What’s Wrong with Peta?
-
28
Liked it 
Subscribe to RSS
A breakdown of everything wrong with People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals.
Animals are not ours to eat. Animals are not ours to wear. Animals are not ours to experiment on. Animals are not ours to use for entertainment. Animals are not ours to abuse in any way. This is the official slogan of People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals (PETA).
PETA is an animal rights group that calls for “total animal liberation.” Total animal liberation. That means no milk, no meat, no zoos, no circuses, no wool, no leather, no hunting, no fishing, and no pets of any kind. I think that it should pointed out that PETA’s president uses a photo of herself hugging a chicken on sites that require her picture; maybe they should add “no using animals in cheesy photos to make yourself look good” to their definition of total animal liberation.
I wonder does anyone else think that their goals are a little extreme. I’m all for animal rights, I don’t think people should unnecessarily torture their pets, and they should be punished for that, but rightfully, an appropriate line has been drawn on what constitutes cruelty to animals and what doesn’t. PETA obviously doesn’t know where to draw their line.
The first line in their slogan is hypocritical to everything that they claim to stand for. Eating animals is not abuse. If all species are equal and should be afforded the same rights, why are other animals allowed to eat meat and it’s wrong for humans to be afforded that same luxury.
They say that humans have a choice, that there are meat alternatives like soy sausages. That’s an oxymoron; if it’s soy, it can’t be a sausage. There is no substitute for meat, if it didn’t have parents, it can’t be a substitute.
PETA also uses some very questionable methods to promote their values. At an animal rights convention in 2001, PETA vegetarian campaign coordinator, Bruce Friedrich, issued a statement saying that “blowing stuff up and smashing windows is a great way to bring about animal liberation.” It’s been reported that PETA has given thousands of dollars to other organizations such as Animal Liberation Front, which is known for using terrorism, and deemed a special threat by the Federal Bureau of Investigation.
It may be hard to believe that an organization would openly promote vandalism and what is essentially terrorism but I personally signed up for a website that PETA uses to target young people, peta2.com. On this website, PETA offers awards and legal assistance to students who vandalize buildings and cause disruptions at school or other places in the name of animal rights; in 2000 and again 2002, PETA started a campaign encouraging students to drink beer instead of milk, claiming that milk caused a variety of health problems, from acne to cancer. Substituting beer for milk may be ok for students at Ole Miss but not for high school students. Their brainwashing of America’s youth starts much earlier than junior high and high school.
PETA uses colorfully illustrated pamphlets to target children as young as six years old. I came across two pamphlets that were really disturbing, one titled, “Your Daddy Kills Animals,” features a very graphic illustration of a man gutting a fish on the cover. A second similar pamphlet depicted a woman ramming a knife into a rabbit that is clearly still alive. Both pamphlets encourage children to disobey their parents by saying things like, “Since your daddy is teaching you the wrong lessons about right and wrong, you should teach him fishing is killing.” They’ll go on to say something like, “Until your daddy learns it’s not fun to kill, keep your doggies and kitties away from him. He’s so hooked on killing defenseless animals, they could be next.”
Another common method PETA uses in an attempt to get their point across is naked or nearly women. Their posters often show completely nude women with a caption that says something along the lines of “I’d rather go naked that wear fur.” Now, I’m all for naked women, but it does seem a little wrong to exploit one group while you’re fighting for the rights of another.
They also use the aptly named “lettuce ladies,” women dressed in bikinis made of lettuce who pass out pamphlets to promote veganism. And in a parody of the Running of the Bulls, PETA activists also annually run naked through the streets of Pamplona, Spain.
By far the most disturbing campaigns PETA have launched have to be their campaigns which compare tragic human suffering to animals. Their KFC tortures chickens: Holocaust on Your Plate and Are Animals the New Slaves campaigns were horrendously insensitive. More offensive than Don Imus, Michael Richards, or any N-word using Ku Klux Klan member or Neo-Nazi could ever be. How insensitive does someone have to be to compare an animal whose only purpose for living was to make its way to a KFC box at the second window of the drive-thru, or an animal performing in the circus to the Holocaust where six million innocent people were killed and the millions of minorities that were snatched from their homes and forced to believe that they were inferior just because of their heritage.
