PETA Seeks Memorials to Cows Killed on Ill. Roads

[applecorped]

http://www.chicagotribune.com/topic/disasters-accidents/accidental-death/300000069.topic

"It would serve as a tribute to the victims, according to People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals (http://www.chicagotribune.com/topic/social-issues/people-for-the-ethical-treatment-of-animals-ORNPR0000030.topic), which also seeks installation of a second memorial to six cows killed in traffic after they were thrown from a truck that overturned on Oct. 14 near Cambridge, Ill.

The markers would be the first official highway memorials in the U.S. dedicated to animals killed in traffic accidents. Two previous applications submitted in Virginia, to honor almost 200 pigs killed in traffic wrecks, were turned down."




I'm moooved to tears about this.

[mikeyx]

http://www.chicagotribune.com/topic/disasters-accidents/accidental-death/300000069.topic

"It would serve as a tribute to the victims, according to People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals (http://www.chicagotribune.com/topic/social-issues/people-for-the-ethical-treatment-of-animals-ORNPR0000030.topic), which also seeks installation of a second memorial to six cows killed in traffic after they were thrown from a truck that overturned on Oct. 14 near Cambridge, Ill.

The markers would be the first official highway memorials in the U.S. dedicated to animals killed in traffic accidents. Two previous applications submitted in Virginia, to honor almost 200 pigs killed in traffic wrecks, were turned down."




I'm moooved to tears about this.

PETA is likely the dumbest activist ever.................

[Dessi]

I can tell this is going to be a very informative thread.

[mikeyx]

I can tell this is going to be a very informative thread.

are you a peta member?

[Furcifer]

The markers would be the first official highway memorials in the U.S. dedicated to animals killed in traffic accidents.

I'm moooved to tears about this.

Markers? Why not use steaks?

[Dessi]

are you a peta member?
I work for the ALF, professional fire starter.

[tyr_13]

Some PETA members, and PETA in general believe and gain from the belief that the value of the life of an animal is equivalent to the value of the life of a human. From that mindset, it makes rational sense to want those lost lives be memorialized. Seeking the memorial for animals killed in traffic accidents probably draws less ire than comparing farming to the Holocaust, but it's the same reasoning.

But the premise draws fire as being insanely stupid, even if it's not offensive, so it still draws ire.

[NobbyNobbs]

This is udder nonsense but that won't keep them from milking it.

[mikeyx]

I work for the ALF, professional fire starter.

I used to think you were cute, so sad..........

[tyr_13]

I used to think you were cute, so sad..........

What does physical appearance have to do with anything?

[Resume]

I have no beef with anyone here, though some of you seem to have a stake in things; I'll just take the bull by the horns and advise that if you feel your ox is being gored, calm down and maybe take a hoof down the road.

[fuelair]

http://www.chicagotribune.com/topic/disasters-accidents/accidental-death/300000069.topic

"It would serve as a tribute to the victims, according to People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals (http://www.chicagotribune.com/topic/social-issues/people-for-the-ethical-treatment-of-animals-ORNPR0000030.topic), which also seeks installation of a second memorial to six cows killed in traffic after they were thrown from a truck that overturned on Oct. 14 near Cambridge, Ill.

The markers would be the first official highway memorials in the U.S. dedicated to animals killed in traffic accidents. Two previous applications submitted in Virginia, to honor almost 200 pigs killed in traffic wrecks, were turned down."




I'm moooved to tears about this.

PETA sucks mutant cow rectums for dinner.:jaw-dropp:jaw-dropp:jaw-dropp:jaw-dropp

[marplots]

Those cows gave their lives so I could live. Altruistic martyrs, the lot of them.

[sgtbaker]

If it's a fee PETA is willing to pay, who cares?

[Estellea]

I work for the ALF, professional fire starter.How in Hades can you think that is even remotely funny?

Este

[Johny2x4]

Odd, I care more about dogs I see ran over than cows, go figure.

