Chris ‘Birdman’ Andersen Joins PETA’S ‘Ink Not Mink’ Campaign
The Birdman (“BRRRR!”) has hopped on the anti-fur campaign, joining up with the PETA folks. From the Denver Post: “In coordination with PETA (People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals), the Nuggets center has joined the ‘Ink Not Mink’ campaign. He joins tattooed professional athletes from around the country who have joined the movement: ‘Be Comfortable in Your Own Skin, and Let Animals Keep Theirs.’ Andersen is going to visit the New Genesis homeless shelter in Denver. There, according to PETA news release, ‘Andersen will join PETA members in giving away donated fur coats to the homeless – the only people who have any excuse for wearing fur.’ Andersen will also unveil his new ‘Ink Not Mink’ ad for PETA. ‘Animals, they don’t deserve to be beaten or slaughtered,’ Andersen says in a video he put out that decries the treatment of animals in China. ‘Be aware of what was really going on behind the scenes, and tell your friends and your family members … not to purchase fur.’”
LATEST NEWS & RUMORS
View all »
- Ray Allen and Paul Pierce Say They Prefer the Quick Turnaround Between Series
- Report: Thunder and Spurs Executives are Strong Candidates for Magic GM Job
- NBA Fines Erik Spoelstra $25K For Criticizing Officiating
- Report: Hawks Not Talking Extension With Josh Smith
- Knicks Sign Mike Woodson to 3-Year Contract
- SLAM Radio: Epitaphs Out East
- Avery Bradley to Undergo Season-Ending Shoulder Surgery
- Jeff Van Gundy Blasts Orlando Magic for Handling of Stan Van Gundy’s Firing
- JR Smith Arrested in Miami Due to License, Then Released
- View All »
___________
“SLAM: A lot of NBA guys have been playing in streetball games this summer. Not you. Why? What have you been up to instead?
CA: I’m actually from the woods down in Texas. I’ve been training and whatnot about basketball, but also I’m trying to start a hunting show right now. So I’m out in the woods with Converse.
SLAM: A hunting show?
CA: It’s gonna be called “Willie B and the Good Ole Boys.” Basically with all my friends I grew up with down in Texas, and it’s going to be celebrity rednecks that do crazy, dumb stuff…hopefully I get sponsored by Converse.”…… yeah.
Wonder how those PETA freaks will feel about that hunting show…
So how can both parties fail to see the irony in this?
I mean, come on – “Be Comfortable in Your Own Skin, and Let Animals Keep Theirs”?
I know a little about hunting, and I’m pretty sure if Anderson has hunted he’s probably not “let animals keep their” own fur 100% of the time.
Yes, the fur issue is horrible, as far as what you mentioned, being skinned alive and all, but this would be like the Marlboro CEO teaming up with a Lung Cancer Awareness group.
Also, with the wide-spread availability of low-cost synthetic materials, WHY in the f*ck do people insist on skinning animals to get their fur? Fur/mink coats look so stupid, too.
Google “PETA your mommy kills animals”.
They were handing that sh*t out to little five year old kids
F*ck them. I like animals too but come on..
Here are just a few examples of PETA’s attempts to shock kids into adopting its warped worldview: This past Christmas, PETA camped outside holiday performances of The Nutcracker and other shows to force its graphically violent comic book (titled “Your mommy kills animals”) into the hands of unsuspecting children. Denver’s Rocky Mountain News classified PETA’s attempt “to manipulate adults by traumatizing their children” as “despicable.” Dr. Jeffrey Dolgan, chief of psychology at Children’s Hospital, warned in the Denver Post: “Some vulnerable kids will not do well with this. It is potentially very anxiety-arousing. Someone has made a mistake.”
Earlier this year, PETA announced its plan to distribute “Buckets of Blood” to children outside middle schools, high schools, and KFC restaurants. According to the Associated Press, these grotesque toys are filled with “fake blood and bones, a bloodied plastic chicken and a cardboard caricature of a blood-spattered Colonel Sanders holding a butcher knife toward a terrified-looking chicken.”
