digg

Join DiggAbout

Introducing Digg Dialogg!
Check out the first Digg Dialogg with Nancy Pelosi. More guests to be announced soon!

PETA Says Horseracing = Dog Fighting. They’re Wrong

environmentalgraffiti.com — Anybody that saw the Kentucky Derby Saturday was treated to a spectacular race, and then immediately robbed of that memory with one of the most heartbreaking sights in racing.

Bury
show profanity settings
expand all
  • Semirhage527, on 05/05/2008, -69/+146I'm no PETA fan, but I have to agree with them on this issue. It's great that horsetrainers love the horses -- unlike dog fighters -- but if the industry really cared about the health of these animals, they wouldn't race them before their bones fully formed. Postponing horse racing by just a few years would do wonders for the animals and their bone development. I suppose we'd rather see that extra speed of a 3 year old horse, than show concern for the well-being of the animals.

    • whatsrequired, on 05/05/2008, -19/+50That's not inaccurate, but I think you're missing PETA's position here-- they ARE comparing horse racing to dogfighting, in addition to calling for the suspension of jockeys that they see using the whip (read: all of them). You're calling for a reform, which in my mind puts you in with advocates of polytrack more than I would ever characterize you as being onboard with PETA's ***** craziness.
      • mystcnurse, on 05/05/2008, -10/+24I'm sorry, but here is where I see the ***** craziness: "Suffice to say that Kentucky has a farm that receives significant taxpayer subsidy that houses retired thoroughbreds". Why, if these animals are so loved, does the need exist for a FARM that receives SIGNIFICANT TAXPAYER SUBSIDIES, once the animals are no longer useful in the money making, racing arena? I mean, if I had a horse, I would love it. If I made a bunch of money off of it, because it was fast as *****, cool. But when it couldn't race anyomre, I really can't see myself throwing it off to the side, letting YOU pay to keep it alive, and calling that compassion?
        • subterfuge, on 05/05/2008, -3/+9i do not have a problem with horse owners selling or humanely euthenizing their horses. i DO have a problem with taxes going to help pay to keep these horses alive if, as you say, nobody cares about them.
        • ashfish, on 05/05/2008, -1/+12They do not say if this is a federal or state tax subsidy. I would assume it's a state one seeing as how the Kentucky Derby is the biggest horse race of the season. States give tax subsidies to things that bring in LOTS of money to the state. In reference to the owners sending their horses to these farms, take a look at what actually happens here: The horse is an investment, thus it has space made for it as it is brining in enough money to shelter and board it. Once it stops making money, the owner cannot afford to give up a space in it's barn for this horse. So, instead of just sending it off to the meat farm they send it some place to retire. They do have to PAY for the horses to be there, however because of the tax subsidies I'll make another assumption that the price is reasonable for taking care of the horse for the rest of it's natural life. My family used to own race horses in California and I can assure you, the utmost care is taken with these animals.
        • darkstar949, on 05/05/2008, -0/+3I would have to do some searching around to find exactly what the article was referring too, but there are actually a lot of thoroughbred retirement farms in Kentucky but they are not the only place to have them and in fact some of the thoroughbred retirement farms are part of state correctional facilities - http://www.trfinc.org/farms/farms.php You could argue that is a bit of subsidizing there, but not too much. However, most of these retirement funds appear to be funded by donations and retirement donations.
        • kevlarbaboon, on 05/05/2008, -1/+5dugg for, "If I made a bunch of money off of it, because it was fast as *****, cool."
        • YoctoYotta, on 05/06/2008, -0/+6You know, I heard from a guy at a place that donating $0.01 via credit to PETA under an offensive anti-animal organization name (for example, The Nazis for Raping Baby Calves Society) is not only accepted by them and on their books, but it takes money away from them as well via credit card processing fees.

          Now what sort of jerk would do that?
    • blackolive, on 05/05/2008, -28/+3The article is wrong when it says "this is the first time a horse has had to be euthanized."

      Remember Barbosa being euthanized just months ago?...

      http://sports.espn.go.com/sports/horse/news/story? ...
      • partysan, on 05/05/2008, -3/+34"I’ll take this moment to note that in the 134 years of the Kentucky Derby, this is the first time a horse has had to be euthanized."
        note "Kentucky Derby".
        • blackolive, on 05/05/2008, -18/+2Wonderful point! /sarcasm.

          Yes Barbosa, *by chance*, was injured at a different track... but the article makes it sound like a very rare event. It's misleading.
        • partysan, on 05/05/2008, -0/+12as misleading as your out of context copy/paste job.
        • blackolive, on 05/05/2008, -7/+1Barbosa raced in the K Derby too, even won it. He just *finally* finished damaging his leg at a different race.
          • douggmc, on 05/06/2008, -0/+5I'll quit digging you down when quit calling Barbaro ... Barbosa.

            ... on second thought ... no I won't.
          • kevlarbaboon, on 05/06/2008, -0/+2that's captain barbosa, to you.
      • linuxpenguin, on 05/05/2008, -2/+13Just months ago? You need to change your clock, man. January was "months ago". January 2007 was not.
        Also, it's only misleading to YOU because you took it out of context. The REAL quote is "I’ll take this moment to note that in the 134 years of the Kentucky Derby, this is the first time a horse has had to be euthanized." That's right, the article explicitly mentioned the Kentucky Derby.
        • blackolive, on 05/05/2008, -7/+1It hasn't been "years ago" so it's "months ago." That's not hard to understand is it?

          And the article *is* misleading, barbosa raced in the K Derby too, even won it. He just *finally* finished damaging it's leg at a different race.
        • linuxpenguin, on 05/06/2008, -0/+2@blackolive: do your math. January 2008 has come and gone. The article you linked to was last updated on January 30, 2007. So let's figure out how many months it's been:
          2008 - 2007 = 1 year = 12 months
          Just for leniency we'll say the article is from February which is the 2nd month of the year. April just ended, which is the 5th month.
          5 - 2 = 3 months
          12 months + 3 months = 15 months since that article was updated. Usually you call that "over a year ago", not "months ago". We could say that Pres. Bush got elected "months" ago if we wanted to go about things your way, but we don't.
    • jkraft12, on 05/05/2008, -16/+52peta is a joke
      • OwdenBowden, on 05/05/2008, -5/+9PETA lies (see Pen and Teller's Bull *****)
        • ashfish, on 05/06/2008, -1/+5That is one of my favorite ones.
        • BabyWookie, on 05/06/2008, -6/+2Why would I listen to anything that right-wing libertarian ***** says to support his twisted far right agenda?
          • specialbuddy1, on 05/06/2008, -2/+4You're retarded. Don't you have a lab or human society to bomb rather then be on digg?
          • ashfish, on 05/06/2008, -1/+3Because they're hilarious.
          • Maver1c, on 05/06/2008, -1/+5Um, because you can fact-check them?
        • Morphine7399, on 05/10/2008, -0/+1No offense but there are several mistruths in that video, It's really said when someone sees one video with a bias pov and thinks it's the absolute truth. Try doing some open minded research and not just watch one hour long video. I don't agree with some of Peta's practices but anyone who has spent a respectable amount of time looking into the organization, without some kind of agenda (such as ratings), knows the majority of the members are normal people who generally care about the well being of both of these animals. I don't equate horse racing with dog fighting but it's clear to anyone who isn't a blatant speciest that what they are doing to these animals is wrong.
      • BabyWookie, on 05/06/2008, -6/+1bury
    • salomejones, on 05/05/2008, -10/+22I love how everyone is suddenly all up in arms over shooting a horse with a broken leg (or in this case, two broken ankles) after a race---but let me tell you something sweethearts, this happens *all the time*, and always has. Why is this suddenly a huge thing to cry about? Furthermore, if I were an evil neocon bastard, the very first organization I would hit up for distraction operations would be PETA. It's a known quality of Ingrid Newkirk--- she can be bought.
      • tdogg241, on 05/05/2008, -7/+9Just playing devil's advocate here, but slavery was once the norm too, should we not have changed that? I can't stand PETA, but as Semirhage527 pointed out, these are horses whose bones haven't even fully developed. Something's not right about that.
        • salomejones, on 05/05/2008, -5/+12Something's not right about that? What's not right about that? Organizations like PETA would have us all believe (and by the way, Ingrid Newkirk's office is 40 feet above the killing rooms where to date, 10 THOUSAND animals have been euthanized--not one of which had any sort of health problem that can be accounted for---and most of their bodies are still there, in PETA headquarters, in richmond virginia, in a big walk-in freezer) that there's something *unnatural* about the way humans conduct business on this planet.

          For the current period on this world, we have won, evolutionarily speaking. Until the next thing comes along by way of wayward asteroid or evolution of species (or both), this rock is OURS.

          But don't fret. It won't always be ours. We'll have to pass it on like everything that came before us did, in some way. For the time being however, PETA really is a bunch of self-important idiots.
          • blackolive, on 05/05/2008, -10/+3PETA wasn't the person who breed too many animals, they tried to find homes for them but couldn't.
          • salomejones, on 05/05/2008, -3/+9blackolive, that's only one side of the story. The other side of the story is that no-kill shelters up and down the east coast have been offering their services to PETA for YEARS to take the animals that PETA would otherwise euthanize off their hands. PETA has always, always said no.

            I don't know why. I do know that Ingrid Newkirk is crazy as a goddamn loon though, and that she has a thing for manipulating her environment to make herself and her organization look like martyrs. The fact is, not one of those animals had to die. The fact is, they died anyway.
          • frieddonuts, on 05/06/2008, -1/+2[citation needed]
          • ashfish, on 05/06/2008, -0/+1http://www.petakillsanimals.com/downloads/PetaKill ...
            A list of public records collected by the Virginia Department of Agriculture and Consumer Services at the request of the Center for Consumer Freedom. I had doubts about the validity of the arguments about the actual number of animals killed but when PETA themselves is submitting those reports on that .pdf well... Do a google news search for PETA euthanizing animals and see what comes up. Some interesting articles spanning several years about how many animals they have euthanized as compared to how many are adopted.
        • BOFH2, on 05/05/2008, -3/+7Wow - slavery and horse racing. nice comparison. I am guessing the NAACP would love to hear that.
        • Julik, on 05/06/2008, -0/+0Slavery and Horse Racing are not close to the same thing... When the horses are not racing they live better than most of us... They eat the best food,and they are taken care of by the best horse trainers in the world. That is a far cry from slavery.
          I realize you were playing devil's advocate, but slavery is not a very good comparison.
      • wherley, on 05/05/2008, -3/+1This has data that doesn't jibe with your comment:
        http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/People_for_the_Ethica ...
        • salomejones, on 05/05/2008, -1/+7I am really so surprised that the PETA entry on wikipedia, which is almost exclusively edited by PETA, has data that doesn't jibe with my comment.
      • xaxxon, on 05/06/2008, -2/+2Just because something has been going on for a long time without people complaining about it is NOT a reason to start. All it means is that people were WRONG for a long time and they're just starting to try and do the right thing.
      • mabhatter, on 05/06/2008, -2/+1This is a $200k horse that just made it's owners millions of dollars winning a race. You'd think with that much profit made from the animal, they'd put more research into fixing a few broken bones so the horse can retire to be some little girl's pet. Like tdogg241 said, why it is accepted from "professionals" when people with "house" pets spend $1000 on vet trips for cats and dogs far worse off?
    • div2n, on 05/05/2008, -7/+38Actually if you listen to equine vets, they'll tell you the chance of injury in horses than begin racing in later years is GREATER than in horses than begin racing in the first 2 years of life.

      Don't believe everything PETA peddles. No group, regardless of their noble intentions, is infallible.
    • tehbored, on 05/05/2008, -4/+22Generally the horses don't get hurt though. Occasionally there is an injury, but it's not a common occurrence like in dog fighting. The horses are treated well and cared for. If this sort of thing happened more often I'd agree with you, but it doesn't.
      • heystoopid, on 05/05/2008, -6/+3Nice to see this good line of propaganda again , for injuries to horses are far more common in horse racing then you think you know !
        • whodat807, on 05/05/2008, -1/+5There is about 1 accident per 100 races. Not bad, but not great either. Instead of talking about stopping horse racing or ending whipping, perhaps a more constructive discussion would be changing the track surface to a softer, artificial surface, like many tracks have done.

          Even so, Churchill Downs has a fantastic track record when it comes to horse injuries.
    • andreas1999, on 05/05/2008, -13/+8Penn & Teller tells me what to think and say on the internet. I follow whatever youtube tells me to follow. I am part of the new sheep now.
      • sryan8913, on 05/05/2008, -1/+4i'd like to know what youtube tells you
      • BoneheadFarker, on 05/06/2008, -0/+4Penn and Teller are biased as *****, but they do make some good points...
    • Asianwaste, on 05/05/2008, -0/+17Really? I would have thought it's not like dog fighting at all. More like dog racing.
    • ruddy, on 05/05/2008, -1/+2you can PETA mah bawl sack
    • OMnicient, on 05/05/2008, -0/+1Even if you postponed racing for a few years, you'd still have to train them hard early on to teach them to race.