[Estellea]

If this is how PETA wants to spend their money then I say let them; it's not like they're an organisation who are supposed to help animals or something like that...oh wait.

Este

[Furcifer]

How in Hades can you think that is even remotely funny?

Este

I believe it was sarcasm carried over from the other thread.

[Estellea]

I believe it was sarcasm carried over from the other thread.Thanks, I know that but I still can't find it remotely funny. It's really bad form to joke about something like that.

Este

[bynmdsue]

I don't know, it was 16 cows that died and that seems like an awful lot, maybe enough to memorialize but there's gotta be a line or else every damn squirrel is going to wind up with a sign. And then there's the deer strikes.

But if those 200 pigs in VA were all killed in the same incident there should definately be a marker.

[Furcifer]

And then there's the deer strikes.


Funny story: bought my first brand new car, nothing special a Dodge SX2.0. Had it for about 3 weeks when I was driving home on the 401 doing 117km/h when a deer decided to check out the new car smell for himself and stuck his head through the windshield. Totaled the car. The spoils of war what they are I was of course entitled to the carcass.

And of course I was a vegetarian at the time. :cool:

[Sledge]

Why put up memorials for these few cows rather than however many are slaughtered each day? I don't have the figures, but I feel pretty secure in guessing that more than sixteen cows are killed by the meat industry every day.

[dropzone]

What does physical appearance have to do with anything?I think you have that backwards: If she is cute, what do her personal beliefs have to do with anything? You can always pretend to listen and agree.

[Sledge]

What does physical appearance have to do with anything?

More to the point, what's she doing out of the kitchen?

[epepke]

They would probably get a lot more sympathy, as well as draw attention to a rather more serious problem, by putting up memorials to deer who had been killed on the highway.

As usual, PeTA seem hell-bent on ridiculing the very things they pretend to advocate.

[Andrew Wiggin]

This would be as silly as a monument to the hypothetical few drivers who crashed their cars and died on their morning commute to the world trade center on 9/11 and therefore avoided being in the collapse.

[commandlinegamer]

Extremist movement is extremist.

But maybe they're not so dumb; they're getting attention.

[mikeyx]

I have no beef with anyone here, though some of you seem to have a stake in things; I'll just take the bull by the horns and advise that if you feel your ox is being gored, calm down and maybe take a hoof down the road.

Dont have a cow man!

[Dessi]

More to the point, what's she doing out of the kitchen?
What are you, a cattle-tail?

[mikeyx]

More to the point, what's she doing out of the kitchen?

with shoes no less.

[ponderingturtle]

If this is how PETA wants to spend their money then I say let them; it's not like they're an organisation who are supposed to help animals or something like that...oh wait.

Este

What about a memorial wall for all the animals they directly put down? That would be more sensible place to start.

[Silly Green Monkey]

That's far too responsible for them to ever do. Admit fault? Them?

[Robrob]

Publicity stunt and nothing more.

[wakawakawaka]

What do you think is the wackiest PETA stunt? I think its the time they accuse seaworld of breaking the ban on slavery!

[portlandatheist]

What about the slugs? Is anybody going to give the slugs a voice?

[marplots]

What were the names of the cows?
I would like to pray for them.

[fuelair]

What about the slugs? Is anybody going to give the slugs a voice?

Nope - just want those PETA idiots to shut up and go away - they shouldn't have a voice.

[ponderingturtle]

What do you think is the wackiest PETA stunt? I think its the time they accuse seaworld of breaking the ban on slavery!

Trying to get Fishkill to change its name to Fishsave. They know nothing about history of the Hudson valley. Kill is dutch for stream.

[tyr_13]

Nope - just want those PETA idiots to shut up and go away - they shouldn't have a voice.

'Having a voice' doesn't mean one gets to be insulated from criticisms of use of that voice. Critics get that voice as well. Don't like what they're saying? Criticize it. Just try to use a valid criticism.

This is one of the less offensive things PETA has done from my point of view. If they want to do so, and have the permission of the land owners, I don't see a problem with it. It's their money, and they're free to use it. It's not even out of line with their declared charity status, unlike some of their other spending.

[marplots]

Is there a specific fund set up for the bovine memorial? I would like to contribute.

But then there's this: http://www.northmyrtlebeachonline.com/modules/news/article.php?storyid=2161
"State officials worry that they are distractions and hazardous to drivers and may cause more accidents."

[Wolfman]

PETA going to far?

I think not! The problem is they aren't going far enough!!

What about acknowledgement and reparations for the Cow Holocaust that's been going on for centuries! How many cows have lived and died in the equivalent of Nazi "Cow Concentration Camps"?

My proposal:

1) All "Cow Concentration Camps" (ie. farms, dairies, slaughter houses, etc.) should be closed immediately, and all living cows released to live freely, as they please

2) The heads of every government in the world that has used "Cow Concentration Camps" should issue an official acknowledgment of their heinous abuses, and make an official apology

3) All living cows whose predecessors suffered or were killed in the "Cow Concentration Camps" should receive financial compensation (subject to adequate documentation of the deaths of their predecessors, and proof of their relationship)

4) Wherever possible, the remains (steaks, hamburger, bones, guts, etc.) of those cows killed in this holocaust should be returned to their families, and the state should also pay for proper funerals and interment of the remains

5) Establish an international monument to the Cow Holocaust at the United Nations, listing the names of every person who ever ate or used a cow-derived product (meat, leather, milk, etc.); and a vow to never allow such a Holocaust to happen again

6) Award India a special Nobel Prize for its historic refusal to participate in the Cow Holocaust, going to far as to provide shelter and succor to their bovine companions, and even sacrifice their own comfort in order to ensure the cows do not suffer

This, of course, is only the beginning...once adequate precedent is established, we can go on to do the same for pigs, chickens, sheep, fish...and not stop until the day that there is an international memorial to commemorate the final end to the Earthworm Holocaust, as fishermen around the world stop using them as bait, and children are taught (upon pain of having a limb cut off) not to stomp on earthworms laying on the sidewalk.

PETA? Bunch of do-nothing moderate softies, if ya' ask me!

[bit_pattern]

What about acknowledgement and reparations for the Cow Holocaust that's been going on for centuries! How many cows have lived and died in the equivalent of Nazi "Cow Concentration Camps"?

I think that future generations are going to look back on this period of industrial slaughter with much the same revulsion as they look at Auschwitz and the horrors of WW2.

[marplots]

I think that future generations are going to look back on this period of industrial slaughter with much the same revulsion as they look at Auschwitz and the horrors of WW2.

This is good.
Because I wouldn't want my generation solving all the moral dilemmas. Those unborn future people will need something to feel good about.

It is my duty and pleasure to continue my brutal carnivore ways so that someday, some shining day, they can look down on me with disgust. This is my gift to them. Well... that, and global warming.

[bit_pattern]

This is good.
Because I wouldn't want my generation solving all the moral dilemmas. Those unborn future people will need something to feel good about.

It is my duty and pleasure to continue my brutal carnivore ways so that someday, some shining day, they can look down on me with disgust. This is my gift to them. Well... that, and global warming.

We have vegans to do that already in the here and now :p

But in all seriousness, I don't mean to moralise about my dietary choices, I really don't, it was just a reflection on the idea of a Cow Auschwitz and that while we obviously don't see it as a moral quandary that maybe in the future they will. Kind of like how we see slavery today compared to how they saw it in the 18th century.

[cornsail]

While we're on Auschwitz, wouldn't this be a bit like someone in Nazi Germany proposing a memorial for Jews who've died in train accidents?

[cornsail]

Thanks, I know that but I still can't find it remotely funny. It's really bad form to joke about something like that.

Este

You must be a blast at parties.

[sadhatter]

If animals are to be given the same rights as people, then my extension they should be given the same responsibilities. I always wonder what segment of peta gets to talk to lions, and tigers and whathave you about their brutal killing of animals.

