75 replies [Last post]
expatriate's picture
Offline
Location: Arizona
Joined: 10/26/2002
Posts: 3207
Is hunting really threatened by animal-rights activists?

Excellent point, Orp. It'd be a national priority if any other industry that contributed over $1.7 billion to the economy every year were under attack from terrorists.

Offline
Joined: 11/02/2002
Posts: 130
Is hunting really threatened by animal-rights activists?
Offline
Joined: 11/02/2002
Posts: 130
Is hunting really threatened by animal-rights activists?

All i can say is the politicians can't put that money in their pockets. Look at what happened to the fur industry! Also look at the TOBACCO industry! Don't ever say never!

[ This Message was edited by: bucknaked40 on 2002-11-03 21:06 ]

Offline
Joined: 10/09/2002
Posts: 17
Is hunting really threatened by animal-rights activists?

bucknaked40,

I have no clue what you are trying to say. Can you please elaborate? I cannot see any coalition with any of your statements and the hunting industry. Especially “the politicians can't put that money in their pockets and also look at the TOBACCO industry!”

ORP

[ This Message was edited by: orp0741 on 2002-11-03 21:54 ]

expatriate's picture
Offline
Location: Arizona
Joined: 10/26/2002
Posts: 3207
Is hunting really threatened by animal-rights activists?

Good point, bucknaked40 (won't ask about the handle).

I think the main threat we face is the attempt to make us social lepers in the same way smokers were ostracized. We see this routinely in the entertainment industry, which seems unable to portray a sportsman as anything other than an overweight, uneducated, bigoted, perhaps even sadistic, white male. This is no more true about sportsmen than similar stereotypes are about minorities. The threat we face isn't from eco-terrorism, but from those who are trying to label us as existing at the fringes of society, where they can bump us off.

Why do the liberal elite in the media and entertainment industries always resort to labels and image attacks? Because image is their bread and butter. In their world it's more important than politics or anything else. Image = $$ in the entertainment industry, and that's how they see the world. Some politicians have adopted this philosophy.

Look at what happened when Charlton Heston was elected president of the NRA. The media immediately took every effort to destroy his image, because image is the critical center of gravity for any celebrity. Luckily, Mr. Heston is one of those few that put beliefs ahead of career.

I guarantee you that most of those Hollywood celebrities don't care a whit about their liberal causes as much as they do about appearances. These people live and die through publicity, and they'll support any cause they believe to be trendy or might gain them positive media exposure. If being a PETA supporter incurs even a hint of negative media coverage, you'll see a mass exodus of celebrities running away from the organization.

It's dog eat dog in an entertainment industry that delivers tremendous wealth to those willing to play the game. I believe very few of those people (especially the younger ones) would stick with a cause if it began to affect their careers.

[ This Message was edited by: expatriate on 2002-11-03 22:38 ]

bitmasher's picture
Offline
Moderator
Location: Colorado
Joined: 02/27/2002
Posts: 2973
Is hunting really threatened by animal-rights activists?

I think what bucknaked is talking about is related to the "Cockfighting Ban" that is up for a vote in Oklahoma on Tuesday. 47 states ban chicken fights, OK is a hold out.

On a side note, this issue isn't for me to decide (i'm a CO resident). However I would support a ban on the use of the word "cockfighting". Everytime I hear it, bad (very bad) visuals pop into my head and lets just say they don't involve chickens. (Hint: "cock" has multiple meanings, most of which are not good.)

So please lets stick to nice words like "roster fighting" or "chicken fighting". I think a guy named "buckednaked" talking about cockfighting will drive me over the edge.

Wink

[ This Message was edited by: bitmasher on 2002-11-03 22:22 ]

expatriate's picture
Offline
Location: Arizona
Joined: 10/26/2002
Posts: 3207
Is hunting really threatened by animal-rights activists?

Bravo, Bitmasher!
Not only is the term almost pornographic, it is also sexist. The term "chicken" is also a politically incorrect slam. Thus, if Oklahoma were to put a measure on the ballot to ban courageously challenged poultry conflict, I doubt it would pass.

[ This Message was edited by: expatriate on 2002-11-03 22:47 ]

Offline
Joined: 11/02/2002
Posts: 130
Is hunting really threatened by animal-rights activists?

I can understand anyone from Colorado being afraid to say COCK FIGHTING with Wayne ALLERD one of the top 16 HSUS senators. However my point is that these politicians are taking money from these animal rights groups and are writting legislation against you just as they have the tobbaco industry which generated a lot more money than hunting. Wayne Pacelle head of the HSUS has bragged that only seven percent of Americans are hunters so he is going to take it state by state starting in Calif and make hunting against the law by the initive process that they have used to outlaw cock fighting. So are you voting for Mr allerd tomorrow? Thanks Buck

ERD

[ This Message was edited by: bucknaked40 on 2002-11-04 21:38 ]

Offline
Joined: 11/02/2002
Posts: 130
Is hunting really threatened by animal-rights activists?

Here is also some interesting reading if you are so inclined. This is the person that got the ANTI cock fighting question on the ballot in OKLA.So What Does Janet Halliburton Do When She Is Not Trying To Shove Some New Rights Robbing Law Down The Throat Of Oklahoma?

Maybe We Can Get Some Idea From This Website?

http://www.gayly.com/

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From The Community Section..............

