Nothing surprising. When you collect as much cash as these creeps and your on the ropes,you do whatever necessary to keep that cash flow going. Please mention,1 candidate for the for Gov of TN is a big HSUS supporter. Watch out Tennessee farmers!!!!

I feel most sorry for the gullible young people who enroll in this farce of a “university” thinking that they are going to receive a legitimate degree.  Only a group as corrupt as HSUS could actually find a way to make thousands of dollars off of indoctrination.

Pretty funny when you consider that “undercover video” is one of their favorite gambits.

These people are scam artists with a nose to betraying the public’s trust in the name of animal welfare. Just lining their own pockets and those of politicians whom they can bribe to see things their way. The only way to defeat this group is with public outcries and true information as to what they are doing.

Remember, folks… Lord Obama has already promoted one of HSUS’s Eugenicists to run the CDC. I think it’s quite likely that the HSUS is using its “University” to indoctrinate “Rainbow-shirts” to work for Obama’s “Health Under-Fuhr… er… Czar”, his “Calorie Under-... Uh… Czar”, his “Healthcare Un… erm… Czar”, and so-on.

If this is the case, I can most certainly understand why they wouldn’t want “outsiders” knowing what they’re talking about in these “lectures”.

Well, of course you were asked to leave!  You did not have on your button camera or even your sun glasses with the nifty little camera at the bridge.  Who wants to actually KNOW they’re being videotaped? LOL.

My goodness!  You people are the ones who would encourage the FBI to infiltrate “vegan potlucks”!  You won’t engage anyone in any philosophical debates… Your “meat” and animal using propaganda is all over the media and contaminates every faction of our culture… Yet, you frown because you’re not welcome at an animal “welfare” gathering? 

Thankfully, the civilized world is waking up to the vile misconception that animals are “property”... And are beginning to realize that we don’t “need” to breed, butcher or eat them at all! Go Vegan

No Bea,you had better wake up! When you strip the earth bare to try and plant enough veggies to feed this world (which veggies cannot do) your vegans will have destroyed the crust of earth that supports life. Then you have the supplements to take to make your body feel good about the nutrition your not getting, then you have the chemicals to grow, the crop-control bugs, grass, weeds. I am not against veggies, I was one. I object to people telling me what to eat. Veggies might save an animal’s life every now and then but preach veggies to those in countries that survive off of bugs, cats, dogs, any meat they can eat because the land is to barren to produce. A veggie world in 100 years is an unrealistic dream. And what would you have the millions doing that now exist on raising livestock or other food animals? Put them out of work? Starve their famliies because you don’t want people to eat meat? I also hate big corporations that rob money that is much needed for the real humane treatment of animals. Pacelle speaks with a forked tongue!

Just read David’s blog. If you are interested in a philosophical discussion,I suggest you contact David. While I only have COMMON sense,this man is well studied and well versed and speaks the truth in a form most any educated persons can understand. No matter what your stance is towards food, anyone who thinks HSUS isn’t a group out of control must stay in Farmville all day and not in the real world.

@ Bea Elliott: To the contrary, the animal rights crew are the ones who struggle to enter a philosophical debate. Whenever the “you are being mean to animals” line is exhausted, and an actual discussion is attempted on the issue, they usually abandon the point and start belittling the intelligence of everyone else because they don’t have anything else to substantiate their claims.

In this situation, he was trying to gather an understanding of the other side and what their points are and was given a resounding “NO!”

But you are probably right, we are probably all too stupid to talk to you anyway.

Also, good luck getting the general population on board with your: “don’t “need” to breed, butcher or eat them at all! Go Vegan” point of view. When most people realize that will eventually lead to the extinction of domestic pets, they will want nothing to do with your organization or movement.

