Campy Posted November 16, 2005 Share Posted November 16, 2005 http://www.jesusveg.com/ Though when I wrote that, I was thinking more along the lines that PETA is itself a quasi-religious (i.e. a cult) organization. 504809[/snapback] Wow. I think I've seen it all now. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RuntheDamnBall Posted November 16, 2005 Share Posted November 16, 2005 You have GOT to be kidding... I know, laws shouldn't have been in my statement there. PETA has been fairly effective (I'm not making a judgement call saying they're right / wrong in what they've done) in pursuing lawsuits and to some extent laws that are in line with their mission. I'd argue they are not an electoral force. Not exactly a fair comparison, comparing the membership of a specific organization to everyone who "ascribes to" a fundamentalist Christian belief. A fair comparison would be something more akin to comparing PETA/Earth First membership to 700 Club/Operation Rescue membership...which is about the same, about a million each. Or comparing the number of people who share PETA's beliefs and philosophy to the number of people who ascribe to fundamentalist Christianity...which is likewise probably about the same, at several million. But, just like not every Muslim isn't a terrorist, not every vegetarian environmentalist is a member of PETA, and not every fundamentalist Christian is a political extremist, either. 504819[/snapback] I'd agree to all three of these and am sorry if I used any overwhelming generalizations, I'm sure you're aware I despise them. I think it's clear that every person who thinks of him/herself as a strong Christian is not a political extremist -- I didn't say they were. I grew up in a strong Christian home that was pro-union and strongly Democrat, I'm aware there are subtleties and complexities and I generally try to acknowledge that. But I think my argument is valid; a good number of people who voted for Bush did so for what they viewed as moral reasons. There were massive voter registration and mobilization drives that were church-oriented, and Rove made this a central part of Bush's re-election strategy. It worked, that's evidence enough. On the left, you have a lot of issue wedge groups that may or may not overlap (PETA, Sierra Club, etc) and I think perhaps environmentalist groups would be the strongest parallel to the organization we'd see on the Christian right. But the thing is, you can't just say the "700 Club" and cite it as the one leading example of an organization that finds its grounding in the right-wing Christian ethos. There are also Focus on the Family, Moral Majority, Christian Coalition etc. etc. PETA cites membership of 850,000 worldwide. That's not necessarily just America. CBN claims to reach 2 billion people, and that's one network from just one of these organizatinos. Not even close, Tom. PETA doesn't reach billions worldwide via television, it hasn't started up its own universities, and no other organization on the left has mobilized anything that compares to what the religious right has. It's a fact that there is a lot of money and muscle behind this movement, and I really do think they have a lot more pull with the government and with the electorate than the myriad wedge groups on the left that are less holistic and big-picture with regard to their goals. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Campy Posted November 16, 2005 Share Posted November 16, 2005 Is PETA really a left-wing group? I consider them nuts, and I've had the "pleasure" of doing business with Ingrid Newkirk (grade-A beeyatch), but I just thought they were loons, not leftist-loons per se. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Crap Throwing Monkey Posted November 16, 2005 Share Posted November 16, 2005 I know, laws shouldn't have been in my statement there. PETA has been fairly effective (I'm not making a judgement call saying they're right / wrong in what they've done) in pursuing lawsuits and to some extent laws that are in line with their mission. I'd argue they are not an electoral force. I'd agree to all three of these and am sorry if I used any overwhelming generalizations, I'm sure you're aware I despise them... That's why I was kind of surprised at the post. ...I think it's clear that every person who thinks of him/herself as a strong Christian is not a political extremist -- I didn't say they were. I grew up in a strong Christian home that was pro-union and strongly Democrat, I'm aware there are subtleties and complexities and I generally try to acknowledge that. But I think my argument is valid; a good number of people who voted for Bush did so for what they viewed as moral reasons. There were massive voter registration and mobilization drives that were church-oriented, and Rove made this a central part of Bush's re-election strategy. It worked, that's evidence enough. On the left, you have a lot of issue wedge groups that may or may not overlap (PETA, Sierra Club, etc) and I think perhaps environmentalist groups would be the strongest parallel to the organization we'd see on the Christian right. But the thing is, you can't just say the "700 Club" and cite it as the one leading example of an organization that finds its grounding in the right-wing Christian ethos. There are also Focus on the Family, Moral Majority, Christian Coalition etc. etc. PETA cites membership of 850,000 worldwide. That's not necessarily just America. CBN claims to reach 2 billion people, and that's one network from just one of these organizatinos. Not even close, Tom. PETA doesn't reach billions worldwide via television, it hasn't started up its own universities, and no other organization on the left has mobilized anything that compares to what the religious right has. It's a fact that there is a lot of money and muscle behind this movement, and I really do think they have a lot more pull with the government and with the electorate than the myriad wedge groups on the left that are less holistic and big-picture with regard to their goals. 