Posted on 12/17/2005 6:07:46 PM PST by blam
My ex-wife's lawyer did the same thing to me, but I wasn't given anything for the pain.
It's grown awfully quiet in here since you pointed out the fact that the skinning alive is indeed happening...
You realize it's 3AM in some parts of the country. I'm here because I'm a glutton for punishment :^)
I'm not surprised to hear that live skinning is happening in the world. Is it happening on the scale such that a great many furs in the stores are likely to be mis-labeled, such that one should "avoid all fur products"? BZZZZZZT. Sorry I'm not buying it. I think a lie is being sandwitched between two truths here. Like I said, someone who is not sympathetic to PETA and not an anti-fur nut will have to make the case. I think they're stretching the truth to fit their agenda.
,,, fur coats and winter. It's it and that's that.
I have no problem with people wearing fur coats, just not made from dogs or cats.
It's quite a leap of logic to deny that the skinning takes place because Peta is against all fur coats.
That's not all they're arguing in the story, and they specifically do try to get people to avoid all fur from this one argument ("It is a disgusting industry and our advice is simply to avoid all types of fur."). They are making the specific charge that so many pelts from dogs and cats are making it into the commercial market as mis-labeled items that it's "unsafe" to buy any fur products for fear of buying something made from a dog or a cat. I'm pointing out that they have not made this case, and that their attempt to show their case with the "cat rug" is not only inadequate to their argument, it smacks of demagoguery and convinces me otherwise (that such widespread commercial penetration is indeed not taking place). Their example is something that specifically could never prove their argument, as it could convince no one of being anything other than what it is. Are cats and dogs being skinned somewhere in the world? Probably. Is it a problem in the commercial fur market, to the specific degree that one should avoid all fur, as they recommend? They have not shown this, and their (in my opinion) overreach tells me that it probably isn't the case. They simply have no credibility.
Now you contradict your own demagoguery:
No one skins dogs or any other animal alive...As I said, BS.
Skinning an animal alive would destroy the pelt 100% of the time. Struggling animals tend to get blood all over the pelt (bye bye, fur), and would make it impossible to make clean cuts. The more I look at this story, the more convinced I am that it's a 100% manufactured LIE.
100%, no less.
It simply doesn't hold water. Skinning alive. TOTAL BS.
I guess it's easy to make such blanket statements, not unlike the what you're accusing Peta of doing...
""You can find dog fur in shopping centres in Britain labelled as something else. It is a disgusting industry and our advice is simply to avoid all types of fur.""
Yes! Trapping was a cruel thing inflicted on wild animals, too. We don't need fur coats.
If you look around long enough, you could find some guy in China serving a fetus as a delicacy. Does that mean there are 100,000 dead fetus's showing up at McDonalds?
I smell a rat, not a dog or cat. I believe there is a little sensationalism in this article with embellishment.
Since when did the PETA crowd care about facts anyway?
I still say BS. Sorry, but I don't believe it. There is no reason to skin them alive. As I said before this is BS.
Very inhumane and just sad.
That picture of those dogs crammed into that little cage pretty much ruined my morning.
BS, MS, PHD. Why should we want to reply.
The part about systematically skinning them alive to "preserve the freshness of the fur" is BS. However, I don't doubt for a second, that the people doing this don't worry if some of the dogs aren't quite dead, or even unconscious, when they're skinned. You can be sure that they are using some cheap unreliable method of killing the dogs in large batches, with most but not all being dead before they are quickly pushed ahead to the skinning phase of the operation. People who kill animals to make a profit from their fur are completely hardened to the suffering of sentient creatures. There are well-documented instances of baby harp seal hunters skinning the little seals alive -- they just can't be bothered to take another whack at the poor thing's head if the first one didn't finish the job.
Um... the picture is cat fur, not dog fur.
Anyway, it would seem really stupid to skin any animal alive. It would make it really hard to get an intact pelt. This has to be bogus.
AH I see it says that. Why don't they show a picture of dog fur then so people can see what it looks like when they get a 'korean wolf' coat?
So why is it wrong to have fur coats from dogs but not wolves? Aren't they dogs too?
Anyway... still the idea that they're skinned alive has got to be just them yanking people's chains.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.