mailing list For webmasters
Welcome Guest
PETA calling fish "Sea Kittens" Options
Kat
Posted: Sunday, June 21, 2009 1:04:56 PM
Rank: Advanced Member

Joined: 5/19/2009
Posts: 878
Neurons: 3,389
I live in a coastal community where fishing is a major industry and employs many people.
Below is an introduction to PETA’s campaign to save “Sea Kittens” taken directly from their website..................

"Given the drastic situation for this country's sea kittens who are often the victims of many major threats to their welfare and ways of life—it's high time that the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS) stop allowing our little sea kitten friends to be tortured and killed. Who'd want to hurt a sea kitten anyway?! Sea kittens are just as intelligent (not to mention adorable) as dogs and cats, and they feel pain just as all animals do. Please take just a few moments to send an e-mail to H. Dale Hall, the director of the FWS, asking him to stop promoting the hunting of sea kittens (otherwise known as "fishing"). The promotion of sea kitten hunting is a glaring contradiction of FWS' mission to "conserve, protect and enhance fish, wildlife and plants and their habitats."

There is obviously much more to the website then this, just not enough room to fit here.
Haven't fish been supplying nourishment to mankind since the beginning of time?
What's your opinion?







arthbard
Posted: Sunday, June 21, 2009 1:43:19 PM
Rank: Advanced Member

Joined: 3/26/2009
Posts: 63
Neurons: 189
Location: South Carolina
Oh, wow ... That's ... Wow ...

SEA KITTENS!?

Well, I don't know what PETA realistically hopes to accomplish by inventing the most ridiculous bit of terminology I've heard recently, but they should be reminded that the world already has catfish. You know what people do with catfish? They eat them.

Here's the link to the Web site, though, if anyone wants to see it in all its glory: http://www.peta.org/sea_kittens/
vr091073
Posted: Sunday, June 21, 2009 1:45:41 PM
Rank: Advanced Member

Joined: 5/4/2009
Posts: 236
Neurons: 720
Location: Mauritius
Kat wrote:
I live in a coastal community where fishing is a major industry and employs many people.
Below is an introduction to PETA’s campaign to save “Sea Kittens” taken directly from their website..................
"Given the drastic situation for this country's sea kittens who are often the victims of many major threats to their welfare and ways of life—it's high time that the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS) stop allowing our little sea kitten friends to be tortured and killed. Who'd want to hurt a sea kitten anyway?! Sea kittens are just as intelligent (not to mention adorable) as dogs and cats, and they feel pain just as all animals do. Please take just a few moments to send an e-mail to H. Dale Hall, the director of the FWS, asking him to stop promoting the hunting of sea kittens (otherwise known as "fishing"). The promotion of sea kitten hunting is a glaring contradiction of FWS' mission to "conserve, protect and enhance fish, wildlife and plants and their habitats."
There is obviously much more to the website then this, just not enough room to fit here.
What's your opinion?


It was not really on the cards but I think that I'm gonna have smoked marlin for breakfast tomorrow morning. And perhaps fresh fish for dinner, in the evening.
dana51
Posted: Sunday, June 21, 2009 2:19:40 PM
Rank: Newbie

Joined: 6/21/2009
Posts: 1
Neurons: 3
Location: United States
It is now a KNOWN FACT that PETA collects MILLIONS of dollars from well intentioned individuals {?] to 'save' dogs and cats....only they DESTROY THESE INNOCENT DOGS AND COMPANIONS THEM INSTEAD. Please do a little more research into this EVIL and TRAGICALLY MISLEADING organization called PETA. IF ANYTHING, PETA should be prosecuted on Fraud and cruelty charges. These SICK individuals use the good hearts of many people to FRAUDULENTLY EXTORT money from them to the DETRIMENT OF THE ANIMALS THEY ARE CLAIMING TO HELP. PLEASE PLEASE MAKE YOURSELVES AWARE OF THE TRAGIC HARM PETA IS DOING! IF MORE PEOPLE ARE AWARE, PERHAPS SOMEONE will be able to do something about them!!!~
early_apex
Posted: Sunday, June 21, 2009 2:25:00 PM
Rank: Advanced Member