PETA garnered a lot of national attention this summer during the Michael Vick dog fighting controversy, but I think they need to take a long look at themselves before protesting anything else. Michael Vick allegedly killed 8 dogs, PETA kills, they say euthanize to make it sound nice, 80 percent of the animals they receive, only a relatively small number are ever adopted. They reportedly “euthanized” over 14,000 animals from 1998 to 2005 alone. With their constant protesting, PETA had brought themselves back into the public eye where they can be exposed for what they really are, an organization more evil that dog fighting can ever be.
I liked the article, but felt that you invalidated your remarks by using the word ‘euphemize’ instead of ‘euthenize’. Euphemise is to refer to something. Euthenize is to kill something humanely.
peta kicks butt :]
Article gets a thumbs up. PETA goes way over the line with their ad campaigns, particularly the ones turning children against their parents. The first time I saw the covers for their pamphlets concerning the mother and father, I actually cried, and I’m sixteen. I lost all respect for PETA at that moment. I don’t know when it happened, but PETA has become less and less animal-loving and more and more human-hating.
Just a footnote: Your last paragraph didn’t make too much grammatical sense, but I still got the point =)
The actual act of eating meat is not abuse; however, animals are often abused in factor farms before being slaughtered. If you treated a dog the way chickens and pigs are treated in farms, it would definitely be “unnecessary torture.” It’s easy to ignore the cruelty that takes place, but it still happens. I think PETA’s point is that any being that can feel pain has the right not to feel pain. Most Americans do have the choice not to support this suffering.
As for ALF, it is important to note that, while they are considered “terrorists” by the FBI, they have a policy of nonviolence toward people and animals. In fact, the radical animal rights movement is not responsible for any human deaths.
I was not aware of the text of PETA’s campaigns aimed at children, but I guess PETA’s trying to reach a generation that has not yet been taught to distrust them.
I’m not sure how far PETA should go in the violence and sex area in order to attract attention, but I don’t think they’re ads are any worse than what’s in most media these days.
PETA’s use of euthanasia is supposedly only for animals that could never be companions or have such bad health conditions that death is merciful. In any case, properly performed euthanasia is humane and virtually painless — definitely less cruel than dogfighting. The number of animals that are humanely killed is not the fault of the people that do that job; it is the fault of an uncaring society.
PETA views non-humans as morally equal to humans because both feel pain, hunger, distress, and loneliness. According to that logic, slaughterhouses are not that different from Nazi concentration camps. The difference between humans and non-human animals, following PETA’s logic, is that, while carnivorous animals naturally eat meat, humans do have the choice to avoid it and remain healthy. You could argue that people naturally eat meat, as we have the proper teeth for it, but the same logic dictates that we should run naked in the woods and sleep in the bushes, because we do not “naturally” come with clothes and housing.
PETA’s opposition to pets does bother me. I don’t see the harm in humans and dogs or cats, etc. living together as companions with the human acting as a guardian. Then again, I can’t imagine treating my dogs as anything other than especially privileged family members. Considering that so many pets do not have happy lives, perhaps it would be better if we did not keep pets, though that is hard to imagine.
But look at PETA’s view of the cycle: dogs are raised (often) in puppy mills, sold to pet stores, sold to a human family; the human family neglects to sterilize the dog, leaves him or her chained outside and lonely; the dog runs away, lives a hard life of injuries and disease before being captured and killed — not necessarily in a humane manner. This is a negative scenario, but it does happen. On the other hand, a large number of people adopt a companion animal and treat him or her with kindness and respect, and the animal lives a happy life with his or her people.
It is a shame that so many humans are uncaring and cruel (intentionally or not), but there are still many people who love animals (these people may or may not be vegan/vegetarian) and try to make the world a better place for them. I think that, at least, a large number of PETA’s supporters fall into this category, though I do have some reservations about the organization itself.
Go PETP! http://www.angelfire.com/bug2/shellpics/
DO you want to see the TRUTH ?????.
Yes peta Kill animals just like most other shelters out there. BUT most other shelters dont have a 300 Million Dollar income.
Which is more important making some stupid add depicting women having sex with veggies, or saving some poor unwanted Pets.
Peta kill the Pets because it is cheaper than keeping them and finding homes for them.
