Jump to content




Welcome to Unexplained Mysteries! Please sign in or create an account to start posting and to access a host of extra features.


- - - - -

So is it OK to wear fur now?

mink fur wear peta fur coat

  • Please log in to reply
42 replies to this topic

#16    mfrmboy

mfrmboy

    Remote Viewer

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 520 posts
  • Joined:18 Mar 2006
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Past the stars and beyond the moon !

  • Beam Moo Up!

Posted 22 March 2013 - 04:36 PM

The reason people do not have as big a problem with leather is because it is a byproduct of the meat industry. The beef cattle here are killed humanly and then butchered.  But that Fox, Raccoon, Mink and many others are not used as food and are killed only for their fur. Many / Most killed cruely after spending their lives in small cages then skinned alive. If you don't believe it watch this if you dare.  I warn you it's very disturbing.......

LInk :



Edited by mfrmboy, 22 March 2013 - 05:27 PM.

One man's TOOL is another man's TOY ! :tu:

#17    mfrmboy

mfrmboy

    Remote Viewer

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 520 posts
  • Joined:18 Mar 2006
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Past the stars and beyond the moon !

  • Beam Moo Up!

Posted 22 March 2013 - 05:25 PM

Sorry for that but the cruelty must be stopped.

Edited by mfrmboy, 22 March 2013 - 05:54 PM.

One man's TOOL is another man's TOY ! :tu:

#18    redhen

redhen

    Poltergeist

  • Member
  • 2,825 posts
  • Joined:14 Aug 2005
  • Gender:Not Selected
  • Location:Samsara

Posted 22 March 2013 - 08:07 PM

View PostHilander, on 22 March 2013 - 03:40 PM, said:

I don't know why they make a big deal out of furs when nothing is said about leather.  Maybe because they like their leather shoes and handbags.

See above video on the tu quoque logical fallacy.


#19    redhen

redhen

    Poltergeist

  • Member
  • 2,825 posts
  • Joined:14 Aug 2005
  • Gender:Not Selected
  • Location:Samsara

Posted 22 March 2013 - 08:21 PM

View PostFrank Merton, on 22 March 2013 - 03:52 PM, said:

I have trouble as it is rationalizing my Buddhist heritage with eating meat, and now you guys bring up leather and furs and so on.  

Everyone lives with some amount of cognitive dissonance, hell even the Dalai Lama eats meat. He does this under his doctors instructions. Personally I think his doctor is misinformed, it's quite possible to obtain the same nutrients as meat from other sources. Then again, Tibet still has a State Oracle, it certainly is a weird syncretic religion.

Quote

When the animal has a better life being raised to be a product than it would have had in the wild,

That would be hard to prove, do you know of any empirical studies?

Quote

and when the animal is killed with no pain or fear,

and where does this occur?

Quote

then I take it this meets the Buddhist precept.  Indeed, one is doing the animal a favor by giving it the karma of help humans.  

you know what, please don't do me any favours.

Quote

But what about animals taken in the wild by hunting?  Justifying this is more difficult.  Obviously the Inuit who must kill to survive, and who does the rituals of his culture and so on is within Buddhist bounds.

yes, this is morally defensible.

Quote

In parts of the world where natural controls no longer exist, so that without hunting overpopulation and its ensuing Malthusian suffering would ensue, proper controlled hunting for management purposes seems justified.

Hmm, and why are there no natural controls? I would guess that top predators (our competitors) like wolves have been killed off. So now we must cull the deer for "management purposes".

Some final words for thought;




#20    redhen

redhen

    Poltergeist

  • Member
  • 2,825 posts
  • Joined:14 Aug 2005
  • Gender:Not Selected
  • Location:Samsara

Posted 22 March 2013 - 08:31 PM

View Postmfrmboy, on 22 March 2013 - 05:25 PM, said:

Sorry for that but the cruelty must be stopped.

Don't be sorry, these video exposés need to be shown every day. Fur farms in Russia and other countries operate in the same cruel way.  Electrocution is just one of the many acceptable ways to euthanize animals.  https://www.avma.org/KB/Policies/Documents/euthanasia.pdf


#21    MoorWalks

MoorWalks

    My freestyle rapping career didn't work out, so I came back

  • Member
  • 6,293 posts
  • Joined:12 Dec 2004
  • Gender:Male

  • The illegitimate love-child of Strategy and Creativity. Sex God, Entrepreneur, Super Hero, Rapper, Table Dancer.

Posted 22 March 2013 - 08:36 PM

View Postredhen, on 22 March 2013 - 08:21 PM, said:

Everyone lives with some amount of cognitive dissonance, hell even the Dalai Lama eats meat. He does this under his doctors instructions. Personally I think his doctor is misinformed, it's quite possible to obtain the same nutrients as meat from other sources. Then again, Tibet still has a State Oracle, it certainly is a weird syncretic religion.

