HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: spp@zabriskie.berkeley.edu (Steve Pope)
Newsgroups: talk.politics.animals
Subject: Re: Another interesting bit of "activism"
Date: 16 Nov 1992 17:30:22 GMT
Organization: U.C. Berkeley -- ERL
NNTP-Posting-Host: zion.berkeley.edu

>There was an interesting event a few years ago in Madison, Wisconsin,
>where I lived at the time.  The U.W. arboretum sits in the center of
>Madison, several hundred acres of woods surrounded by the city.
>Absolutely free of predators, the deer herd grows with abandon, and
>the arboretum staff had been accustomed to thinning the herd each
>autumn.  Without thinning the herd the arboretum would fairly quickly
>be stripped of all undergrowth, and a deer famine would ensue.  Being
>in the middle of the city it is not safe to allow normal deer hunting,
>so the arboretum staff had set up a blind and salt lick to attract the
>deer to a clearing where they would thin the herd.

This is not the most humane approach to the problem.  Better
would be to capture, surgically sterilize, and release the animals
to control the popoulation.

>This had been going on for years, but one year the staff made the
>mistake of announcing to the public when the deer thinning was
>scheduled.  

Why is this a mistake?  Perhaps the public has a
perspective on the problem that the staff lacks.

>You can't go set up birth control clinics for deer, and there are a
>LOT of deer, so the cost of managing the herds is a significant
>concern.  

The city of Madison should've thought about that cost
before installing the arboretum.

>I can't get away from the thought that it is hard to make a
>go of it in this world if you don't have big brown eyes.

A gratuitous, off-the-subject comment.

>Charles F. Delwiche			(812) 855-2549
>Dept. of Biology, Indiana University
>Bloomington, IN 47405

Steve
Newsgroups: talk.politics.animals
From: swood@vela.acs.oakland.edu (Scott Wood - EVENSONG)
Subject: Re: steaming lobsters
Organization: Oakland University, Rochester MI.
Date: Thu, 19 Nov 1992 21:16:28 GMT

timi@mendel.berkeley.edu ( Tim Ikeda) writes:

`<Swood> would probably shoot you in the act.

`<grin> - An inside joke and probably not funny for everyone.

And Ted Nugent would just give them a Gonzolectomy and just "Whack em!"

(should explain, Ted was on air for 3 hours this morning.  As a result,
I am feeling rather "Teddish" this afternoon...)

From last years radio show regarding high numbers of car jackings
occuring last year in the Detroit area (paraphrased) :

" ... If some dirty, rotten scumbag wanted to take my car, I would say
'Sure, go ahead and take it...  ...but I should warn you pal, it comes
with a little LEAD poisoning' then I would fill 'em full of lead!!"

swood
-- 
  Nov. 14   Closing day of Bird season in Michigan and pheasant in zones 2 & 3
  Nov. 14   Closing day of Goose season (U.P. of Michigan)
  Nov. 14   Closing day of early Archery Deer season in Michigan
  Nov. 15   Opening day of Rifle Deer season in Michigan (YES!)
Newsgroups: talk.politics.animals
From: swood@vela.acs.oakland.edu (Scott Wood - EVENSONG)
Subject: Discrimatory treatment of animals
Organization: Oakland University, Rochester MI.
Date: Thu, 19 Nov 1992 02:18:07 GMT

Given that some people want to give animals the same rights and considerations
as humans, and given that some of these same people have commented that they
feel hunting is in-humane and unnecessary in present day for population
control and whereas they have suggested that an alternative would be to
chemically sterilize some animals.
Who chooses which animals and why?  If it would in fact be considered a
breach of human rights to sterilze a human against there will and in fact
be discriminatory in nature to not sterilize all humans, would that not
apply with the above stated logic to animals as well!  What ever happened
to the Animal Rights movement?  (ho hum - seems to be as hypocritical as
has always been S.O.P.)

