PETA = Hypocrites

[Farbin Kaiber]

They are no more hypocritical than any person who associates themselves with any organized religion...Farbin.

Good thing I don't associate with any organized religion, I believe in the Christ, but I'm not a Catholic, Pentecostal, Protestant, Baptist, etc. I read the Bible, but do not use it as a tool to mandate others behavior. I do my thing, and openly speak of what it is, but I don't profess to force it upon anyone else. I simply speak my opinion on what my interpretation of the text says.

There is a difference between faith and religion. My beliefs are not used for tax exemptions, deductions, etc. I don't go out trying to convert people.

I do not identify as "religious" but acknowledge my faith.

Tell me how that is hypocritical.

Nice try though.

[cale]

I do not identify as "religious" but acknowledge my faith.

Tell me how that is hypocritical.

Nice try though.

You have faith in a deity and adhere to a holy book, you're religious.

Carry on.

[herbivor]

Good thing I don't associate with any organized religion, I believe in the Christ, but I'm not a Catholic, Pentecostal, Protestant, Baptist, etc. I read the Bible, but do not use it as a tool to mandate others behavior. I do my thing, and openly speak of what it is, but I don't profess to force it upon anyone else. I simply speak my opinion on what my interpretation of the text says.

There is a difference between faith and religion. My beliefs are not used for tax exemptions, deductions, etc. I don't go out trying to convert people.

I do not identify as "religious" but acknowledge my faith.

Tell me how that is hypocritical.

Nice try though.

Well, since you said you DON'T associate yourself with an organized religion, then you are less of a hypocrite than those that do. If believing in Christ means selectively agreeing with some of his views, then we all believe in Christ, but if believing in Christ means believing everything he has said and done according to the gospels, then yeah, you are a hypocrite. Because there are very few people that live life as Christ encouraged. Expressing hatred towards a group of people that are outspoken about animal violence tells me you are not one of those few.

[Farbin Kaiber]

In your words, encouraged, not mandated.

I believe in the concept of the New Testament, meaning a replacement for an Old Testament. A testament, as you know is a contract...

So, if a "New" contract has replaced the "Old" contract, then, as you know, in the context of legal contractual obligations, a new contract voids the previous, replaced contract.

Yes, the old contract required adherence to the ENTIRE Moasic/Abrahamic/Levitical Law, but God, YHWH, El Shaddai, elohim, etc. began the New Testament with the death of his Son because He knew that it was impossible to follow the law He set forth. The only way to have met the requirements of the Old Testament would have been to follow EVERY law, personally, perpetually, perfectly, without deviation in your mind or heart from birth keep everything written in God’s law and not only the ten commandments but the whole book of God, and just one tiny deviation from that will bring God’s wrath. One misstep was as bad as breaking the WHOLE law.

Thus, HE sent His Son to fulfill the law, so that a New contract could be written.

The interpretation of the aforementioned "New" contract, or testament requires simply one thing, Faith in Him. He already is surrounded with perfection, the real thing He wants is faith/trust/belief, it's something He cannot create, it is simply something that comes of free will. The angels he is surrounded with are perfect, but they have no free will, their will is of Him.



Also, Despise ≠ Hate.

[iamsam]

but if believing in Christ means believing everything he has said and done according to the gospels, then yeah, you are a hypocrite.

It's true, we are all hypocrites. No one has been able to adhere to the Law other than Christ.

[herbivor]

In your words, encouraged, not mandated.

I believe in the concept of the New Testament, meaning a replacement for an Old Testament. A testament, as you know is a contract...

So, if a "New" contract has replaced the "Old" contract, then, as you know, in the context of legal contractual obligations, a new contract voids the previous, replaced contract.

Yes, the old contract required adherence to the ENTIRE Moasic/Abrahamic/Levitical Law, but God, YHWH, El Shaddai, elohim, etc. began the New Testament with the death of his Son because He knew that it was impossible to follow the law He set forth. The only way to have met the requirements of the Old Testament would have been to follow EVERY law, personally, perpetually, perfectly, without deviation in your mind or heart from birth keep everything written in God’s law and not only the ten commandments but the whole book of God, and just one tiny deviation from that will bring God’s wrath. One misstep was as bad as breaking the WHOLE law.

Thus, HE sent His Son to fulfill the law, so that a New contract could be written.

The interpretation of the aforementioned "New" contract, or testament requires simply one thing, Faith in Him. He already is surrounded with perfection, the real thing He wants is faith/trust/belief, it's something He cannot create, it is simply something that comes of free will. The angels he is surrounded with are perfect, but they have no free will, their will is of Him.



Also, Despise ≠ Hate.

Silly god is silly. Funny, I've heard this "reasoning" before but I have difficulty finding it anywhere in the bible explained that way, which means you conveniently make up your own rules to try and make an unreasonable story make since in your head. Despising is definitely closer to hate than compassion in my book. Instead of despising PETA, show compassion and try to listen to their views and understand them. Your God would probably prefer such actions.

[Farbin Kaiber]

If you've heard it before, then it's obvious I didn't "conveniently make up MY own rules", right?

Glad to hear you have your own "book" you live by, and expect others to do so as well.

Please don't attempt to speak for my God.


