From: unglenie@ford.ecn.purdue.edu (Robert J Unglenieks)
Subject: Re: PETA Activities Suspected of Violating FCC Act, Says PPF
Organization: Purdue University Engineering Computer Network
Distribution: usa
Date: Thu, 20 Aug 1992 03:51:19 GMT

John S. Van Etten writes:
>Robert J Unglenieks writes:
>>John.  There are those of us involved in animal issues that long for the
>>day that the media STOPS treating as nuts.  At a local meeting last monday,
>>we spent a lot of the time talking about how some of the local groups have
>>been treated by the media recently.  We KNOW how we are being perceived and
>>that image is not what we are.
>
>That's very interesting.  I get an entirely different perception.  The
>fanatical actions of ALF and such are often downplayed.  Also, the AR
>movement is often confused with being good for animals, by the media.
>Why do you get a different opinion?  

Because I am one of the people that is having my position mistated.  A recent
TV news story about a protest at the State Fair implied that the animal rights
movement is out of touch with the mainstream, although there is evidence to the
contrary.

> You folk will *never* help the herds (and hence the
>*greater number* of animals) by stopping hunting of the individuals.

What of the groups that purchase lands to set up sanctuaries?  Are these groups
not good for the herds?  What of the groups reintroducing native animals to
lands where they have been eradicated?  What of the countless hours local
groups have spent to clean up wildlife areas?  So these groups are not helping
"herds", but they are helping entire ecosystems.  Is this the wrong approach?

>Life just doesn't work that way.  Sacrifices must be made, and correct
>management and culling is proven to work.

Has birth control and reintroduction been proven not to work?

>>In a letter to the editor from Lisa Catapano, managing director, NAMES Project
>>Foundation came this reply to the ad:
>>
>>    It has come to our attention that some of the Exponent's readers have
>>    been confused by an advertisement for Americans for Medical Progress,
>>    Inc. that featured a photograph of the Names Project AIDS Memorial
>>    Quilt.  The NAMES Project Foundation wishes to clarify that it is in no
>>    way affiliated with AMP and does not endorse AMP's position regarding
>>    animal experimentation.  In response to our complaints, AMP has ceased
>>    all publication and dissemination of this advertisement.  Thank you.
>>
>>Seems to be one case where an anti-ar group thought it would have allies.....
>
>Let me try to get this straight (and remember I'm an old duffer, so
>it's pretty easy to confuse me).  You're saying that you AR folk are
>against trying to cure AIDS by experimenting on animals, but it's OK
>because some group associated with AIDS doesn't agree with some bunch
>of radicals about using lots of animals in experiments?  

Seems that AMP thought the public would be outraged that the AR movement is
against animal experimentation to find a cure for AIDS.  However, it also 
appears that an AIDS support group is against the AMP position.  Why does
the "opposition" resort to scare tactics to make a point?  Evidently the
group that should be outraged is in agreement.

>>All the good?  Does this include the Hegins pigeon shoot, the prairie dog
>>"roundup" in Nucla, CO, spring bear hunting, hunting ranches.....
>
>Of course not, Rob.  I never said it did.  Odd how these "canned hunt"
>activities bear such similarities to slaughterhouses, where the
>animals are led in for the kill.  Is a pigeon that is shot in more
>pain than a chicken that is thrown upside-down into a funnel and has
>it's throat slit and then flops around for a few minutes to "get the
>blood out of the meat?"  I still think your sights are set on the
>wrong targets, although I'm not trying to condone "canned hunting."

There is no difference and that is why my local group treats it as such.  But
if there is no difference between a "canned hunt" and a slaughterhouse, then
should canned hunts be perfectly ok?

>>Rob U, is jacklighting an ethical hunting practice?
>
>Two comments.  First, it's illegal here in New York, as in most other
>places.  Second, is a deer that is jacklighted and shot going to be
>any more dead or in any more pain than than one killed in the daytime?

They are both dead.....

>You've often told me that hunting is not a sport and that the deer
>don't have any real chance against a hunter, so why do you consider
>this case different?
>
>John

So, do you advocate legalizing of jacklighting?  There is no difference to me,
and if you think there is no difference then it is your duty as a man to
perform a bit of civil disobedience and start jacklighting.  Heck, it might
even be easier to bag a few this season......

Rob U, now if you hunted with a club or knife that would be sporting
--
-       Rob Unglenieks             REAL race cars DON'T wear BOWTIES       -
-     "Our task must be to free ourselves by widening our circle           -
-      of compassion to embrace all living creatures."                     -
-                           -  Albert Einstein                             -
Newsgroups: talk.politics.animals