Joined: 4/20/2009
Posts: 2,281
Neurons: 12,855
Location: Spindletop, Texas, United States
About many things, PETA has some valid points. As an organization, however, they seem to be unable to avoid making it clear to the world that they are crazy.
Luftmarque
Posted: Sunday, June 21, 2009 2:26:05 PM

Rank: Advanced Member

Joined: 3/17/2009
Posts: 3,119
Neurons: 39,962
Location: Pau, Aquitaine, France
Does the real PETA know about this obviously bogus effort to depict their organization as being run by infantile morons? Oh, wait a minute, that is the real PETA! Wow. They do some things I fully approve, but this… is just silly. Most real cats (and kittens) do love fish, but not as friends!
grammargeek
Posted: Sunday, June 21, 2009 2:43:23 PM
Rank: Advanced Member

Joined: 3/21/2009
Posts: 11,136
Neurons: 33,836
Location: Arizona, U.S.
As far as PETA calling fish sea kittens, it sounds like a marketing ploy to me. I realize they are not trying to sell a product, but I think you can catch my drift. The use of proverbs such as "There are many fish in the sea" implies that they are expendable. If you don't like one fish; i.e., man/boyfriend or woman/girlfriend, toss them back and "catch" another. On the other hand, the word kitten evokes a positive emotional response because most people think they are cute and adorable and often have them for pets. They want to play with them, cuddle them, and protect them, especially since they are still babies. I'm sure the desire to protect babies of any kind must have a lot to do with why they chose not to call them sea cats. It seems like PETA could evoke their desired response just as easily by renaming fish as sea puppies instead of sea kittens. However, I would find either term to be equally ridiculous.

Somebody else pointed out that catfish already exist. I would add that dogfish exist too; we just don't eat them.

If PETA wants us to refer to fish as sea kittens, should we then refer to kittens as land fish? Oh wait, SNL already did that. (Knock knock. Who's there? Land shark.)
Luftmarque
Posted: Sunday, June 21, 2009 3:09:00 PM

Rank: Advanced Member

Joined: 3/17/2009
Posts: 3,119
Neurons: 39,962
Location: Pau, Aquitaine, France
dana51 wrote:
It is now a KNOWN FACT that PETA collects MILLIONS of dollars from well intentioned individuals {?] to 'save' dogs and cats....only they DESTROY THESE INNOCENT DOGS AND COMPANIONS THEM INSTEAD. Please do a little more research into this EVIL and TRAGICALLY MISLEADING organization called PETA. IF ANYTHING, PETA should be prosecuted on Fraud and cruelty charges. These SICK individuals use the good hearts of many people to FRAUDULENTLY EXTORT money from them to the DETRIMENT OF THE ANIMALS THEY ARE CLAIMING TO HELP. PLEASE PLEASE MAKE YOURSELVES AWARE OF THE TRAGIC HARM PETA IS DOING! IF MORE PEOPLE ARE AWARE, PERHAPS SOMEONE will be able to do something about them!!!~

PETA does not hide the fact that they do not advocate a "no-kill" policy at their shelters. Here's their web page on the policy.
Ringtail
Posted: Sunday, June 21, 2009 3:40:38 PM
Rank: Newbie

Joined: 6/21/2009
Posts: 1
Neurons: 3
Location: United States
PETA is more of an eco-terrorism group than any other kind of organization. This disqualifies any information or reconsideration of their making from being considered seriously anyway.
Kat
Posted: Sunday, June 21, 2009 4:38:22 PM
Rank: Advanced Member

Joined: 5/19/2009
Posts: 878
Neurons: 3,389
grammargeek wrote:
As far as PETA calling fish sea kittens, it sounds like a marketing ploy to me. I realize they are not trying to sell a product, but I think you can catch my drift. The use of proverbs such as "There are many fish in the sea" implies that they are expendable. If you don't like one fish; i.e., man/boyfriend or woman/girlfriend, toss them back and "catch" another. On the other hand, the word kitten evokes a positive emotional response because most people think they are cute and adorable and often have them for pets. They want to play with them, cuddle them, and protect them, especially since they are still babies. I'm sure the desire to protect babies of any kind must have a lot to do with why they chose not to call them sea cats. It seems like PETA could evoke their desired response just as easily by renaming fish as sea puppies instead of sea kittens. However, I would find either term to be equally ridiculous.