swood

-- 
  Nov. 14   Closing day of Bird season in Michigan and pheasant in zones 2 & 3
  Nov. 14   Closing day of Goose season (U.P. of Michigan)
  Nov. 14   Closing day of early Archery Deer season in Michigan
  Nov. 15   Opening day of Rifle Deer season in Michigan (YES!)
Newsgroups: talk.politics.animals
From: todd@refrig.dixie.com (Todd H.)
Subject: Re: Posting fan mail fragments
Organization: throw it on the floor - it's happier there.
Date: Thu, 19 Nov 1992 19:09:53 GMT

russ@wpg.com (Russell Lawrence) writes:

>Can you tell the difference between verifiable facts and your own 
>fantasies?

Hilarious, Russell - a real knee-slapper.

The irony of hearing this from you was enough to make me laugh better than
I have in weeks.  I showed this one to a friend of mine, and he laughed really
hard for a few minutes, then said "uh-oh!".  I asked if he was OK, and he said
that he'd shit his pants.  Well, he still didn't move for a minute or so, and
I asked what was wrong.  He said "oh, nothing, I'm just not through yet."

(drum sounds) ta-dump.

Russell, I told you once that there are 1,683 Guidrys with listed telephone
numbers in the state of Louisiana.  If you're really worried about how a guy
like me could possibly know such a thing, I suggest you get a CompuServe
account, and type 'GO PHONEFILE' when you log on.  Amazing things, computers.

Given that, why do you think that there ISN'T a Linda Guidry in Louisiana?
Be honest, and keep your answers to 200 lines or less.

Besides, when she's posted her work phone number in her messages, she' really
not too hard to track down.

Now, you're not interested in my mother (god I hope not), so why don't you
just admit that your only goal in life is to fight on Usenet, and to hell
with the animals and everything else - you've got a hobby, and it keeps you
off the streets.

Your messages have a common theme - leave the issue behind about message 3 or
so, and concentrate on the opponent.  Did you work on the Bush campaign?

Grow up.

-- 
Todd++;
------------------
todd@refrig.dixie.com
**** I voted with the majority this past election - AGAINST Clinton! ****
Newsgroups: talk.politics.animals
From: myhui@bnr.ca (Michael Hui)
Subject: Re: research and medicine
Organization: Bell-Northern Research Ltd., Ottawa, Canada
Date: Sun, 22 Nov 92 16:55:47 GMT

In article <1992Nov18.201612.5344@samba.oit.unc.edu> itsmine@med.unc.edu (Greg Popken) writes:
>In article <1992Nov17.193707.6535@zooid.guild.org> rwaigh@zooid.UUCP (Rosemary Waigh) writes:
>> (The researcher can't be *certain* that the results obtained
>>in non-human animals will apply to humans anyway, can (s)he?)
>No your right nothing in science is certain.  If we already know how
>things will turn out we wouldn't need to do the research.

There are two separate questions here:

1. How does the non-human animal respond to the treatment. No, science cannot
   predict this completely, hence the need for the experiment.

2. Whatever the result, how well does it correlate to an experiment
   done with humans, which, of course, has never been done so far.

You give the answer to [1]. Rosemary Waigh asked question [2].

>But, in the vast majority of cases the information gathered from
>animals studies is applicable to humans.

Often times, using voluntary human subjects can give you far faster and
far more accurate results. Humans can talk to you. And you remove the
uncertainty in question [2] above, resulting in far faster
certification of new drugs and treatments. Now with Bill Clinton as
President, let's hope he repeals the executive order banning use of
fetal tissue for research.
-- 
Michael MY Hui  ~{~}  myhui@bnr.ca  Ottawa Canada
Newsgroups: talk.politics.animals
From: achenbac@epcot.spdc.ti.com (Jeff Achenbach)
Subject: Re: Another interesting bit of "activism"
Organization: TI Semiconductor Process and Design Center
Date: Mon, 16 Nov 1992 19:20:27 GMT

