[Lou3]

I have not ONCE mentioned the word terrorist in this thread. Banning slaughter IS an activist issue so do not drag an old beef you have with me stating the FACT that PETA members have been convicted of terrorist activities in the past into this thread.
He IS an activist, he is making political statements on an animal rights issue - that IS activism or have you not checked the definition in the dictionary?
When an issue goes beyond a concern for animal welfare into a political agenda - such as the slaughter issue it becomes an activist issue. Sorry but that is an absolute undeniable FACT.
I am not using any emotion whatsoever. I am basing my posts purely on FACTS.
it is a FACT that horse slaughter is not cruel
it is a FACT that other cultures condone the eating of horse meat
It is therefore a FACT that condemning the slaughter of horses for meat is a prejudice against those cultures.

Condemning a belief based on false information and then giving the true information is not condeming a culture, it is condemning an organisation or individual who knowingly gives out false information in order to acheive their own personal or political agenda.
My eyes are very open, it is those people who cannot see that their "save the pretty horsies and to heck with the consequences" mentality or their prejudice against other cultures for eating a meat they would not, is more harmful than it will ever be helpful who need to open their eyes.

[Rain]

I think sometimes people get too caught up on finding a lable for a situation. They don't look at the whole picture, only the part they agree with. So while I can understand being against something when your heart says "No this is wrong" ... you also have to make sure you understand all the facts so that you're saying "No" for the right reasons. So, I think it's vital to know what you're defending or opposing before jumping in with both feet. People also forget that other's have different opinions, and they have a right to their opinions. It's really not your job to harp on them if it's not the same as yours.. a better way to approach that would be politely explaining your ideas and let them draw their own conclusions. Personal insults, or "this will happen to you in the future" should be left out.

As for celebrities... What's the difference between a celebrity backing no horse slaughter if that's what they believe (Not saying I agree with it). Whats the difference between a celebrity and regular old Joe who oppose horse slaughter? The only difference is what you apply to them. Now on one hand, I hate celebrities who have to be in the lime light (like Paris Hilton)... but sometimes it's not their doing, but the publics so... what then?

[lynnconnor05]

Originally Posted by Lou3

My eyes are very open, it is those people who cannot see that their "save the pretty horsies and to heck with the consequences" mentality or their prejudice against other cultures for eating a meat they would not, is more harmful than it will ever be helpful who need to open their eyes.

What are the consequences of banning horse slaughter? I think we should change this thread from an attack on different people to a place to learn more information.

I wonder why we need to have the slaughter of horses in this country if horse meat isn't sold here. (Or is it? I have never seen it, but I could be wrong.) Is the selling of horse meat a big enough export to make it worthwhile to our economy to keep it? Also, what are the standards and guidelines a slaughter facility must meet?

[Rain]

Blistering Wind knows alot about horse slaughter from an insider's persepective. So, here's a question that should be taken as food for thought. IF horse slaughter is sucessfully banned in the U.S... what happens to all those unwanted horses? Where will they go, who will pay for their upkeep?

[Lou3]

Originally Posted by lynnconnor05

What are the consequences of banning horse slaughter? I think we should change this thread from an attack on different people to a place to learn more information.

I wonder why we need to have the slaughter of horses in this country if horse meat isn't sold here. (Or is it? I have never seen it, but I could be wrong.) Is the selling of horse meat a big enough export to make it worthwhile to our economy to keep it? Also, what are the standards and guidelines a slaughter facility must meet?

Horse meat is sold for export and is also one of the main sources of food for zoo animals (very good for Lions who would eat zebras in the wild!) It would be worthwhile to the economy to keep horse slaughter because -
1) The industry provides many jobs and closing the industry would increase unemployment levels
2) Horse meat fetches a good price on the international market, particularly in Japan for human consumption
3) 80,000 horses are slaughtered annually, thats 80,000 unwanted horses per year that would otherwise be down to charities to support, I dont know of a single charity that could take more than one or two horses a year more than they currently do at their present level of funding - the level of funding increase required would more than likely mean government funding to the tune of millions per year - and that means higher taxes.
4) the bottom would drop out of the horse market completely. At the moment the least a horse can be worth is their "price per pound" which although it does not seem like much at least keeps horse prices in a reasonable state. Take that away and you have the situation seen on dartmoor in the UK for the yearlings too small and young to go to slaughter being sold for as little as £3 ($5) a piece. But it wouldnt just be yearlings - the situation would be similar for ALL horses. Its simple logic, the more of something there is and the less demand there is the less that thing is worth.

[Equine_Harmony]

Originally Posted by Lou3

I have not ONCE mentioned the word terrorist in this thread. Banning slaughter IS an activist issue so do not drag an old beef you have with me stating the FACT that PETA members have been convicted of terrorist activities in the past into this thread.
He IS an activist, he is making political statements on an animal rights issue - that IS activism or have you not checked the definition in the dictionary?
When an issue goes beyond a concern for animal welfare into a political agenda - such as the slaughter issue it becomes an activist issue. Sorry but that is an absolute undeniable FACT.
I am not using any emotion whatsoever. I am basing my posts purely on FACTS.
it is a FACT that horse slaughter is not cruel
it is a FACT that other cultures condone the eating of horse meat
It is therefore a FACT that condemning the slaughter of horses for meat is a prejudice against those cultures.

Condemning a belief based on false information and then giving the true information is not condeming a culture, it is condemning an organisation or individual who knowingly gives out false information in order to acheive their own personal or political agenda.
My eyes are very open, it is those people who cannot see that their "save the pretty horsies and to heck with the consequences" mentality or their prejudice against other cultures for eating a meat they would not, is more harmful than it will ever be helpful who need to open their eyes.

Lou, would it be fair to state your an activist? cause your for horse slaughter? No it would not be! Are you one? I don't know and if I thought so I would pm you, now I hold an out look on you that is best NOT to bring in here.

I have read posts in this site and so have a others, you bringing up activist, terrorists pointing your finger in a way where your crafty at at it..., now that is not right at all. I have refrained from getting into issues like the thread that is locked and made one comment and rhat comment was my vision.. This is a horse site and this is horse news, Is he an activist? yes he is cause he is ACTING, I do not act at all, nor does Lynda, unless you want to call working at a rescue, helping horses and foals get a home away from the slaughter plants.

Willie Nelson has done alot for Farmers, he put on a concert for all money to go to them, to save their land, he is an out spoken activist for a variety of thngs he is an out spoken activist for our Vetrans and I could go on, I know him, I mean I know his music and what he does for I hold the up most admiration for him, he uses his celberity voice to make things happen and why not I would!

an activist is anyone who ACTS, lobbys, just not chattering about what we all do in here, PETA I am not into I lost faith in them when they were caught lining their wallets with money that was to go to the animals, i never got into them cause they were extremists

What is going on in Scotland? For real I mean is there any fighting to end horse slaughter? Your for horse slaughter, many on here are, but express temselves with concern over this animal, but you? you? make statements such as this and this says alot about you IMHO.

oh yay another celebrity jumping on the idiot wagon without knowing a thing about the situation. Just what we need When will people bother to actually EDUCATE themselves on the real facts of horse slaughter and get away from this "dont kill the pretty horsies" mentality. The world would be a lot better place if people could just be more objective and realistic about things.
__________________
Do not condemn another persons culture until you have lived a lifetime in their shoes.


{More animal rights activists trying to get perfectly humane methods of slaughter banned? I dont think we need that at ALL. Very last thing we need in fact.}
__________________
Do not condemn another persons culture until you have lived a lifetime in their shoes.

Your line that you stated "don't kill the pretty horsies" that is sarcasm and hatful and this does show where your heart is at. that is sad very sad....I will not respond to you after this one.

[Rain]

Originally Posted by Equine_Harmony

Lou, would it be fair to state your an activist? cause your for horse slaughter? No it would not be! Are you one? I don't know and if I thought so I would pm you, now I hol dan out look on you that is best NOT to bring in here.