Gay and Lesbian Film Festival
TULSA - Joining the ranks of other cities across the country, Tulsa and Oklahoma City will once again have a gay and lesbian film festival. The OUT-OK Gay and Lesbian International Film Festival will be presented over the course of two week-ends in November. Oklahoma City will be host for the opening weekend of the film festival which will be November 15-17th............

From The Classified Section..............

Attractive GWM bottom, Clinton area, seeks young top men, straight, bi or gay from Elk City, Weatherford, or wherever for weekly encounters. Race unimportant.

G/W/Pt/TV, 43 yrs, sub bottom, 135 lbs, HIV-, bored, lonely, seeks GWM top possibly Dom, 35-50, well endowed, HIV- and Sane. No game players please! Interests in Role Play, Light B/D, S/M, spankings. Send Photos and letters of interest.

Lesbian couple ISO friends ONLY. 21 and older! We enjoy clubbing, movies, staying home and having a few beers, etc. Must be DRUG free! Interested? Want more than friendship? Find someone else.

From The Features Section..............

Family Law
by Janet Halliburton

Privacy Isn’t a Luxury, It’s the Law
My kung fu sensei sat in the park with his class. As usual, I had challenged him on one of the fundamentals of the martial arts: reality versus everything else.

“There is no need for privacy.” He said. “The locked door is an illusion of security. And why should you care what is known and unknown about you? Secrecy is not a requirement of life. Your imagined need for privacy is only a result of your cultural upbringing.”

True enough, I thought. But, still. Whether we are talking about privacy in my house or privacy in my thoughts, I have to have it. Most Americans believe that way. The Constitution is plain evidence of that. I definitely have a death grip on the crutch of “that which is mine is mine, and not yours.”

Being gay in America involves privacy issues. The social pressures of the majority forces most glbt people to disguise themselves as heterosexual. This oppressive living is obviously unpleasant and damaging to the individual. But the negligent or intentional release of information about their sexual orientation without their consent could cause them to lose their family or their job, and even make them the victim of crimes.

Our state government interferes with the right of glbt’s to engage in the most basic of human activities. Our Oklahoma Constitution mirrors much of the language of the federal Constitution’s Bill of Rights. But just like the history of the U.S. Constitution, the Oklahoma Constitution has been interpreted to exclude people of color and women. Today it is frequently interpreted to not include gays and lesbians.

Laws are enacted to relieve an immediate pressure on the legislature. Sometimes the pressure is so intense that the governmental officials do not have time to research and understand all of the ramifications that passing the law will have on daily life. We should all live to be so powerful as the forces that push the buttons of Congress.

During our lifetime, Oklahoma has been the foot-dragger among the states as far as human rights. But sometimes there is a glimmer of light. In fairness, I must also point out that frequently Oklahoma laws and regulations that protect the rights of glbt’s are forced on our state legislature by the threat of loss of federal funds.

One of these laws the feds pressured Oklahoma to pass is Title 63 of the Oklahoma Statutes, Section 1-502.2. This law creates powerful penalties for the unauthorized release of information about an individual’s HIV status. The law makes the release a crime, even if the information got out due to simple negligence on the part of the record keeper. It also gives you a right to sue for damages if records including your HIV status are released without your permission, and makes a provision for exemplary damages and attorney fees to be paid by the negligent record keeper. “Exemplary damages” is legalese for an amount of money that will punish the offenders and make an example of them so this kind of thing won’t be happening again.

You might have noticed that every time you go to a new doctor there is a consent form for you to sign. This generally gives your permission for the medical facility to release your file to your insurance company or government agency that is paying for your treatment. You might have found it odd that this release includes your permission to release information about your HIV status or venereal disease, even when you are being treated for a broken arm. This is the health care providers way of covering themselves so they do not violate Section 1-502.2 and related federal regulations.

As a health care consumer, you have rights. Here are some of them:
- You have a right to read everything you sign. No one should hurry you through this.
- You have a right to a copy of anything you sign, and to a copy of anything in your medical records.
- You have a right to be notified of any release of your records before it occurs.
- You have a right to cross out anything on a release form with which you don’t agree. Cross it out, initial the cross out, and date it.
- You have a right to put a beginning and ending date on any consent you sign. For example, you can pencil in that your consent to release the record to your insurer begins on today’s date and ends in six months. For any release of records after six months, the health care provider would have to ask for your consent again.

If you suspect that your records containing your HIV status or your condition of hepatitis, syphilis or gonorrhea have been released to anyone without your consent, contact an attorney. This law pertains to all people and agencies that have such information, not just medical care providers.

My kung fu teacher is right in his philosophy. For the kung fu adept, security of individual property is not a condition of life. But at the end of class that day I still walked away a civil rights lawyer with my love of privacy intact.

Janet Halliburton is an attorney in private practice in Oklahoma City, Oklahoma. She is a member of the American Trial Lawyers Association, the National Criminal Defense Lawyers Association, and is registered with Lambda. Her articles printed in The Gayly are not intended to substitute for legal advice and are presented for informatio nal purposes only.

Source: http://www.gayly.com/

bitmasher's picture
Offline
Moderator
Location: Colorado
Joined: 02/27/2002
Posts: 2973
Is hunting really threatened by animal-rights activists?

So let me get this straight. Your post has nothing to do with cockfighting (if you insist)? I thought in one of your other posts you were asking people to vote no on the cockfighting ban (SQ687)?

Your also stating that Allerd (sic) is in the back pocket of HSUS? Can you please give a link or reference to evidence of such?

It is not a secret that the Fund for Animals core goal is to ban all hunting.

Related Forum Threads You Might Like