In article <1e8lreINN90o@agate.berkeley.edu> spp@zabriskie.berkeley.edu (Steve Pope) writes:
>
>>You can't go set up birth control clinics for deer, and there are a
>>LOT of deer, so the cost of managing the herds is a significant
>>concern.  
>
>The city of Madison should've thought about that cost
>before installing the arboretum.
>

So, Steve, are we to refrain from building parks so that animals won't 
populate them when they're done? Or maybe we should abandon any that wild
animals find attractive? Are you suggesting humans have no right to any
property (land) that wild animals may find attractive? And that we have no
right to protect it from them?
   Do y'all have fire ants in your part of the country? Roaches, mosquitos,
fleas, chiggers, ticks? All can be a serious problem. Do we humans have a 
right to eradicate (or attempt to) these pests when they become a problem?
If not, we'll have a fairly miserable existence here in the deep south. If
so, then how are overpopulous deer any different?  

Jeff Achenbach

Newsgroups: talk.politics.animals
From: russ@wpg.com (Russell Lawrence)
Subject: Re: animals in research
Organization: WP Group
Distribution: usa
Date: Mon, 16 Nov 1992 04:05:58 GMT


Russell Lawrence writes:
rl> Do you agree with me that the badness of torture depends on the 
rl> victim's ability to feel pain, rather than her ability to develop 
rl> and/or communicate conceptions of pain?  If so, please explain 
rl> why it might be "bad" to torture a woman, but "not bad" to 
rl> torture a female chimpanzee.  

From article <1992Nov16.013238.23471@samba.oit.unc.edu>, by itsmine@med.unc.edu (Greg Popken):
gp> Again no the falt in your actions is that by tortureing a person
gp> you are infringing on their rights.  

Without invoking a circular argument (ie "torture is wrong 
because torture is wrong"), please explain why you think humans 
ought to have a right not to be tortured.  

BTW, in a separate posting, you and I wrote:

======================================================================
gp> Rights are a human contraption and should only be applied to 
gp> humans.

rl> Why?

gp> Russell, i hope you will agree with me on this definition of a 
gp> right (if not please find a dictionary.  
gp> 
gp> A right is a claim or potential claim that one party may exercise 
gp> on another, based on laws and/or tradition.  
======================================================================

Let's test your definition with a real-life, historical example:

During the inquisition and counter-revolution, various european 
secular authorities (under church supervision) tortured millions 
of heretics in accordance with legal precedents established by 
roman law.  Would you say that the heretics had no rights...  
given the definition you've provided above?  

Now let's go back to the previous round of dialog:
======================================================================
rl> Do you agree with me that the badness of torture depends on the 
rl> victim's ability to feel pain, rather than her ability to develop 
rl> and/or communicate conceptions of pain?  If so, please explain 
rl> why it might be "bad" to torture a woman, but "not bad" to 
rl> torture a female chimpanzee.  

gp> Again no the falt in your actions is that by tortureing a person
gp> you are infringing on their rights.  
======================================================================

In view of the fact that the heretics did not have a right not to
be tortured, would this mean that there was nothing "bad" about
their painful treatment?

--
Russell Lawrence, WP Group, New Orleans (504) 443-5000
russ@wpg.com   uunet!wpg!russ
From: markwc@barney.esl.com (Mark Christiansen)
Newsgroups: talk.politics.animals
Subject: Re: animals in research
Date: 18 Nov 92 06:56:08 GMT
Organization: ESL Inc., Sunnyvale, CA

In article <BxvGAF.9E9@ccu.umanitoba.ca>
chrstie@ccu.umanitoba.ca (William John M. Christie) writes:
|
|In <Bxu6zB.y5@wpg.com> russ@wpg.com (Russell Lawrence) writes:
|
|>Russell Lawrence writes:
|>rl> Humans are animals, Greg. And human rights are a subset of animal 
|>rl> rights.   
|
|>From article <BxsMwB.7EI@ccu.umanitoba.ca>
|>chrstie@ccu.umanitoba.ca (William John M. Christie) writes:
|>jc>
|>jc> Out of curiosity (I don't know what transpired before) what are 
|>jc> the rights that animals give to each other?  What do you mean by 
|>jc> saying human rights are a subset of animal rights?  
|
|>Are you an animal, John?
|
|Actually I prefer to go by Will.  Yes I would consider myself basically an
|animal as opposed to a plant, bird, fish or reptile. 