See the TRUTH, Open your eyes and brain.
XXXXX PETA KILL ANIMALS every Day XXXXXX
People like this make me angry. You do not have a problem with PETA; you have a problem with the animal rights cause in general. And judging by this article, it clearly stems from a misunderstanding of the issues. Saying, “We should raise animals in nice buildings and then slaughter them for food” is NOT animal rights. It’s animal welfare, which is debatably not even a real cause. It’s not really in the animal’s interest at all to be prevented from their natural behaviors and killed without living out their full lifespan.
Semantics like, “We created the word sausage to describe an animal carcass” doesn’t change anything. You can be an obstinate jerk and say that unless your food involved death, you won’t eat it, but the fact remains that if you can replicate the taste, texture, and nutritional value of something, then it IS an alternative. But “humans have a choice” doesn’t refer to that at all. As you eloquently put it, meat is a luxury for us. We don’t need it to survive. Other animals do. Furthermore, most of us, if left to fend for ourselves, would be too physically and/or emotionally incompetent to kill an animal. So, no, it’s nothing like real omnivores and carnivores in the wild.
But some of your “facts” about PETA are wrong too:
They are not trying to eliminate pets. They are trying to eliminate commercial breeding (and spay and neuter as many animals as possible in the mean time). This does not come from a desire to “liberate” pets, but a desire to stop them from being killed in droves. In fact, a lot of people who work for PETA own pets; adopting animals saves them. They are also not trying to eliminate circuses, but only the circuses that involve animals. There are plenty of acts involving humans that are interesting. While these are arguably exploitive, these people made a choice. The animals don’t have one; instead they are unwillingly bullhooked to do unnatural tricks.
PETA does NOT fund the Animal Liberation Front. In fact, nobody funds it because it’s not an organization. It’s a coalition of individuals, and what they do really doesn’t require that much money. The biggest connection PETA has to it is writing about them; they are willing to collaborate with anyone in the cause. Also, both “terrorism” and “violence” need to involve some kind of personal harm, and one of the central aspects of the ALF is nonviolence towards all animals, human or not. The crazy people who blow up buildings and threaten families are not involved with the mainstream movement. And if the “vandalism” they help young people commit you’re referring to is posting stickers in public places (which is the most peta2 does), you really need to start watching current events and learning about the real problems in the world. But PETA would lose their 501(c)3 status if they did something illegal like that. I admire that you believe everything the government says, but you should consider thinking for yourself at least some of the time. And that Friedrich quote… totally sounds like a serious quote an organization representative would say in public, right? You, my friend, need to learn about sarcasm. I’ve read his books, so I probably have a better grasp on his thoughts than you do.
You think PETA is brainwashing the youth to drink beer? Nonsense; the alcohol industry has been doing that for centuries; they’re simply jumping on the bandwagon to get their message across. Maybe not morally sound, but understandable for any organization with such an unorthodox social message. The Dairy Council has done plenty of brainwashing by sending “nutritional information” to schools about healthy snacks like ice cream, and the “fact” that you should have dairy with every meal. If you’re so good at critical thinking, I have a couple of questions. Why are humans the only mammals (or any animals for that matter) who drink the milk of another species? Besides the fact that we’ve been doing it for as long as we can remember, what reason do any of us have to believe it is natural or good for us, when every study not funded by the industry has shown results to the contrary?
With the children, again, you should be more careful with the word “brainwashing.” A culture brainwashes children; an ad for a product brainwashes children. A social movement that is based on sound ethical and scientific considerations cannot “brainwash” someone. They are telling the truth. I understand why, in our culture where parents “own” their children, instilling personal values in them sounds shocking, but I also think it has to be done. I don’t want each new generation to grow up as dumb and callous as the last. However, I’m not sure what your sources are, but seeing as PETA doesn’t even say such emotionally charged things to adults, I seriously doubt they would say it to children. This is their kids website: http://www.petakids.com/ Quote about fish: “Imagine how scary it would be to be swimming along, minding your own business in the deep blue sea, when suddenly, you’re swallowed up by a huge net or impaled by a hook! Remember: Fish are friends, not food!” Hardly sounds as graphic and threatening as you made it out to be.