      These thoroughbreds used for racing are the horses that become the same equine sports horses that you see in the olympics and movies like "national velvet".
    • jaxontyler, on 05/06/2008, -0/+1They've been racing 3 and a half year olds like this for 134 years. This is the first horse to ever die at the derby.
  • Hobobaggins, on 05/05/2008, -18/+65Horse fight to the death. Make them eat each other.
  • suzywang3000, on 05/05/2008, -61/+185PETA is up there with scientologists.
  • JonTheGoose, on 05/05/2008, -42/+79***** PETA and all their *****.
    • skidooer, on 05/06/2008, -1/+4The funny thing about PETA is that they are forcing more and more farms to turn to factory farming practices because their message is making it economically harder and harder to raise animals in a comfortable manner. Had they just kept to themselves, the animals would have been better off for it.
    • BabyWookie, on 05/06/2008, -9/+2***** you too.
    • mcnasby, on 05/06/2008, -3/+4Perfect time to bring up Penn and Teller's ***** on Peta:
      http://myspacetv.com/index.cfm?fuseaction=vids.ind ...
      • thesonofdarwin, on 05/06/2008, -3/+1Yes, and let's bring up Stein's movie as fact every time an evolution digg comes up. Because extremely biased people are the ones to follow blindly.
  • OfNumbers, on 05/05/2008, -33/+7Equines are born to die as soon as they break their legs or run off a cliff on accident. When they go down these tracks at top speed with a 4'5 jockey whipping their ass, they know the life they signed on for. And ***** The Onion.
    • greenlight2001, on 05/06/2008, -0/+1"they know the life they signed on for"

      Because they obviously chose racing instead of a life out on the mesa. These horses are Adrenaline junkie! They deserve it!
  • fsjenkins2000, on 05/05/2008, -7/+59Mr. Horse: "No sir, I didn't like it."
  • TheConman, on 05/05/2008, -15/+7What is "peta"?
    • StormyAaron, on 05/05/2008, -11/+34People Eating Tasty Animals.
      • steven401, on 05/05/2008, -4/+2Someone already beat you to it below.
      • BabyWookie, on 05/06/2008, -2/+1You are a disgusting human being.
    • fletcherrr, on 05/05/2008, -0/+13A guy from Boston.
    • FortyCaliber, on 05/05/2008, -0/+13A type of bread.
    • giveer, on 05/05/2008, -2/+26Dude, you're sitting there - on the Internet - with a browser open and you can't figure that question out for yourself?
    • centran, on 05/05/2008, -2/+10answer his question first then make the jokes!
      peta = people for the ethical treatment of animals.
      A common joke is people for the eating of tasty animals.
      Learn more at their site or search around google for anti-peta information.
      http://www.peta.org/
      or wiki http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/People_for_the_Ethica ...

      They are a group that claims to want to stop animal cruelty. However, the devot peta members take it much father then that. They do not believe we should be interfering with animals at all. We should not breed them, raise them, keep them as pets, or eat them as food.
      However, they are hypocritical as they try to stop euthanasia of pets BUT they themself put down millions of animals. They do this becuase as I stated above, they do not think animals should be kept as pets and they cannot release them because the animals are domesticated.

    • matador3, on 05/05/2008, -5/+3.
    • tehbored, on 05/05/2008, -1/+16"peta-" is a prefix meaning "quadrillion." PETA is an animal rights group that is mostly full of *****.
      • BabyWookie, on 05/06/2008, -2/+1How are they full of *****?
        • giveer, on 05/06/2008, -1/+1Penn & Teller have gone much deeper than I can in 2 lines of commenting. Here you are:
          http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=l9ijLulwUTY
          • BabyWookie, on 05/06/2008, -0/+1I trust Penn Gillete as much as I trust the FOX News. He's an ultra-right wing libertarian douch with an agenda.
          • giveer, on 05/06/2008, -0/+1All right, I didn't realize this was a competition to discover which answer would please your highness the most... in which case:
            PETA financially supported Ray Coronado. This isn't made up, they actually did and that should be enough reason right there.
            PETA did in fact run an ad campaign equalizing the Holocaust with the slaughter of chickens. I'll let you decide if that's a bad thing, but if you think it's a good thing, I'll reserve my right to think you're an *****.
            PETA chooses to have "no comment" if violence is used in order to achieve their goals. I can think of other world groups who run the same way - and I don't like them either.
            PETA's former vice president has type two diabetes and can only stay alive by using medicine that was tested on dogs. I don't care about the medicinal animal testing, in fact, I support it, it's just PETA's ironic hypocrisy I have a distaste for.
            I will say most people who are involved with PETA have fantastic intentions and true zeal. PETA though, is ***** up beyond reason and I would be comfortable labeling them an evil organization. Evil in its disregard for the lives of... y'know... humans. Y'know, those OTHER living things? Yeah those.
    • br0wnstar, on 05/05/2008, -2/+4http://www.*****.com
    • TheConman, on 05/05/2008, -1/+1i was being sarcastic, seriously, who doesnt know what peta is
  • ohplease, on 05/05/2008, -17/+7Anyone who knows anything about how horses are treated, fed, raced and discarded in horse racing would see it as such a great sport.

  • bbliss17, on 05/05/2008, -27/+7PETA is gay....it does not hurt them....I kill animals for pleasure
  • HoratioHellpop, on 05/05/2008, -24/+81I'm a lifelong member of People Enjoying Tasty Animals
    • heystoopid, on 05/05/2008, -0/+1hmm tasty Gustavskorv, kabanos , Vossafår , paardenworst , kazy , shuzhuk , zhaya , zhal , karta , sur-yet , sakuraniku , carparccio , bresaola , sate jaran , sauerbraten , charqui and leberkase !

      Some people just don't know what they are missing , except for astute New Yorkers that travel to Quebec for the fine French Chevaline meat dishes served in the province !
    • ZombyWoof78, on 05/06/2008, -0/+2I could go for a nice horse steak right now.
    • BabyWookie, on 05/06/2008, -5/+1You are sick.
  • dhVyse, on 05/05/2008, -22/+129PETA is almost always wrong. I'm all for fair treatment to animals, but PETA is too extreme to be taken seriously.
    • localzuk, on 05/05/2008, -10/+2That is the difference between animal rights and animal welfare. All animal rights groups have the same basic beliefs as PETA.
      • davidrools, on 05/05/2008, -2/+4And the way PETA pretends to be an animal welfare group hurts the animal welfare cause.
        • pharmakon, on 05/06/2008, -0/+1peta never pretended to be for anything aside from animal rights. they might SUPPORT animal welfare, but the fact is their bottom line has always been RIGHTS.
    • rpebble, on 05/05/2008, -4/+23PETA is like that guy, who you might agree with on some level, but they are so completely nuts and out of touch with reality that you never want to associate with him. They take things out of context, make stuff up when needed, and do a lot of things that in the big scheme of things, are very irritating but never really change anything. On the rare occasion that they get something right, it's so drowned out by their craziness that nobody pays attention. Talk about the boy who cried wolf.
      • pharmakon, on 05/05/2008, -7/+1"research." try it.