HSUS will do away with pets before mankind and have stated so pubicly many times. The reality is you can’t push your veggie agenda on those who don’t want it. I don’t see see any world waking up to the veggie fad, in fact, beef and chicken producers have increased production every year just to feed the masses and you think this will change any time soon? And who pays the farmers’ bills or supports his family?
Growing veggies? Sure, more corporate food control and when they control the food chain they control you.
I do not deny veggies are good for humans but I am also a realist and a veggie world will never happen. Go Meat!

Bea, animal welfare gathering? Now that’s funny stuff!

Wondering how many Christians support HSUS? Read the good book many times and find no reference to feeding the masses with veggies. Nor can the blood of a green bean cleanse you. You were not given 1 word in the good book that says don’t eat meat. In fact,the Bible is full of references to feast of meat but Ive never read about a feast of pinto beans. If someone will point that verse to me I will be sure and read it.

@Joe Williams - About stripping the earth bare, etc.:

My view is to move away from animals as food.
I see a future where hydroponics, aquaponics and horticulture would sustain the world many times over. I imagine floating platforms with acres of produce, perhaps greenhoused? Using a fraction of (desalinated) water? These platforms could also be an energy source - with wind farms and solar panels? Are we talking about (almost) “free” food ? For the world? Maybe….

http://tinyurl.com/5x53xb
http://www.verticalfarm.com/
http://tinyurl.com/5m49km

Urban gardens, living towers and vertical farming would provide:
Year-round crop production; No weather-related crop failures.
VF food is grown organically: no herbicides, pesticides, or fertilizers.
Virtually eliminates agricultural runoff by recycling black water.
Convert abandoned urban properties into food production centers.
Dramatically reduces fossil fuel use (no tractors, plows, shipping.)
Would avoid the need to control wildlife “pests” and/or predators.

If we focus on this technology there will be enough for all… The major regions of civilizations will be vegan… And this will hasten the way towards the inevitable, but long overdue issue of Animal Rights.

“And what would you have the millions doing that now exist on raising livestock or other food animals?”  Certainly the plantation owners in the South once thought that too, with the elimination of slave labor… But everyone did manage to adapt to a new line of work… Surely there are other things to grow besides “corn” and “soy”—- or animals.  I actually think we would become more diversified and prosperous on a plant based diet.  As I understand… We in the west, only consume 7% of all existing varieties of edible grains, nuts, seeds, fruits and veggies… I’d say that’s a huge untapped market.

And about religious teachings… No one will betray their faith if they refuse to kill animals or eat their flesh.

There’s a very good discussion about the subject here at opposing views:
http://www.opposingviews.com/i/why-christians-cannot-support-animal-rights

See, I don’t mind the debate at all… I think it’s long overdue.  In fact I’m trying to get my local library to hold a “pro/con about the subject of veganism”.  I think all communities should engage in this very important issue.

@ ktb3317 - About “domestic pets”... There are many who think that man might eventually have a kind of “guardian” status with animals, who for one reason or another couldn’t survive in the wild… In any case, no one should let this fear of “pet prohibition” “someday”, be an excuse to eat, use, breed and confine animals in the “now”. This is so far into the future it really is a non sequitur.

@ joe .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) “A veggie world will never happen”.  I’m quite sure that most cultural, political and technological advances were once seen as “impossible”.  It wasn’t that long ago that we thought the earth was flat!  Regardless, I would never let “group think” guide my eithics… If I believe something is right to do… I intend to do that thing, even if I stand alone.

But really, I’m not alone at all! Who would have thought my 200 pound, raised on Southern fried chicken, meat and potatos husband would be in his second “meat free” year?  Or two of his burly guy friends too?  Or the elderly woman four doors down from me?  Or my dentist? All these are within the last few years.  No, I think you’re mistaken when you say “never”.

Aren’t they a non-profit? If so; any and all sponsored events are open to the public regardless of what “outside” group one may below to. I think you should file a complaint with the IRS.