Will, could you clarify the differences between animals and plants,
birds, fish, and reptiles?

|Now let's go back to the question, what are the rights that animals give
|each other?  In asking about the subset of animal rights I do not
|understand how the rights that humans have established in various
|political states (as rights given in each country vary) can be a subset
|when I don't see any rights that non-human animals afford each other.  In
|other words the only rights apparent are those set-up within certain political
|boundaries for humans.

Excellent point.  We humans can assign rights to the various creatures
of the plant and animal kingdoms (and non-organic objects like the
Earth) because one, we can reason and establish agreements with other
humans on how we will behave, and two, we are the king of the hill
(right now) as far as survival of the fittest is concerned.

Mark
-- 
   I do not feel obliged to believe that same God who endowed us with
sense, reason, and intellect had intended for us to forgo their use.
   -- Galileo
Newsgroups: talk.politics.animals
From: welchb@woods.ulowell.edu
Subject: steaming lobsters
Organization: University of Lowell
Date: Thu, 19 Nov 1992 15:38:19 GMT

(Sorry if this was covered before; I am not a regular reader.)
In the delicatessen department of my local supermarket, they have a sign
posted that, free of charge, they will steam your lobster purchase while
you are doing your other shopping.  Upon inquiry they tell me they steam
them live; I had always thought lobsters were killed by dropping them in
boiling water (which is bad enough).  This seems pretty horrible to me;
I do not know much about lobster biology, except that they can be very
lively, fast creatures.  If someone suggested "rabbit steamed to death"
there would be an outcry from many previously silent places.

1) Is this a normal way of preparing lobsters?  

2) I am thinking of protesting to the management (the store is part of a
fairly large chain).  Any suggestions on how to do it, other than
simply write a letter to customer service?
-- 
Brendan Welch, UMass/Lowell, W1LPG,  welchb@woods.ulowell.edu
Newsgroups: talk.politics.animals
From: redin@lysator.liu.se (Magnus Redin)
Subject: Re: Another interesting bit of "activism"
Organization: Lysator Academic Computer Society, Linkoping University, Sweden
Date: Tue, 17 Nov 1992 22:29:07 GMT

spp@zabriskie.berkeley.edu (Steve Pope) writes:
>I do not consider it acceptable to kill, bludgeon, poison
>etc. the deer just because we (a) want to build a recreational
>facility and (b) don't want to spend the money to address
>the situation humanely.
Isent it a waste of money and natural resourses to sterilice/feed
hormones to the deers? It gives better control over the population
and wery nutritient meat to kill them.
I cannot se a real difference between deers dying of old age, hunting
by carnivores or human hunters or disease. Death is death.
But it feels a little better if one dosent harm them so I
support efficient hunting and hunting if a population is growing
to much (Its also better for the ecosystems if one keeps them in balance.).
This is probably due to my mamalian instincts thats makes
me somewhat protective of animals to and not only humans.
But I dont like when people cant tell the difference between humans
and animals. I think they are loosing contact with the real world.
But its easier to live in a fiction in a city then on a farm where
one se birth-life-death daily.

