PETA hopes billboards spark controver...

PETA hopes billboards spark controversy at Thanksgiving dinner tables

There are 74 comments on the Prince George Citizen story from Sep 27, 2012, titled PETA hopes billboards spark controversy at Thanksgiving dinner tables. In it, Prince George Citizen reports that:

The billboards, which will also run in Winnipeg and Ottawa, will read: 'Kids, if you wouldn't eat your dog, why eat a turkey? Go vegan.' Lauren Stroyeck of People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals says the ad's intent is to get children and their parents thinking about why some animals are consumed as food but not others.

Join the discussion below, or Read more at Prince George Citizen.

Since: Apr 12

Location hidden

#54 Oct 24, 2012
hunters are COWARDS wrote:
<quoted text>haha....thanks my friend!:) Unbelievable how many posts the crybaby trolls whine to the mods about. I feel sorry for the mods for having to deal with the whiny trolls.
hey! no problem HAC, glad to be of service. yeah it's truly unbelievable what passes for fair and balanced here on these topix forums. but i've seen worse, even on so-called vegan friendly forums.
hunters are COWARDS

Virginia Beach, VA

#55 Oct 24, 2012
mojo karma cookie wrote:
<quoted text>hey! no problem HAC, glad to be of service. yeah it's truly unbelievable what passes for fair and balanced here on these topix forums. but i've seen worse, even on so-called vegan friendly forums.
Unfortunately, there seems to always be at least a few pitiful, socially inept attention seeking trolls on just about every internet forum. though I have been on a few that have really good moderators and when the forums don't have several thousands of posts every day (like topix) it's easier to weed out the morons. Like I said, I pity the topix mods for having to deal with the PoS trolls who infest these threads and then incessantly whine to the mods when they get their sorry fat asses kicked around with the TRUTH.

Anyone with good sense looking at these threads has to shake their heads at the absurdity of past middle age slobs having hissy fits day in and day out over people who eat plants. Hilarious yet so pathetic at the same time. Wanna place a bet on which troll will infest the thread first in the morning? jk....because we already know which loser will be here first thing...just like every morning, flailing about throwing uncontrollable hissy fits!:)

Have a good night, my friend!:)

“Use renewable resources”

Since: Apr 11

Wear fur and save the earth

#56 Oct 25, 2012
mojo karma cookie wrote:
<quoted text>wrong. instant fail. the word natural can have many meanings, depending on context and usage.
http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/nat...
but in this case i'm sure it means either normal or derived from nature.
this definition from wikipedia for natural foods is quite interesting, as it highlights the inappropriate and basically useless definitions for natural and organic, as it applies to consumer goods and foodstuffs here in the united states.
*****
“Natural foods” and “all natural foods” are widely used terms in food labeling and marketing with a variety of definitions, most of which are vague. The term is assumed to imply foods that are minimally processed and do not contain manufactured ingredients, but the lack of standards in most jurisdictions means that the term assures nothing. The term “organic” has similar implications and has an established legal definition in many countries and an international standard. In some places, the term “natural” is defined and enforced. In others, such as the United States, it has no meaning.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Natural_foods
*****
so yeah thanks for proving once again that you are a witless and delusional "brain on dead" superficial idiot. and your cherished trollspew is pathetic and obscene, fodder for dull and apathetic minds.
If we are using "normal" and "derived from nature" humans eating meat is "natural" while taking pills is "not natural." If you are going to argue that taking things from nature and then do things to them so they no longer have a "natural" form, then the term looses all meaning as everything is "natural." Suggesting that taking a pill is natural while killing and eating an animal is unnatural is one of the more ridiculous things you have said HAC.
Jessie

Dover, PA

#57 Oct 25, 2012
also, creating an account so you can agree with yourself is not something that demonstrates strength with regard to your position. In fact, it is quite the opposite. Having to create an account so "someone" agrees with you is a sign of weakness and/or stupidity. I makes me laugh.