        http://www.peta.org/about/victories.asp
        • bphicke, on 05/05/2008, -2/+7Reality, try it.
          • pharmakon, on 05/06/2008, -4/+1what a day, when a ron paul supporter tells me about reality.
        • rpebble, on 05/05/2008, -2/+9LOL I love how their "victory" for 2007 is that they shut down a contest at a small high school in north carolina that would have scared a pig. Do they really not have bigger fish to fry or was that the only thing they succeeded at doing?
        • Kiwibomb, on 05/06/2008, -1/+7na thats a big deal. i mean could you go to sleep at night knowing you scarred a little piglet beyond repair?
    • BabyWookie, on 05/06/2008, -10/+3That's BS. You can never be too extreme in trying to stop things like animal cruelty, slavery, genocide, torture, etc.
      • BoneheadFarker, on 05/06/2008, -0/+8...pet ownership, medical research, seeing-eye dogs, etc.
      • specialbuddy1, on 05/06/2008, -2/+2Having pets is slavery. Have you killed any pets lately to end the torture? How about coming over to my house so you can set my animals free so that they can return to the wild. Your nuts like the rest of the people from PETA.
        • BabyWookie, on 05/06/2008, -4/+1LOL. More right wing anti-PETA propaganda BS. A lot of PETA members have animal companions and see nothing wrong with it. The only reason that Ingrid doesn't have one or more is because she travels all the time.
          • rpebble, on 05/06/2008, -1/+2First of all, who the hell is Ingrid? Second, you don't have to be right-wing to be anti-PETA. They are called "radical left-wing" for a reason -- most liberals don't want to be associated with them.
          • BabyWookie, on 05/06/2008, -2/+1@rpebble:

            http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ingrid_Newkirk

            There's this indipendent documentary movie about her and PETA, called "I Am an Animal." Check it out if you have the chance. It might change your mind.



          • BoneheadFarker, on 05/06/2008, -1/+1Then please explain Mary Beth Sweetland's story. For a group of people that claim they would never accept a cure for AIDS if animals were involved in the testing, the top ranks are pretty damn hypocritical.

            If you didn't know, Mary Beth Sweetland is diabetic. She requires daily insulin shots. It's only been recently that animal-based insulin started being supplanted by genetically engineered versions. So this means that the vice-president of PETA required the "torture" of animals in order for her to live. On top of the fact that they kill about 80% of the pets that they take in, I'd say that this is one ***** up group of people...
      • pharmakon, on 05/06/2008, -4/+1@babywookie: dont try to talk to diggers about animal cruelty, they just cant understand anything that might conflict with their desires for bacon and pepperoni pizza. but hey they're all "against animal cruelty."
        • rpebble, on 05/06/2008, -1/+3I love how you make that comment, carefully omitting yourself from the category of "diggers". Can you taste the irony?
  • Scottievm, on 05/05/2008, -30/+70***** PETA.
  • harvinator24, on 05/05/2008, -16/+52I love the people with pets who just adore peta because what would they do if there tiny annoying dog died.

    Peta is against people owning pets, because they think its slavery.
    • InfiniteNothing, on 05/05/2008, -4/+17Seriously? What would they have us do with all the pound puppies? Set them free so they can starve to death? Instantly euthanize them?
    • zKman, on 05/05/2008, -3/+24You aren't that far off InfiniteNothing. From Wikipedia:

      "PETA was criticized in 2005 when police discovered that at least 80 animals had been euthanized and left in area dumpsters over the course of a month. Two PETA employees approached a dumpster in a van registered to PETA and left behind 18 dead animals. Thirteen more were found inside the van. The animals had been euthanized by the PETA employees immediately after taking them from shelters in Northampton and Bertie counties."
      • MrPingu, on 05/05/2008, -1/+8I know its been said, but ***** PETA.
      • xaxxon, on 05/06/2008, -5/+1Euthanization is considered humane. Like it or not, it's often times a lot better for the animal than their alternatives.
        • specialbuddy1, on 05/06/2008, -0/+4Maybe we should euthanize you. It might be better then the alternatives.
      • thesonofdarwin, on 05/06/2008, -0/+1People criticizing them for this really need to volunteer at their local shelters, BOTH no-kill and kill varieties. It's an unfortunate reality, but it has to be done in many instances. As long as the person in charge kills only out of necessity, and not convenience. Once they become too desensitized to the euthanasias it's all too easy to make the switch.
    • ruddy, on 05/05/2008, -3/+2we have Desert Eagles for that
    • wherley, on 05/05/2008, -3/+5If "Peta is against people owning pets", then why do they say:
      http://www.peta.org/about/faq-comp.asp
      "Adopting a cat or dog from a shelter and providing a loving home is a small but powerful way to prevent some of this suffering. The most important thing that animal guardians can do is to spay or neuter their animals and avoid buying animals from breeders or pet stores, which contribute to the overpopulation crisis."

      • xaxxon, on 05/06/2008, -0/+3Because the OP was talking out his ass.
    • davidrools, on 05/06/2008, -3/+3They're also against any kind of animal influence. Whether protecting endangered species, nursing sick animals to health, or giving a pet a comfortable and loving home, they're against any situation where humans interfere with an animal's "natural" lifestyle. And it's ridiculous and they pretend to be for animal welfare but they really only do that to gain support (i.e., money) from "supporters" who don't know better.
    • BabyWookie, on 05/06/2008, -6/+1Did you hear that on the Rush Limbaugh show or something? That's pure BS.
  • blitzkrieg047, on 05/05/2008, -26/+12People
    Eating
    Tasty
    Animals
    • tehbored, on 05/05/2008, -1/+5OK, enough! We get it already!
    • matador3, on 05/05/2008, -6/+5People Eating Tasty Activists - Save an animal, eat a hippie.
  • EGOvoruhk, on 05/05/2008, -20/+5Well in dog fighting, the dog in second place dies, no? That's exactly what happened in the horse race
  • kargod, on 05/05/2008, -26/+18The horse gets pushed to it's limit until it's not usable anymore. Then it's killed.
    The dog gets pushed to it's limit until it kills or is killed.
    Either way, people are not using these animals kindly.
    • FortyCaliber, on 05/05/2008, -3/+5Alpo means horses are still usable.
      Koreans mean dogs are still usable.
    • InfiniteNothing, on 05/05/2008, -0/+8There's no retired racing horses? I'm asking honestly.
      • ashfish, on 05/05/2008, -0/+5There are LOTS of retired racing horses. They go to farms like the one in Kentucky to live out the rest of their lives, or sometimes owners have special pastures that are kept for retirees. Sometimes they're used to breed new race horses too.
    • giveer, on 05/05/2008, -0/+2Everybody now!
      Oooooohh, If you want it to be possessive,
      it's just i-t-s..
      But if you want a contraction,
      It's I-T apostrophe S.
      Scalliwag.
    • lotsa1s, on 05/05/2008, -0/+7RTFA. You're an absolute embarrassment to animal rights and YOU should be put out of your misery.
      "I’ll take this moment to note that in the 134 years of the Kentucky Derby, this is the first time a horse has had to be euthanized."
      ***** you.
      • RedHerringHack, on 05/05/2008, -0/+1That goes double for me. Self important *****.
    • ludar, on 05/05/2008, -0/+4except once the horse is killed its processed into a lot of every day products, so think again.
      • lotsa1s, on 05/05/2008, -0/+8Its the CIRRCLLE OF LIFFEE!
        And it MOOVES US ALLLL!
    • blakestah, on 05/05/2008, -0/+1Life is pain, Highness. Anyone who says differently is selling something.
  • wilhoitm, on 05/05/2008, -16/+7Horses have been bred so that they cannot heal after an injury. I am not a big PETA supporter but I am just curious, were horses ever that way originally?
    • Luminoth, on 05/05/2008, -0/+12Humans invented the crutch and horses lack the ability to use them, so I'm going to say yes, they've always been this way.
    • ibone, on 05/05/2008, -0/+9The horses breeding has nothing to do with the inability to recover from broken legs. Horses must keep equal weight on each leg or they will get a life threatening condition called lamanitis. (forgive if i spelled it wrong). Blood vessels to the hoofs are compromised and the horse dies.

      See Barbaro for more info.
    • rpebble, on 05/05/2008, -1/+4Bred so that they can't recover after injury? Why would anyone ever breed for that? I call shenanigans.
  • krsone2424, on 05/05/2008, -13/+26I think PETA member fighting would be better than anything, because unlike dogs or horses, PETA members are unquestionably worthless
  • erhanaltay, on 05/05/2008, -14/+47I'm still waiting for PETA to call for a ban of fly swatters... or are only the "cute" animals worthy of ethical treatment?
    • InfiniteNothing, on 05/05/2008, -0/+3Vertebrates? Just guessing since they'd probably oppose killing fish.
      • Maxamegalon2000, on 05/05/2008, -1/+9http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2004/11/17/national ...
        "No one would ever put a hook through a dog's or cat's mouth," said Bruce Friedrich, PETA's director of vegan outreach. "Once people start to understand that fish, although they come in different packaging, are just as intelligent, they'll stop eating them."
  • Chassit, on 05/05/2008, -18/+28PETA is an utterly ridiculous and hypocritical organization. ***** them, ***** them right in the eye.
    • InfiniteNothing, on 05/05/2008, -5/+4I'm no member but please explain the hypocrisy.
      • matador3, on 05/05/2008, -1/+7http://www.petakillsanimals.com/
        • BabyWookie, on 05/06/2008, -0/+1That's like linking to hillaryisacommie.com for some info on Hillary. It's a vile right-wing propaganda site.
        • InfiniteNothing, on 05/06/2008, -0/+2As far as I know, PETA doesn't deny their high kill rate.
      • InfiniteNothing, on 05/05/2008, -4/+3I'm getting buried for this one but I don't believe PETA is protesting the euthanization, they are protesting the treatment of the horse. I'm not sure I see the contradiction.
    • BabyWookie, on 05/06/2008, -0/+1How so?
      • MrMongoose, on 05/06/2008, -1/+2Tadaa!
        http://www.petakillsanimals.com/petasdirtysecret.c ...

        Get off your ***** high horse already.
        • thesonofdarwin, on 05/06/2008, -0/+1I'll say it again, go work a month or two at your local animal shelter especially if you are in a heavily populated area. Once you fill up, everything that comes in goes down. Everything. More cages don't magically appear and other shelters rarely have the room to take them with the rare exception in less densely populated areas. I live in a very small county and our euthanasia rate was just a little over 60%. Expecting any less from a city shelter is just silly and reeks of ignorance about the reality of the dog and particularly cat rampant overpopulation.
        • BabyWookie, on 05/06/2008, -1/+2That's a right wing hate site. This is like pointing me to godhatesfags.com for information on the gay culture in America. Try again. Lame.
  • KevinRWright, on 05/05/2008, -22/+5PETA is a bunch of terrorists, BUT, I agree with them on this issue. Horse racing is just stupid as ***** anyway. Are people that ***** dumb that they are entertained by animals running in circles? Or do people just like horse racing because of the money they bet on it?

    Either way, it's such a waste of time.
    • lotsa1s, on 05/05/2008, -3/+13The Olympics are just stupid as ***** anyway. Are people that ***** dumb that they are entertained by people running in circles?

      Take your pretentious ***** elsewhere, *****.
      • KevinRWright, on 05/05/2008, -9/+2Oh, my mistake. I thought the olympics were a test of HUMAN feats...

        How could I have mixed that up?
      • RooX, on 05/05/2008, -1/+5and we all have to agree that human feats are the only ones worth watching? Just wondering...
        • KevinRWright, on 05/05/2008, -5/+2Well, when A human trains their entire life and pushes their body to the limits of capability, that is interesting. A horse, while well treated, is doing it because they are made to do it. So I don't feel awe or express wonder, but only feel bad for them.

          And to be honest, the Olympics are pretty ***** stupid too. So yeah, you can apply my logic to people running in circles around a track being boring too, because it is.
    • localzuk, on 05/05/2008, -2/+2What terror have they inflicted?
      • KevinRWright, on 05/05/2008, -2/+2Every time the release a press statement, it reaps terror on my eyes and ears.
        • localzuk, on 05/05/2008, -3/+3You must have serious psychological problems then.
      • punkyetti, on 05/06/2008, -1/+3They support ALF which is a terrorist group so by help terrorist they them selves are.
        • localzuk, on 05/06/2008, -1/+1Lol, they provided money to someone for a project, who was later convicted for criminal activity. That is not the same thing as funding the ALF. Also, one incident doesn't mean it is a habitual thing.
    • VivaLaShay, on 05/06/2008, -1/+2People also love to watch cars drive in circles all day.
  • Radical5, on 05/05/2008, -7/+71so does dog racing = horse fighting?
  • fletcherrr, on 05/05/2008, -5/+21I usually hate these retarded blog posts, but I have to give a hearty round of applause. What a great conclusion.
  • KillerFuzzball, on 05/05/2008, -18/+15Man, ***** PETA.
  • overtoke, on 05/05/2008, -14/+4The owners should have been euthanized as well. THAT would make this newsworthy.
  • axiomflash, on 05/05/2008, -21/+8I think PETA is right. People hate them, but they can never justify why. I'm a friggin HUNTER and I think PETA is almost always right.
    • rpebble, on 05/05/2008, -1/+6Never justify why? I've already written too much, i'm not going to bother. Try reading the rest of the posts on this thread, you'll find plenty of reasons to hate PETA.
    • BabyWookie, on 05/06/2008, -2/+1Same here, bro.
  • FriedTurkey, on 05/05/2008, -8/+18According to PETA, although not officially, any companion animal is being slaved by humans. PETA doesn't come out that they are against you keeping Fluffy in your house because they know they will lose what is left of their mainstream support. It is curious that the high management of PETA do not keep any pets if they are supposedly animal lovers.

