thenerdieone:

theveganmothership:

In January 2006, Molly leapt a 5-foot-5-inch slaughterhouse gate at Mickey’s Packing Plant in Great Falls, raced through town with police and animal control on her heels, ran in front of a train, swam across the Missouri River and took three tranquilizer darts before finally being recaptured six hours later. She was spared from slaughter and dubbed the Unsinkable Molly B. “Animals do not ‘give’ their life to us, as the sugar-coated lie would have it. They struggle and fight to the last breath.”

The only reason I still eat meat is the mindset that these poor creatures at least served a purpose with their deaths. But seeing stuff like this…it really makes me question it…..

I… I just… really? You really think the only possible purpose a cow could serve is to die for human consumption? Did you ever consider that the cow’s purpose might be to raise her children in a safe environment free from suffering and pain? Does a creature really need to have a set purpose in order to deserve the right to live a long, healthy and happy life? Every one of earth’s creatures is here for a reason, and despite what people think, that reason is certainly not just to serve humankind. 
RAPING ANIMALS IS NOT OKAY!!!!

fighting-for-animals:

Okay I don’t give a fuck if you think I’m being ‘discriminatory’, IT IS NOT OKAY TO RAPE ANIMALS. 

IT IS NEVER OKAY. 

Please sign this petition to get this disgusting website investigated by the authorities. And please report it to any internet crime sites you think will take action. 

WARNING - GRAPHIC IMAGES/VIDEOS OF BESTIALITY/ANIMAL ABUSE RAPE IN THE LINK

PLEASE SIGNAL BOOST THIS. SICKENING. 

SIGN PETITION HERE

(Source: fightingforanimals)

der-prinz-aus-stahl:

logicd:

Is this true or is this true? ——————
Yes it is most likely and in 2007 is when big bang theory premiered.

true/10

So freakin’ ridiculous man, I know that absolutely all of my female friends throughout my childhood and into later life have always played games. I was pretty surprised actually when I discovered that people think otherwise, because I’d always hang out with my male and female friends and play NES/SNES/Gameboy/Xbox/Gamecube/N64/PC and the like, it was what all kids did. I’d go over my friends houses to play Super Mario Bros., The Legend of Zelda, Spyro, Need For Speed, Tony Hawk’s, Pokemon, Halo, Wolfenstein, Croc, Sims, Mortal Kombat, WWE, Morrowind and all that as a kid, and I still do now. I’d say an equal amount of girls play games, and have for their whole lives. I don’t see how anyone could think this is remotely true, or is it supposed to be a joke?!! Honestly I don’t know of one girl who doesn’t play games at least occasionally!! Open your eyes my friends
69 /
483 /

faggotviolence:

if, as vegans, we see animals as our equals, why do we refer to them as “it” when we would never refer to a person in that way (unless they identified in that way)? talk about objectification.

I wouldn’t really say it’s objectification, it’s just proper grammar. If we referred to an animal by its given name, we probably wouldn’t say “it,” as in: “I love Mittens, she’s so cute!” as opposed to “I love that cat, its so cute!” It’s often the same with babies. Somebody may look at a baby and say “Look at that baby, it’s adorable!” as opposed to “Look at Thomas, he’s adorable!” You’re not necessarily objectifying the child, it’s just the fact that the term “baby” was used instead of “Thomas.” I wouldn’t consider it insulting to the child, and I wouldn’t consider it insulting or degrading to an animal either. 

For example, on the rare occasion where somebody would say: “Look at that human!” it would be grammatically correct to refer to the human as “it” such as “Look at that human, it’s doing things.” Because it’s not common to refer to a person as “human”, this sounds strange, but it would be the right way to say it if the opportunity ever arose. Usually, if we saw a person and weren’t sure of their gender/sex, we’d say “Look at that person, they’re doing things.” That’s because the terms “human” and “person” mean different things.

The terms “human” or “cat” or “baby” are different to given names and terms such as “person” or “people”. I’d say this is because these more personal terms refer to the actual being, the soul, the person within, etc. etc. rather than just the outward physical appearance. 

I don’t think it’s anything to get worked up over.

housesoftheholy:

(via Gottfried Helnwein | WORKS | Mixed Media on Canvas | The Murmur of the Innocents 12) 
1199 /
164 /
15 /