Somebody else pointed out that catfish already exist. I would add that dogfish exist too; we just don't eat them.

If PETA wants us to refer to fish as sea kittens, should we then refer to kittens as land fish? Oh wait, SNL already did that. (Knock knock. Who's there? Land shark.)



Unfortunately, they are selling something: plush fish toys...
(check out their website)
and what of it...this is America, home of capitalism...but...
What I really want to know is, what is their ultimate goal?
Should we all be eating twigs and berries or do they have feelings
too?


Luftmarque
Posted: Sunday, June 21, 2009 4:51:41 PM

Rank: Advanced Member

Joined: 3/17/2009
Posts: 3,119
Neurons: 39,962
Location: Pau, Aquitaine, France
I just went back to the site and read the stories. Utterly astonishing. Who in the f*** is the audience for these things? They are like a self-parody of a children's book written by a very scary and warped mind. I like them! But surely I am not their target audience. Please tell me I'm not!!!
early_apex
Posted: Sunday, June 21, 2009 5:57:25 PM
Rank: Advanced Member

Joined: 4/20/2009
Posts: 2,281
Neurons: 12,855
Location: Spindletop, Texas, United States
Kat wrote:


Unfortunately, they are selling something: plush fish toys...
(check out their website)
and what of it...this is America, home of capitalism...but...
What I really want to know is, what is their ultimate goal?
Should we all be eating twigs and berries or do they have feelings
too?




You may feel free to eat the plush toys with a clear conscience. In fact, eat all you want, we'll make more.
Kat
Posted: Sunday, June 21, 2009 6:14:26 PM
Rank: Advanced Member

Joined: 5/19/2009
Posts: 878
Neurons: 3,389
early_apex wrote:
Kat wrote:


Unfortunately, they are selling something: plush fish toys...
(check out their website)
and what of it...this is America, home of capitalism...but...
What I really want to know is, what is their ultimate goal?
Should we all be eating twigs and berries or do they have feelings
too?



You may feel free to eat the plush toys with a clear conscience. In fact,
eat all you want, we'll make more.





Like I said, anything to make a buck..it's America...but you eat them...
while I eat fresh fish, meat and raw oysters with a very clear conscience.



grammargeek
Posted: Sunday, June 21, 2009 6:53:32 PM
Rank: Advanced Member

Joined: 3/21/2009
Posts: 11,136
Neurons: 33,836
Location: Arizona, U.S.
OK, I did go to the PETA site, as well as a couple of others. To answer Luftmarque, PETA's target audience is children. That explains the plush toys for sale as pointed out by Kat. (Thanks Kat. I hadn't previously realized that PETA sells more than propaganda.) It is also clearly stated in item #4 of an article entitled "7 things you didn't know about PETA" which can be found here: http://animalscam.com/peta_7things.cfm

I encourage you to go there and take a look at all 7 points. It is quite interesting and disturbing reading. I've taken the liberty of copying and pasting #4 below:

4) PETA activists regularly target children as young as six years old with anti-meat and anti-milk propaganda, even waiting outside their schools to intercept them without notifying their parents. One piece of kid-targeted PETA literature tells small children: “Your Mommy Kills Animals!” PETA brags that its messages reach over 1.2 million minor children, including 30,000 kids between the ages of 6 and 12, all contacted by e-mail without parental supervision. One PETA vice president told the Fox News Channel’s audience: “Our campaigns are always geared towards children, and they always will be.”

I will also add that item #1 includes this sentence (underlining added by me):
According to government documents, PETA employees have killed more than 19,200 dogs, cats, puppies, and kittens since 1998.

