MovieChat Forums > Brooke Shields Discussion > Fur-wearer? I'm so disappointed

Fur-wearer? I'm so disappointed

posted 13 years ago by blackie-5
10 replies | jump to latest

Here is an image of Brooke Shields that I'm very disappointed by. I have been such a fan of hers. Before you attach me for being a "Peta nut" (which I'm not), please read my reasoning for how I feel below...
http://iftfblog.com/?p=212

One of the things that's too bad about our society is that if you stand up for something most people don't know a thing about, you are viewed as a "PETA fanatic".
The problem with fur is the incredible, shocking cruelty with which the animals used in this industry are treated (animals used for fur are often skinned alive, or fatally electrocuted through the anus).

It's not a matter of fanaticism. It is utter cruelty that no living thing should have to endure to feed someone else's greed or someone's idea of fashion.
It's not fanaticism; it's simply a blend of knowledge, common sense, kindness, and compassion. Clearly Brooke Shields has none of these qualities.

There is no reasonable person who would support wearing fur if they knew about the way animals bred for fur are often skinned alive or fatally electrocuted anally for their pelts.

[–] n/a

This message has been deleted by an administrator

[–] blackie-5 13 years ago

To be clear, what I meant was - the link to photo of her picking out fur pelts (looking over a bunch of animals' dead bodies) is at the link below:

http://iftfblog.com/?p=212

[–] GoTheDistance 13 years ago

People against animal rights people are just unethical 'jerks',...ie Limbough types, often blinded by business. 90+% of people are against animal abuse.....and don't need to be apologetic for being decent.

Though it's likely that PETA has hurt the image of ethical people, and people who wish harm to Brooke are being hypocritical(as PETA is)

[–] melbalt22 13 years ago

she's an awful fugly skank. And she's Republican. Makes sense that she wears fur. Republicans tend to be anti-animal-rights because they believe that God has created humans to be the chosen ones.
She is such an awful bigotted human being. Kiddie porn in her youth, "devout Catholic", divorce, Republican. Plus can't act.

[–] cookiela2001 13 years ago

<< And she's Republican. Makes sense that she wears fur >>

I'd be waaaaaaay more concerned by her being a Republican than by her wearing fur.

What is the source for this? I believe her father was a Republican, but I never read that Shields herself was.

[–] cookiela2001 13 years ago

Or digesting a hamburger...

[–] SataiDelen 10 years ago

Nice over-generalization there. Not all Republicans are against animal rights (or human rights). I'm a Republican, and proud of it. I do not wear fur, as I think it is unnecessary to kill an animal solely for their coat because I don't have one (fur/coat). There are other materials that I can use to stay warm, and I do (leather, wool, cotton, etc.) And before anyone jumps on me for wearing leather, think about it. Cows are used for meat AND leather, so not much is wasted product-wise.

Anyway, I am against animal testing for makeup, shampoo, etc.

I am pro-choice.

So, just so you're all aware, not all Republicans are old people opposed to common sense and human and animal welfare and rights.

[–] krypton_son 9 years ago

I'd be waaaaaaay more concerned by her being a Republican than by her wearing fur.

Really? Are you that much of a fragile PC libtard that someone having their own views offends you? It's your kind of scum that ruins it for everyone else.