• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Ban on furs

Would you support such legislation in your own country?


  • Total voters
    46
Why not just let the market work? If people feel so stongly against mink farms, don't buy minks. Educate others about what you consider to be cruelty while we still have free speech. If sales drop, mink farmers and all those connected to the mink business will gradually have to come up with a new source of income. You just want an out right ban on something that will put lots of people directly into the unemployment line.

Some injustices require action. This is one of them. These animals suffer horrifically, and the free market has not corrected the problem.

P.S.I bet you're all for banning toys in Happy Meals too.

No. I'm in favor of stupid fat people and their children self-destructing. We have too many stupid fat people already.
 
Some injustices require action. This is one of them. These animals suffer horrifically, and the free market has not corrected the problem.



No. I'm in favor of stupid fat people and their children self-destructing. We have too many stupid fat people already.

We already have animal welfare laws in place. Just enforce what's on the books. Stop trying to put people out of work.

What about smart fat people and their children?
Are you saying only stupid fat people enjoy treating their kids to Happy Meals?
Still, glad to hear you are not in favor of banning the toys to stupid fat kids.
 
We already have animal welfare laws in place. Just enforce what's on the books. Stop trying to put people out of work.

I already suggested alternative employment for them. Their line of work is cruel and evil.

Are you saying only stupid fat people enjoy treating their kids to Happy Meals?

Yes.
 
This is how I see it also. Modern textile science has the ability to artificially replicate animal fur. Many modern fabrics are also excellent insulators and retain heat much better than animal fur. They are also waterproof.

Considering the technical advances that have been made, I just no longer see a viable reason to cultivate and slaughter certain animals exclusively for their fur.
Good post and I agree. I see no compelling reason to sanction cruelty simply because a species is not endangered.
 
Here's what you do if you're all upset and bothered by the ugly conditions on a mink farm.

Buy your own mink farm, hire your own furriers or learn the trade yourselves, and sell minks for less than the evil cruel mink dudes.

You can market it as Pre-Petted Mink. It'll cost you some fingers, but what the heck, no price is too big to save the earth, right?

They go out of business and you're in.

Otherwise, since you don't seem to own an interest in the business, you don't seem to have any reason to be bothered.
 
I am sure the federal/national government (America) would love to add more bloated legislation to the books to take more of our money and grant them more powers. In a free society, we should allow the people to choose to either buy or not buy furs (this includes choosing in light of how the company obtains their furs, etc).
 
This is how I see it also. Modern textile science has the ability to artificially replicate animal fur. Many modern fabrics are also excellent insulators and retain heat much better than animal fur. They are also waterproof.

Considering the technical advances that have been made, I just no longer see a viable reason to cultivate and slaughter certain animals exclusively for their fur.
You might want to rethink buying faux fur. Not that I agree with them about running out of oil. LOL, and I just noticed this is from the fur commision. Oh well, maybe there is some truth to it anyway. Sorry for such a biased link.

*******************************************************************************************
All fake fur is manmade, from textiles such as polyester and nylon. But according to the UK magazine Ethical Consumer, these are manufactured at a huge cost to human health.
Ruth Rosselson, spokeswoman for the consumer magazine In Touch, says: 'Both these synthetic materials are responsible for large-scale factory pollution of our waterways, rivers, canals and even the sea. More than 50 per cent of this country's emissions into our air of the poisonous "greenhouse" gas nitrous oxide comes from nylon production.
'As for polyester, it's made using petrochemicals which are oil-based products.
Oil is a natural resource that will one day run out and its use should be controlled today for the sake of tomorrow.
'Some chemicals used in the dyeing of polyester for our fashion market are also known to be highly poisonous carcinogens in their own right. So they, too, are polluting the air and waterways.' Other environmentalists go further, insisting that to waste our precious oil reserves on making something as flippant as a fake fur jacket, when nature provides wool, fur and leather as renewable resources, is a dangerous mistake. Our precious oil will run out faster and cost future generations dearly.
'Real fur garments are much less polluting to manufacture than synthetic faux furs which are made with some of the most toxic chemicals known to man,' says Eugene Lapointe, one of the world's leading experts on the Earth's wild resources, in a damning report he released recently.

Should you be faking it? - Fur Commission USA [New Window]
But is it really any better for the environment than the one made from the skin of an animal? The truth will amaze you. All fake fur is manmade, ...
Should you be faking it?
 
I am sure the federal/national government (America) would love to add more bloated legislation to the books to take more of our money and grant them more powers. In a free society, we should allow the people to choose to either buy or not buy furs (this includes choosing in light of how the company obtains their furs, etc).

In a free society, who'll make the companies tell people how they get the fur?
 
Hunters as fishermen are almost always truer conservationists than animal rights extremists if for no other reason than self interest. The vast majority of animal rights whackos I have met (and I have debated Ingrid NewKook, Wayne Pacells and others on live talk shows) don't know the difference between a great horned owl and a wombat and their "education" as to wild animals seems to have come from watching Bambi a dozen times while tripping on acid

Oh you lucky dog! I'd love to meet Inbred Newkirk.
I'd bring with me a big juicy hamburger and eat it in front of the media whore.
 
@ spud
I suppose only government can help, eh? :doh
The customer has plenty of resources from the private sector, for example; information from other customers, customer demand, independent organizations, and now the internet.
 
Oh you lucky dog! I'd love to meet Inbred Newkirk.
I'd bring with me a big juicy hamburger and eat it in front of the media whore.

I pretty much had everyone in the studio laughing at her

the host-asked her how to describe her philosophy. She said if you were driving down a road and hit an icy patch and on one side of the road there is a baby in a carriage and on the other side of the road a chimpanzee it should be a moral dilemna as to what living being you hit when your car went into a skid. so he asked me-I said if the chimp was mine I'd merely ask her to buy me a new one but if it was my kid I'd track her down and skin her.

she also was whining about schools teaching kids about the holocaust while not teaching them about the billions of chickens murdered by Kentucky Fried Chicken. The host-(now deceased) was the brother of a Jesuit who once ran Georgetown U-noted that if she couldn't tell the difference between a Jewish ghetto victim and a chicken someone ought to stick her in an oven. she's totally nutty
 
Seriously, what's the difference between killing an animal for it's fur and killing it for it's skin?

It's wasteful. I would have no problem killing an animal for it's fur and meat, but I draw the line at skinning and leaving the meat to rot. Like I said, it's wasteful.

Are we proposing to ban all forms of leather as well?

I'm all for leather as it's mostly a by-product of cows, an animal we use for meat. So less waste but using the skin... I'm all for that.
 
Last edited:
Lol. Biased doesn't even do it justice. More like life-preserver.

LOL, I know. I was all ready to send when I noticed the source. Decided to do it anyway because faux fur is bad for the environment, no matter the messenger.
 
I pretty much had everyone in the studio laughing at her

the host-asked her how to describe her philosophy. She said if you were driving down a road and hit an icy patch and on one side of the road there is a baby in a carriage and on the other side of the road a chimpanzee it should be a moral dilemna as to what living being you hit when your car went into a skid. so he asked me-I said if the chimp was mine I'd merely ask her to buy me a new one but if it was my kid I'd track her down and skin her.

she also was whining about schools teaching kids about the holocaust while not teaching them about the billions of chickens murdered by Kentucky Fried Chicken. The host-(now deceased) was the brother of a Jesuit who once ran Georgetown U-noted that if she couldn't tell the difference between a Jewish ghetto victim and a chicken someone ought to stick her in an oven. she's totally nutty

Who was it, Pete Singer? who says, If a dog and a child were drowning and he could save only one, If it was a smart dog and a retarded child, he'd save the dog.
Animal Rights Advocates make my skin crawl.
 
Who was it, Pete Singer? who says, If a dog and a child were drowning and he could save only one, If it was a smart dog and a retarded child, he'd save the dog.
Animal Rights Advocates make my skin crawl.

They don't love animals-they just hate humans

Great bumper sticker I once saw in a Rural NY archery shop

When Hunting is banned, I am going to hunt the banners
 
One doesn't have to be an animal rights advocate to believe that the fur industry is an abomination. I'm no Ingrid Newkirk (my cats work for me, dammit), but the fur industry at this point in time serves no worthwhile purpose. I hope we will someday develop a conscience about animals in the U.S.

