Active discussions

Meet the Other Phone. Only the apps you allow.

Meet the Other Phone.
Only the apps you allow.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Talk
News
Original poster

Has MN done this?? LUSH cosmetics fund Hunt Saboteurs

134 replies

Macdog · 17/10/2009 10:11

www.lush.co.uk/index.php?option=com_content&id=17717&catid=&view=article

OP posts:
wannaBe · 18/10/2009 22:58

but you can eat a salmon.

fortyplus · 18/10/2009 23:07

Of course you can - but what about coarse fishing where they all get thrown back?

MitchyInge · 18/10/2009 23:07

What about all the game that's raised especially for shoots, feathered and furry, not much of that is destined for the table and there are plenty of actual pests like pigeons that could be shot instead - why are so many people so upset about the fox? I think the litter after a shoot is awful, cartridges everywhere and plastic bags and stuff. Wouldn't actually interfere as don't care enough but it's odd how strongly people feel about some rural pursuits and how indifferent they are to others that are every bit as questionable.

MitchyInge · 18/10/2009 23:14

Is it because shooting is seen as something for the hoi polloi to do on Saturdays?

SqueezyCheesyPumpkin · 18/10/2009 23:26

I don't agree that shooting birds is ok either, or catching fish just to throw them back in. It is all cruel.

If it is truly a vermin problem, there are quicker, easier and more humane ways of dealing with it. For example, pigeons - hawks can be used to scare them off. Also, I don't really see many pigeons in my part of the countryside, I mostly see them when I go into town and they are trying to raid bins etc.

Drayford · 18/10/2009 23:29

cross thread posting going on here -

Squeezy are you a veggie?

fortyplus · 18/10/2009 23:35

Ok...
I don't like hunting (even tho I have been out with the hounds as a teenager)

I don't like shooting

I don't like fishing

But just because I don't like them why should I feel I have a right to stop other people taking part if it's not actua;ly cruel.

Dairy cattle don't have great lives - the male calves are sghot at birth - but I still drink milk.

Chickens reared for meat have crap lives - but I still eat chicken products.

Cattle and sheep suffer stress being transported for slaughter - but I still eat meat.

What difference does it make just because the animal is going to get eaten?? It's the quality of life and death that matters to the animal, surely?

Drayford · 18/10/2009 23:43

huraah fortyplus!!!!

Sazisi · 18/10/2009 23:55

But Fortyplus, it is actually cruel

Drayford · 18/10/2009 23:57

What exactly is cruel sazisi?

fortyplus · 19/10/2009 00:00

'Cruelty' is inflicting deliberate and persistent pain or neglect. Hunting doesn't meet that definition

SqueezyCheesyPumpkin · 19/10/2009 00:02

Nope, I'm not a veggie.

Not all farms give their animals a crap life and there is the choice to buy meat that is produced in as favourable a way as possible to the animal. Bad practices are being improved and legislated against all the time.

However, that is what goes on my plate.

Fox hunting has absolutely nothing to do with food that we eat.

fortyplus · 19/10/2009 00:04

And neither does coarse fishing - would you ban that too or is it ok because it's only a fish?

SqueezyCheesyPumpkin · 19/10/2009 00:10

Well fortyplus, actually I would. It has been scientifically proven that the fish suffer.

fortyplus · 19/10/2009 00:18

Oh I don't doubt that they suffer - it's just that a lot of people don't seem to regard fishing in the same light as hunting. As I've said - I don't like hunting, fishing or shooting, but when it comes to the latter 2 my opinions are based on ignorance. At least my opinions on hunting are based on what I'vw seen with my own eyes and I never saw anything I would call cruel... unless you count a woman beating the crap out of a horse - but that's a rather different issue.

OrangeFish · 19/10/2009 00:26

Well, I'm not hunting suporter but the fact that the HuntSabs have already killed someone (by accident or not), while trying to distract a hunt makes me think that a store that can overlook that death and publicise their support for a charity that has now -human- blood in their hands is not worth it of my attention.

A pitty because I absolutely loved those bath bombs...

SqueezyCheesyPumpkin · 19/10/2009 00:28

Fair enough fortyplus, it;s true what you're saying. It's such a contentious subject. Each side, for or against, feels passionately about their stance. I just can't cope with the idea of cruelty for (what to me) seems like no real purpose.

I admit to not feeling as passionate about fish as I do other animals. There are two fisheries (is that the correct word?) within 2 miles of my house and I don't exactly feel the need to stop and run in, causing havoc to get them to stop their angling. If I saw a hunt, I would feel the need to do something though, not necessarily direct action or sab behaviour, but to write to my MP or similar. I would ban it all though if I had the choice.

Maybe that makes me a hypocrite.

sarah293 · 19/10/2009 08:39

This reply has been deleted

Message withdrawn

ilovemydogandmrobama · 19/10/2009 08:47

Thought hunting was illegal anyway, or am I misinformed?

sarah293 · 19/10/2009 08:50

This reply has been deleted

Message withdrawn

MitchyInge · 19/10/2009 08:50

hunting is NOT illegal, only in some forms

why do people keep saying that?

ilovemydogandmrobama · 19/10/2009 08:53

I thought it was illegal. I said it because I thought it was true.

Orangesarenottheonlyfruit · 19/10/2009 09:01

I always suspected Lush was a bit naff and now I have a good reason never to shop there again.

Blottedcopybook · 19/10/2009 09:16

It's illegal in Scotland.

Good on Lush. I have no affinity to foxes but I believe it's far fairer for them to be shot and killed as close to instantly as possible.

Original poster
Macdog · 19/10/2009 10:35

It is NOT illegal in Scotland either

OP posts:
Swipe left for the next trending thread