--
--
Magnus Redin    Lysator Computer Club    redin@lysator.liu.se
Mail: Magnus redin, Rydsv{gen 240C26, 582 51 LINK|PING, SWEDEN
Phone: Sweden (0)13 260046 (Answering machine)
Newsgroups: talk.politics.animals
From: young@serum.kodak.com (Rich Young)
Subject: Re: Another interesting bit of "activism"
Originator: young@sasquatch
Reply-To: young@serum.kodak.com
Organization: Clinical Diagnostics Division, Eastman Kodak Company
Date: Mon, 16 Nov 92 22:54:40 GMT

In article <1e8lreINN90o@agate.berkeley.edu> spp@zabriskie.berkeley.edu (Steve Pope) writes:

>>There was an interesting event a few years ago in Madison, Wisconsin,
>>where I lived at the time.  The U.W. arboretum sits in the center of
>>Madison, several hundred acres of woods surrounded by the city.
>>Absolutely free of predators, the deer herd grows with abandon, and
>>the arboretum staff had been accustomed to thinning the herd each
>>autumn.  Without thinning the herd the arboretum would fairly quickly
>>be stripped of all undergrowth, and a deer famine would ensue.  Being
>>in the middle of the city it is not safe to allow normal deer hunting,
>>so the arboretum staff had set up a blind and salt lick to attract the
>>deer to a clearing where they would thin the herd.
>
>This is not the most humane approach to the problem.  Better
>would be to capture, surgically sterilize, and release the animals
>to control the popoulation.
>
>>This had been going on for years, but one year the staff made the
>>mistake of announcing to the public when the deer thinning was
>>scheduled.  
>
>Why is this a mistake?  Perhaps the public has a
>perspective on the problem that the staff lacks.
>
>>You can't go set up birth control clinics for deer, and there are a
>>LOT of deer, so the cost of managing the herds is a significant
>>concern.  
>
>The city of Madison should've thought about that cost
>before installing the arboretum.
>
>>I can't get away from the thought that it is hard to make a
>>go of it in this world if you don't have big brown eyes.
>
>A gratuitous, off-the-subject comment.

	Please note that, in all of the above, there is not a single
	indication that the part about the ARFs cutting down valuable
	trees was edited out.  Also please note that the part about
	the ARF actions wasn't addressed...almost as though it would
	be forgotten if it disappeared.

	Given this, I don't think it's a "gratuitous, off-the-subject
	comment" at all...it's a perfect summation of the AR attitude.


-Rich Young (These are not Kodak's opinions.)
Newsgroups: talk.politics.animals
From: me@halfab.ka.sub.org  (Udo_Meyer)
Subject: Re: animals in research.
Organization: Udo Meyer, Postwiese 32, 7746 Hornberg, Germany, 49 7833 1425
Date: Wed, 18 Nov 1992 00:09:40 GMT

In article <1992Nov9.154610.23202@samba.oit.unc.edu> itsmine@med.unc.edu (Greg  
Popken) writes:
> In article <1992Nov8.210634.755@halfab.ka.sub.org> me@halfab.ka.sub.org  
(Udo_Meyer) writes:
> >
> >I think that general public should be concerned about the harm to humans
> >by medicine that has been tested with animals!
> >
> >Like in the one of the last cases about some medicine where many people 
> 
> i don't think your argument belongs here.  This sounds like a discussion on
> the ethics of the particular company.  If the drug had proved harmful in
Yes, it has to do with the ethics of a particular company. But it is a
company that made and sold a product tested with animals. These tests
showed a problem. But it was sold. Was that company a 'black sheep'
or only a company that has been caught? 

> 
> ANIMAL RESEARCH SAVES LIVES!!    DOES ANYONE DISAGREE?
> 
>                                          Greg Poken 

YOU KNOW I DISAGREE. ANIMAL RESEARCH KILLS ANIMALS LIVES!!!

Udo.

>P.S Next posting please include references.  I don't doubt you word. But,
>I prefer to assess primary liturature myself. Thank you.
Before telling its name I first will reassure the name because I do not
want to 'flame' the false company. But there must exist some references
of this case in USA-courts. I will send it to you via mail.
Newsgroups: talk.politics.animals
From: Rosemary Waigh <rwaigh@zooid.guild.org>
Subject: Recommended readings? was Re: pointer to review articles
Reply-To: rwaigh@zooid.UUCP (Rosemary Waigh)
Organization: The Zoo of Ids
Distribution: talk
Date: Thu, 19 Nov 1992 02:23:52 GMT

I too would like some pointers to readings, in particular about
anti-animal rights philosophy.

