: State of Confusion
I don't own any mink, but I don't really have a problem with those who do. I believe that animals exist for our pleasure (sorry vegetarians!). I am against animal cruelty though. I won't eat veal because of the inhumane way that they are farmed. However, if I am invited to someone for dinner and they are serving veal, I will eat it. Because I believe that hurting a human's feelings (by not eating their food) is worse than the crime of eating the veal.
sprite
Posted: Sunday, November 07, 2010 9:56:48 PM

Rank: Her Royal Spriteness
Moderator

Joined: 6/18/2010
Posts: 16,671
Location: My Tower, United States
Dancing_Doll wrote:
Bunny12 wrote:
All this silly snide bickering aside I'd like to know what any of you have done to help animals in general? I have been doing rabbit rescue occasionally for years one of my current pet bunnies is a rescue rabbit and looks like I have another one on the way soon. I also contributed 3 pickup truck loads of supplies to a caravan going to the Baton Rouge LA SPCA for hurricane Katrina stranded animals which consisted of cages, Bales of straw bedding and many large sacks of feed not just for cats and dogs but for horses, goats, rabbits and hamsters too! I invested some of my own money and collected donations anywhere I could from local merchants. You can bitch all your want but what have you done??? Boo hoo!


Well done Bunny! I'll name a few things... I started out by donating my allowance money to the Canadian Wildlife Federation since the time I was around 11 yrs old, I volunteered my time at an animal shelter for four years, I've donated supplies (eg. food, crates, blankets etc), and I've put in monetary donations to a number of of other organizations including Greenpeace, WWF, OSPCA and my local humane society. Last year a particularly horrific case of abuse was identified in the media and they were seeking donations for the dog's medical bills, and I donated money to that as well. I've also written letters to politicians (both locally and internationally), and signed countless petitions. I've reported cases of animal cruelty, and followed up on them, including confronting the owners themselves. I don't wear fur, but I wouldn't throw paint on someone that did. I don't consider myself a rabid activist in the true sense of what that word implies today... but I'm more of a concerned citizen that tries to be ethical about my decisions and do what I can when I have time/money to spare. Hopefully that was enough violin music to justify my 'bitching'... icon_smile


while not able to do as much as either of you, i have two adopted cats from the SPCA, my partner and i donate regularly to several organizations that fall under the heading of animal rights/helping animals (among other things, for the 4th year in a row, we've adopted a turkey for thanksgiving), we are both vegetarians, and i have done volenteer work in the past for the SPCA. i think this gives me the right to 'bitch' at least a little.

Live, love, laugh.
LadyX
Posted: Monday, November 08, 2010 7:28:43 AM

Rank: Artistic Tart
Moderator

Joined: 9/25/2009
Posts: 4,813
You don't have to save baby rabbits or protest slaughterhouses to discuss the ethics of wearing fur. Nobody's forced to read the 'bitching' if they don't want to.

That said, it's great to see things like that being done by those that are passionate. Actually doing something about it gives change a chance to happen.
SIL50
Posted: Wednesday, November 10, 2010 7:10:46 PM

Rank: Forum Guru

Joined: 9/3/2009
Posts: 62
Location: Alabama
Dang you guys take all the fun out of running over the little critters in my Hummer. But seriously,I hunt never for trophys but I also do alot to help animals. I own three rescue kitties, feed four more strays that show up at my door. Not to mention 2 racoons 4 skunks, 1 baby opossum,8 squirrels, and a very creepy red fox. Oh and least I forget I also helped maintain 1,000 acers of habitat that is totally off limits to anything but hikers. Should people be allowed to wear fur that's their decesion if you disagree keep it to your self, just as they should not condem you for your choice to not wear fur. And for the record we are not top of the food chain.
Dancing_Doll
Posted: Wednesday, November 10, 2010 9:53:40 PM

Rank: Alpha Blonde
Moderator

Joined: 2/17/2010
Posts: 6,602
Location: Your dirty fantasy
SIL50 wrote:
Should people be allowed to wear fur that's their decesion if you disagree keep it to your self, just as they should not condem you for your choice to not wear fur.


How can a person condemn someone for not wearing fur? That's like suggesting that I could condemn someone for not doing drugs. One is controversial (wearing fur). The other is not (not wearing fur). It's not about condemning. It's about having an opinion and backing it up with logic.

sprite
Posted: Wednesday, November 10, 2010 11:16:40 PM

Rank: Her Royal Spriteness
Moderator

Joined: 6/18/2010
Posts: 16,671
Location: My Tower, United States
Dancing_Doll wrote:
SIL50 wrote:
Should people be allowed to wear fur that's their decesion if you disagree keep it to your self, just as they should not condem you for your choice to not wear fur.


How can a person condemn someone for not wearing fur? That's like suggesting that I could condemn someone for not doing drugs. One is controversial (wearing fur). The other is not (not wearing fur). It's not about condemning. It's about having an opinion and backing it up with logic.


does this mean i get to condemn people for being heterosexual too? about time! pushing their heterosexual agenda on me! shame on them! drunken

Live, love, laugh.
SIL50
Posted: Thursday, November 11, 2010 10:58:44 AM

Rank: Forum Guru

Joined: 9/3/2009
Posts: 62
Location: Alabama
Sprite and Dancing Doll the point I was making is it's a personal choice based on a person's own beliefs and morals. If you have no problem with it wear it but if you do have a problem then don't . But you can't really condem a person for their beliefs although I know we as humans do. And for my fellow Alabamaian Bker Bum, wait to you run into a large cat bear or dangerious shark minus you firearm to find your place on the food chain. LOL
Users browsing this topic
Guest 


Forum Jump
You cannot post new topics in this forum.
You cannot reply to topics in this forum.
You cannot delete your posts in this forum.
You cannot edit your posts in this forum.
You cannot create polls in this forum.
You cannot vote in polls in this forum.

Main Forum RSS : RSS

Powered by Yet Another Forum.net version 1.9.1.6 (NET v4.0) - 11/14/2007
Copyright © 2003-2006 Yet Another Forum.net. All rights reserved.