EDIT: I find it highly unlikely you've read the "entire" Bible. Also, I did take the time to listen to their views, and I deemed them hypocritical. Granted, that is my opinion. And, what makes you think God is some nice, cuddly, loving guy, obviously you haven't read the whole book. You do know he CREATED the devil, right?

[Farbin Kaiber]

Further reading, back on topic.

http://www.petakillsanimals.com/

[cale]

Thanks for giving reason to provide posters like that to simpletons who can't differentiate between euthanasia and slamming a dog into the ground repeatedly until it was dead because it wasn't aggressive enough. This type of comparison could only possibly appeal to someone equally as mentally inept as a peta member, but hails from the other side of the fence.

Sharp as a tack you are, great thread you've contributed here.

[Farbin Kaiber]

^Sounds like the difference between Hitler and Jeffery Dahlmer.


At least Hitler was humane, right?

[mulletman]

Thanks for giving reason to provide posters like that to simpletons who can't differentiate between euthanasia and slamming a dog into the ground repeatedly until it was dead because it wasn't aggressive enough. This type of comparison could only possibly appeal to someone equally as mentally inept as a peta member, but hails from the other side of the fence.

Sharp as a tack you are, great thread you've contributed here.

Euthanasia due to a pet not having a home is a logical fallacy. Animals exist in the wild. Animals have instincts that enable them to do so. If an animal doesn't have a 'home,' then how about just turning it lose? What's the worst that happens? It dies. Welcome to the fucking food chain. Not to mention that the animal being killed is the outcome of euthanasia anyway.

At least killing an animal in order to eat it (which PETA opposes) actually has a purpose...

[cale]

^Sounds like the difference between Hitler and Jeffery Dahlmer.


At least Hitler was humane, right?

So now peta are committing a holocaust? If that's the case, so does every SPCA branch who accepts that not every pet can be adopted.

While I think they're a bunch of ideological nancies who want to pretend we're not who we are as omnivores, your attempt to portray their group in the same light which is being cast on an individual who victimized animals for his own amusement is pathetic. They are not in it for the same reasons, and the methods which they use and why they use them must certainly be taken into consideration. You have a blatant detest for their organization and are making ridiculous comparisons in an attempt to insult them.

You're a moron.

Euthanasia due to a pet not having a home is a logical fallacy. Animals exist in the wild. Animals have instincts that enable them to do so. If an animal doesn't have a 'home,' then how about just turning it lose? What's the worst that happens? It dies. Welcome to the fucking food chain. Not to mention that the animal being killed is the outcome of euthanasia anyway.

At least killing an animal in order to eat it (which PETA opposes) actually has a purpose...

Actually no, feral populations of unregulated and un-nutered/spayed go crazy and add to another whole list of problems.

I think peta are a bunch of twats. Equally so, I think someone who tries to compare peta to Vick is of equal intelligence...nill.

[Farbin Kaiber]

So now peta are committing a holocaust? If that's the case, so does every SPCA branch who accepts that not every pet can be adopted.

While I think they're a bunch of ideological nancies who want to pretend we're not who we are as omnivores, your attempt to portray their group in the same light which is being cast on an individual who victimized animals for his own amusement is pathetic. They are not in it for the same reasons, and the methods which they use and why they use them must certainly be taken into consideration. You have a blatant detest for their organization and are making ridiculous comparisons in an attempt to insult them.

You're a moron.

No, I posted a picture I found. I didn't make it. I reposted it. If that image was made by me, you might have an argument.

I don't have blatant detest, I called them hypocrites. I really don't give a flying fuck what they do, I simply called them out for "do as I say, not as I do..."

I made a comparison of Hitler and Dahlmer in reference to your statement, not the image, or the opinions of someone else's website. You tried to differentiate between euthanasia and slamming a canine into the ground repeatedly, I was making the implication that killing is killing, and both are very bad. I don't condone either angle. Dumbass.


If you look, you looked to be the one trying to defend them.

[frankenbeemer]

Looks like a landslide win for the farb.

[cale]

No, I posted a picture I found. I didn't make it. I reposted it. If that image was made by me, you might have an argument.

I don't have blatant detest, I called them hypocrites. I really don't give a flying fuck what they do, I simply called them out for "do as I say, not as I do..."

I made a comparison of Hitler and Dahlmer in reference to your statement, not the image, or the opinions of someone else's website. You tried to differentiate between euthanasia and slamming a canine into the ground repeatedly, I was making the implication that killing is killing, and both are very bad. I don't condone either angle. Dumbass.


If you look, you looked to be the one trying to defend them.

You created a thread out of nowhere and then reposted images in support of it. Now had you posted a picture of boobs, then you could use the excuse "I just posted a picture". You clearly do have some distaste for them, or you have too much time on your hands. Me thinks it's likely the latter with 25k posts, but hey...you posted it.

A terrible comparison, as both Hitler and Dahmer with psychotic and brutalized their victims. There most certainly is a difference when it comes to killing an animal. Do you prefer a bullet to the head or would you prefer stoning?

I haven't defended anyone, I've called you our for your bullshit. In both of my posts I've shown I have no fondness for pet. I'm sorry you suffer from some sort of selective reading disorder and failed to pick up on it, you'll have to work on that.