Even the Dalai Lama swats flies.. I saw him do that during a talk.

Posted Image

#22    Moon Gazer

Moon Gazer

    Remote Viewer

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 542 posts
  • Joined:17 Jan 2011
  • Gender:Not Selected
  • Location:Pineapple under the Sea

  • Stonewylde.... follow me to Stonewylde....

Posted 22 March 2013 - 08:47 PM

View Postfreetoroam, on 21 March 2013 - 06:00 PM, said:

In places like Alaska and Siberia, its understandable for them to wear fur, especially if they hunt the animals to eat, then why not use the fur to keep warm?
Sausages are made up of what can not be sold as a cut, so if it is ok for them not to waste it, then the same should go for fur.

We have the fox thing were people want foxes killed, I do not agree with this because the meat is not used for food, but where meat is used as food then I can not see why the fur or hide can not be made use of.

As for models  or the rich buying it to show off their wealth....NO, that is wrong. Use the fur as a necessity and not a fashion statement!!

This is pretty much where I stand with regards to people wearing fur.


#23    freetoroam

freetoroam

    Honourary member of the UM asylum

  • Member
  • 6,677 posts
  • Joined:11 Nov 2012
  • Gender:Female
  • Location:rivers and canals of England and Wales.

  • If you didn't see it with your own eyes, or hear it with your own ears, don't invent it with your small mind and share it with your big mouth!

Posted 22 March 2013 - 09:28 PM

All this about fur and leather, how about halal which seems to be immune from the anti animal cruelty brigade?

In an ideal World a law would be passed were NO guns were allowed and all those out there destroyed, trouble is the law makers are not going to take a risk of trying to pass that without making sure they are armed first.

#24    redhen

redhen

    Poltergeist

  • Member
  • 2,825 posts
  • Joined:14 Aug 2005
  • Gender:Not Selected
  • Location:Samsara

Posted 23 March 2013 - 01:20 AM

View Postfreetoroam, on 22 March 2013 - 09:28 PM, said:

All this about fur and leather, how about halal which seems to be immune from the anti animal cruelty brigade?

Yup, animals suffer a lot of unnecessary pain and death, the definition of cruelty, but the original post was on fur and how fashion designers are pushing fur as um, fashionable.

anti animal cruelty brigade? I assume that's just rhetoric, or else I want to be at least a Brigadier General dammit. Yup, halal and kosher slaughter is unnecessary to say the least and hence cruel. But once again, most politicians, religious "leaders" and business all remain silent. Not only are "they", the anti animal cruelty brigade,  up against the usual barriers, but it's also highly politically incorrect. The bottom line though is the financial bottom line, as usual. Here's a recent example from France;

"Though a European law mandates that animals must be stunned unconscious before being killed, there is an exception for religious slaughter, where the animal's throat is slit while it's alive. The television documentary reported that most abattoirs around Paris practice only halal slaughter methods because it's too expensive to do both, and they don't want to miss out on the large Muslim market in and around the French capital."

Nope, wouldn't want to miss out on that fast growing Muslim population, mon Dieu.


#25    ChewiesArmy

ChewiesArmy

    Apparition

  • Member
  • PipPip
  • 307 posts
  • Joined:31 Jan 2011
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Rockford, Illinois

  • When you were born, you cried and the world rejoiced. Live your life so that when you die, the world cries and you rejoice. - Cherokee

Posted 23 March 2013 - 01:44 AM

It's okay to wear fur as long as it's before Labor Day...oh wait, that's white.

Animal cruelty aside, fur is just plain ugly on a human, as far as fashion. Now functional reasons, i.e. the Inuit, its fine, or, for post apocolytpic wear...then it really rocks! But you could always opt for the usual shoulder pads.

"And how do you know God doesn't swear? Especially taking a good look at the human race, it must be a part of his daily ritual" -Lewis Black

#26    Bavarian Raven

Bavarian Raven

    Psychic Spy

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,497 posts
  • Joined:14 Sep 2011
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:British Columbia

Posted 23 March 2013 - 02:00 AM

Nothing wrong with wearing fur. It's sustainable and environmentally friendly - in a world trying to go "green", we should be encouraging fur, over clothing made from cotton or plastics...


#27    evancj

evancj

    Poltergeist

  • Member
  • 2,767 posts
  • Joined:07 Sep 2006
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Northern, UT

Posted 23 March 2013 - 02:32 AM

We humans would never have made it out of the tropics without wearing fur. I think if you wear fur you should have the guts to kill an animal and skin it yourself at least once.

