Skip to comments.
Westerners are changing the way they see animals, study shows
Denver Rocky Mountain News ^
| Gary Gerhard
Posted on 11/12/2005 11:44:43 AM PST by Graybeard58
click here to read article
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-40, 41-60, 61-71 next last
Elk bask in the morning light at Moraine Park in Rocky Mountain National Park on Thursday. A CSU study of 12,673 Westerners indicates a shift in the way they view animals - not as food but as "part of our extended family." About 35 percent of the 641 Coloradans polled are animal lovers who don't condone hunting or fishing.
There was a picture with this quote but it was so small it was hard to tell what it was.
Have fun with your comments.
To: All
The study even found some people who said if there was an accident involving a human and an animal, they would help the animal first. Sick.
2
posted on
11/12/2005 11:46:45 AM PST
by
Graybeard58
(Remember and pray for Sgt. Matt Maupin - MIA/POW- Iraq since 04/09/04)
To: Graybeard58
Earth worhsipping PETA brainless crap.
To: Graybeard58
Colorado has been taken over by Californicators who seem to think that their Hamburger and Salmon come from a magical factory. Even Californicator Freepers are a bunch of softies when it comes to animals.
Ah, for the good old days, when Cockfighting was legal and we killed for food.
4
posted on
11/12/2005 11:49:18 AM PST
by
Clemenza
(In League with the Freemasons, The Bilderbergers, and the Learned Elders of Zion)
To: Graybeard58
If we aren't supposed to eat animals then why are they made of meat?
I just love animals. They're simply delicious!
http://mtd.com/tasty/
5
posted on
11/12/2005 11:49:48 AM PST
by
Tarantulas
( Illegal immigration - the trojan horse that's treated like a sacred cow)
To: Graybeard58; jan in Colorado
Such a shoddy, biased study. For example...
34 percent believe wildlife exists for personal or economic uses, such as hunting or fishing.
I wouldn't be included in that 34 percent. I don't believe they "exist for" personal or economic uses...but personal or economic uses are quite valid.
6
posted on
11/12/2005 11:53:06 AM PST
by
Gondring
(I'll give up my right to die when hell freezes over my dead body!)
To: Graybeard58
7
posted on
11/12/2005 11:53:54 AM PST
by
Dallas59
(“You love life, while we love death.” - Al-Qaeda / Democratic Party)
To: Graybeard58
"...the majority probably believed in hunting wild animals."
Probably? There goes the crediblity of this post. How do we know that there isn't more of an interest in hunting?
Pure-D BS.
8
posted on
11/12/2005 11:54:01 AM PST
by
lawdude
(Err Amerika induces "in-talk-sication".)
To: Graybeard58
Animals. They're what's for dinner.
That said, if it isn't threatening you (or someone else, or your propery), and you don't want to eat it, it shouldn't be harmed.
9
posted on
11/12/2005 11:55:39 AM PST
by
M203M4
To: Clemenza
At one time we kept a few chickens so we always had fresh eggs.
My brother in law would never accept the few dozen extra eggs we always had, he preferred "factory eggs" from the store.
We never were able to convince him that eggs come from chickens on farms, not a "factory". We could never convince him that what you fed a chicken determined the colestoral content of the egg, the hardness of the eggshell, and color of the yolk, and that infact our all grain fed chickens laid better eggs than those "factory" ones, which were fed by-products made from redenring plants.
As far as wild critters are concerned, I veiw them as something to eat, and always will, because that's what they are. They have no other perpose other than being part of the foodchain. Of course we should always manage their welbeing to ensure we always have plenty to eat...
To: Graybeard58
Says to me the brainwashing efforts since the 60's (teaching children in schools and mass media that animals have thoughts and feelings just like us) have paid off. Repeat often enough to impressionable minds that Bambi was an ordinary fawn, that Mother birds share their feelings with their family by singing, etc and you'll convert the third of the country that doesn't allow any empirical observation to color their views...
11
posted on
11/12/2005 11:59:10 AM PST
by
Kay Ludlow
(Free market, but cautious about what I support with my dollars)
To: Clemenza
I'm not, but I havent hunted in cali in 10 years. Its gettin bad.
To: Graybeard58
plants have feeeeelings to yaknow,, and rocks too, or so I hear. well, I don't hear them when I hug them ... but.. ;-)
13
posted on
11/12/2005 12:05:45 PM PST
by
NormsRevenge
(Semper Fi ... Monthly Donor spoken Here. Go to ... https://secure.freerepublic.com/donate/)
To: Graybeard58
"Westerners are changing the way they see animals, study shows"'Tiz true. I am finding a wider and wider array of them delicious and am discovering new ways to prepare them.
14
posted on
11/12/2005 12:06:22 PM PST
by
muir_redwoods
(Free Sirhan Sirhan, after all, the bastard who killed Mary Jo Kopechne is walking around free)
To: Graybeard58
The worship of nature rather then the Creator was foretold many centuries ago.
"Ive said it once, and Ill say it again: Hell in a handbasket!"-- Grandpa Simpson
15
posted on
11/12/2005 12:11:53 PM PST
by
rollo tomasi
(Working hard to pay for deadbeats and corrupt politicians.)
To: Clemenza
I'm one of those darned ol' Californian Freepers.
I eat and enjoy meat and dairy products. I see no problem with people hunting to feed themselves and their families. In fact, I admire them for doing so.
Here's the bit where you and I apparently disagree: enjoyment of animal suffering for 'entertainment' value, e.g., cockfighting and the like. Most hunters I've known (in several different states) have taken pride in their skill in making a 'clean kill' (i.e., not making the animal suffer unnecessarily, but instead providing a quick and clean death). That's one of the values I admire in hunters, along with self-reliance, etc. Making the animal suffer for the sake of suffering is very much frowned upon by the hunters I've been privileged to know.
Flame me as a 'softie Californicator' if you wish.
16
posted on
11/12/2005 12:15:34 PM PST
by
annie laurie
(All that is gold does not glitter, not all those who wander are lost)
To: Tarantulas
I understand that "Vegetarian" is a Cherokee word meaning "very bad hunter." ;)
17
posted on
11/12/2005 12:19:58 PM PST
by
Grizzled Bear
("Does not play well with others.")
To: Forte Runningrock
We could never convince him that what you fed a chicken determined the colestoral content of the egg, the hardness of the eggshell, and color of the yolk, and that infact our all grain fed chickens laid better eggs than those "factory" ones, which were fed by-products made from redenring plants.You've got that right! Give me home-raised eggs over "factory eggs" any day :)
18
posted on
11/12/2005 12:23:00 PM PST
by
annie laurie
(All that is gold does not glitter, not all those who wander are lost)
To: Graybeard58
More and more Westerners are seeing the fish, fowl and wild animals around them as something to cherish rather than something to eat. Some people are taking it way, waaaaay beyond that.
To: Forte Runningrock
I always thought chickens WERE egg factories.
Take him to a "Chicken-Battery" (I think that's the correct name for it). Let him watch the process his factory eggs take to get from the bird to the store. After he recovers from his break down; take him out for ice cream.
Then show him the "Dairy Factory."
20
posted on
11/12/2005 12:24:12 PM PST
by
Grizzled Bear
("Does not play well with others.")
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-40, 41-60, 61-71 next last
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.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson