A Better Tomorrow isn't simply the name of the latest Wu-Tang Clan album—it's also RZA's hope for the world. He encourages fans to follow in his footsteps and make the change and go vegan because, as he puts it, it doesn't make sense to put "dead flesh" into a "live body." The musician understands that the choices he makes in his own life can either contribute to or help alleviate the pain and suffering that animals experience at the hands of the meat industry. RZA, along with PETA friend Masta Killa and other Wu-Tang members, has chosen to live better today, knowing that it'll truly make for a better tomorrow. And he hopes others will be inspired to go vegan to help to save the lives of animals and for their own well-being.
Watch his exclusive interview with PETA and see RZA explain his choice to help animals by not eating them.
Animals value their lives just as much as you value yours. Yet their lives are sacrificed for profit, and human health suffers because of it. RZA makes the point that we shouldn't be putting the product of such stress and death into our living bodies.
It's never too soon (or too late) to make the kind, smart choice to adopt a plant-based diet, giving your health a boost and sparing animals unnecessary suffering. And it's never been easier to give up meat, eggs, and dairy products—today, there are numerous cruelty-free options available in grocery stores and restaurants across the country. PETA also has hundreds of free, delicious vegan recipes for you to try!
PETA isn’t just looking to make Earth a vegan planet, they have their sights set on Mars too.
PETA recently sent out a press release about rocket producer SpaceX and their plans to send flights to Mars to create a colony. According to the animal rights organization, “the Martian colony is an opportunity to make a kind civilization in which humans don’t exploit other beings. And since the animal agriculture industry is toxic to human health and to the environment, an all-vegan civilization would ensure that the new Martian citizens would have long and healthy futures.”
The letter from PETA president Ingrid Newkirk to SpaceX founder and CEO Elon Musk was also included. Newkirk said, “We can get off on the right foot on our new biosphere by ensuring that SpaceX crafts traveling to Mars are stocked only with vegan food and that Mars’ colonists commit to enjoying an animal-free diet once they’ve arrived. Colonizing Mars can give us the opportunity to learn from our mistakes on one planet and create a just civilization on another. Ensuring that Mars is a vegan planet (rather than importing animal products from Earth or creating factory farms on our new home) would protect animals from the horrors that they endure in the meat, egg, and dairy industries.” She also pointed out the cruelty of factory farms, such as animals being “crammed by the thousands into filthy sheds and cages so small that many can’t even turn around or spread their limbs.”
Musk’s response to PETA’s letter was somewhat supportive of the idea. He told Space.com, “”I’m a big fan of free choice for any future Martian colony. That said, it is likely that early Mars colonists would have a mostly vegetable diet, because of the energy and space needed to raise farm animals.” Space.com also points out that feeding the Mars colony will be difficult, as food will either need to be transported from Earth or grown on Mars itself. Musk hopes to fly people to Mars within 10-20 years.
Meanwhile, Newkirk and PETA say going vegan is the best solution for people on Earth too. “If Elon Musk’s vision of a colony on Mars comes true, the last thing those people will need is the disease and destruction that results from eating animals…Whether you’re settling into your new Martian home or staying here on Earth, going vegan is the best way to ensure that you’ll be able to enjoy the world around you for as long as possible.”
I have no idea how they even got funding for such a film that looks big time and Indy at the same time, maybe it's just the technology today? I had a few words with the director after the screening and he said it didn't cost much for them to make and they financed it themselves. So then I tell him he's got to get people like my host for the evening, Russell, to speak to people at HBO and call Bill Maher too, this film deserves to be seen and enjoyed, and to be an educational tool like no documentary on the subject can be. For all it's cornball I do believe it's something that the average person can watch and learn from and probably enjoy.
I never became a vegan for the animals, I did it for the environment, and over the years I have become way more sympathetic to the animal rights groups and cause in general, it's just a consciousness that develops i guess over time. This movie slams home that consciousness in a great way. Get to see it or get some one you know who does not yet have the consciousness to see it.
