No, I don't own animal skin products. Not that you asked, but I also don't eat meats. And I've been actively involved in animal rescue for a number of years. Have I bought many products over my time on Earth that in some way used animals, or abused animals through the making of the product - undoubtedly, though I strive not to. I also drive over the speed limit often, and have occasionally illegally downloaded music. But I happen to think having and enforcing speed limits makes sense and it should be illegal to download music for free (if not done legally). These laws aren't encroachments on my freedoms, they are just laws that make sense, as having them serves a greater good. The greater good here. I'm not okay with this because it doesn't effect me. I'm ok with it because it doesn't effect anyone. It's just a talking point that some will hold onto as an encroachment of "freedoms". If furs were banned nationwide, in 10 years time the % of the population that would care would be absurdly small. The number of people who would reminisce about the good ole days when you could go out in a nice fur coat would be small small small. And the number of people suffering from lack of warmth due to not being able to dress in their fur coat would be 0.
Animals are here for our usage, food, clothes, everything. I am going to buy a leather jacket today and eat a steak for lunch, in honor of this thread. DD
Joking noted.... though, if you believe that you have no problem with me killing you for my enjoyment? Might make a decent soap?
Who goes to LA to buy fur anyways? You go to Europe, specifically Paris or Moscow, to buy high quality fur. Maybe these exquisite pieces will change your mind. So silky smooth. There's nothing I like more than draping a woman in animal skin in the winter.
I'm honestly always amused by these knee-jerk reactions. If the civil rights movement was going on, would you have burned a cross in honor of this thread?
I didn't need a resume, it was just a question. I've seen many people who act this way when 1) what's being 'outlawed' (used loosely in this situation) doesn't affect them then they don't object, not because they're for the purpose, but because that particular infringement doesn't affect their lifestyle.... and 2) who have halfprinciples where they are against fur, but drive a car with leather seats, have a nice leather coat, insert your idea of an example here. I left open the possibility you were one who uses no animal products whatsoever, eats no meat, etc. Just curious which of the three you were in this case. No need to link me to pictures of tortured animals to answer my question. Thanks for that, though, or something.
I'm down with it. The democratically-elected municipal leadership passed legislation to regulate commerce within its borders, something all municipalities have been empowered to do for a long time now. This isn't speech or religion or guns, it's just commerce. If anyone is feeling oppressed by the law, they can drive an extra mile down the street to buy in a different township. And, since disclosure is an issue, I wear leather and I eat meat. I object to fur only as a fashion choice. That doesn't make me a hypocrite. I just think sometimes the people should be empowered to make some choices for collective action for themselves to make their community something they want to live in, instead of having to always bow to the insistence on cheap freedoms by libertarians. If Houston wants to ban some similar clothing I do wear, say leather jackets, I might say it's dumb but I'm not going to complain about my freedoms.
sorry, wasn't for you specifically, more just for enlightment's sake. I recall the relative recent thread the asian bear bile industry having a different tone, partially because it was clearly and obviously inhumane. I think people remain fairly removed from the fur industry practices. I didn't press my beliefs on anyone. I responded to a thread. I don't believe they are extreme. The one thing I noted was that fur coats no longer serve any functional purpose - which doesn't seem extreme to me - seems factual. Do you disagree with this statement. Moreover, I recall the fight against fur being much bigger 20 years ago, and mostly played out back then in the minds of the public. I don't think many people support furs anymore. Certainly, they are not worn much. Not supporting furs, and banning their sale are different things, and people may still find support of a ban to be extreme, but a large % of Americans also don't believe in evolution, and I'm happy to push an agenda that notes how idiotic an opinion that is.
You used that reasoning to justify a law banning them. That law presses your beliefs on others. That is extreme. I don't really want to argue with a vegetarian but I will just explain my beliefs. The website you posted elicited the same emotional response from me as this video. <object width="420" height="315"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/xR2GAjHvuD4?version=3&hl=en_US"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/xR2GAjHvuD4?version=3&hl=en_US" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" width="420" height="315" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true"></embed></object> Also I would say that the argument that a luxury item like fur is no longer functionally necessary starts off illogically. No luxury items are functionally necessary but that does not in any way justify a ban.
No, it's not. If you don't believe a law that opposes killing people makes sense, and I do, my "pressing that belief" on you doesn't make me extreme. You'd be the extreme one, as you'd be in the extreme minority. I've noted reasons for why I don't believe my position (fur is bad) is extreme. If you have evidence to prove otherwise, that shows most Americans support the fur trade, or similar, feel free to bring it out. you can "feel" that way if you want. I will factually note that it is a stupid and idiotic statement, as, factually, small animals, regardless of intelligence, are not remotely the same as plants. Not even close. If my argument was all luxury items need to be banned by virtue of them being luxury items, then you'd have a point. That's not my argument.
I had a very nice steak for lunch, but was unable to find time to buy a nice leather coat, I will wait a bit on that, but I do love the feel of leather. DD
all i can think about is jimmy the gent yelling at stevie carbone for buying his wife the pink fur with the Lufthansa heist
I'm going to jump on the bandwagon for this ban! I hope it spreads nationwide! I'll make a killing selling fur!