Since: Apr 12

Location hidden

#58 Oct 25, 2012
usa blockhead the braindamaged sycophant wrote:
<quoted text>
If we are using "normal" and "derived from nature" humans eating meat is "natural" while taking pills is "not natural." If you are going to argue that taking things from nature and then do things to them so they no longer have a "natural" form, then the term looses all meaning as everything is "natural." Suggesting that taking a pill is natural while killing and eating an animal is unnatural is one of the more ridiculous things you have said HAC.
wrong. your are twisting and distorting simple, easy to understand definition as nothing more than a deficient flame-bait tactic. FTR you are a complete fucking moron, there is no doubt about it. yes human beings can eat meat that doesn't mean it's natural or healthy. although it is obviously part of the evolutionary landscape. just like a human being can eat poo-poo straight out of the toilet, again that does not mean that it is natural, healthy or good for you.

i am glad that you are attempting to distinguish between synthetic substances and those that are derived from nature and those that are derived from natural substances. i think it is an important distinction to make, but once again you have managed to leave this important point hanging in the breeze.

Since: Apr 12

Location hidden

#59 Oct 25, 2012
[QUOTE who="jessie can't think"]also, creating an account so you can agree with yourself is not something that demonstrates strength with regard to your position. In fact, it is quite the opposite. Having to create an account so "someone" agrees with you is a sign of weakness and/or stupidity. I makes me laugh.[/QUOTE]such idiotic kidblather. grow a pair baby.

Since: Apr 12

Location hidden

#60 Oct 25, 2012
usa blockhead the braindamaged sycophant wrote:
<quoted text>
(A) Perhaps you don't understand what "natural" means.

***and***

(B)You don't appear to have even a basic understanding of the terminology and/or principles.
wait. false dichotomy. doesn't this hinge on what a natural scavenger may or may not be. that is the way you have framed this ridiculous off-topic kidblather. you obviously seem to be lacking basic critical thinking skills. the rest of the crap in yer god forsaken post was equally unreasonable and irrelevant.

“Use renewable resources”

Since: Apr 11

Wear fur and save the earth

#61 Oct 25, 2012
mojo karma cookie wrote:
<quoted text>wait. false dichotomy. doesn't this hinge on what a natural scavenger may or may not be. that is the way you have framed this ridiculous off-topic kidblather. you obviously seem to be lacking basic critical thinking skills. the rest of the crap in yer god forsaken post was equally unreasonable and irrelevant.
Yeah, about that. In no way can the 2 things you quoted be an example of a false dichotomy. You don't even have a basic understanding of logic. In addition to biology classes, you are also in need of a basic logic course.

“Use renewable resources”

Since: Apr 11

Wear fur and save the earth

#62 Oct 25, 2012
mojo karma cookie wrote:
<quoted text>wrong. your are twisting and distorting simple, easy to understand definition as nothing more than a deficient flame-bait tactic. FTR you are a complete fucking moron, there is no doubt about it. yes human beings can eat meat that doesn't mean it's natural or healthy. although it is obviously part of the evolutionary landscape. just like a human being can eat poo-poo straight out of the toilet, again that does not mean that it is natural, healthy or good for you.
i am glad that you are attempting to distinguish between synthetic substances and those that are derived from nature and those that are derived from natural substances. i think it is an important distinction to make, but once again you have managed to leave this important point hanging in the breeze.
Pills/capsules are unnatural.
Meat is natural.

Seriously, you cannot be possibly arguing otherwise can you? I challenge you to find pills/capsules growing in nature. If you do, I will recant my laughter.
mojo karma cookie

San Jose, CA

#63 Oct 25, 2012
usa blockhead the braindamaged sycophant wrote:
<quoted text>
Yeah, about that. In no way can the 2 things you quoted be an example of a false dichotomy. You don't even have a basic understanding of logic. In addition to biology classes, you are also in need of a basic logic course.
wrong. obviously you are not functionally literate otherwise you would understand that what i have stated is correct. like i said before you are a total, delusional and complete moron, with no basic understanding of the world around him.