And I’m a woman and a feminist, and they have my blessing to “exploit” women who volunteer to be half naked for their cause. I’m not of the persuasion that we should be ashamed of our bodies because society tells us they are “obscene,” anyway, but dressing down outside on a hot day hardly makes you look odd, unless you’re promoting a cause of course.
If you don’t understand the connection with humans exploiting other humans and exploiting animals, you have obviously not been oppressed nor studied it in depth. Exploitation and oppression always run by the same excuses, “We’ve always done it this way.” “They aren’t as advanced, or intelligent, or powerful as we are.” (Which may be true or not, but is never an excuse for abuse and exploitation.) Plenty of people have been offended with these comparisons because they do not understand them. But plenty of people, including some people who are descendents of slaves or survivors of the Holocaust, for example, have praised it and opened their eyes to the issue. And this isn’t just PETA, it’s all the thinkers of the animal rights movement. There are plenty of books about it, if you wanted to consider it fully before you attacked it.
And they could care less about profit. While their budget is bigger than other animal rights organizations, it’s smaller than some other animal organizations and exponentially smaller than the vast majority of human ones. No matter what your opinions are, the amount of suffering involved with this issue makes it important, and it deserves a large scale organization to help it. Moreover, their executive director lives off a small stipend, while other organizations’ EDs take lavish salaries and no one ever complains… Weird.
Why don’t you blame organizations like the feminist peace organization “Code Pink for Peace” for showing half naked (and sometimes fully naked) women? Or, why don’t you blame the thousands of shelters across the United States who are forced to euthanize animals in similar numbers as PETA? Oh, that’s right, because you don’t disagree with their fundamental premise. Come on, if you had told the truth and examined the entire issue, this article would have been pitifully short.
I am an animal rights activist. I don’t even agree with everything they do, but I agree with their fundamental beliefs, and I recognize that they have done a lot for the movement as far as corporate and youth outreach goes. Anyone who is not an animal rights activist is just looking for an excuse to discredit the cause; you choose a monster and exploit it. Good job, hope it clears your conscience. Didn’t work for me…
People like this make me angry. You do not have a problem with PETA; you have a problem with the animal rights cause in general. And judging by this article, it clearly stems from a misunderstanding of the issues. Saying, \”We should raise animals in nice buildings and then slaughter them for food\” is NOT animal rights. It\’s animal welfare, which is debatably not even a real cause. It\’s not really in the animal\’s interest at all to be prevented from their natural behaviors and killed without living out their full lifespan.
Semantics like, \”We created the word sausage to describe an animal carcass\” doesn\’t change anything. You can be an obstinate jerk and say that unless your food involved death, you won\’t eat it, but the fact remains that if you can replicate the taste, texture, and nutritional value of something, then it IS an alternative. But \”humans have a choice\” doesn\’t refer to that at all. As you eloquently put it, meat is a luxury for us. We don\’t need it to survive. Other animals do. Furthermore, most of us, if left to fend for ourselves, would be too physically and/or emotionally incompetent to kill an animal. So, no, it\’s nothing like real omnivores and carnivores in the wild.
But some of your \”facts\” about PETA are wrong too:
They are not trying to eliminate pets. They are trying to eliminate commercial breeding (and spay and neuter as many animals as possible in the mean time). This does not come from a desire to \”liberate\” pets, but a desire to stop them from being killed in droves. In fact, a lot of people who work for PETA own pets; adopting animals saves them. They are also not trying to eliminate circuses, but only the circuses that involve animals. There are plenty of acts involving humans that are interesting. While these are arguably exploitive, these people made a choice. The animals don\’t have one; instead they are unwillingly bullhooked to do unnatural tricks.
PETA does NOT fund the Animal Liberation Front. In fact, nobody funds it because it\’s not an organization. It\’s a coalition of individuals, and what they do really doesn\’t require that much money. The biggest connection PETA has to it is writing about them; they are willing to collaborate with anyone in the cause. Also, both \”terrorism\” and \”violence\” need to involve some kind of personal harm, and one of the central aspects of the ALF is nonviolence towards all animals, human or not. The crazy people who blow up buildings and threaten families are not involved with the mainstream movement. And if the \”vandalism\” they help young people commit you\’re referring to is posting stickers in public places (which is the most peta2 does), you really need to start watching current events and learning about the real problems in the world. But PETA would lose their 501(c)3 status if they did something illegal like that. I admire that you believe everything the government says, but you should consider thinking for yourself at least some of the time. And that Friedrich quote… totally sounds like a serious quote an organization representative would say in public, right? You, my friend, need to learn about sarcasm. I\’ve read his books, so I probably have a better grasp on his thoughts than you do.