    PETA was great in the 80's with the campaign against fur but it was taken over by nut-jobs.

    • FriedTurkey, on 05/05/2008, -3/+2Here is some info from their own site:

      http://www.peta.org/campaigns/ar-petaonpets.asp

      Almost come right out that they are against people keeping pets.
      • LucasJ218, on 05/05/2008, -1/+6This isn't accurate at all - you're reading it too literally.

        Breeding animals has caused major issues in a breed's personality and stability. Some animals are bred more for their looks then a gentile disposition. This is especially true for dogs. Cats, on the other hand, have large large litters and often when the animals aren't wanted they're thrown on to the street. That's not only an issue for the safety of the animal, but a population issue. Cats breed almost like rabbits so we end up with areas over populated with cats. Worst yet, they don't care about inbreeding, so we get weird mutant cats with extremely short legs and malformed tails.

        I'm not crazy enough to say that I don't enjoy the three dogs we own - I'm just saying, if society hadn't started breeding these pets, the pets might have been better off.
        • BoneheadFarker, on 05/06/2008, -1/+1On the other hand, we might not be here if the first person to find a wolf cub decided to kill it instead of bringing it home where it grew up to protect the people from other wild animals.
  • zbeast, on 05/05/2008, -4/+12I don't know about the rest of the world but... horse racing in north America is generally a
    good sport. The horses are feed well, they have good medical care. Yes, there are bad owners and a few
    horses do die in the sport. But over all it's well managed and controlled.

  • FortyCaliber, on 05/05/2008, -10/+7I would like to see a jockey race PETA member...
    Until it collapses.
  • StevesJobs, on 05/05/2008, -9/+2I hate seeing animals die as much as the next guy, but I think alot of people neglect that to certain types of people, horseracing and dogfighting are perfectly fine and to an extent, tradition.
    • mystcnurse, on 05/05/2008, -2/+3So is beating your wife, to certain types of people, tradition.
  • mycatsasha, on 05/05/2008, -3/+1I must say, I did like the random football picture. Soon it will be that football is no better than horse racing/dog fighting.
    • CobaltBlue, on 05/06/2008, -0/+1That infamous dog fighter Michael Vick in the picture.
  • grimax, on 05/05/2008, -10/+26Genocide in Darfur, 10k dead in Myanmar, rising food and fuel prices threatenting to drive millions into hunger....
    and one dead thoroughbred. Perspective.
    • dafunkmonster, on 05/06/2008, -0/+7A concept wholly alien to PETA.
    • rpebble, on 05/06/2008, -0/+1It's an issue of putting an animal life on the same level as a human life. Not that I have any philosophical objections to that, but to me it doesn't seem practical...I've got these sharp teeth and fantastic stomach enzymes for a reason.
      Also, the cute animals are the only ones to ever get any attention from them. You'll never see them with "Save the lungfish!" posters...not that they need saving.
    • SuperMoses, on 05/07/2008, -0/+1You forgot 1.2 mil iraqis... but this is still a poor argument.
  • shi11, on 05/05/2008, -11/+0If a soldier can get prosthetic limbs why can't a horse?
    • whodat807, on 05/05/2008, -0/+5Are you serious?
    • HaloZero, on 05/05/2008, -0/+1Umm, first of all I doubt there's much of a market in it. Secondly, it would require massive investigation into the brain of a horse. There might be similarities with a human, but it wills till be very different.
    • logan074, on 05/06/2008, -0/+1I'll make it if you foot the bill.
    • rpebble, on 05/06/2008, -0/+1Millions of dollars of R&D for a product that will sell a few units...pass.
  • oldcyborg, on 05/05/2008, -5/+8Even if I could have Pam Anderson as a Pet, I could not support them.... They are far out of hand, and make less and less sense....
    And I believe Pam could be whole lotta fun, but it just isn't worth it....

    Cyborg
    • Niallgriff, on 05/05/2008, -0/+3When did people start signing their posts?

      NiallGriff
  • lotus22, on 05/05/2008, -6/+27Most of these comments are just plain ignorant.
    • mycatsasha, on 05/05/2008, -0/+8Most of the comments on Digg are just plain ignorant.
    • andreas1999, on 05/05/2008, -0/+1finally someone making sense
    • BabyWookie, on 05/06/2008, -3/+2The far right has been doing an amazing job in demonizing PETA. It's mostly just plain lies and propaganda.
    • cnot3, on 05/06/2008, -0/+3PETA is ignorant
  • bunki8, on 05/05/2008, -1/+11The statement about it being like dogfighting is completely off-base, but their statement about the horses bones are on target for sure.
    "For the last 15 years, as prices for young horses have risen, the thoroughbred gene pool has been shrinking. The average price for a 1-year-old horse at the annual Keeneland yearling sale has risen 41% since 2002 to $101,347, and with more money on the line, breeders are narrowing the breeding field to fewer big-name stallions. The number of stallions that produced offspring has dropped by about 50% since 1992, according to the Jockey Club." -- WSJ
    The last 14 derby winners have been decedents of Native Dancer and many of them were inbred with Dancer in both bloodlines. Agreed, the horses are treated well, but until rules are made about inbreeding, it seems cruel to put money above the health of the horses
    • heystoopid, on 05/05/2008, -0/+2Forgotten much about the simple fact that the bulk of the gene pool on the English Thoroughbred Race Horses for the most part is based on a mere 12 original sires , I see !
  • painperdu, on 05/05/2008, -14/+9No one stood up when they took away ***** fighting.

    No one stood up when they took away dog fighting.

    Now, they're wanting to take away horse racing and no one is there to stand up to stop them.