your vapid and idiotic trollspew seems to have gotten the better of you. the issue, as you pretend to frame it, isn't your moronic and dull-minded definition twisting and bogus propaganda, it's what or what not constitutes a natual scavenger, as it concerns human and non-human animals in our evolutionary past.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/False_dilemma

http://c2.com/cgi/wiki...

http://www.nizkor.org/features/fallacies/fals...
mojo karma cookie

San Jose, CA

#64 Oct 25, 2012
usa blockhead the braindamaged sycophant wrote:
<quoted text>
Yeah, about that. In no way can the 2 things you quoted be an example of a false dichotomy. You don't even have a basic understanding of logic. In addition to biology classes, you are also in need of a basic logic course.
wrong as usual. your vapid and pointless trollspew seems to have gotten the better of you. i was pointing out the faulty nature of you pretended fast-food logic, nothing you say makes any real sense or is relevant to this discussion. your statements seem to lack commonsense and a fair amount of veracity.

in case you have magically forgotten, you are pretending to force this discussion into what is or what is not a natural scavenger, whether it is a human or non-human animal, from our evolutionary past. you pretending to actually know and understand the science underneath is absurd, completely obscene and pointless. not to mention ironic and totally bogus.

http://www.nizkor.org/features/fallacies/fals...

“Use renewable resources”

Since: Apr 11

Wear fur and save the earth

#65 Oct 26, 2012
mojo karma cookie wrote:
<quoted text>wrong. obviously you are not functionally literate otherwise you would understand that what i have stated is correct. like i said before you are a total, delusional and complete moron, with no basic understanding of the world around him.
your vapid and idiotic trollspew seems to have gotten the better of you. the issue, as you pretend to frame it, isn't your moronic and dull-minded definition twisting and bogus propaganda, it's what or what not constitutes a natual scavenger, as it concerns human and non-human animals in our evolutionary past.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/False_dilemma
http://c2.com/cgi/wiki...
http://www.nizkor.org/features/fallacies/fals...
I know what a false dichotomy is. The problem is that you do not. I have not attempted to shove you into 1 of 2 groups when more exist. I think what you are trying to argue is a non sequitur (it does not follow). I stated that because you do not know what "natural" means that you need to take a course on biology and/or evolution. I stand by my assertion that if you do not know what "natural" means, you require more education. Perhaps a biology course or a course on evolution could clear things up. In addition, since you don't understand the laws of logic, perhaps a course on logic could be beneficial as well.

“Use renewable resources”

Since: Apr 11

Wear fur and save the earth

#66 Oct 26, 2012
mojo karma cookie wrote:
<quoted text>wrong as usual. your vapid and pointless trollspew seems to have gotten the better of you. i was pointing out the faulty nature of you pretended fast-food logic, nothing you say makes any real sense or is relevant to this discussion. your statements seem to lack commonsense and a fair amount of veracity.
in case you have magically forgotten, you are pretending to force this discussion into what is or what is not a natural scavenger, whether it is a human or non-human animal, from our evolutionary past. you pretending to actually know and understand the science underneath is absurd, completely obscene and pointless. not to mention ironic and totally bogus.
http://www.nizkor.org/features/fallacies/fals...
I wasn't talking about what is/isn't a natural scavenger. I was talking about natural/unnatural food sources. Meat is a natural food source. Your pills are not. The fact that you do not understand this demonstrates a lack of understanding on your part.

As for humans being natural scavengers, millions of years of human survival (and death of those who did not scavenge) absolutely refute your wacky assertions.

Since: Apr 12

Location hidden

#67 Oct 27, 2012
usa blockhead the braindamaged sycophant wrote:
<quoted text>
I know what a false dichotomy is.
obviously you do not know what a false dichotomy or false dilemma is, or any other logical construct. and it is obvious that you cannot graps these and other simple ideas in logic. what a macaroon.

here is your free animal rights lesson for today.

http://www.sharkonline.org/

Since: Apr 12

Location hidden

#68 Oct 27, 2012
Stanley Dobbs wrote:
Hunter is all knowing and all powerful. Hunter thinks its a god.
that ain't the half of it. hunter has some serious issues, beyond being a garden variety sociopath and a violent psychopath.