You think PETA is brainwashing the youth to drink beer? Nonsense; the alcohol industry has been doing that for centuries; they\’re simply jumping on the bandwagon to get their message across. Maybe not morally sound, but understandable for any organization with such an unorthodox social message. The Dairy Council has done plenty of brainwashing by sending \”nutritional information\” to schools about healthy snacks like ice cream, and the \”fact\” that you should have dairy with every meal. If you\’re so good at critical thinking, I have a couple of questions. Why are humans the only mammals (or any animals for that matter) who drink the milk of another species? Besides the fact that we\’ve been doing it for as long as we can remember, what reason do any of us have to believe it is natural or good for us, when every study not funded by the industry has shown results to the contrary?
With the children, again, you should be more careful with the word \”brainwashing.\” A culture brainwashes children; an ad for a product brainwashes children. A social movement that is based on sound ethical and scientific considerations cannot \”brainwash\” someone. They are telling the truth. I understand why, in our culture where parents \”own\” their children, instilling personal values in them sounds shocking, but I also think it has to be done. I don\’t want each new generation to grow up as dumb and callous as the last. However, I\’m not sure what your sources are, but seeing as PETA doesn\’t even say such emotionally charged things to adults, I seriously doubt they would say it to children. This is their kids website: http://www.petakids.com/ Quote about fish: \”Imagine how scary it would be to be swimming along, minding your own business in the deep blue sea, when suddenly, you’re swallowed up by a huge net or impaled by a hook! Remember: Fish are friends, not food!\” Hardly sounds as graphic and threatening as you made it out to be.
And I\’m a woman and a feminist, and they have my blessing to \”exploit\” women who volunteer to be half naked for their cause. I\’m not of the persuasion that we should be ashamed of our bodies because society tells us they are \”obscene,\” anyway, but dressing down outside on a hot day hardly makes you look odd, unless you\’re promoting a cause of course.
If you don\’t understand the connection with humans exploiting other humans and exploiting animals, you have obviously not been oppressed nor studied it in depth. Exploitation and oppression always run by the same excuses, \”We\’ve always done it this way.\” \”They aren\’t as advanced, or intelligent, or powerful as we are.\” (Which may be true or not, but is never an excuse for abuse and exploitation.) Plenty of people have been offended with these comparisons because they do not understand them. But plenty of people, including some people who are descendents of slaves or survivors of the Holocaust, for example, have praised it and opened their eyes to the issue. And this isn\’t just PETA, it\’s all the thinkers of the animal rights movement. There are plenty of books about it, if you wanted to consider it fully before you attacked it.
And they could care less about profit. While their budget is bigger than other animal rights organizations, it\’s smaller than some other animal organizations and exponentially smaller than the vast majority of human ones. No matter what your opinions are, the amount of suffering involved with this issue makes it important, and it deserves a large scale organization to help it. Moreover, their executive director lives off a small stipend, while other organizations\’ EDs take lavish salaries and no one ever complains… Weird.
Why don\’t you blame organizations like the feminist peace organization \”Code Pink for Peace\” for showing half naked (and sometimes fully naked) women? Or, why don\’t you blame the thousands of shelters across the United States who are forced to euthanize animals in similar numbers as PETA? Oh, that\’s right, because you don\’t disagree with their fundamental premise. Come on, if you had told the truth and examined the entire issue, this article would have been pitifully short.
I am an animal rights activist. I don\’t even agree with everything they do, but I agree with their fundamental beliefs, and I recognize that they have done a lot for the movement as far as corporate and youth outreach goes. Anyone who is not an animal rights activist is just looking for an excuse to discredit the cause; you choose a monster and exploit it. Good job, hope it clears your conscience. Didn\’t work for me…
^
Too long, did not read.
For Amanda:
http://www.fishinghurts.com/pdfs/DaddyKillsAnimals.pdf
Your proof.
