Animals are not ours to eat, wear, experiment on, use for entertainment, or abuse in any other way.

Senator Reid: Give Vegetarians a Break

Written by PETA | May 30, 2007

Related Posts

Respond

Comments

Post a Comment

If your comment doesn't appear right away, please be patient as it may take some time to publish or may require moderation.

By submitting this form, you are agreeing to our collection, storage, use, and disclosure of your personal info in accordance with our privacy policy as well as to receiving e-mails from us.

  • Tay says:

    Kso about cars… I’m assuming the PETA members drive cars. You OBVIOUSLY don’t get leather right so do all of you have cloth? Or can they make cars with pleather?

  • Htrg says:

    What about methane capture? How much of a difference does that make?

  • Htrg says:

    Well if you can have a carbon tax you can have a methane tax. It wouldn’t just be meat though. Irrigation for farming particularly the flood irrigation needed for rice farming releases methane too. Not sure how much but it’s some.

  • Maya says:

    Kelley is absolutely correct that would be completely impossible to regulate. Maybe we should ask the govt. to give tax breaks to fruit and veggie farmers instead? By the way for environmental causes we should be pushing for a carbon tax. That way ALL vehicles will be responsible for their contribution to climate change. Don’t forget that buildings actually produce more CO2 than cars.

  • Htrg says:

    What about trapping the gasses that the animals produce and then using them to generate power? Aren’t some people doing that? I think they’re calling it “poo power”. Anyone heard of this? I guess it depends on how efficiently can they capture the gasses.

  • Htrg says:

    Hmmm is it an issue of shear numbers how many cattle or is it that they’re all crammed together? It would be interesting to see stats comparing the greenhouse gasses that different animals give off per pound of meat. I’m sure it’s different for cattle poultry and deer. Maybe wild deer don’t give off as much but it must help some to have hunters thin out their herds especially if they then eat the wild meat instead of buying domestically raised. That would be like killing two birds with one stone.

  • Halv says:

    Animal waste is a huge polluter and yes the animals flatuence is another. But don’t forget about all the emissions from the trucks shipping these poor animals across the country from birth to feeding lots to the slaughterhouse to the stores etc. Then there’s the huge amounts of land used for grazing. The majority of North America’s fresh water is used for livestock not to mention to grow huge amounts of grain to feed them. The list of enviroment problems with the meat industry goes on and on and on.

  • jimmy the shark says:

    to Htrg it’s the mass of excrements which causes the poisonous gasses in a forest you never see tenthousand animals together isn’t it?

  • rojo says:

    Htrg you make good points but to take it a little further why will the amount of fauna change if people stopped eating meat? And thus the amount of excreta remaining the same. Will animal groups be seeking the extermination of all ruminants to allay their global warming concerns?

  • doug says:

    it isnt just about the animals farting. how about manour lagoons the amount of energy required to run the machines needed in oreder to kill the animals etc etc i can go on for a while but if you are really interested just google it…

  • Htrg says:

    shark Isn’t it the livestock flatulence that contributes to Global Warming? It all goes into the same atmosphere so why should it matter if they fart together in a confined group or roam around farting freely? Are domestic livestock notably more flatulent that wild game? Maybe you know more about this than I. Please enlighten me.

  • kaitlin says:

    i think kelly has a point maybe we should use recycled paper punch cards to keep track of vegan purchases and non vegan purchases

  • jimmy the shark says:

    to Htrg animals raised by humans create greenhouse gasses because they are kept close on one place releasing their excrements in one huge place! wild animals are free to let their excrements where they need to so your statement that hunting should be rewarded is completely wrong and mentally deficient there is just one advice i can give you before you put a comment for the next time pls use your brains if you got some!

  • Htrg says:

    All those animals raised to feed humans release greenhouse gasses so eliminating them would help the environment. What about wild animals? If hunter bags 10 deer a year how much carbon dioxide is he removing from the atmosphere? I know you’re going to be mad at me but isn’t that the logical extension of the argument presented here? Avoiding raised livestock is good for the planet and should be rewarded. Likewise hunting is good for the planet and should be rewarded.

  • Canaduck says:

    How true Kelley. But either way it’s a good idea.

  • Kelley says:

    I agree we should get a tax break along with discounts on our health insurance but how would we ever be able to stop omnivores from lying about their diets?