    This PETA crap is getting out of hand. These animals are treated far worse in their natural habitat. Why are we allowing a small group of mentally ill rich people control oue actions?
    • cadmiumpaint, on 05/05/2008, -5/+1you think its cute to take something written about millions dying in the holocaust and make a cool little joke out of it? its not funny. learn about respect.
  • getbusylivin, on 05/05/2008, -7/+17Horses love to run. Accidents happen. Life can be very sad at times.
    • BLiSTeD, on 05/05/2008, -6/+4A lethal injection isn't an accident, is it?
      • GREEDOnvrFIRED, on 05/05/2008, -1/+9He is right. Horses love to run, and accidents happen. The difference is when a horse breaks an ankle in the wild it lays down and waits to die of dehydration or starvation or be eaten by predators or all three.
      • whodat807, on 05/05/2008, -1/+8you're right, they should have let the animal lay on its side and watch as it died a horrible death.
        • jhdteacher, on 05/05/2008, -5/+1horses love to run, but they don't choose to do so around a race-track (nor do they choose to train or be whipped for said events)
          • whodat807, on 05/06/2008, -0/+5Do you honestly think that racehorses have it harder than workhorses? Race horses are worth hundreds of thousands of dollars, not just to race but to reproduce after they retire -- and their owners treat them as such.
  • krazikamikaze, on 05/05/2008, -8/+28I've never seen PETA make a intelligent, well-thought out argument. Their statements are so stupid it's almost like they are a parody of themselves. I don't need to make fun of PETA to show how ridiculously out of touch they are with reality because they're doing a damn fine job of it themselves.
    • mlrigsby, on 05/05/2008, -5/+4I haven't seen anyone in this thread make an intelligent, well-thought counter argument. The fact that horse-racing is exploitative and dangerous to the animals is so obvious that it is not debatable. The majority of the folks in this thread, if they've bothered to make an argument at all, simply argue that the enjoyment they get from horse-racing outweighs the suffering and possible death of the animals. That may be convincing to most people, but it is far from a rational argument. It is an irrational, emotional response.
      • gmprunner, on 05/06/2008, -0/+4The fact that horse-racing is exploitative and dangerous to the animals is so obvious that it is not debatable? Really? I'd love to see your intelligent, well-thought argument for that.
        • mlrigsby, on 05/06/2008, -0/+1I think the argument would go something like this:
          1.) It is immoral to inflict unnecessary pain on animals.
          2.) Horse racing causes pain to animals and pleasure to gamblers.
          3.) Gambling is not necessary.
          ...
          tf: Horse racing in immoral.

          This argument is logically valid (at least it easily would be if I bothered to formalize it). We could debate the premises (I myself do not accept the first premise without qualification) but the argument is beyond debate. I don't generally agree with PETA, but it is a huge mistake to say they do not make intelligent arguments; their biggest advantage, I think, is that they make incredibly simple and compelling logical arguments. Opponents of PETA typically respond with illogical rants (I like eating meat, I like horseracing, eff you!). An intelligent, well-though out response would require tackling their premises directly and establishing proper moral guidelines for dealing with animals.
    • RedHerringHack, on 05/05/2008, -1/+3They are all about the drama. I have a 4 year old that acts the same way.
  • BigglesPiP, on 05/05/2008, -4/+8"or sent to Europe to be killed for the dinner table"

    What the ***** is wrong with certain American groups this year? Not the 1st horrifically offensive comment directed at me this week.
    • damawa42, on 05/05/2008, -1/+5Since when do Europeans eat horse meat!?!?
      Why are Europeans more likely to eat horse meat than North Americans?

      Who the hell do PETA think they are?
    • mllawso, on 05/06/2008, -1/+2If you're "horrifically offended" by that, you need to get off the internet. Btw, I think americans are currently bearing the brunt of "you're stupid/inbred/fat" comments.
      • BigglesPiP, on 05/08/2008, -0/+1At least that's statistically accurate.

        I can't stand the way a large portion of the American population has no idea about the rest of the world.
  • linuxpenguin, on 05/05/2008, -6/+15I agree with PETA - I think we should just have all the horses sit in the barn all day. Like we do to our kids - maybe we should even start driving them in minivans everywhere, like McDonalds or the all-you-can-eat buffet. Or the vet to figure out why they're so fat now that we've made them healthier by not racing them.
    I'm surprised they aren't attacking the Amish - they use horses every day like they're stuck in the 1700s or something, you'd think PETA would tell them to get with the program!
    (I'm joking if anyone can't tell)
    • mlrigsby, on 05/05/2008, -2/+8Amish horses are living in a symbiotic relationship with humans in which they are treated well and with respect. It is in no way comparable to horse-racing, in which the animals are dangerously exploited for the purposes of gambling.
      • Flagg3, on 05/05/2008, -0/+7This argument may be true, but PETA is just as against the Amish keeping horses as they are against horse-racing.
      • mlrigsby, on 05/05/2008, -1/+1Are they really? I'm not a PETA expert, so I'm not totally enlightened on their exact stances on every issue. I was just responding to linux's reductio argument.
      • linuxpenguin, on 05/06/2008, -0/+4First of all, I was kidding.
        Second of all, are you serious? They put a buggy on them and use them like cars! Sure they take care of them and treat them great. . . after making them pull around a wooden carriage full of people and goods all day. Yeah, they are treated wonderfully - but they still do backbreaking work which I'm certain can be just as dangerous (or even more so) as racing.
        Third of all. . . what's to say that horse jockeys, equestrians, and the like don't take equally good care of their horses and treat them with respect and dignity?
        • thespiff, on 05/06/2008, -1/+1The difference here is the amish are (possibly over)working their horses to plow fields which grow food to feed their families. Whereas race horses are (possibly over)worked for sport so that rich people and gambling addicts are entertained.
          • linuxpenguin, on 05/06/2008, -0/+3Thanks, I know the difference and I really wasn't arguing that what the Amish do is wrong or inhumane. I'm just saying that it's weird that it's OK to endanger an animal for the sake of doing something hard and boring, but it's not OK to endanger the animal by having it do something it might enjoy.
            Not only that, but what about the equestrians, jockeys, etc. who have families to feed? What about the people who work for the TV network? It's easy to think of the people making a quick buck, but what about everyone else? Not to mention, again you're operating under the assumption that these horses don't want to do this and have caretakers and riders who don't care about them. People who treat their dogs like crap not only don't have a caring relationship with their dog, but also usually don't end up with a dog with good physical or emotional health. Why should this be different for horses? A horse is much stronger, too - if you upset a horse, it's plenty powerful enough to at least do some serious damage so there's motivation to not mistreat it.
    • darkheritage, on 05/06/2008, -0/+0SYMBIOTIC?!?! You have never spent any time around an Amish farm. If I was a horse I would be a race horse over an Amish horse any day. The Amish abuse, under feed and over work their horses and just replace them after a few years, sending most of the older horses to slaughter auctions.
      • punkyetti, on 05/06/2008, -1/+1I know more then a few amish that have bought retired race horses. They treat their animals better then most english.
  • localzuk, on 05/05/2008, -3/+12I really do wish people would do some research and realise that animal welfare (ie. being nice to animals) is different to animal rights (believing that animals should not be used for our personal gain).