Amanda = fail
I like Amanda. You people need to stop being damn stupid. Cruelty to animals is mostly what PETA is worried about.
I find your article to be completely arrogant as you obviously do not understand the workings of the organisation. I am a firm believer in PETA and yes I own pets and I do not believe that to be animal cruelty, they live in luxury baha but, I do believe that animals are not ours to eat. You stated that if animals can eat other animals, why cant we eat animals if we are all equal. If this is what you believe in, from now on you can eat meat but, I suggest you hunt for it with no weapons and then, you will be considered equal. Your ignorance has unjustified your opinion
Well Alexanda, Apes use tools to get food, so then going by your logic we could use tools to hunt our food, seeing as we dont have natural defenses/weapons. Fail.
hahaha lets just ask the lion to hunt without his fangs!!
I love how its only females so far defending PETA.
While I can’t stand PETA as an organization I do believe that Animal Rights is important. I’m all for eating meat (I’d die if I was a vegetarian) but we gotta treat our cows/chickens/pigs/other delicious animals properly.
We wouldn’t treat our dogs or cats like it so we shouldn’t treat the other animals like that.
PETA, a pathetic excuse for people who are ignorant to the more important problems in the real world. Don’t feign sympathy for something that is almost insignificant to the HUMAN tragedies happening in the Middle East, Africa, and honestly, everywhere in the world.
James wrote :
“PETA, a pathetic excuse for people who are ignorant to the more important problems in the real world.”
Well James, what exactly is it that you and your cohorts (PETA bashers) are doing to help correct the ‘important problems’ in the world?
“The greatness of a nation and its moral progress can be judged by the way its animals are treated.” –Ghandi
Would help if bloggers would be more like Amanda and become more informed on issues such as this one. (There’s these handy tools called ‘books’ available. Might want to read some of them).
Adam – you’ll die whether or not you remain a meat-eater or go vegetarian. Humans aren’t immortal.
“It is the position of the American Dietetic Association that appropriately planned vegetarian diets, including total vegetarian or vegan diets, are healthful, nutritionally adequate, and may provide health benefits in the prevention and treatment of certain diseases.”
Whoever wrote this is undereducated in general. Your facts are wrong, your grammer is atrocious.
My biggest issue with this nonsense was your statement, “I’m all for animal rights, I don’t think people should unnecessarily torture their pets”.
What would you define NECESSARY torture of be then?
You’re disgusting and have no idea what you’re talking about.
Whoever wrote this is undereducated in general. Your facts are wrong, your grammer is atrocious.
My biggest issue with this nonsense was your statement, \”I’m all for animal rights, I don’t think people should unnecessarily torture their pets\”.
What would you define NECESSARY torture of be then?
You\’re disgusting and have no idea what you\’re talking about.
I think this whole thing is looked at the wrong way. I don’t necessarily agree with PETA about not eating meat. I am a hunter, and a fisherman. Always will be. I will even use the hide of an animal, that I have killed myself, if it serves my purpose. But.. do I also believe cruelty against animals is wrong? Damn right I do.
So.. why does it always seem that this is more a battle of vegetarians vs omnivores? If people concentrate more on whether or not it is wrong to eat meat, and consume animals, dont you think the true issue will be overlooked? Don’t get me wrong… you all seem passionate about your beliefs. But lets not forget, PETA says we have a choice. “choice” is the key word here. I CHOOSE to eat meat, just like some people “choose” a vegetarian diet. who cares. The point, is that animals should not be abused. If a cougar takes a deer in the wild, it kills the deer in a matter of short minutes, if not seconds. That is indeed nothing like the inhumane slaughter houses, and “factory farms”. When I kill an animal for my food, it dies even faster than if it was taken by a wild predator. I wont have anyone say I am wrong for that, as I am no better than the cougar, or the bear… I eat the same foods, enjoy the same shelter from the elements, and survive just like they do.
I guess I am offended, not by PETA alone, but also by the ones who are against PETA. You are all trying to change the natural order of things, and the end results will not be good….
Give up the fight against eating of meat, and concentrate on the fight against cruelty… if that’s what you really want, PETA. And those of you “anti PETA” people, so what if they say eating meat is wrong? You really going to let that bother you so much? Still a stupid reason to throw dirt on each other.
