« Of Jewish jokes & niggers | Main | Yet more from the religion of peace »

PETA & some good eco-news

Trendhunter reports that

A Canadian fur company has hailed their fur products as ethical… “Protecting nature, while pampering yourself,” is their tagline ... In their marketing campaign, the Fur Council of Canada is calling fur an “Eco-Fabric” and is featuring banners across the site with model cloaked in a fur-trimmed hood with the slogan, “Fur is Green.”

Fur%20coats%20PETA.jpg

According to the FCC

Fur is fashion, warmth, comfort and beauty. For many, fur is the ultimate luxury. But using fur also helps to protect our natural environment while supporting people and cultures.

To be considered “green” or “environmentally-friendly”, apparel and accessories should be made from natural materials that are:
Renewable
Durable, long-lasting
Reusable, recyclable
Biodegradable
Non-polluting, non-toxic
Energy efficient in their production, use and disposal

which is all excellent news as this should mean that my plans for this afternoon's R&R
Seal%20hunting%20clubs%20seal%20pups%20cludded%20to%20death.jpg

are completely 'sustainable'

Comments

What do baby seals drink?


Canadian club on the rocks!

Hehehehehehehehehehe!

So you're planning a Club 18-30 holiday then?

That picture is totally mental. I'm stealing it.....

The fur trade's "green" claim is just one of its gimmicks to divert people's attention away from the cruelty. An ecological product helps protect and conserve Canada’s treasured wildlife, NOT kill them for needless fur fashion products.

Sandy Parker Report, one of the fur trade’s own publications, states that China is considering adding pollution tax on fur imported for processing because fur is highly polluting and energy consuming.

According to International Labour Organization, chemicals commonly used to process fur include acids, hydrogen peroxide, chromates, formaldehyde, bleaching agents, and various types of dyes.

The fur trade’s “green” claim sites neither independent research study, nor government inspection report. Canadian consumers should question just how green it is to trap and kill every year a million of Canada's treasured wildlife? How green are the indiscriminate traps that could injure or kill endangered species? How green are the wastes from thousands and thousands of caged animals? How green is cruelty?

Fur is NOT a fabric. The fur trade talks about skins ripped off from our beautiful lynxes, beavers, and other fur-bearing animals as an ecological and sustainable "resource". Is cruelty sustainable? Surely, we as a society, do not want to sustain the trapping and killing of a million of Canada’s treasured wildlife every year. Surely, it is much more ecological to leave the fur on the animal it belongs to.

Personnally, Fannya, I think a beaver is more appealing with the fur ripped off...

...or at least neatly trimmed...

Ah, two comments from banlegholdtraps. I have some sypathy for banning leghold traps, but none for the comments actually made.

"Surely, we as a society, do not want to sustain the trapping and killing of a million of Canada’s treasured wildlife every year"

What an idiotic Disney view of animals. Stupid Bambi movie is where you got your education I'll warrant.

I don't want to hurt them; I don't want to hug them. They are a resource and need to be carefully nurtured and preserved AND harvested humanely. I harvest a deer every year, with a .30-06 and it is a bloody, horrible but humane business. Ever see an exit wound or the internal damage from a fully expanded 150 grain bullet? Any idea what I'm writing about?

But still, much kinder than what a cow gets, and I know because I've worked in a packing plant, preparing your supper.

Do you "treasure" Canadian cows, pigs or chickens? If you do you really are an idiot and if not you are a foolish hypocrite.

If you oppose the killing of all animals please advise how far down the chain you stop. Bacteria? Bugs? Tapeworms? Malaria carrying mosquitos? People - I only ask because most animalists are lefties and the only animals they want to kill are food animals (though they refuse to think about where a steak comes from) and people.

BJS: On the other hand, using the same logic. If we kill, where does the killing stop? Humans actually cannot stop killing, everything we eat kills something. Harvesting plants kills a lot of animals. Even if we stop eating meat, we cannot help it. But the differrence lies in whether we justify it or try to avoid it. If we think it's ok, then eventually it may lead to killing other humans, and destroying the place we live in. There is a thin line here.
The "bacteria, bugs..." argument. Come on.
Also: killing animals for food is not economical. And this, if not other, more, let's say, conscious issue, probably will force humanity to alter it's view on breeding animals for foood.
Not to mention breeding or killing animals for fur.

And all this "fashion, and women look beautiful in furs, so hell with seals" stuff. Well, I guess we're just curious how they look when they take off the fur. So they may as well skip the fur and save some poor seals. I don't mind if they run around naked.

Post a comment