There is so much more that I could say about all of this, but I don't think a forum post is the place for a tome, so I just ask that you read and draw your own conclusions. But I do have a question. How does PETA actually know that fish feel pain? Did they hear a fish yell "ouch" one day? I'm not saying fish don't feel pain; I just don't know how it can be proven.

Here is the URL for The Center for Consumer Freedom from which the link given above comes:
http://www.consumerfreedom.com/
Be sure to take a look down the page at their list of most popular articles.
arthbard
Posted: Sunday, June 21, 2009 6:55:59 PM
Rank: Advanced Member

Joined: 3/26/2009
Posts: 63
Neurons: 189
Location: South Carolina
Luftmarque wrote:
I just went back to the site and read the stories. Utterly astonishing. Who in the f*** is the audience for these things? They are like a self-parody of a children's book written by a very scary and warped mind. I like them! But surely I am not their target audience. Please tell me I'm not!!!

This is a bit off the subject of "sea kittens," but if you liked that, you should check out PETA's version of the "Cooking Mama" video game.

Kat wrote:
Like I said, anything to make a buck..it's America...but you eat them...
while I eat fresh fish, meat and raw oysters with a very clear conscience.

I always wonder what their position is on animals eating other animals. Don't fish eat ... Other fish? Think of all the minnows I could save by frying up a sea kitten!
bugdoctor
Posted: Sunday, June 21, 2009 7:37:24 PM
Rank: Advanced Member

Joined: 4/8/2009
Posts: 1,789
Neurons: 5,456
Location: United States - Georgia
PETA

Petulant
Egotistical
Terrorist
Assholes
Christine
Posted: Sunday, June 21, 2009 7:38:40 PM
Rank: Advanced Member

Joined: 4/3/2009
Posts: 3,917
Neurons: 15,842
Remind President killed a fly and PETA were angry.
TL Hobs
Posted: Sunday, June 21, 2009 7:42:36 PM
Rank: Advanced Member

Joined: 4/16/2009
Posts: 1,399
Neurons: 6,101
Location: Kenai, Alaska, United States
PETA obviously never took a close look at how vicious cats really are. Being cute and furry hides the fact. They eat little animals alive by biting off their heads and ripping out their entrails with their claws. They fight dirty by ripping open their opponent and urinating and defecating in the wound. So, to gain sympathy for fish by relating them to cats shows a really twisted view of cats.

Here in Alaska, we take great pride in killing sea kittens by the hundreds of tons at a time. I killed a boat load last week and they are really tasty. I plan to kill some more next week. For many of us, it is a source of livelihood. We like to think we give wild caught salmon and halibut a choice. They can swim into our nets, or take our bait, and be caught and eaten. Or, they can swim the opposite direction and make an escape. That's fair.
Luftmarque
Posted: Monday, June 22, 2009 12:32:50 AM

Rank: Advanced Member

Joined: 3/17/2009
Posts: 3,119
Neurons: 39,962
Location: Pau, Aquitaine, France
arthbard wrote:
Luftmarque wrote:
I just went back to the site and read the stories. Utterly astonishing. Who in the f*** is the audience for these things? They are like a self-parody of a children's book written by a very scary and warped mind. I like them! But surely I am not their target audience. Please tell me I'm not!!!

This is a bit off the subject of "sea kittens," but if you liked that, you should check out PETA's version of the "Cooking Mama" video game.

That was even worse! And these are really intended for children? I'm starting to feel like someone's slipping me crazy pills.
Luftmarque
Posted: Monday, June 22, 2009 12:39:21 AM

Rank: Advanced Member

Joined: 3/17/2009
Posts: 3,119
Neurons: 39,962
Location: Pau, Aquitaine, France
grammargeek wrote:
… But I do have a question. How does PETA actually know that fish feel pain? Did they hear a fish yell "ouch" one day? I'm not saying fish don't feel pain; I just don't know how it can be proven.

