i really want it to get voted in being from california and all. I want to know what i can do to help...

melisser wrote:

I hope some of you are attending a party for farm animals tomorrow. I know I am!

here's the link for the parties near you on Sunday July 27. 
http://www.party2win.com/humanecaliforn … /index.cfm
party for the animals - how can you go wrong?!

lululuv wrote:

melisser wrote:

I hope some of you are attending a party for farm animals tomorrow. I know I am!

here's the link for the parties near you on Sunday July 27. 
http://www.party2win.com/humanecaliforn … /index.cfm
party for the animals - how can you go wrong?!

Wow, so many parties nearby! So, anyone can go?

I'm totally going to the party today...it sounds like fun!

adamcrisis wrote:

animal agriculture has deep pockets

indeed.

also, the parties are open to the public if they say they are!

GuiltyofBeingTrite wrote:

It was AWESOME. an older couple at our party donated $6,000!!!!!!!!

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v512/ … 081915.jpg

that's fabulous!!!

Was that a vegan cake by chance?  It looks too cute to eat!  Our party was awesome-the mayor of Sacramento showed up and an older gentleman donated $1000.  It was a cool way to get involved.

GuiltyofBeingTrite wrote:

CaliCatWoman wrote:

Was that a vegan cake by chance?  It looks too cute to eat!  Our party was awesome-the mayor of Sacramento showed up and an older gentleman donated $1000.  It was a cool way to get involved.

yup! from sticky fingers bakery in DC.

Actually, it is now HSUS policy to only serve vegan food at their events.

rad, go sacramento

lululuv wrote:

GuiltyofBeingTrite wrote:

Actually, it is now HSUS policy to only serve vegan food at their events.

i love that.
no matter what people say about HSUS
and i agree they're not perfect,
they are not the bad guys.

yea, and most people that don't like them haven't been to a conference, or met a lot of staffers. They're practically all vegan, they're practically all animal RIGHTS supporters, they simply understand that the path to liberation is through reform.

PS: Just did a little googling and found a nice critique from SF Vegan's blog:

SF Vegan wrote:

It is extremely disingenuous of the supporters to use the slogan "Vote to prevent animal cruelty!" to promote Proposition 2. As a more fitting slogan, may I suggest:


"Vote to minimally reduce cruelty at certain times to certain animals in certain situations, while reinforcing and encouraging the production and consumption of animal products and giving legal protection to rodeos!"

http://sfvegan.org/2008/07/california-h … allot.html

Gobie Dillis wrote:

I cannot, in the big picture, see why any vegans are supportive of this proposition.  I am not in California, however, if I were, I would have to do some heavier research into the real motives and repurcussions of this proposition.  With such emphasis on the gourmand, a la the Michael Pollan'z and Alice Waters o' the world, our culture is finding any excuse to perpetuate eating flesh, even if it means martyring ourselves for the sake of animal welfare instead of animal freedom.  Without turning anything negative here, can any vegan really promote this measure when it seems like an underhanded, cloaked excuse to make killing and eating animals acceptable?  That is, with many compassioante, empathic people bypassing vegetarianism/veganism in favor of "humane" meat (an oxymoron), ideas/measures like these seem to do more harm overall for animals and the animal rights movement than good.

If it is there, on the ballot in front of me, sure, I'd check "yes," but from a "seeing the forest for the trees" perspective, I don't understand putting so much money and effort into its support, especially when the website stresses several times how it will NOT affect animal product production.

So, it will NOT affect the amount of animals killed, and it will encourage people to feel BETTER about killing animals for food: this is good how?

Again, I am not meaning to be antaganostic, but with NO evidence in history showing improved welfare leading to freedom, and other than animals getting a few inches here and there and STILL enduring cruelty and murder, how can anyone be enthusiastic about this?

yes yes, we've heard this all before.   the farm animals will be killed anyway.  .


this IS a shamefully small step.  however, i have total empathy for those animals.  and there is a difference between 24/7 spent in a cage that one cannot turn around in and 24/7 spent in one in which one can at least lie down. 

this proposition in no way makes killing and eating meat acceptable, or reinforces and encourages the production and consumption of animal products.  it's a small step, but for millions of tortured animals, it will be some relief on a daily basis. 

if there were an alternative by which all of these animals would be forever freed from this cruelty, i would certainly do all i could to promote it.  but there is not.  the great majority of signatures were collected by volunteers, many of them vegan, like myself. 

who's against this proposition? Moark LLC, a company that paid $100,000 to settle an animal cruelty case after a concerned neighbor videotaped company workers throwing live birds into a dumpster; Gemperle, a California egg factory with a long history of animal cruelty that was uncovered by Farm Sanctuary in 2005 and 2007, and whose abuses made the news earlier this year after a Mercy for Animals investigation; Foster Farms whose abuse has been documented by East Bay Animal Advocates.  Care to join them?

Last edited by lululuv (Fri 8/1/08 11:15 pm)

I don't necessarily care to join them, no, but I really do not think this measure is anything to get excited about.  In fact, it is something to furrow a brow or two about.  It may turn out to be counterproductive.  I am sure that all vegans and most people would like to promote better living conditions for animals, hence the deceptively pro-active title, "Prevent Animal Cruelty."  I get concerned about these type of campaigns.  I have friends who have gone from vegan to "the pickiest meat-eater you'll ever meet" because of these ridiculous band-aids composed halfway with good intentions and the other half with deception.  The bottom line is that animals will get a MINIMAL benefit for the price of more people finding it acceptable to consume their flesh.  The repercussions are what we should be focusing on here. 

It is easy to brush this aside:

lululuv wrote:

yes yes, we've heard this all before.   the farm animals will be killed anyway.

But that sort of dismissal misses many of the crucial points animal rights should be getting at, such as the message measures like prop 2 will send to the public (including vegans, vegetarians, and borderline veg people). 

lululuv wrote:

this proposition in no way makes killing and eating meat acceptable, or reinforces and encourages the production and consumption of animal products.

I disagree with you on this.  Proposition 2 is backed by MANY people who make their livelihood from the flesh of animals!!  Just click on some of the farms with links:

Drakes Bay Family Farms: Oysters and Beef

Prather Ranch: Beef, Pork, Lamb, Buffalo, Veal (although they call it "vitellone", and chicken.

Lindner Bison: Bison Flesh


Hell, all this research now is making me HATE Proposition 2.  It really is not looking out for the animals, and I feel it is dangerous for us to just take it for its surface value.  Look into these things, it is sponsored by people who want to sell gourmet meat to affluent people.  This is a horrible measure, despicable.