In January, PETA sent a costumed activist into primary schools in England and Ireland to frighten kids into adopting vegetarian diets. According to media accounts, PETA’s representative distributed “graphic leaflets detailing animal killings” to young children. The Sentinel newspaper (Staffordshire, England) reported: “PETA has been condemned by the government over the tactics it uses to convince youngsters to give up dairy products and meat.”
PETA continues to lie in wait outside schools, distributing misleading anti-dairy trading cards to children as they walk home. The cards depict children suffering debilitating illnesses and embarrassing conditions, supposedly as a result of drinking milk. PETA’s campaign is “based on sensationalism” and “a real tragedy,” according to registered dietitian Deanna Rose. “It targets teenagers who really are calcium deficient and need to drink their milk.”
As recently as last year, PETA’s payroll included a convicted Animal Liberation Front felon who served as the group’s full-time “humane education lecturer.” This activist, who has openly advocated murder and arson, extolled the virtues of meatless eating to groups of children as young as 12 years old.
In 2002, PETA co-founder Ingrid Newkirk told CNN: “Everything we do is based at adults.” Yet PETA bragged last year that it reached over 2.3 million kids and teachers with its animal-rights propaganda.
See, that right there is not a very convincing article. Reducing anything rights-related to “propaganda” usually means some sort of agenda or ulterior motive. And there’s kind of a sick logic in accusing animal rights activists of having a “warped worldview.” Maybe the author doesn’t attach the same value to non-human life–but warped? What is so outrageous about not wanting to slaughter and torture animals for food or profit or whatever? Think about that; even if you’re okay with their suffering–why would you ever try to prevent someone from helping living beings?
And as for kids being exposed to gruesome images–yeah, that’s a bit extreme… But I also don’t see a need to go overboard in trying to protect children from reality. Letting kids decide for themselves and informing them of alternatives is a good thing, imo. Maybe not in scaring them to that extent, but yeah.
Humans have no necessity whatsoever to eat meat. Vegan diets are also cheaper and more affordable than meat-eating lifestyles. America would be a LOT healthier if schools adopted vegetarian diets as opposed the absolute junk they serve now. They really need to at least regulate the level of junk/fast food kids eat…
And lastly, the world would be completely unsustainable if Chinese and Indian people consumed as much pork and beef as the average American. This obsession with eating meat is kind of another egotistical First World way of protecting privileges at the expense of others, in this case animals.
And as for the article’s suggestion that kids need to drink milk for calcium… American milk is contaminated with bovine growth hormone, a cancer-causing agent that tortures cows and causes puss/discharge from their utters to land in your milk. Unlike Europe and Canada, the US government hasn’t banned rBGH… so pretty much all of your supermarket milk is contaminated. Just a tidbit, lol.
Sorry for the rant.
PETA has used the Holocaust and slavery to advance their cause. If you equate anything that happens to animals with those two events, your organization has a problem. You’re basically saying that your cause is so important you don’t care who you offend to advance it. Fine. Then deal with the fall out that comes from that choice.
As for fur and vegetarianism, I’m ambivalent. I don’t wear fur, but I don’t hate people who do. And I eat meat, but I don’t have a problem with people who don’t. My best friend is a veggie.
Now, we don’t NEED to eat meat, but even still, we DEFINITELY, at the very least, don’t need to factory farm or genetically alter our cows. It’s completely insane… American farmers already overproduce milk as it is. There are some places where the government actually pays farmers to not produce milk because there’s so d@mn much of it.
What the hell is the rationale, then, for letting farmers inject cows with growth hormones to raise milk production, knowing that it tortures the animals, contaminates our milk with carcinogens, and is completely unnecessary?! So Monsanto Corporation can maximize their profits by a decimal of a percent? That is facked up.
Comments