Very few human activities are humane, or good for the natural world. Some of us like to think we are humane and kind to all animals but none of us really are. Not even the PETA freaks, or vegans are innocent when it comes to the "murder" of animals.

Just think of all the environmental degradation thru topsoil erosion, pesticides, herbicides, the use of petroleum products, as well as habitat destruction, and all the displaced animals that cotton is responsible for. Petroleum products are used for synthetic fabrics.

All of us are animal killers.


#28    freetoroam

freetoroam

    Honourary member of the UM asylum

  • Member
  • 6,677 posts
  • Joined:11 Nov 2012
  • Gender:Female
  • Location:rivers and canals of England and Wales.

  • If you didn't see it with your own eyes, or hear it with your own ears, don't invent it with your small mind and share it with your big mouth!

Posted 23 March 2013 - 10:33 AM

View Postevancj, on 23 March 2013 - 02:32 AM, said:

We humans would never have made it out of the tropics without wearing fur. I think if you wear fur you should have the guts to kill an animal and skin it yourself at least once.

Very few human activities are humane, or good for the natural world. Some of us like to think we are humane and kind to all animals but none of us really are. Not even the PETA freaks, or vegans are innocent when it comes to the "murder" of animals.

Just think of all the environmental degradation thru topsoil erosion, pesticides, herbicides, the use of petroleum products, as well as habitat destruction, and all the displaced animals that cotton is responsible for. Petroleum products are used for synthetic fabrics.

All of us are animal killers.
Your point is valid, but nature is also cruel, its just the way it is. Animals kill animals. The difference with many humans and what is part of the natural world, is some do not kill for survival, they kill for money.
Big difference between killing to survive and stay warm than to killing to make money out of the animals bits, like fur or tusks.
As long as there is someone out there who will buy the furs and other animal parts to show off their wealth, there will always be killers.

In an ideal World a law would be passed were NO guns were allowed and all those out there destroyed, trouble is the law makers are not going to take a risk of trying to pass that without making sure they are armed first.

#29    Frank Merton

Frank Merton

    Blue fish

  • Member
  • 13,099 posts
  • Joined:22 Jan 2013
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Ho Chi Minh City, Vietnam

  • fmerton.blogspot.com

Posted 23 March 2013 - 11:48 AM

We got a nice informative and entertaining film on why two wrongs don't make a right (the tu quoque fallacy) and yet it's as though no one noticed and keeps doing it.

I don't eat mammalian  meat because I think, based on the presence of serotonin pathways and other similar considerations about the mammal brain, that they clearly fall into the category of sentient beings.  As the meat business is run today, I wouldn't touch it, but I was building a scenario where people could -- in fact there are three such scenarios.  The first is when one is served meat as a guest.  One does not pull a holier-than-thou and refuse it.  The second is when one is sure the animal lived a better life than in nature (not hard -- nature is brutal) and died humanely.  This is hard to do unless one is personally familiar with where the meat came from.  The third is when the animal's death came about during scientific management so as to keep populations from becoming harmfully excessive (usually done by having a hunting season).

There is little to distinguish not eating meat and not wearing leather shoes, and, in fact, I don't.  Living in Vietnam means I were rubber thongs outdoors and am barefoot indoors.  For more formal events I have a pair of plastic sandals.

Now what is my view of people who don't follow these rules?  I don't think about it.  That is their business, just as it is my business that I have decided it is okay to eat fish and poultry, while I assure you a strict monk would not.


#30    redhen

redhen

    Poltergeist

  • Member
  • 2,825 posts
  • Joined:14 Aug 2005
  • Gender:Not Selected
  • Location:Samsara

Posted 23 March 2013 - 01:42 PM

View Postevancj, on 23 March 2013 - 02:32 AM, said:

We humans would never have made it out of the tropics without wearing fur. I think if you wear fur you should have the guts to kill an animal and skin it yourself at least once.

This is a fallacy; appeal to tradition

Quote

Very few human activities are humane, or good for the natural world. Some of us like to think we are humane and kind to all animals but none of us really are. Not even the PETA freaks, or vegans are innocent when it comes to the "murder" of animals.

Just think of all the environmental degradation thru topsoil erosion, pesticides, herbicides, the use of petroleum products, as well as habitat destruction, and all the displaced animals that cotton is responsible for. Petroleum products are used for synthetic fabrics.

This is the tu quoque fallacy (see above video). In short this fallacy is an "appeal to hypocrisy, is a logical fallacy that attempts to discredit the opponent's position by asserting the opponent's failure to act consistently in accordance with that position; it attempts to show that a criticism or objection applies equally to the person making it. This dismisses someone's point of view based on criticism of the person's inconsistency, and not the position presented,"






Also tagged with mink, fur wear, peta, fur coat

0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users