I grew up on a cattle farm. The thing about cattle is that EVERY SINGLE PART of that animal is used for something....food, dogfood, leather, other products. But fur animals are killed, skinned, and left to rot, not to mention confined in stinking tiny cages their entire lives. It's a sickening industry.
 
One doesn't have to be an animal rights advocate to believe that the fur industry is an abomination. I'm no Ingrid Newkirk (my cats work for me, dammit), but the fur industry at this point in time serves no worthwhile purpose. I hope we will someday develop a conscience about animals in the U.S.

I grew up on a cattle farm. The thing about cattle is that EVERY SINGLE PART of that animal is used for something....food, dogfood, leather, other products. But fur animals are killed, skinned, and left to rot, not to mention confined in stinking tiny cages their entire lives. It's a sickening industry.

Amen, sister.

For years, I have been on the fence about the seal slaughter here in Canada. After reading a great article in National Geographic that shedded light on the pros and cons of the hunt, I came to the conclusion that it's wrong after weighting in on all of the facts. First, the method of killing is not always consistent, quick and painless. And second, most of the time, the meat is left to rot on the ice after the seal is skinned. I simply cannot back that.
 
The fur farms are even worse.

Beyond that, fur is simply no longer something that people need. We have plenty of warm alternatives. I love my north face jacket that is made out of recycled plastic bottles. It is so soft and warm! Best jacket I've ever owned, and it sheds water.
 
The fur industry (raising minks for example) is not the only source of fur. and if someone wants to trap himself a new Raccoon coat or a rabbit skin cap I have no problem with that. THe people who want to ban the fur industry tend to be the same loons who want to ban hunting and fishing. And while they claim it is because they love animals, a shot of truth serum would most likely uncover a far more sinister motivation.
 
The fur farms are even worse.

Beyond that, fur is simply no longer something that people need. We have plenty of warm alternatives. I love my north face jacket that is made out of recycled plastic bottles. It is so soft and warm! Best jacket I've ever owned, and it sheds water.

You are in no position to tell someone else what they need. Control freaks thrive on that phrase-from the gun banners to the wealth stealing tax hikers. Each case involves-you DON'T NEED THAT

you determine what YOU NEED and leave us to Determine what WE NEED
 
The fur industry (raising minks for example) is not the only source of fur. and if someone wants to trap himself a new Raccoon coat or a rabbit skin cap I have no problem with that. THe people who want to ban the fur industry tend to be the same loons who want to ban hunting and fishing. And while they claim it is because they love animals, a shot of truth serum would most likely uncover a far more sinister motivation.

YEah, I love how you keep making these generalizations that are totally inaccurate. I have no problems with people in Alaska trapping furs for their own purposes. However, I do have problems with the fur industry overall, and most especially fur farms.

I don't like factory farms of any kind. They are horrible polluters to the groundwater. As we've seen from recent food scares, they are dangerous. They're horrible neighbors. And, the treatment of animals is shameful.

Just because we eat animals doesn't mean that they shouldn't be treated in as humane a way as possible.

As far as banning hunting and fishing, why on earth would we want to do that? I live in the South. Most of my neighbors hunt and fish, my dad hunted and fished, I fish, my boyfriend fishes, and my kids fish. We're responsible stewards.

I know, as someone who grew up on a farm, the difference between farm practices that are responsible and respectful of animals, and those that aren't.

Why don't you try arguing the actual topic, instead of creating strawmen. *yawn*
 
You are in no position to tell someone else what they need. Control freaks thrive on that phrase-from the gun banners to the wealth stealing tax hikers. Each case involves-you DON'T NEED THAT

you determine what YOU NEED and leave us to Determine what WE NEED

You NEED a fur coat? What, you pimpin in the hood, yo?

bwhahhahahahhaahah.

Chill out, bro. No one is trying to steal your guns on this thread, or your capital gains.

And stop with the strawmen. They're lame. Didn't you have to take a basic rhetoric/logic class in law school?
 
Back
Top Bottom