@ Bea, I don’t fear a prohibition, I fear a complete and utter lack of animal to “guardian.” If we outlaw breeders or even drastically limit them [especially to a point where it is no longer economically feasible to do it], and spay and neuter all of our current animals, that is what will happen. I am against the pet overpopulation as much as the next girl, the three cats that I have had over my lifetime have all been spayed and I think that is best for rescue animals (as I have adopted all of my pets from a shelter). However, I feel that blanket legislation in domestic animal breeding only seeks to perpetuate the problem. The people currently breaking the laws and abusing animals are unlikely to stop, but the responsible and reputable breeders are the ones who will be hurt by legislation. Why not spend their millions of deceptively earned money to directly combat puppy mills (which in most cases are already against the law) AND caring for those animals, rather than using sound bites and small clips from their half-assed “rescue efforts” and lobbying all of the time. The people they hurt with their lobbying aren’t the undefined “factory farms” and “puppy mills” that they claim to, they hurt the small-time breeders and farmers that are forced to follow new guidelines within a short amount of time, and they hurt the shelters and animal rescues overflowing with abandoned animals after such legislation passes. 

In any case, no one should let this fear of “pet prohibition” “someday”, be an excuse to eat, use, breed and confine animals in the “now”
I am not using any fear of pet prohibition as an excuse to eat animals. I use the fact that I know that meat proteins offer me valuable and delicious nutrients, and are brought to me by hard-working Americans that love and nurture their animals to justify my current habits. You can tell me that I don’t “need” meat until you are blue in the face, but a well-rounded diet including animal proteins are something that I feel I should be able to continue if I wish. I have no problem with the fact that you are a vegetarian or vegan (I am not sure what lifestyle you have chosen), and I feel pretty strongly that I should be entitled to my lifestyle if I so choose.

In response to one of your other comments, “Certainly the plantation owners in the South once thought that too, with the elimination of slave labor…” First of all, plantation owners didn’t change their line of work, they simply paid people to continue doing the work, you don’t really think that they stopped producing cotton when slaves were emancipated do you? Contrary to what most people seem to think, few slaves actually left where they were when they were emancipated, but they did start getting paid. So, very little changed on plantations in the south, but I digress. My second point on this is where my main issue with your claim lies. You are likening the keeping of animals for agriculture to the slavery of human beings. You make such valid and educated points, and then you throw in emotional, sensationalized things that cause your argument to lose credence. Animals are not humans. I agree they should not be mistreated or abused, but keeping them out of harms way, fed, cool in the summer, warm in the winter, etc. is a good life for an animal. In fact, it could be likened to keeping a pet in your home, which you have expressly stated that you are not against. My point is: animal agriculture does not equal slavery of a human being.

I also wonder: there are many parts of the animal that are not consumed, but the by-products go into an almost unlimited list of products used by every day Americans. How will we replace all of those along with all of the food that we will need to produce? I found this link (a legitimate source nonetheless) that lists all of the by-products of just beef in particular: http://www.cdfa.ca.gov/ahfss/Meat_and_Poultry_Inspection/By_Products.html

Hello ktb3317 - You say that prohibiting animal reproduction for profit will harm the “responsible and reputable breeders”—- Are these the breeders that make variations of “doodles”... while mutts await their final hour?  I just don’t believe breeding designer animals for money is responsible… Sorry.

But did you happen to see the expose’ Kennel Club UK BBC Documentary about the horrible health issues created by pedigree dog breeders? http://vids.myspace.com/index.cfm?fuseaction=vids.individual&VideoID=61370242#

“You can tell me that I don’t “need” meat until you are blue in the face”  Would a statement from the American Dietician’s Association do?
“...An appropriately planned vegetarian diets, including total vegetarian or vegan diets, are healthful, nutritionally adequate, and may provide health benefits in the prevention and treatment of certain diseases. Well-planned vegetarian diets are appropriate for individuals during all stages of the life cycle, including pregnancy, lactation, infancy, childhood, and adolescence, and for athletes.”
http://www.eatright.org/About/Content.aspx?id=8357
“I feel pretty strongly that I should be entitled to my lifestyle if I so choose.”  The reason why most who eat animals don’t mind that others don’t, is that what vegans consume, don’t require the taking of lives… Many have tried the “pain inflicted on vegetables” route… But we can all see that for the silliness that it is.