I think PeTA does a whole lot of good, they make mistakes, sometimes big ones. OK so we'll look past that for a moment, Because they are fierce for their cause and they usually get done whatever it is they are trying to do. And at the very least they will get attention for their causes. A wise man once said "Any ink is good ink", and while this may not always be true, it has certainly worked to their benefit.
A few years ago I had the chance pleasure to meet Ingrid Newkirk (the leader of PeTA) via my old friend Russell. Being Vegan myself for over 20 years i had a leg up on many of her associates, so i certainly was not intimidated by her and the entourage, particularly when i took them to task on one of their campaigns i had a problem with, much to my surprise they graciously accepted and even agreed with my critique saying "we never heard it put that way before"... So with that I can say, with a personal experience they do seem to be human, (although it seems many, if not most, of them are ashamed to be). That said, just like Whole Foods, I do appreciate them being here, and they have certainly done a lot of good.
So here's their 2009 "reel" that shows you a lot of what they did or attention they got in the media by being the relentless people they are.
To see what the first Thanksgiving was like you have to go to: Texas. Texans claim the first Thanksgiving in America actually took place in little San Elizario, a community near El Paso, in 1598 -- twenty-three years before the Pilgrims' festival. For several years they have staged a reenactment of the event that culminated in the Thanksgiving celebration: the arrival of Spanish explorer Juan de Onate on the banks of the Rio Grande. De Onate is said to have held a big Thanksgiving festival after leading hundreds of settlers on a grueling 350-mile long trek across the Mexican desert.
Then again, you may want to go to Virginia.. At the Berkeley Plantation on the James River they claim the first Thanksgiving in America was held there on December 4th, 1619....two years before the Pilgrims' festival....and every year since 1958 they have reenacted the event. In their view it's not the Mayflower we should remember, it's the Margaret, the little ship which brought 38 English settlers to the plantation in 1619. The story is that the settlers had been ordered by the London company that sponsored them to commemorate the ship's arrival with an annual day of Thanksgiving. Hardly anybody outside Virginia has ever heard of this Thanksgiving, but in 1963 President Kennedy officially recognized the plantation's claim.
MYTH # 2
Thanksgiving Was About Family
If by Thanksgiving, you have in mind the Pilgrim festival, forget about it being a family holiday. Put away your Norman Rockwell paintings. Turn off Bing Crosby. Thanksgiving was a multicultural community event. If it had been about family, the Pilgrims never would have invited the Indians to join them.
MYTH # 3
Thanksgiving Was About Religion
No it wasn't. Paraphrasing the answer provided above, if Thanksgiving had been about religion, the Pilgrims never would have invited the Indians to join them. Besides, the Pilgrims would never have tolerated festivities at a true religious event. Indeed, what we think of as Thanksgiving was really a harvest festival. Actual "Thanksgivings" were religious affairs; everybody spent the day praying. Incidentally, these Pilgrim Thanksgivings occurred at different times of the year, not just in November.
MYTH # 4
The Pilgrims Ate Turkey
What did the Pilgrims eat at their Thanksgiving festival? They didn't have corn on the cob, apples, pears, potatoes or even cranberries. No one knows if they had turkey, although they were used to eating turkey. The only food we know they had for sure was deer. 11(And they didn't eat with a fork; they didn't have forks back then.)
So how did we get the idea that you have turkey and cranberry and such on Thanksgiving? It was because the Victorians prepared Thanksgiving that way. And they're the ones who made Thanksgiving a national holiday, beginning in 1863, when Abe Lincoln issued his presidential Thanksgiving proclamations...two of them: one to celebrate Thanksgiving in August, a second one in November. Before Lincoln Americans outside New England did not usually celebrate the holiday. (The Pilgrims, incidentally, didn't become part of the holiday until late in the nineteenth century. Until then, Thanksgiving was simply a day of thanks, not a day to remember the Pilgrims.)