Since: Apr 12

Location hidden

#69 Oct 27, 2012
hiss of death wrote:
<quoted text>The theory that humans are not omnivores is also dismissed by science. Just saying.
well kiss of dunce you are wrong again as usual. but your shady and deficient statement hinges on what an omnivore might be. technically you are correct, but comparative anatomy science shows that humans are primarily vegetarians.

“Use renewable resources”

Since: Apr 11

Wear fur and save the earth

#70 Oct 27, 2012
mojo karma cookie wrote:
<quoted text>obviously you do not know what a false dichotomy or false dilemma is, or any other logical construct. and it is obvious that you cannot graps these and other simple ideas in logic. what a macaroon.
here is your free animal rights lesson for today.
http://www.sharkonline.org/
What you are attempting to argue is a non-sequitur...not a false dichotomy. False dichotomy does not in any way apply. Then you use ad hominem attacks. You are the one who has a deficiency in the principles of logic.
HUNTERS ARE COWARDS

Virginia Beach, VA

#71 Oct 27, 2012
USA R0CKS wrote:
<quoted text>
What you are attempting to argue is a non-sequitur...not a false dichotomy. False dichotomy does not in any way apply. Then you use ad hominem attacks. You are the one who has a deficiency in the principles of logic.
WRONG as always, troll. Unlike YOU, mojo karma cookie is not deficient in anything. Unlike YOU, mojo has knowledge and experience as well as compassion and empathy. You're just a brain dead, attention seeking, corpse eating TROLL who serves no purpose. Get lost you pathetic PoS.
John

Brisbane, Australia

#72 Oct 28, 2012
HUNTERS ARE COWARDS wrote:
<quoted text>WRONG as always, troll. Unlike YOU, mojo karma cookie is not deficient in anything. Unlike YOU, mojo has knowledge and experience as well as compassion and empathy. You're just a brain dead, attention seeking, corpse eating TROLL who serves no purpose. Get lost you pathetic PoS.
No, mojo karma cookie is a gibbering imbecile just like you.
In fact, mojo karma cookie IS you HAC you sad little troll.
USA ROCKS is self evidently correct - eating meat is natural, taking vitamin supplement pills to try to prevent death from veganism is unnatural.
What would you HAC know of "compassion and empathy"?
You have no compassion for or empathy with or understanding of your own species. Instead you have the pretence of "compassion and empathy" with other species that do not have intelligence or the power of speech, which is the only reason the beasts of the field don't tell you straight up what an idiot you are HAC.
hunters are COWARDS

Virginia Beach, VA

#74 Oct 28, 2012
As predicted, the spineless, sackless insecure COWARD from oz is STILL flailing about in his uncontrollable pansyass hissy fits screaming about the 'big bad VEGANS' that widdle johnny frets over every second of his pathetic, pointless cowardly 'life'!! Keep whining about the big bad VEGANS, widdle johnny because it only magnifies what a sackless, spineless, frightened COWARD you are!!!'tis true and you will prove it again and again and again, because like all spineless, sackless COWARDS you lack pride, dignity, confidence and intelligence!

Be sure to come back real soon for more humiliation!!

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

Thanksgiving Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
News Travel Q&A: Best to trim route for 'epic' Calif... 22 hr Sheri 1
News TV Review: 'Michael Jackson: Bad' no match for NFL (Nov '12) Apr 21 Octopus 84
News Brasch WordsA Turkey by Any Other Name is Still... Apr 19 Lucy Jane 1
News Tulare officer faces assault charge (Mar '11) Mar '16 The Cleaning Guys 5
News 'We weren't supposed to read books, we had to h... Mar '16 Shapeshifter 1
News Convicted Bridgeport strangler back behind bars Mar '16 BPT 3
News Sydney's Cargo Bar up for sale after 15 years -... Mar '16 May 1
More from around the web