504874[/snapback] CBN, however, only claims a viewership of 1 million (which in itself I think is bull...but whatever). "Reaching" people is far different from having them pay attention. PETA reaches, at a minimum, several tens of millions on a daily basis in this country alone, frequently through several front organizations (e.g. PCRM) that no one realizes is PETA, and PETA is FAR from representing the views of those tens of millions every day. The real difference, which you allude to without really hitting, is one of finance and organization. Both live primarily on the donations of others...but churches typically have a much longer tradition of it that tends to leave them particularly well-endowed nowadays, which in itself gives them an edge-up on groups like PETA. Sure, their (PETA's and the 700 Club's) membership is roughly the same, by most estimates (at roughly a million)...but a million organized people can throw their weight around a hell of a lot more effectively than a million scrabbling individuals. So I think your real complaint isn't that fundamentalist Christians are more numerous (at least, I don't think they are...in any population as large as the US's, the distribution of philosophical leanings will almost certainly follow a strict gaussian, so the fringe groups on either side should be roughly equal.) Just that they're better organized than left-wing fringe groups. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Crap Throwing Monkey Posted November 16, 2005 Share Posted November 16, 2005 Is PETA really a left-wing group? I consider them nuts, and I've had the "pleasure" of doing business with Ingrid Newkirk (grade-A beeyatch), but I just thought they were loons, not leftist-loons per se. 504905[/snapback] They're generally leftist loons, as much as they claim not to be. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alaska Darin Posted November 16, 2005 Share Posted November 16, 2005 No argument, but the extremist left isn't claiming that the US is a Christian nation and that Biblical parables should be tought in public schools, which is what this thread's about. The "yeah, but the other guys are worse" angle doesn't cut it in this debate. 504764[/snapback] Nah, it's sex education, abortion for teenage girls without parental notification, etc. It's all a bunch of crap to keep us arguing amongst ourselves so we don't notice them stealing all of our money and the very freedom that so many people have died for. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Campy Posted November 16, 2005 Share Posted November 16, 2005 It's all a bunch of crap to keep us arguing amongst ourselves so we don't notice them stealing all of our money and the very freedom that so many people have died for. 505143[/snapback] When I first started posting on PPP I used to get really pissed off at comments like that. Now I agree with them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OGTEleven Posted November 17, 2005 Share Posted November 17, 2005 When I first started posting on PPP I used to get really pissed off at comments like that. Now I agree with them. 505150[/snapback] For Pete's sake (not that Pete), don't give him an even bigger ego. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Campy Posted November 17, 2005 Share Posted November 17, 2005 They're generally leftist loons, as much as they claim not to be. 504909[/snapback] From the guy who, just a few posts above, said, "But I wholly understand your point of view...when overgeneralization suits you, use it" I guess there's something to be said for practicing what you preach afterall. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Crap Throwing Monkey Posted November 17, 2005 Share Posted November 17, 2005 From the guy who, just a few posts above, said, "But I wholly understand your point of view...when overgeneralization suits you, use it" I guess there's something to be said for practicing what you preach afterall. 505372[/snapback] Fine...they are generally, but not overgenerally, leftist loons. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Campy Posted November 17, 2005 Share Posted November 17, 2005 Fine...they are generally, but not overgenerally, leftist loons. 505422[/snapback] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Crap Throwing Monkey Posted November 17, 2005 Share Posted November 17, 2005 505718[/snapback] I've seen reasonable "analysis" (not scientific, but better than anecdotal) of electoral patterns of their membership that suggest it's about 90+% far left. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Campy Posted November 17, 2005 Share Posted November 17, 2005 I've seen reasonable "analysis" (not scientific, but better than anecdotal) of electoral patterns of their membership that suggest it's about 90+% far left. 505949[/snapback] I don't argue that at all. During my business interactions with their fearless leader, I had to go to their HQ in Norfolk more times than I can count, and the place is like a freakshow. Animals, all kinds, cats, dogs, lizards, birds, running all over the place. And they all (generalization alert ) look like rejects from the off Broadway touring company of Hair. There are so many hemp belts, hemp shirts, and hemp sneakers running around in that place that I swear I walked out with a buzz. So I knew the members, or at least knew that the people at their HQ, appeared to be loons, but other than pushing vegetarianism, I guess I never thought of them as a political group. But as I type this, I'm realizing that they, the organization, is to the left in that they want to abolish hunting and that little thingy... What's it called? Oh yeah, the ability of people to choose their lifestyle, because if it involves meat, it's wrong. Hmmph. I never considered them to be a political organization at all, but I guess they really are. That makes them not only nuts, but dangerous too. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts