I think people who buy/make/wear fur should have less freedom to make up for the destruction of millions upon millions of animals.

Dude.

If you can't post tits on the blog, but you can post that shit... Something is very wrong with this blog.

You guys need to have a meeting... a conference... SOMETHING.

Clearly, what's next for the fur haters is the extinction of cats. Cats torture their prey mercilessly, and if the concern is REALLY to lessen the suffering of animals instead of merely fucking with Schumacher and other furriers, the stamping out of cats needs to be added to the agenda.

Now, if you want to argue that it's "natural" for cats to torture their prey, then you are accepting the excuse that to torture creatures is okay as long as it's natural, and there you go with the start of a slippery slope, for many would find this impulse in human nature. If you argue that MOST people aren't prone to torture animals, and use that fact to argue that torture isn't natural, well homosexuality isn't something most people practice either. Is that natural? For the same reason I respect people's right to be gay, I respect people's right to sell and buy fur.

Whatever you do, BE CONSISTENT OR SHUT UP. If you're feeding your cat canned or dry cat food instead of mice and birds, THAT is unnatural.

I expect there's an unspoken agenda here having something to do with vegetarianism so I've put veal cutlets on my shopping list.

Carrie, they have vegan cat food now. All is lost.

I recognize those big rosey cheeks ? I've seen them hanging out,at a new pizza joint on SE Clinton. That's it, Amy Jenniges.

I will point out that old navy uses sweatshops...fucking moron, If you really give a shit you would make your own clothes out of wicker

People are expendable, but using animals for fur is deplorable.

"People are expendable." Yeah, especially the logic challenged. Mother Nature is a motherfucker. Turn all those weasels (minks are weasels) and foxes loose and what would they be doing? Well, they'd be out there increasing the suffering of mice and birds and fish. Net change in suffering? One weasel or fox in nature probably increases the suffering of hundreds of animals during its lifetime. Keep them in cages to make fur coats out of if you're REALLY concerned about suffering. And God DAMN it: There are children dying of diarrhea all over the world, and you're all weepy eyed over the suffering of some predators who've been known to go on killing sprees, killing every prey item they can find (let a weasel or fox into a chicken coop and see if it kills only what it can eat). Wouldn't your time be better spent making sure some of those kids get some Imodium A-D? Oh, I forgot: the kids, as people, are expendable. Fine fucking example of humanity you are.

Carrie - the argument is not what is "natural" or not. Cats do not have a choice in their prey. Normally developed humans DO have choices, and they ethically responsible for those choices in a way that nonhuman animals, babies, severely mentally handicapped people, etc. are not.

Anyway, I have yet to read about a cat caging a fox or mink in a tiny barren cage for life, and then skinning that animal for a luxury item.

Wile - will those people I save with Imodium grow up to defend caging, torturing (what else do you call being stuffed into a small cage for life, and then being anally electrocuted), and skinning alive helpless creatures, just because they don't happen to be human? Will they go on to stuff 100 land animals (raised on deplorably cruel factory farms) inside their mouths each year (as the average US resident does)? Will they defend catching monkeys in the wild, flying the terrified animals in the cargo holds of planes from Africa, and then sticking them alone in wire cages and dumping chemicals down their throats as per OHSU Primate Center? If so, I'll work on saving the animals. Humans are so self interested - no other creature's pain matters where your comfort is concerned - and screw the earth and the other creatures who inhabit it. If you are what it means to be human, you go "save the humans" (as though we aren't overtaking the planet into our own extinction anyway).

To all~
There are many important issues to be addressed. (but when) What effect do we have on eachother? Whose minds can really benefit from the information? Old systems die with old people, thankfully. The children need to know that the rate at which things are being used is not maintainable. They will not learn in school. They can choose, with guided fair knowledge, the other compassionate options, not only with fur, but food, and WAR, and health care, and humanitarian activism. We have an ethical root of responsibility as dictators of the natural world to promote balance and not perpetuate cruel acts on ourselves and anything that scurries in our path~...To truly lose the pride, still be realistic, optimistic, and successfully change our condition in life is a challenge most find hard to meet. Avoid Hypocrisy, and never stop rejecting the negative energy. NEVER!

Hey Ben:
The Vanilla Fudge just called from a pay phone at Haight-Ashbury. They want their speech back.

Robin, your argument implies that the question is ethical, and yet what is the basis for your ethics? Do you believe in an ethic based on your opinions (as it seems to me), or on one based on some cosmic or Platonic Absolute or on God's Ten Commandments? Whence comes this ethic you want to impose on me? What justifies it? I submit it's really nothing more than your opinion or preferance that you feel justified in imposing on others, you little fascist.

Maybe minks don't cage foxes, but ants enslave other ants and aphids.

As for choice, freedom of choice is just a feeling we have with no scientific basis. If you look for freedom of choice, you can't find it.

We are controlled by our brain, and yet our brain exists in a deterministic universe where biochemistry and bioelectricity rule our behavior. So, it appears our behavior isn't free at all, and involves no real choice, but is determined by physics or, if you will, Nature. If you counter this with the randomness of the subatomic level, are we any more free if our behavior is due to mere chance? I think not. If there's a third possible cause for behavior, I think it must be superstitious (religious), but I'm not religious. People have no more freedom of choice than cats or minks or ants. What man DOES have is the delusion of freedom.

Karen. As Sartre noted, there's no telling what a human will do until his/her life is over. Existence precedes essence in the case of a human. A mink or fox will kill, kill, kill cute little furry and feathered creatures its whole life. Its essence is born with its existence. You need to let a human being grow up before you know if it'll turn into a treehugging friend of all lifeforms or a meat eating lumberjack. I guess you are so down on life you're unwilling to take the chance. BTW, I'm not sure that being electrocuted through the asshole is any worse than being electrocuted in the mouth or ear or eyesocket. If mankind is as fucking horrible as you seem to think, then you should be happy we're about to wipe ourselves out. SOME other (by your account probably better) lifeform will take over. Isn't that an improvement? BTW, why not lay out your view on cats and dogs as pets. I'm guessing you oppose that as well, which should alienate you from the majority of other people here.

you all are forgetting that none of this is about the animals anyway..

ending their pain and suffering is just an excuse for vegan anarchists to get together once a week and make social connections.

Bebe, you have it right. It's become clear from the misanthropy of the Animal Rights advocates that they are the new Puritans. Remember what Macaulay wrote: "If the Puritans suppressed bull-baiting, it was not because it gave pain to the bull, but because it gave pleasure to the spectators." Obviously, given the profound hatred by the Animal Rights people for their fellow humans (exemplified by Karen above), it's not really about the animals, it's about the Animal Rights People's need for some professional help for their hostility. People are predators. Let's accept ourselves for what we are.

This whole discussion takes me back to the old question of "Can plants feel pain?" The usual answer is that "No, they can't feel pain because they don't have a nervous system." I suspect that many of these people also are pro-choice. And yet, an embryo or fetus has a much more developed nervous system than a clam or lobster, and yet to kill an embryo or fetus is supposedly okay up until the third trimester or even in the view of some, until it's born. Hmm... Anyway, wouldn't it be prudent until we are absolutely and 100% sure that plants can't feel pain (or some botanical analog) to not eat plants, either? In other words, shouldn't people just fucking STARVE TO DEATH?

O.k., smegma, since people are predators and we should all just accept it, I hope you don't waste my money by calling the police if someone attacks you. Just accept it. We should close all the rape crisis centers too.

Zola - since when are clams being used for their fur? Try staying on topic. A fox has a more developed nervous system than a two week old fetus.

Hi guys its me again. Can you look

Please do not hesitate to choose. This

Uh, tell me again why it's o.k. to skin animals alive for a fashion item? Why it's o.k. to keep a wild animal in a tiny cage for life because you think a fox trim collar looks cool? Why it's o.k. to raise rabbits on caging that digs into their sensitive footpads and drives them crazy because you enjoy the feel of their fur?

Are humans really this selfish?

http://www.furisdead.com

I must win this battle. You should help

schumacher throws in the towel!

http://www.kgw.com/news-local/stories/kgw_112806_news_schumacher_terrorists.33a8771c.html

My Dear Carrie,
Thanks for your comments, i get these questions a lot. (your comments in italics)

Clearly, what's next for the fur haters is the extinction of cats. Cats torture their prey mercilessly, and if the concern is REALLY to lessen the suffering of animals instead of merely fucking with Schumacher and other furriers, the stamping out of cats needs to be added to the agenda.

It's in their nature for cats to be predators. Many animals eat other animals to survive. Cat's don't systematically raise animals in extreme condition like that on factory farms. At least their prey had a chance at a good life outdoors. Even still cats are a domesticated animal, most don't hunt but are fed factory-farmed animal laden foods. The cats that do hunt are probably feral and scrapping by while decimating local wildlife populations. It's the responsibility of humans to keep feral cats off the street. Don't worry though, we're on the case. Many vegans are involved with working to rescuing suffering strays and overpopulation of companion animals.

Now, if you want to argue that it's "natural" for cats to torture their prey, then you are accepting the excuse that to torture creatures is okay as long as it's natural, and there you go with the start of a slippery slope, for many would find this impulse in human nature.

Having a choice to refrain from torturing animals is a luxury humans have. There is no reason to torture and murder animals for clothing, food or anything frankly. There are plenty of more humane, healthy and environmentally ways to fulfill our needs. This 'impulse' of human nature is just that. If everybody were to act on impulse imagine the chaos. Since humans can reason and make the choice it is our onus to do the right thing.

If you argue that MOST people aren't prone to torture animals, and use that fact to argue that torture isn't natural, well homosexuality isn't something most people practice either. Is that natural? For the same reason I respect people's right to be gay, I respect people's right to sell and buy fur.

Arguing on the 'naturalness' of homosexuality is not something i'd take you to task on in this thread. But i will say that being homosexual does not infringe on others but furriers do. In our civilizing society, THAT is unnatural.

Whatever you do, BE CONSISTENT OR SHUT UP. If you're feeding your cat canned or dry cat food instead of mice and birds, THAT is unnatural.

Everybody's lives are filled with inconsistencies, it's true. The horrible practices that go on to meet our needs makes it impossible to live in America without contributing in some way. But with education and the exchange of information we can stem the tide and reform our practices to become more sustainable, humane and fair for all especially other humans.

I expect there's an unspoken agenda here having something to do with vegetarianism so I've put veal cutlets on my shopping list.

You know if you drink milk or cheese already you might as well be eating veal. I wouldn't suggest increasing that though because there are a number of health risks associated with dairy. People have been thriving very well on a vegan diet for quite some time. Since we don't need to animals to survive and be healthy, their suffering is unnecessary and egregious.

I hope you consider my responses and check out what a vegan lifestyle entails. If you've been harassed or abused by an animal rights advocate in the past there is no excuse and we do apologize. You might see though how your language can incite negative response. Protesting fur and a vegan lifestyle are weird ideas in this culture i know, but a reasonable discourse may teach us all something. Let's address the issue at hand and not delve into these other straw men arguments. Your passion though is appreciated, some would rather shrug their shoulders and continue on in apathy.

Och beautifull site below too

I agree please revange

Do not be angry please