Shampoo is tested on bunnys

[Gabby]

Buck Jones wrote:

PETA is too strident and shrill for my tastes. Anyorganization that suggests it has all the answersabout any topic not only earns my suspicion, butgainsmyderision when it tries to jamthose ideas down mythroat. I am too intelligent for that tactic.

I agree, PETA doth protest too much, for far too long!

Buck

DITTO

 

[MyBabyBunnies]

Buck Jones wrote:

PETA is too strident and shrill for my tastes. Anyorganization that suggests it has all the answersabout any topic not only earns my suspicion, butgainsmyderision when it tries to jamthose ideas down mythroat. I am too intelligent for that tactic.

I agree, PETA doth protest too much, for far too long!

Buck

I agree 100%. Although they may have good intentions they arecompletely forgetting some facts about life as an omnivore and "owning"pets.

I have no problem with people saying they own their pets because, as amatter of fact, they do. I own my boys, but they are still my bestfriends. The term "own" does not say that an animal is just another toylike PETA seems to imply, an animal can still be "owned" and part ofthe family.

 

[Bo B Bunny]

MyBunnyBoys wrote:

Buck Jones wrote:

PETA is toostrident and shrill for my tastes. Any organizationthat suggests it has all the answers about any topicnot only earns my suspicion, butgains myderisionwhen it tries to jamthose ideas down my throat. Iam too intelligent for that tactic.

I agree, PETA doth protest too much, for far too long!

Buck

I agree 100%. Although they may have good intentions they arecompletely forgetting some facts about life as an omnivore and "owning"pets.

I have no problem with people saying they own their pets because, as amatter of fact, they do. I own my boys, but they are still my bestfriends. The term "own" does not say that an animal is just another toylike PETA seems to imply, an animal can still be "owned" and part ofthe family.

Exactly! I say I own my pets also, but it's more a term ofhaving "purchased" or "procured" them in some manner. I CHOSEthem to be a part of our family.

I can't imagine my life without my animals. I do rememberwhen we had no inside pets. I was miserable. Imissed having a dog or cat that cuddled next to me while I slept orwatch televison..... I got Tank then the bird, then sydney and arat..... and Bo LOL!

 

[SunnieBunnie Rabbitry]

Heck, look how well itworkedfor these guys! Just imagine the wonders it would do on arabbit's coat! And, if everything goes well, Bytheend of next year... Split ends, Frizzy, Dry,Brittlehairwill all be history! For Allspecies! (Chimps, Rabbits, Sloths, Elephants, Humans, etc.)

(Oops, sorry everyone... this was taken at the last party we had andthey promised to behave. Monkey's! I tell ya! )

 

[rabbitgirl]

romylovestofu wrote:

If I understand their precepts at all they would haveno animal as a pet for humans and would disallow us our favorite rabbitcompanions.

they dont want animals for pets bcuz no one should "own" a animal butkeep care of them and keep them as companion animals

Isn't"companion animal"the same thing as having them as pets?

As far as the testing goes, not sure about the issues there. It wouldprobably be good to do some research in other sources to confirm ordeny. Like I learned in college--prove it! Research is great! Awell-informed opinion carries much more weight.

Try scientific journals--there are quite a few online. A reallyaccurate way to confirm things is to read an actual summary of anexperiment, where they describe exactly what is done to test subjectsand what happened.

Good luck!

Rose

 

[Lissa]

I hate to bring up this old topic, but I've beenreading up on animal testing and have learned that rabbits,particularly with ruby eyes, do not have the ability to produce tearsand that is the reason why they are tested for almost all householdproducts. Is this true?

 

[m.e.]

Actually, I'veheard that the reason they use REW rabbits is so they can observe thedamage done to the eye (versus a rabbit with dark eyes).

~Emily and the Fuzzbutts~

 

[gentle giants]

Here's one of the issues I have with PETA. Idon't know if any of you have seen these, but PETA has startingprinting--and distributing at schools--pamphlets with extremly graphicpictures on the front, and the title "Your Mommy Kills Animals". Thepicture on the front is of a woman, supposed to be a mommy I guess,with this horrible grin on her face, a huge knife in her hand, and alive, bleeding rabbit being held down by the ears and stabbed. There isalso one about daddies going fishing, but I haven't seen that onepersonally.
It makes me mad about them breaking into labs and freeing the animals,too. I may not like animal testing, and I definalty don't think itshould be done at all for things like shampoos or cosmetics, but it isa neccesary evil when it comes to medicine. PETA's methods are not anybetter, though. They take white rats and rabbits and simply turn themloose to starve or be eaten by predators, and that infuriates me.

 

[Spring]

I had this issue at the beginnig of October.These girls (students)were going around with very graphicpamphlets (like Giants said) and practically shoving it open intopeople's faces. For me, I do believe vegetarians have everyright to do what they are doing and I respect them for theirchooses. What I have a problem with, is I think the website waspet2.com or some nasty site about small animals being killed orsomething stupid like that, and nearly forcing people to view picturesthat I couldn't get out of my head for days!