MYTH # 5
The Pilgrims Landed on Plymouth Rock
According to historian George Willison, who devoted his life to the subject, the story about the rock is all malarkey, a public relations stunt pulled off by townsfolk to attract attention. What Willison found out is that the Plymouth Rock legend rests entirely on the dubious testimony of Thomas Faunce, a ninety-five year old man, who told the story more than a century after the Mayflower landed. Unfortunately, not too many people ever heard how we came by the story of Plymouth Rock. Willison's book came out at the end of World War II and Americans had more on their minds than Pilgrims then. So we've all just gone merrily along repeating the same old story as if it's true when it's not. And anyway, the Pilgrims didn't land in Plymouth first. They first made landfall at Provincetown. Of course, the people of Plymouth stick by hoary tradition. Tour guides insist that Plymouth Rock is THE rock.
MYTH # 6
Pilgrims Lived in Log Cabins
No Pilgrim ever lived in a log cabin. The log cabin did not appear in America until late in the seventeenth century, when it was introduced by Germans and Swedes. The very term "log cabin" cannot be found in print until the 1770s. Log cabins were virtually unknown in England at the time the Pilgrims arrived in America. So what kind of dwellings did the Pilgrims inhabit? As you can see if you visit Plimoth Plantation in Massachusetts, the Pilgrims lived in wood clapboard houses made from sawed lumber.
MYTH # 7
Pilgrims Dressed in Black
Not only did they not dress in black, they did not wear those funny buckles, weird shoes, or black steeple hats. So how did we get the idea of the buckles? Plimoth Plantation historian James W. Baker explains that in the nineteenth century, when the popular image of the Pilgrims was formed, buckles served as a kind of emblem of quaintness. That's the reason illustrators gave Santa buckles. Even the blunderbuss, with which Pilgrims are identified, was a symbol of quaintness. The blunderbuss was mainly used to control crowds. It wasn't a hunting rifle. But it looks out of date and fits the Pilgrim stereotype.
MYTH # 8
Pilgrims, Puritans -- Same Thing
Though even presidents get this wrong -- Ronald Reagan once referred to Puritan John Winthrop as a Pilgrim -- Pilgrims and Puritans were two different groups. The Pilgrims came over on the Mayflower and lived in Plymouth. The Puritans, arriving a decade later, settled in Boston. The Pilgrims welcomed heterogeneousness. Some (so-called "strangers") came to America in search of riches, others (so-called "saints") came for religious reasons. The Puritans, in contrast, came over to America strictly in search of religious freedom. Or, to be technically correct, they came over in order to be able to practice their religion freely. They did not welcome dissent. That we confuse Pilgrims and Puritans would have horrified both. Puritans considered the Pilgrims incurable utopians. While both shared the belief that the Church of England had become corrupt, only the Pilgrims believed it was beyond redemption. They therefore chose the path of Separatism. Puritans held out the hope the church would reform.
MYTH # 9
Puritans Hated Sex
Actually, they welcomed sex as a God-given responsibility. When one member of the First Church of Boston refused to have conjugal relations with his wife two years running, he was expelled. Cotton Mather, the celebrated Puritan minister, condemned a married couple who had abstained from sex in order to achieve a higher spirituality. They were the victims, he wrote, of a "blind zeal."
MYTH # 10
Puritans Hated Fun
H.L. Mencken defined Puritanism as "the haunting fear that someone, somewhere, may be happy!" Actually, the Puritans welcomed laughter and dressed in bright colors (or, to be precise, the middle and upper classes dressed in bright colors; members of the lower classes were not permitted to indulge themselves -- they dressed in dark clothes). As Carl Degler long ago observed, "The Sabbatarian, antiliquor, and antisex attitudes usually attributed to the Puritans are a nineteenth-century addition to the much more moderate and wholesome view of life's evils held by the early settlers of New England."