I have read posts on here you bringing up activist, terrorists pointing your finger in a way where your crafty at at it..., now that is not right at all. I have refrained from getting into issues like the thread that is locked. This is a horse site and this is horse news, Is he an activist? yes he is cause he is ACTING, I do not act at all, nor does Lynda, unless you want to call working at a rescue, helping horses and foals get a home away from the slaughter plants.

What is going on in Scotland? For real I mean is there any fighting to end horse slaughter? Your for horse slaughter, many on here are, but express temselves with concern over this animal, but you? you? make statements such as this and this says alot about you IMHO.
.

Woah woah woah.. this thread is getting a little out of hand here. I think we do need to look at the definition of an activist.

Activist noun
1.an especially active, vigorous advocate of a cause, esp. a political cause. –adjective
2.of or pertaining to activism or activists: an activist organization for environmental concern.
3.advocating or opposing a cause or issue vigorously, esp. a political cause: Activist opponents of the President picketed the White House.

Lou would not be considered an activist because she doesn't take it to a political level. However, Willie Nelson IS an activist because he HAS taken it to a politic level. Activist does not mean someone one acting on something, it refers to someone acting on it in a political fashion... i.e. PETA attempting to ban fur coats, making it against the law. Make sense? Regardless, why does it matter who is an activist and who is not? That's redundant. Also, what does it matter whats going on in Scotland (unless that was suppose to be a personal attack against Lou, in that case.. shame on you). This thread is originally about Willie Nelson in U.S against horse slaughter.

[Equine_Harmony]

Originally Posted by Rain

Woah woah woah.. this thread is getting a little out of hand here. I think we do need to look at the definition of an activist.



Lou would not be considered an activist because she doesn't take it to a political level. However, Willie Nelson IS an activist because he HAS taken it to a politic level. Activist does not mean someone one acting on something, it refers to someone acting on it in a political fashion... i.e. PETA attempting to ban fur coats, making it against the law. Make sense? Regardless, why does it matter who is an activist and who is not? That's redundant. Also, what does it matter whats going on in Scotland (unless that was suppose to be a personal attack against Lou, in that case.. shame on you). This thread is originally about Willie Nelson in U.S against horse slaughter.

I did not call Lou a activist period. Lobbying in a court house is being a activists. If I were to hold a picture of horses and in front of the high court I am a activist. Willie Nelson is an activist, he is an out spoken activist on many issues and ones that HELP us Americans...Look I have not a thing against Scotland infact my dad is half Scott/English, mother 100% Sioux Indian, I don't put down peoples nationality, I am not a racist...

I would like to know how her law system works on horses, horse slaughter in Scotland....

Shame on me? This is about Willie Nelson, but she brought in the activist part as she in most does and this bothers me and other members up to them to speak out...HER words like the pretty horsies is sarcasm, forgive me all but I get a bad sour vibe here on that one... I'm not a hatful person, nor looking for a online fight. I do respect the Pro -slaughter's side and I have been educated on this site from people who LOVE this animal.

Another thing she is stating he is not educated, and you all can read what she did post, that is not fair at all. I feel this man is educated and uses his celbrity status tro gain powerment and voice and if we all could do the same most if not all would do it, that is the blessing of being a celb, they have a strong voice, and some use it to better a cause.

With respect,

Tammy

[Sandra-A1]

If this thread is turning educational......then here is a report that will add more factual information to the discussion:
THE UNINTENDED CONSEQUENCES OF A BAN ON THE HUMANE SLAUGHTER (PROCESSING) OF HORSES IN THE UNITED STATES

[Equine_Harmony]

Originally Posted by Lou3

I have not ONCE mentioned the word terrorist in this thread.

OK then please elaberate on this? NOte I am not trying to cause a fight online, however it is your words and I would like to clear them up.

Thank you,

Tammy

And yet still celebrities support PETA and other terrorist organisations without ever realising the true nature of the groups they are supporting. If he is for banning horse slaughter at this point in time he is uneducated on the matter as you have to be completely blind to the negative consequences that a ban would bring about if carried through right now in order to support an immediate stop to horse slaughter.