I have read Alan Herscovici's _Second_Nature:_The_Animal_Rights_Controversy_
(recommended by PPF).  I have been unable to find two other books
recommended by PPF:

1.  _Animal_Rights_vs_Nature_ by Dr Walter Howard
2.  _The_Illusions_Of_Animal_Rights_ by Russ Carman

Has anyone been able to find these?  Are they any good?  Do you know where
I can get copies?

I can't recommend any short articles to the previous poster off the top of
my head.  Peter Singer's book, _Animal_Liberation_, is quite readable and
not too long.  I haven't read Regan's famous book yet (called I think 
_The_Case_for_Animal_Rights_) but it is another popular one on AR philosophy.

Ro
rwaigh@zooid.guild.org

Newsgroups: talk.politics.animals
From: russ@wpg.com (Russell Lawrence)
Subject: Re: More Violence(was Re: Posting fan mail fragments)
Organization: WP Group
Date: Mon, 16 Nov 1992 23:01:08 GMT

From article <1992Nov16.163533.28410@samba.oit.unc.edu>, by itsmine@med.unc.edu (Greg Popken):
gp> I would also point out that the toiletries you claim are 
gp> "cruelty-free" are usually not so.  The manufacturer simple used 
gp> components in the product that have already been tested.  Hence 
gp> there is no need for further testing of the product by them so 
gp> they can claim it is cruelty free.  

Can knowledge be tainted by the manner of its acquisition?  

-- 
Russell Lawrence, WP Group, New Orleans (504) 443-5000
russ@wpg.com   uunet!wpg!russ
Newsgroups: talk.politics.animals
From: russ@wpg.com (Russell Lawrence)
Subject: Re: Anti-AR movie goers - Please read
Organization: WP Group
Date: Mon, 16 Nov 1992 20:36:24 GMT

From article <viking.721894959@vincent1.iastate.edu>, by viking@iastate.edu (Dan Sorenson):
ds> No.  That "right" extends from being a superpower, and the
ds> USA is the biggest kid on the geopolitical block.  With this power
ds> comes responsibility.  Frankly, I don't care what the Vietnamese
ds> do in their country -- let them alone.  However, if China starts
ds> using the VC as a puppet for their political gains, it is legal and
ds> moral to try and stifle that response.  

Please tell us when China began using the VC as a puppet.  

ds> The same goes for the USSR, or even Syria.  Once things have 
ds> quited down, elections should decide the preferences of the 
ds> people.  As you should have noted by now, few revolutions are 
ds> backed by popular elections.  Were this the case, there'd be no 
ds> need for a revolution, would there?  

You're telling me what you think ought to be true, given your theories,
but your theories don't fit the historical facts.  Again, do your 
homework.  

-- 
Russell Lawrence, WP Group, New Orleans (504) 443-5000
russ@wpg.com   uunet!wpg!russ
Newsgroups: talk.politics.animals
From: swood@vela.acs.oakland.edu (Scott Wood - EVENSONG)
Subject: Re: Anti-AR movie goers - Please read
Organization: Oakland University, Rochester MI.
Distribution: usa
Date: Tue, 17 Nov 1992 16:17:27 GMT

Oh no - here we go again.  And I suppose that you feel that your arguements
on my private views of Jane Fonda's involvement in Vietnam as well as the
tangents you have spun it off into on historical debate of the conflict
relate to animals-rights discussions?

Yeah right...

swood

-- 
  Nov. 14   Closing day of Bird season in Michigan and pheasant in zones 2 & 3
  Nov. 14   Closing day of Goose season (U.P. of Michigan)
  Nov. 14   Closing day of early Archery Deer season in Michigan
  Nov. 15   Opening day of Rifle Deer season in Michigan (YES!)
Newsgroups: talk.politics.animals