I haven't done the research, but I suppose this would work by a combination of (1) comparing the structure of sea kittens' nervous systems with that of their land brethren and sistren—mammals that we tend to view as capable of experiencing pain and extrapolating from that and (2) performing experiments around what sorts of stimuli sea kittens will try to avoid (and this would be different from the sorts of animal-experimentation torture PETA protests because?…)
Luftmarque
Posted: Monday, June 22, 2009 12:58:17 AM

Rank: Advanced Member

Joined: 3/17/2009
Posts: 3,119
Neurons: 39,962
Location: Pau, Aquitaine, France
TL Hobs wrote:
PETA obviously never took a close look at how vicious cats really are. Being cute and furry hides the fact. They eat little animals alive by biting off their heads and ripping out their entrails with their claws. They fight dirty by ripping open their opponent and urinating and defecating in the wound. So, to gain sympathy for fish by relating them to cats shows a really twisted view of cats.

Here in Alaska, we take great pride in killing sea kittens by the hundreds of tons at a time. I killed a boat load last week and they are really tasty. I plan to kill some more next week. For many of us, it is a source of livelihood. We like to think we give wild caught salmon and halibut a choice. They can swim into our nets, or take our bait, and be caught and eaten. Or, they can swim the opposite direction and make an escape. That's fair.

The last bit (about the sea kittens having a choice) reminds me of a quote from The Shooting Party where the townsman and sometimes poacher remarks about the early Animal Rights Activist, "Animal rights! They have the right to get into my pot, that's what rights they have!" or words to that effect. Great movie BTW.

Good point about the innate viciousness of cats too—one of the many delights of cat ownership is being presented with a headless mouse trophy, "see what I brought you, Mommy!" PETA may have made the decision to take advantage of the widespread ignorance of what, exactly, our most popular pets, are. In the case of dogs, pack predators only too happy to dig baby bunnies out of their nests and toss them around before eating them raw. We've already discussed cats. Walter Disney did not design them, that's for sure. I'd better not get started on dog owners who treat their dogs like surrogate children. I'm in enough hot water around here already.
alvrez
Posted: Monday, June 22, 2009 10:51:00 AM
Rank: Advanced Member

Joined: 5/11/2009
Posts: 259
Neurons: 795
Location: United States
Christine wrote:
Remind President killed a fly and PETA were angry.



That's funny right there, I don't care who you are. I suppose members of PETA don't drive cars so they won't kill any insects? Perhaps they drive, but, they drive real slow to give them time to escape.
Luftmarque
Posted: Monday, June 22, 2009 11:08:46 AM

Rank: Advanced Member

Joined: 3/17/2009
Posts: 3,119
Neurons: 39,962
Location: Pau, Aquitaine, France
alvrez wrote:
Christine wrote:
Remind President killed a fly and PETA were angry.

That's funny right there, I don't care who you are. I suppose members of PETA don't drive cars so they won't kill any insects? Perhaps they drive, but, they drive real slow to give them time to escape.

As far as I'm concerned, the only group of people with credibility in this area are the Jains. They have both a developed philosophy of harmlessness and a commitment to living their beliefs. (Although I suppose some TFD poster in India is about to disabuse me of my naivety.)
risadr
Posted: Monday, June 22, 2009 12:00:21 PM
Rank: Advanced Member

Joined: 3/16/2009
Posts: 1,155
Neurons: 3,545
Location: PA, United States
Wow... "Sea kittens"? Are you kidding me? I mean, don't misunderstand, I am 100% in favor of animal rights and the humane and ethical treatment of animals, but really? Come on now, PETA...
risadr
Posted: Monday, June 22, 2009 12:03:51 PM
Rank: Advanced Member

Joined: 3/16/2009
Posts: 1,155
Neurons: 3,545
Location: PA, United States
grammargeek wrote:
As far as PETA calling fish sea kittens, it sounds like a marketing ploy to me. I realize they are not trying to sell a product, but I think you can catch my drift. The use of proverbs such as "There are many fish in the sea" implies that they are expendable. If you don't like one fish; i.e., man/boyfriend or woman/girlfriend, toss them back and "catch" another. On the other hand, the word kitten evokes a positive emotional response because most people think they are cute and adorable and often have them for pets. They want to play with them, cuddle them, and protect them, especially since they are still babies. I'm sure the desire to protect babies of any kind must have a lot to do with why they chose not to call them sea cats. It seems like PETA could evoke their desired response just as easily by renaming fish as sea puppies instead of sea kittens. However, I would find either term to be equally ridiculous.