    PETA is an animal rights organisation, so their views echo those of animal rights philosophy.
    • novenator, on 05/05/2008, -0/+1well thought out. Thank you for some good perspective
    • aelias, on 05/05/2008, -1/+3Ingrid gives two ***** about animal rights. She wants to continue to fund PETA. That is her sole goal. She sends ridiculous demands up the flagpole, cries foul when they aren't met instantly, and uses sensationalism to draw donations. The correlation to US politics aside, the sad fact is efficiency isn't always pretty and to feed 300 million people takes a lot of pretty disturbing -looking- things to occur.
      • localzuk, on 05/06/2008, -0/+1Again, you are confusing animal welfare with animal rights. Animal rights calls for the end of the usage of animals for our personal gain - be this food, sport, pets etc... And your comments about 300 million people is misguided. It is easier to feed 300 million using crops than it is meat. It is more environmentally friendly too.
    • JasonMath, on 05/06/2008, -1/+2No they are not. They euthanize 97% of the animals they take in (see http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index?qid=200802 ... for more info). If you really want to protect animals, donate to a no-kill animal shelter.
      • localzuk, on 05/06/2008, -0/+1So instead, they should struggle to keep 7000 animals in a shelter built for a couple of hundred? How is that humane? Animal rights doesn't equal no-kill.
  • lotsa1s, on 05/05/2008, -10/+14As a vegetarian and animal rights advocate I humbly apologize for the actions of PETA. They do not represent us.
    • SuperMoses, on 05/07/2008, -1/+1You don't represent anyone but yourself. There are many animal rights organizations that don't support horse racing... not just PETA.
  • br0wnstar, on 05/05/2008, -8/+8The difference between horseracing and dog fighting is that one is done by rich white people and the other by people from 'the ghetto'. Obviously, the latter should be illegal. It's simple really.
    • bainfu, on 05/05/2008, -0/+4There is one other difference. Horses typically are treated a little better win, lose, or just in generally every category.
      • br0wnstar, on 05/05/2008, -1/+2They race til they die. They enjoy no other life. What about the difference between dogracing and horseracing? Is there anything that comes to mind besides the money involved?
        • whodat807, on 05/06/2008, -1/+1I'm sorry, can you talk to horses? Do you have conversations with them? Do you think they live crappier lives than workhorses, what with the generous care they receive, the companionship they are provided (such as having a friendly goat around them to calm their nerves... no joke), and being allowed to live most of their lives in luxurious retirement? I mean, if you could retire at age 30 and spend the rest of your life eating steak and having sex with an endless supply of beautiful women, wouldn't you take it?

          There are a million other animal rights issues that deserve attention more than race horses. Race horses have it made.
    • huszar02, on 05/05/2008, -2/+5Except the rich white people don't beat the ***** out of the horses while they are off track. They get good food, comfortable digs, and if they win enough, they get to stud for the rest of their life. Dogfighting isn't just in the "ghetto", but those people beat the ***** of the dogs and then let them get maimed by each other, and then breed dogs using rape cages. Far more violent than horse racing.
      • thaboosh, on 05/06/2008, -1/+2how do you think they breed the horses?
    • xNarrowSoulx, on 05/06/2008, -0/+1While there is definitely a difference between dog fighting and horse racing, it doesn't make horse racing any less cruel. Forcing every fiber out of a horse's being for money. I'm no vegetarian, I enjoy my burgers, but damn. I've thought horse racing to be sad since I was small.
      • SuperMoses, on 05/07/2008, -0/+1So put that horse on a plate and it's all good?
  • rockon4life45, on 05/05/2008, -11/+4***** PETA
    Join the real PETA
    People
    Eating
    Tasty
    Animals
    • DesertFlyer, on 05/05/2008, -0/+6Thought that up all on your own, huh?
      • pharmakon, on 05/05/2008, -0/+2no, he also came up with a totally radical screen name: rockon4life45
  • Doctoxicated, on 05/05/2008, -3/+6the main reason they kill horses who break their legs now is because certain injuries most involving broken bones leave horses extremely prone to infection. Horses unlike humans have next to no ability to fight or stave off infection even with intense care so they would end up suffering and dying a very slow painful death.PETA is just like every other group of zealots that is unwilling to listen to all sides of an issue before forming a decision. plus I like to get wasted at the race book.
    • ibone, on 05/05/2008, -0/+2Its called Laminitis. Equal weight must be kept on each hoof or blood vessels die and horse dies.
      • jhdteacher, on 05/05/2008, -0/+1doctoxicated: i don't believe peta is arguing the horses shouldn't have been put down...peta often euthanizes animals to save them further agony
        • NOFXY, on 05/06/2008, -0/+2no, peta often euthanizes perfectly healthy animals because those millions they raise aren't meant for the healthy or sick animals.
    • SuperMoses, on 05/07/2008, -0/+1Your explanation of why they have to kill the injured horses is precisely why they shouldn't be racing like that.
  • tkcom, on 05/05/2008, -9/+3Puppies Euthanizing Team - America
  • Enkairi, on 05/05/2008, -6/+1While I disagree with PETA equating this to dogfighting, I do think horse acing can harmful to horses. The horses are specially breed to make them as fast as possible. This gives them small bones to make them swifter. Their bones are very brittle and most falls will cause a horse to break its legs, that in almost every case means death.
  • marike, on 05/05/2008, -1/+2While I think equating horse racing with dog fighting might be a little extreme, I do agree that horse racing is completely unnecessary. If no harm came to the horses, than I wouldn't have a problem with it, but incidents like yesterdays Derby happen all too frequently.
  • cadmiumpaint, on 05/05/2008, -2/+1i disagree with PETA on this.....dog fighting is inhumane and horrible. At least with horse racing the goal of the sport isn't to hurt the animal to get a winner. Thats the difference.

    However in watching coverage on TV, the sport needs to take some responsibility. The horses are so inbred for speed and gene purity, they are becomming more fragile with each generation.
  • Fetching more discussions...
    Show 51 - 100 of 106 discussions
  •  

    Login or register to add a comment

    Create a new account or login to join in the conversation on Digg. You'll also be able to Digg stories to help promote things you like.


© Digg Inc. 2008 — Content posted by Digg users is dedicated to the public domain.
DIGG, DIGG IT, DUGG, DIGG THIS, Digg graphics, logos, designs, page headers, button icons, scripts, and other service names are the trademarks of Digg Inc.