“Animals are not humans. I agree they should not be mistreated or abused, but keeping them out of harms way, fed, cool in the summer, warm in the winter, etc. is a good life for an animal. In fact, it could be likened to keeping a pet in your home, which you have expressly stated that you are not against. My point is: animal agriculture does not equal slavery of a human being.”

What we disagree on is what you consider abuse and what I consider abuse… Sure, it’s fine to have a good life and be well cared for.  Gosh, I’m certain most “livestock” have better healthcare than humans do… Especially with this recent federal grant paying off loans for “food animal” vets.  I digress… What I’m saying is, if you could imagine yourself in a position of being very well kept by a species from another planet… You have all the comforts you need… But one day this species finds a want of your body parts—- You would think this a terrible injustice!  You would try to communicate to them that your life is important to you!  You would protest that you don’t wish to be made into dice, crayons or wallpaper glue… A child of 5 could understand the unfairness of it all.  And that is the point of empathy.  We were given empathy for a reason… The lion, shark and eagle are not capable of this ethical choice.  We are.  And because we are, moral agents we are charged with the responsibility of being as “merciful” as situtations allow us to be.  What, or rather who we leave off of our plates is the easiest of these compassionate gestures to make.

No animals are not human…  but all of us do share one common thread - Whether a cat, a pig, a man or a frog - We all value our lives equally.  It is our only true possession; And our dearest one.  In order to get social sanction, to steal something that is of equal value to all—- It had better be for a darn good reason.  Self defense or survival… Our moral compass has always pointed towards compassion… I believe this will continue as we evolve. 

We also say we want a nonviolent world… Yet we ask the most destitute and desperate of people to work on kill floors all day… Snuffing the lives of hundreds/thousands of innocent beings.  Do we really believe this can continue without further compromising our progress towards a peaceful society? 

And the idea of equating a companion animal to a farmed animal is very disturbing to me… There is absolutely nothing that I expect as “payment” for the keep of my “pet”... The whole existence of “livestock” is centered around the profit they yield… These are entirely different circumstances. (continued)

You said too that “animal agriculture does not equal slavery of a human being.”  Here again is the empathy… I would think a dairy cow, forced to be impregnatated for the 3rd time—- And having her precious calf removed at birth… Would feel like “slavery” if you were the cow.  I would think if you were the sow in a crate for most of your life… You’d feel like a “captive” too… Or a hen, crowded with 6 or so others - Unable to do anything your bodily instincts say you should do… You’d feel imprisoned as well.  What it comes down to is that your vision of sympathy excludes (most) nonhumans—- If the same were done to a cat or dog… You’d be outraged.  We do share the same emotional response to such bad treatment to Others… It’s just that my circle extends to All while yours is limited to some… 
Finally that list of by products… yes, as a vegan I’m well aware of the many products I attempt to avoid purchasing.  I’ve been very successful minus the explosives and antifreeze… But I’m sure being the evolved and “superior” species that we are—- We can manage to replace everything as technology advances. 

But IF… And that’s a very big IF there is some kind use of an animal that could ever be “justified”, with mankind’s very survival in the balance… I think a reasonable civilization would attempt to work that out and replace such a “use” as soon as possible. But as it is now… 99% of all animal use is simply frivolous at best… And completely devious in it’s worst. We ought to focus on the 99% and tackle the “1” when the time is appropriate to do so. I think adopting a vegan diet is the most genuine effort towards that end.

I wonder… does the discrimination which happened to this student open HSU and HSUS to potential legal action?

Bea, are you saying that it’s OK for HSU to discriminate against students who may hold differing views from their teachers?  Or who may tell others what they hear from HS University teachers?

