[monday]

"I really hate to side with PETA on something, but that is just disgusting. I'm not opposed to skinning animals, but let's keep it humane."

I agree I guess. But what is humane? Should we require they each be individually sedated before they are killed? and if we require animals killed for their skins be sedated, then how can we logically require any less for animals killed for their meat?

The problem with banning dog and cat fur is, why are dogs and cats special? I have two dogs that I love. One is sitting at my feet as I type, however, if we ban dog and cat fur, logically we should ban all types of animal fur. There really isn't much difference between a cat and a mink intellectually speaking. If we ban all animal fur then logically we should also ban meat and meat byproducts.

Is this what we want? It is obvious this is what Paul McCartney and his PETA buddies want, but we need to think about where this is all heading before blindly deciding based on emotion.

[Zeppelin]

I wouldnt say "blindly deciding based on emotion." the article says that the dogs and cats were thrown into boilers alive. I too have a dog, but I don't have a problem with dogskin/catskin apparel if thats what people want, but I would require they not boil them alive, or throw them from heights to break their bones, as was depicted in the video. Simple decapitation would be much less painless. But most people would have problems with dogskin/catskin because of emotional attachment to the species, as opposed to, say, a turkey. My argument was that theres more humane ways of doing it than China is practicing.