[Johny2x4]

I think that future generations are going to look back on this period of industrial slaughter with much the same revulsion as they look at Auschwitz and the horrors of WW2.

With the amount of tragedies that fill the 20 and 21 century, animal slaughter is gonna be way down the bottom of things to be outraged about.

[marplots]

We have vegans to do that already in the here and now :p

But in all seriousness, I don't mean to moralise about my dietary choices, I really don't, it was just a reflection on the idea of a Cow Auschwitz and that while we obviously don't see it as a moral quandary that maybe in the future they will. Kind of like how we see slavery today compared to how they saw it in the 18th century.

Could be.
I'm a big dog fan (in both senses of the phrase) and I was aghast at how I saw dogs treated while I was in Asia. In many ways, they were livestock as much as pets (South Korea, 1980s -ish). I'm revolted when I see a dog mistreated, even if it's just what I perceive to be emotional abuse.

So I could see the whole animal rights thing taking off. But I live in the situation I'm in. I eat meat without guilt. I wouldn't eat a person or a dog though, so I'm at least part way down that road.

Maybe I'm the slave owner who doesn't beat his slaves. Or the Nazi who isn't a sadist. Still foul by definition, but not as foul as the label implies. I guess that puts me in the "reachable middle" camp for the propaganda.

[Irony]

I wholeheartedly agree with erecting a memorial. I suggest a stately pair of golden arches.

[bit_pattern]

With the amount of tragedies that fill the 20 and 21 century, animal slaughter is gonna be way down the bottom of things to be outraged about.

Only if you put human lives above those of other sentient beings, which was my point, I think in the future we're likely to have a very different set of moral values and the billions of slaughtered animals are going to far outweigh the millions of humans killed in war and genocide. I believe that it will all be viewed as part of the same inexplicably violent instincts of 20th Century humans.

[Kahalachan]

If it's a fee PETA is willing to pay, who cares?

This.

Just like religion, why should my money go to something I don't believe in?

If PETA wants to pay let them do it.

[marplots]

Do they have PETA in Norway? This would be a great spot for a monument:

http://news.yahoo.com/blogs/sideshow/20-tons-herring-wash-norway-coast-183358564.html

[epepke]

We have vegans to do that already in the here and now :p

But in all seriousness, I don't mean to moralise about my dietary choices, I really don't, it was just a reflection on the idea of a Cow Auschwitz and that while we obviously don't see it as a moral quandary that maybe in the future they will. Kind of like how we see slavery today compared to how they saw it in the 18th century.

Cornsail had the best answer, though it came after your post and you may not have seen it:

While we're on Auschwitz, wouldn't this be a bit like someone in Nazi Germany proposing a memorial for Jews who've died in train accidents?

The idea that people might look back at factory farming with revulsion, well, maybe so. I think it would even be a good thing. Probably would require some technological advances to happen, but the first time some good products came on the market, I'd be the first in line.

The idea that cows killed on the roads are somehow related to cows killed in slaughterhouses, or that someone either now in the future might look at a person who held that idea with acquiescence, nope. It's fundamentally flawed, enough that one might much more plausibly wonder if it be caused by some cognitive defect related to a nutritional deficiency.

[bit_pattern]

Cornsail had the best answer, though it came after your post and you may not have seen it:

I saw it, was going to comment but got distracted, I agree wholeheartedly.


The idea that people might look back at factory farming with revulsion, well, maybe so. I think it would even be a good thing. Probably would require some technological advances to happen, but the first time some good products came on the market, I'd be the first in line.

Same here. I think there is and has been good cause to eat meat throughout human history but that today, at least for we privileged Westerners, there are plenty of other forms of more ethically suitable forms of protein. I'm under no illusions that such a shift in moral perspective would happen immediately, it will require significant technological advances before we can stop eating animals.

The idea that cows killed on the roads are somehow related to cows killed in slaughterhouses, or that someone either now in the future might look at a person who held that idea with acquiescence, nope. It's fundamentally flawed, enough that one might much more plausibly wonder if it be caused by some cognitive defect related to a nutritional deficiency.

Yes, well, it's a damned good thing no one but you has actually made such a connection because my understanding is that the reflections on the morality of Bovine Auschwitz weren't actually related to the proposed memorial, they were just an extension of the wider discussion on our relationship with animals.

[epepke]

I saw it, was going to comment but got distracted, I agree wholeheartedly.

Same here. I think there is and has been good cause to eat meat throughout human history but that today, at least for we privileged Westerners, there are plenty of other forms of more ethically suitable forms of protein. I'm under no illusions that such a shift in moral perspective would happen immediately, it will require significant technological advances before we can stop eating animals.

Good so far.

Yes, well, it's a damned good thing no one but you has actually made such a connection because my understanding is that the reflections on the morality of Bovine Auschwitz weren't actually related to the proposed memorial, they were just an extension of the wider discussion on our relationship with animals.

Well, perhaps you can help me here. There are two threads I've noticed about veganism recently. One is this one, which has what I think is an obviously stupid proposal by PeTA. The other was a very Poe-like comment about how vegans are superior.

Is there some reason to try to build some "wider discussion" on such particularly egregious examples of vapidity?

I don't see a lot of conspiracy theory discussions turned into serious, calm discussions of physics, let alone ones where someone accuses me of being the only person to have noticed the idiocy (as you just did).

In fact, I'd like to see and participate in a serious "wider discussion on our relationship with the animals" WITHOUT being significantly taken over, or even started with, declarations of the moral supremacy of vegans or chazzerei by PeTA or some such nonsense. Truly, it doesn't seem to happen, and what does happen gives me a sense of "good cop, bad cop" and "pay no attention to the nutcase vegans behind the curtain." Why does this not happen?

[bit_pattern]

Well, perhaps you can help me here. There are two threads I've noticed about veganism recently. One is this one, which has what I think is an obviously stupid proposal by PeTA. The other was a very Poe-like comment about how vegans are superior.

Is there some reason to try to build some "wider discussion" on such particularly egregious examples of vapidity?

Other than the fact we're on a discussion forum? From my perspective, I just saw a comment about Bovine Auschwitz, had a think about it, then made a remark that lead to a few replies. Nothing in that sequence of evvents had anything to do with PETA's monument. I think it is quite natural for topics to diverge from the OP when they are obviously stupid and sensationalist but actually pertain to a wider problem that touches people personally.

I don't see a lot of conspiracy theory discussions turned into serious, calm discussions of physics, let alone ones where someone accuses me of being the only person to have noticed the idiocy (as you just did).

You didn't notice any idiocy, you just made a mistake in assuming that the discussion on Auschwitz was related to the OP, when it wasn't, it might have sparked the discussion but the memorial hadn't much to do with the idea of industrial scale slaughter being on the same moral scale as Auschwitz.

In fact, I'd like to see and participate in a serious "wider discussion on our relationship with the animals" WITHOUT being significantly taken over, or even started with, declarations of the moral supremacy of vegans or chazzerei by PeTA or some such nonsense. Truly, it doesn't seem to happen, and what does happen gives me a sense of "good cop, bad cop" and "pay no attention to the nutcase vegans behind the curtain." Why does this not happen?

You could start your own thread? As to why it doesn't happen, I'd imagine that's because when you start talking about a subject that matters to somebody passionate about a certain issue then the things they are passionate about will be in a sense the moral compass they use to navigate their way through the discussion.

For instance, I don't care much for, nor know a great deal about PETA or their background, I am however interested in the moral and ethical quandary posed by the consumption of meat and the wide scale industrial slaughter of other sentient creatures. Whereas it could go the other way, you could start your thread and find PETA supporters arguing for a monument to bovine traffic accidents. Either way, you can't control the flow of debate, it happens naturally. You can either choose to participate, or not participate, complaining about the nature of the discussion isn't going to get you anywhere.

[Johny2x4]

Only if you put human lives above those of other sentient beings, which was my point, I think in the future we're likely to have a very different set of moral values and the billions of slaughtered animals are going to far outweigh the millions of humans killed in war and genocide. I believe that it will all be viewed as part of the same inexplicably violent instincts of 20th Century humans.

You´re must be joking... :boggled:

I mean, I already thought you had a confused morality after the Auschwiz comments, but now? Damm....

Tell you what, let´s give you an AK and ship you to Somalia. Let´s see how you compare the two AFTER you spend sometime fighting for your life on a daily basis. I will gladly contribute to that.

[bit_pattern]

You´re must be joking... :boggled:

I mean, I already thought you had a confused morality after the Auschwiz comments, but now? Damm....

Tell you what, let´s give you an AK and ship you to Somalia. Let´s see how you compare the two AFTER you spend sometime fighting for your life on a daily basis. I will gladly contribute to that.

That makes no sense to me, sorry. You're in Portugal so maybe it's a translation thing but I'm really not getting the point you are trying to make. What does not killing other sentient animals have anything to do with fighting for survival with an AK in Somalia? :confused:

[Johny2x4]

The fact that you compare animal slaughter to some of the worst tragedies of the XX and XXI centuries. It cheapens them and frankly it´s insulting to the peoples that have gone through them.

Maybe if you experience first hand what´s it´s like, you wouldn´t be a bit self righteous. Somalia was the first example that came to mind, but I´m sure you could be placed in an large number of true and actual tragedies to knock some sense into you.

[bit_pattern]

The fact that you compare animal slaughter to some of the worst tragedies of the XX and XXI centuries. It cheapens them and frankly it´s insulting to the peoples that have gone through them.

Maybe if you experience first hand what´s it´s like, you wouldn´t be a bit self righteous. Somalia was the first example that came to mind, but I´m sure you could be placed in an large number of true and actual tragedies to knock some sense into you.

You evidently still don't get my point. I think that one day humans will recognise humans and human-animals to be equal, we all feel pain and emotions, killing a human is no less ethical than killing any other sentient being.

Obviously, human survival is more important to humans than survival of other species, that is fine and if people need to eat meat they need to eat meat. But it is my personal opinion that humans will eventually have a much higher degree of empathy for other sentient creatures than we have today and will recoil in horror at the thought of what we did to animals in our era.

At least the Nazi's didn't make Big Mac's and pet food out of their victims.

[Johny2x4]

At least the Nazi's didn't make Big Mac's and pet food out of their victims.

No, they made lamps and soap, and killed people for the lols. It´s amazing how you choose to ignore actual history.

I oppose cosmetic animal testing, I oppose whale slaughter, I like to see more painless methods of killing animals for food, but I suppose the fact I don´t equate that (or still eat meat) to the m************ Holocaust, makes me the likes of Goebbels and Himmler, right?

[bit_pattern]

but I suppose the fact I don´t equate that (or still eat meat) to the m************ Holocaust, makes me the likes of Goebbels and Himmler, right?

No it doesn't. It makes you you. I don't think people who owned slaves in the 18th century were necessarily bad people (I'm sure some were and most were't, just like today), just that they lived in a different era and had a different moral perspective that we don't share today. Same as I believe that in the future people will have a similar disbelief and shock at the way we treat animals and may see the scale of the slaughter in similar terms that they see the human slaughter that went on over the same era. That doesn't make you a bad person if you eat meat, it just means you inherited different moral values. Moral values shift over time. It is not unreasonable to assume future moral values will be significantly different to our own. That's not a judgement call.

[Stomatopoda]

Only if you put human lives above those of other sentient beings, which was my point, I think in the future we're likely to have a very different set of moral values and the billions of slaughtered animals are going to far outweigh the millions of humans killed in war and genocide. I believe that it will all be viewed as part of the same inexplicably violent instincts of 20th Century humans.