By stating that veganism is the only ‘right way’ or ‘ethical way’ for humans to feed themselves, you seem to empathize with prey animals and not the Earth’s predators, those creatures which keep this world in balance: correct?  Question: how can predators be ‘good’ when they hunt and eat prey, but humans (omnivores) are ‘evil’ if they do what their own biology demands? Or do you believe that nondomestic wolves, bears, foxes, carp, eagles, etc are ‘evil’ because they hunt, kill and then eat their prey?

Veganism and other forms of starvation have been used for thousands of years to keep human populations submissive. Vegans must supplement their diet with laboratory-created vitamin supplements, the best of which are derived from animal sources, in order to have sufficient nutrition. Note: ‘sufficient’ is not the same as ‘optimal.’

I have to wonder: how does any vegan organization such as HSUS or PeTA get around the science which indicates humans who eat no animal protein and take no animal-sourced nutritional supplements have generally decreased brain functionality and often quickly succumb to brainwashing techniques? Or is the vegan focus of those groups ... a means to another end?

From your last post, Bea: are you saying people should live so separated from animals that only one out of 100 people would ever come into contact with one?  Or perhaps, only 1 out of 100 would ever come into contact with something that was derived from animals in any way, shape or form? Seems to me that’s the logical consequence of eliminating 99% of all animal use.

I doubt the story.  I have sufficient reason to believe that negative propaganda is being deliberately generated, against anyone taking an “animal rights” stand.  I assure you, you are much more likely at a university to be discriminated against if you challenge a teachers non-vegan point of view.

Bea, challenging or disliking a student’s viewpoint is quite different from not allowing the student to attend class.  That’s discrimination and a reaction based in fear.

Then by all means this person or persons are free to pursue their justice through the legal system.  No one is denying them the fairness of the courts.

What about all the animals killed and displaced by farming? Millions of small mammals, rodents, reptiles, amphibians and invertebrates are killed and/or displaced wherever the earth is plowed. I would agree feed lots are not very healthy for the environment or very diverse biologically speaking but don’t open grazing lands support more biological diversity than plowed fields? I would think grazing land is less diverse, in most cases, than unaltered land but it is still more diverse than farmland.

Hi Aaron - I agree that the critters that are plowed during harvest are also a concern… But as a moral issue, no one is deliberately breeding these rodents, reptiles, etc. to be deliberately killed…

And secondly, if one is truly concerned about these nonhuman animals, they would still adopt a plant based diet, thereby eliminating the “middle eater”.  Don’t forget, we fatten animals on about 2/3rds of what we grow.  If we ate the plant material directly, we’d still cause “less harm”.

And as far as “open grazing” is concerned, from my understanding it is very damaging to the environment.  Since cattle are non-natives, their impact on the environment is greater than native species like elk and deer. Cattle have not evolved in the ecosystems in which they have been placed, and therefore they do not co-exist with those ecosystems well. Whereas deer and elk are highly mobile foragers, cattle are stagnant foragers. What this means is that deer and elk move around so much that they do not overgraze an area or cause soil damage. Cattle on the other hand, will often remain in the same area until they have eaten all or most of the edible material there. Only after most of the vegetation has been eaten will they move on. (10) Cattle also need more forage than elk or deer.

Cattle are accused of a wide range of environmental atrocities. They reduce aesthetics with their fecal matter, with the trampling of vegetation, and with their mere presence. They overgraze, causing forage loss for other ungulates. Overgrazing has also been linked to soil erosion due to the loss of water retention and runoff reduction capacity of vegetation. Cattle destroy wetlands by grazing nesting habitat for waterfowl, by adding suspended solids and bacteria to the water, and increasing water temperature. Cattle also directly destroy waterfowl nesting sites, usually by trampling them.  And lets not forget the diversity that is lost due to the reduction/elimination of “predators” such as wolves, lions and coyotes.

This might be “better” than farmland, but in my view only very slightly… I see farmland and grazing as 2sides of the same animal agriculture coin… Both, in a matter of short time, will be ruinous to us.