Somebody else pointed out that catfish already exist. I would add that dogfish exist too; we just don't eat them.

If PETA wants us to refer to fish as sea kittens, should we then refer to kittens as land fish? Oh wait, SNL already did that. (Knock knock. Who's there? Land shark.)


Thank you... I needed a laugh today.
franziska
Posted: Monday, June 22, 2009 12:21:00 PM

Rank: Advanced Member

Joined: 3/23/2009
Posts: 54
Neurons: 211
Location: Genova, Liguria, Italy
Kat wrote:
I live in a coastal community where fishing is a major industry and employs many people.
Below is an introduction to PETA’s campaign to save “Sea Kittens” taken directly from their website..................

"Given the drastic situation for this country's sea kittens who are often the victims of many major threats to their welfare and ways of life—it's high time that the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS) stop allowing our little sea kitten friends to be tortured and killed. Who'd want to hurt a sea kitten anyway?! Sea kittens are just as intelligent (not to mention adorable) as dogs and cats, and they feel pain just as all animals do. Please take just a few moments to send an e-mail to H. Dale Hall, the director of the FWS, asking him to stop promoting the hunting of sea kittens (otherwise known as "fishing"). The promotion of sea kitten hunting is a glaring contradiction of FWS' mission to "conserve, protect and enhance fish, wildlife and plants and their habitats."

There is obviously much more to the website then this, just not enough room to fit here.
Haven't fish been supplying nourishment to mankind since the beginning of time?
What's your opinion?


Mankind has evolved as an omnivorous breed. If Mother Nature (or God) had wanted us to eat grass, She (or He)would have given us a multiple stomach like the one cows have. Besides, I wouldn't call a barracuda or a shark "adorable" neither would I try to pet them...
rluna
Posted: Monday, June 22, 2009 12:24:27 PM
Rank: Advanced Member

Joined: 4/2/2009
Posts: 196
Neurons: 570
Location: Austin, TX - United States
I like my sea kittens with some cocktail and tartar sauce.Drool
vr091073
Posted: Monday, June 22, 2009 12:36:15 PM
Rank: Advanced Member

Joined: 5/4/2009
Posts: 236
Neurons: 720
Location: Mauritius
Luftmarque wrote:
As far as I'm concerned, the only group of people with credibility in this area are the Jains. They have both a developed philosophy of harmlessness and a commitment to living their beliefs. (Although I suppose some TFD poster in India is about to disabuse me of my naivety.)[/color]


Well, I'm not from India but you're not wrong, in theory that is. Jainism, as a matter of fact, does prescribe living in a non-violent way to a verily extreme degree. In practice, of course, many contemporary Jains adopt more modern, pragmatic lifestyles and in a big way fall short of these, to say the least, stringent standards of comportment the philosophy requires of its adherents. However, one can still spot the occasional orthodox Jain, easily distinguishable by dint of the peculiar traditional accoutrement, which includes a sort of veil that is worn over the lower portion of the face (specifically, to cover the mouth and nostrils) so as not to inhale bacteria and other microorganisms, the happening of which would be deemed to be tantamount to a harmful act committed against other living entities.
Luftmarque
Posted: Monday, June 22, 2009 1:03:31 PM

Rank: Advanced Member

Joined: 3/17/2009
Posts: 3,119
Neurons: 39,962
Location: Pau, Aquitaine, France
vr091073 wrote:
Luftmarque wrote:
As far as I'm concerned, the only group of people with credibility in this area are the Jains. They have both a developed philosophy of harmlessness and a commitment to living their beliefs. (Although I suppose some TFD poster in India is about to disabuse me of my naivety.)

Well, I'm not from India but you're not wrong, in theory that is. Jainism, as a matter of fact, does prescribe living in a non-violent way to a verily extreme degree. In practice, of course, many contemporary Jains adopt more modern, pragmatic lifestyles and in a big way fall short of these, to say the least, stringent standards of comportment the philosophy requires of its adherents. However, one can still spot the occasional orthodox Jain, easily distinguishable by dint of the peculiar traditional accoutrement, which includes a sort of veil that is worn over the lower portion of the face (specifically, to cover the mouth and nostrils) so as not to inhale bacteria and other microorganisms, the happening of which would be deemed to be tantamount to a harmful act committed against other living entities.

That Wikipedia page on the Jains makes the claim that their masks are to avoid accidentally spitting on a sacred text, but I've always heard your explanation, which is one of those things that ought to be true even if it isn't. Same page points out a Gandhi-Jains connection that makes perfect sense. I always used to mention the "sky-clad" Jain monks who eschew clothing as being particularly cool (someone in India told me about one who came to a grade-school to give the children a lecture on Jainism—sometimes I regret having been born in the USA!) BUT now I discover that, along with that coolness, comes the requisite anti-feminism: since Jains generally believe that only the most observant practitioner will escape rebirth, and, for the branch that does the nudity, those are the sky-clad ones, and, since women are not allowed that option (which is probably a wise precaution given, well, humans), they clearly need at least one more birth before stepping off this wheel of woe. Still, I think I'll look up the local Jain branch when I return to Colorado (it's near Denver).
vr091073
Posted: Monday, June 22, 2009 3:32:10 PM
Rank: Advanced Member

Joined: 5/4/2009
Posts: 236
Neurons: 720
Location: Mauritius
Luftmarque wrote:

That Wikipedia page on the Jains makes the claim that their masks are to avoid accidentally spitting on a sacred text, but I've always heard your explanation, which is one of those things that ought to be true even if it isn't. Same page points out a Gandhi-Jains connection that makes perfect sense. I always used to mention the "sky-clad" Jain monks who eschew clothing as being particularly cool (someone in India told me about one who came to a grade-school to give the children a lecture on Jainism—sometimes I regret having been born in the USA!) BUT now I discover that, along with that coolness, comes the requisite anti-feminism: since Jains generally believe that only the most observant practitioner will escape rebirth, and, for the branch that does the nudity, those are the sky-clad ones, and, since women are not allowed that option (which is probably a wise precaution given, well, humans), they clearly need at least one more birth before stepping off this wheel of woe. Still, I think I'll look up the local Jain branch when I return to Colorado (it's near Denver).


May I also add that the 'sky-clad' Jain renunciates (I usually use the descriptor 'ether-clad' to refer to them) do have their counterparts in another Indic religion. There is in fact a branch/sect of monistically-inclined Hindu ascetics often called the 'Naga Babas' who also engage in this clothing eschewing practice as a matter of orthopraxy. However, they do not take the 'no violence to other creatures' dictum to the level and intensity striven for by the followers of Mahavira.

As for Buddhism, the third major contemplative system native to South Asia, much of what I wrote with respect to Jainism equally stands true in its particular instance. Strictly speaking, the concept of ahimsa, or harmlessness as you had it, is as pivotal a cornerstone to this faith as it is to the other. However, the trend of 'decadence' (a term I'm solely using in order to illustrate a point, not that I believe that it factually means what it's supposed to convey) among Buddhists seems to be by orders of magnitude more pronounced than in the case of Jains. With no less a totemic figure than the Dalai Lama subscribing to a partly non-vegetarian diet, one can safely conclude that the original teachings of the Enlightened One have, in actual fact, been effectively consigned to those dusty shelves set aside for works expounding the phlogiston theory!
alvrez
Posted: Monday, June 22, 2009 3:40:58 PM
Rank: Advanced Member

Joined: 5/11/2009
Posts: 259
Neurons: 795
Location: United States
rluna wrote:
I like my sea kittens with some cocktail and tartar sauce.Drool



Yeah, battered and fried, with some coleslaw on the side and a nice cold beer.Dancing
Users browsing this topic
Guest


Forum Jump
You cannot post new topics in this forum.
You cannot reply to topics in this forum.
You cannot delete your posts in this forum.
You cannot edit your posts in this forum.
You cannot create polls in this forum.
You cannot vote in polls in this forum.