Has anyone else seen these billboards sponsored by PETA*.
The line at the top says something like “If you choose to eat meat, why should I have to pay for your medical bills?”
*This didn’t mean Peta Wilson, who can “tax” my resources any time she wants.
It seems a reasonable extension of the mindset behind helmet laws, seatbelt laws, etc. It is also every bit as misplaced, IMO. If we as a society decide that we do not think people should be allowed to die untended in hospital lobbies because they lack the funds to pay for treatment, then we may decide to take steps to prevent that from happening. That does not imply that we now have the right to prohibit behaviors which carry an actuarial risk. After all, risk of heart disease can be reduced by drinking 1-2 glasses of red wine daily. Shall we then pass laws requiring all adults to consume wine with dinner?
The best lack all conviction
The worst are full of passionate intensity.
*
Is there scientific evidence that meat eaters are less healthy, or die younger, than non-meat eaters? I don’t think so. Therefore, I think PETA is going to far.
Smoking has been proved to have adverse health effects, and so has second-hand smoke. So smoking is a bigger problem.
The helmet law and seat belt law, IMHO, is a different kettle of fish.
Smoke-related diseases very commonly involve lengthy hospitalization and expensive treatment. therefore, there is an argument that society does not want to pay for medical treatments that arise from individuals’ life-choices or from the marketing of a particularly profitable industry. Hence, the recent lawsuits against the tobacco industry to get them to shoulder some of the costs of medical treatment.
The helmet laws and seat belt laws are not arising from lengthy hospital stays and therefore expensive costs to society. Generally, those who don’t wear seat belts in serious accidents, just die. There’s not usually lengthy, costly medical treatment. The argument is more towards, why should your life-style choice (not to wear a seatbelt) make me be a killer, and live with the guilt (or be sued by your family.)
The argument applied to meat-eating seems entirely spurious.
The logical extension is, why should society pay for ANYONE’s medical expenses? Those who can’t afford it, shouldn’t be treated. After all, society doesn’t buy cars or TVs or VCRs or Caribbean cruises for those who can’t afford them… why should medical care be any different? A nice side effect, we’d help the overpopulation problem, too.
I just finished a delicous roast beef sandwich. I was reading this thread and thinking that there is NO WAY I would stop eating meat. 
I also see this is a logical extension of the seat belt/helmet laws, then a more direct result of the tobacco and gun industry lawsuits.
Isn’t the point of group health care that we lump all the people together and average out the risks?
Fat people, smokers, drinkers, people who are invovled in high risk sports…etc…etc…
The tobacco companies were sacrificied as a first step. It was easy to demonize them and make people feel that the lawsuits were justified, so the principle didn’t matter. I think we are going to wake up 20 years from now and find ourselves in a paranoid society where lawyers own us all.
They need to drop campaign finance reform and work on lawsuit reform.
Well, if you want to be bitchy about it, why do we have to pay for the medical care for vegetarians who don’t strictly follow the vegetarian diet? If you don’t follow the diet carefully, making sure that you make up for the loss of enzymes and proteins, etc. that you would get from meat, you get very sick from malnutrition. Peta just wants people to stop killing animals for any reason and they figure the way to do that is thought the pocket book. I do love animals but I’m less concerned that animals are killed for the supper table and more about how they’re treated before they get there. Nothing should be left to suffer just because they going to be slaughtered in a week. (While transporting animals for dog food, some companies don’t feel the need to give them water or food during the trip.:mad
Bitch by Birth
Sorry. That should have been :mad:
http://www.milksucks.com/headermilkbeer.gif
These guys are a riot. If it wasn’t the 21st century, they would be laughed off. I am afraid that today even a fringe group like this may get some ridiculous proposal passed.
Here are some good quotes from their Beer page.
“Drink beer - save a cow’s life”? Milking a cow does not kill it. I don’t see why PETA is attacking milk.
They are targeting their Beer campaign towards college students, who are mostly under-age and breaking the law if they drink (I know they often do anyway). And I wonder what MAAD has to say about the PETA beer drinking slogan, even though they say drink responsibly.
I for one am glad to see that the people at PETA have a sense of humour.
[quote]
Mothers Against Drunk Driving sent a letter Friday asking PETA to pull the campaign for fear it will encourage underage drinking. Many college students are under the legal drinking age of 21.
“We’re very concerned and appalled with it for the simple fact that underage drinking is the number one drug problem among American youths,” said Teresa Hardt, a spokeswoman for the Irving, Texas-based group, whose mission includes the prevention of underage drinking.
That was where I found about the beer campaign. I should have thrown that in there from the start.
From The Onion:
Heroic PETA Commandos Kill 49, Save Rabbit –
http://www.theonion.com/onion3110/petacommandos.html
I’m sorry, I’m very selective about who I own.
Do you have references?
-Melin
Voted Best Moderator (Emeritus)
Would they still be saying that if some guys got drunk and engaged in cow tipping?
Life is a tragedy for those who feel and a comedy for those who think.
Much as it pains me to defend PETA in any way, I’ll have to admit that drinking a lot of milk leads some cattle - specifically, male calves - to an early grave.
I grew up on a small dairy farm (and around larger dairy farms). When a dairy cow had a female calf, we raised it to become another milk cow. If the calf was male, however, we’d raise it for a month or two - and then sell it to the local slaughterhouse where they’d make veal out of it. You don’t need that many bulls, and dairy breeds like Holstenis or Guernseys don’t grow to nearly the same size as beef breeds like angus do, so it’s not cost effective to let a male dairy calf grow to maturity to slaughter later.
Note that I have absolutely no problems with this practice of slaughtering male dairy calfs early (we farmers always figured that’s what you get for being a cow).
Life is a tragedy for those who feel and a comedy for those who think.
Good sig, but what about we who think “and” feel? Will our heads explode? :eek:
What!? no exploding head smiley available?
Anybody remeber PETA’s attempt to get Fishkill, New York to change it’s name. The townspeople said that PETA can go soak it’s head in the kill (dutch for stream).
I think these PETA people need a different hobby.
Almost an exploding smiley:
So why does this stuff piss people off so much?
You’re still free to have that yummy roast beef sandwich, and wash it down with a nice big glass of cold milk.
BTW;
I remember reading somewhere that the actual net cost of smoking is less than not smoking because smokers die so much younger. Anybody else heard this?
Peace,
mangeorge (smoker, supporter of children)
Yeah, that’s the problem. Everybody eventually dies, so when you conquer ONE leading cause of death, another one rears up to take its place. Remember when pneumonia and cholera were big killers? (Neither do I.)