It also confuses me why people don't eat anything from an animal. Idon't know the whole dairy businesses, but like someone else said, ifthe cow has it's utters full of milk, and no calf, then it would be somuch more cruel to leave it!

I decided not to view those websites as I was on this other rabbitrescue website looking around at the section about rabbits around theworld and came across many graphic disturbing images.. I have now beenvery careful of what I look upon!

 

[LuvaBun]

Spring wrote:

It also confuses me why people don't eat anything from an animal. Idon't know the whole dairy businesses, but like someone else said, ifthe cow has it's utters full of milk, and no calf, then it would be somuch more cruel to leave it!

I think the story behind this is - in intensive milk production, cowsare continually made pregnant, then the calf taken away andslaughtered, so that the milk can be used for human consumption. Innature, a cow gets pregnant, has the calf,which then uses the milk.

I used to be a member of PETA, but left a few years ago because of theaggressiveness of some of their campaigns. However, there are an awfullot of cruel uses of animals, for no realistic reason. I find otherorganisations are more constructive in trying to helpanimals, without being accusing or aggressive.

Jan

 

[BunnyMom]

I try to use products that are natural, organic and not tested on animals.

I also will not eat veal, rabbit, lamb, or foie gras.

And I won't wear fur.

 

[Lissa]

BunnyMom wrote:

I try to use products that are natural, organic and not tested on animals.

I also will not eat veal, rabbit, lamb, or foie gras.

And I won't wear fur.

Good for you!! :elephant::bunnydance:

 

[gentle giants]

I am the same way (except I don't know what foiegras is) and I add lobster to the list. I just can't stand the factthat they boil it alive. I wonder why this is an issue I've never heardmentioned by PETA?

 

[Spring]

Yes, I refuse to eat lamb, rabbit, horse, orduck. I don't think I can eat seafood, so I don;t really encounterthis. Hmm I'm not sure with the dairy, as I know practically nothingabout cows.I'm not sure how long it is from when the cow ispregnant, till it gives birth or the amount of time after that itproduces milk? Not sure about killing the calfs.

Hmm maybe peta just signals on cute furry mamals? Don't get me wrong asit's just a guess,I don't know what they are all about, butyes I've never heard anybody bring up the issue about cooking lobsterswhile they are alive!

Also, with eggs I hate the store bought eggs, as they have no respectfor the chickens (keeping them in tiny cages and the egg quality isterrible compared to farm eggs). I don't get farm eggs often but when Ido, it's great! They are %100 times better! Then you don't have toworry about all that bad stuff they might feed them!

 

[m.e.]

gentle giants wrote:

I am the same way (except I don't know what foie gras is)and I add lobster to the list. I just can't stand the fact that theyboil it alive. I wonder why this is an issue I've never heard mentionedby PETA?

Because it's hard to make the argument that lobsters actually feel pain.

They don't have brains - honestly, they are pretty much very big bugs(and my apologies to those who actually like lobster, but it'strue) Dropping a lobster into a boiling pot of water causesinstantaneous death, and research on neural response suggests thatthey're dead even before the large bundle of nerves that functions as apseudo-brain can register the change in temperature.

If you're still not comfortable with the idea, freeze them before youcook them. Freezing puts the lobster in suspended animation, and is not(as far as can be determined) painful to the, err, big bug

As far as the other issues, I'm dairy-free due to lactose intolerance.I do believe that dairy farming is one of the cruelest things done toany animal for food purposes, so even if I were able to eat dairy, Idon't know that I would.

Our eggs are free-range organic.

As a part of my faith, we abstain from meat every Wednesday and Friday,and have long fasts several times a year, in which we basically eat avegan diet. I don't have the self-control for that at the moment, butwho knows...I may adopt those eating habits more often.

~Emily and the Fuzzbutts~

 

[kfonz]

I agree with many of you who believe that PETA'scampaigns are way too aggressive and they only use scare tactics to gettheir point across. I do believe in animal welfare--yes,testing for medical reasons is a necessity, yet cosmetic reasons istotally unnecessary. I don't eat beef, pork, veal, lamb,duck, and rabbit. I don't eat most meat because ofthe fact of the conditions that most of the animals live in and theproblem with hormone and steroid use. I love eggs and cheesetoo much to give 'em up, and can't see how people can go on avoidingthings like that, lol!

 

[kgarver]

it's duck liver. the controversy comes intoplay because ducks on foie gras farms are force-fed huge amounts offood by machines to make their livers bigger all for the sake of humanconsumption.


gentle giants wrote:

I am the same way (except I don't know what foie gras is)

 

[lionheadbunny]

rabbits do have one tear duct in each eye!!!!

 

[Spring]

kgarver wrote:

it's duck liver. the controversy comes into play becauseducks on foie gras farms are force-fed huge amounts of food by machinesto make their livers bigger all for the sake of humanconsumption.

That is horrible! Is that why vegetarians sometimes eat fish? The theory from the lobsters that they don't feel pain?

 

[AnnaS]

Actually I don't understand why cows have tohave more than one calf to produce milk, I think as long you keepmilking the cow it will produce milk. I read about one woman who keptbreastfeeding her child for 7 years soI guess as long as milkis needed it will be produced.