Why do you discriminate against non-"sentient" beings, huh?? Carrots react to external stimuli, but just because they don't belong to your closed-minded group of "central nervous system" fat-cats, you think their lives are meaningless?! Such bigotry! Let the rabbits wear glasses. Save our brothers!

[bit_pattern]

Why do you discriminate against non-"sentient" beings, huh?? Carrots react to external stimuli, but just because they don't belong to your closed-minded group of "central nervous system" fat-cats, you think their lives are meaningless?! Such bigotry! Let the rabbits wear glasses. Save our brothers!

I bet you thought you were really clever when you thought that up, didn't you? :p

http://forums.randi.org/showpost.php?p=7909954&postcount=1263

Zen did a good job at concisely stating the view that I hold, I can't be bothered repeating what he said so here is the link :)

[ginjawarrior]

Why do you discriminate against non-"sentient" beings, huh?? Carrots react to external stimuli, but just because they don't belong to your closed-minded group of "central nervous system" fat-cats, you think their lives are meaningless?! Such bigotry! Let the rabbits wear glasses. Save our brothers!
yay tool :)
kOvwc8_QXiY
I bet you thought you were really clever when you thought that up, didn't you? :p

http://forums.randi.org/showpost.php?p=7909954&postcount=1263

Zen did a good job at concisely stating the view that I hold, I can't be bothered repeating what he said so here is the link :)

sounds suspiciously fruitarian to me ;)

[bit_pattern]

sounds suspiciously fruitarian to me ;)

Lol. No I'm chubby enough without living off sugar :eek: It's actually based on Buddhist thought.

[Damien Evans]

What do you think is the wackiest PETA stunt? I think its the time they accuse seaworld of breaking the ban on slavery!

There was the time they tried to get Judas Priest to change the name of Hell Bent For Leather to Hell Bent For Pleather.

http://www.roadrunnerrecords.com/blabbermouth.net/news.aspx?mode=Article&newsitemID=5573


Funnily enough Judas Priest already wore fake leather on stage by then.

[TeapotCavalry]

I bet you thought you were really clever when you thought that up, didn't you? :p

http://forums.randi.org/showpost.php?p=7909954&postcount=1263

Zen did a good job at concisely stating the view that I hold, I can't be bothered repeating what he said so here is the link :)

Here's what he said:

I don't think anyone has suggested that plant life is "worthless". IMO, needlessly killing plants is immoral. Needless killing of any living thing is amoral.

However, we do need to sustain ourselves by eating once-alive beings. We have to make some choice as to what we'll consume to sustain our own life. Eating plants reasonably minimizes the known suffering that is inflicted on living beings and allows us to sustain ourselves. (bolding mine)

Am I correct to assume the bolding part is the gist of the argument? Seems rather arbitrary to just flat out downplay the suffering (distress) of plants. Doesn't seem so reasonable to me. I might as arbitrarily downplay the suffering of other animals (which I in a way do, I'm a speciesist) Or are we, again, discriminating by central nervous system?

[Silly Green Monkey]

Especially as plants are eaten alive.

[KwamiFabu]

PETA is a waste of time and money. It needs to go.

[TeapotCavalry]

PETA is a waste of time and money. It needs to go.

Well, if it's a waste of their time and their money, why worry about it?

[Stomatopoda]

What bothers me about PETA is how many ignorant fools donate to them, thinking they're doing a good deed and that their money will be used for useful things like shelters, reforestation, research, etc, when in reality, it's being used on inflammatory advertising and/or funneled to extremist groups. Sane, useful causes often can't compete with PETA's media presence.

[bit_pattern]

I might as arbitrarily downplay the suffering of other animals (which I in a way do, I'm a speciesist) Or are we, again, discriminating by central nervous system?

There's no "we" about it. Everybody has to make their own choices and be responsible for them. For me, that means eating plants and not animals. What it means for you is up to you to decide :)