Enjoy your steak, enjoy your vegetables, and lets all be happy and full. ha-ha.
PS. My dog was euthanized last week, he had cancer. I think the ones who put him down… did it to end his suffering. He was more than a dog, he was my best friend. May he rest in peace ~*~
The article is happen to be true for those with bad comment and saying the PETA is right. They are not right.
I for to mention that PETA did killed some dogs and cat that was healthy and good for adoption. Handling Your Mommy Kills Animals pamphlet to kids is not to good idea. Not that I\’m anti-Peta, it just that they getting out of hand.
peta sucks big cock
Now while I agree that PETA is a hypocritical organization, you article is just as extreme as the organization. Saying that PETA is worse than dog fighting is too far fetched. Not only that, but I hardly consider a naked woman exploitation on PETA’s part.
Men are always killing animals, when they\’re not busy raping women and molesting children.
“Eating animals is not abuse. If all species are equal and should be afforded the same rights, why are other animals allowed to eat meat and it’s wrong for humans to be afforded that same luxury.”
If men are allowed to eat animals, surely pit bulls have the right to maul a man to death. The problem with men is that they are too busy banging on about their own rights to care about anyone else.
Feral is the most logical person I’ve heard here. Read his post if you haven’t because he makes some extremely good points.
On the other side of the spectrum: Ashton, you have some of the worst logic I’ve ever heard concerning world hunger. I’ve re-read your post several times and I still can’t believe that you are essentially saying we should let the hungry go hungry because they are “used to it.” By that logic, the animals being raised in concentration barns under terrible circumstances are fine because “they’ve lived like this, they were born like this; I am sure they are used to it.” Oh, and all the people without clean water are fine too. Same for the women oppressed under the Taliban, children born in Darfur, and all those africans infected with HIV. No worries, they’re fine.
Also at jhbwqlab: I resent your use of pit bulls (a perfectly family-friendly breed) as an example of a dog that commonly mauls humans, but I’ll work with it. The pit bull has every right to try to maul a man to death, the man just has every right to stop and prevent that from happening. Don’t think the dog wouldn’t try to defend itself if it were being attacked as well.
Just to set the record straight:
What I approve of:
Eating meat
Keeping pets
Keeping an opinion
Eating whatever you want
Using every part of the buffalo (if you kill a cow for meat, why not tan its hide for leather as well?)
Hunting animals for a purpose (not just sport or pride)
Being responsible and informed in your actions and beliefs
What I disapprove of:
Purposely and maliciously torturing any living being (plants included)
Considering animals a living thing but not plants
Using potentially disturbing images to sway children (I’ve seen the mommy and daddy kill animals campaign and I find it entirely unnecessary for any age group. The parents have a right to teach their children what they want, PETA is trying to turn children against their parents which could cause the children to perform outlandish actions and/or become status offenders)
PETA is the WORST kind of hypocrite I hate PETA. Why ? The organization has practiced euthanasia for years. Since 1998 PETA has killed more than 17,000 animals, nearly 85 percent of all those it has rescued. Shelters around the country kill 4 million animals every year; by some estimates, more than 80 percent of them are healthy. In recent years those grim statistics have split the animal rights community. Ironically, PETA has emerged as a strong proponent of euthanasia.
A no-kill shelter is an animal shelter where animals are only euthanized if they are too sick to be treated or too aggressive to be suitable for adoption,. No-kill shelters reject euthanasia as a means of population control. No-kill shelters are trying to end this killing by increasing the demand for shelter dogs and cats and reducing the supply by reducing the number of animals born and thus the number of animals which end up in shelters, and through increased spay/neuter, including low-cost/free help for low-income people.
Please support a no-kill shelter and remove PETA!
This is a great reading.
Thank you for sharing, I hope you happy and wish you good luck! this helpfull information.
Thanking you.
Sem Search Marketing
Social Media Services
I think we could eat animals but we need to treat them more humanely.Did you know PETA killed alot of pets.Shame on PETA!!!!
I will boycott them every step of the way until they are ended once and for all because they said humans don;t have the right to live.They are wrong humans have the right to live just as any animal.
Well fantastic comments I must say.
But the need for animal testing is so blaringly obvious that I shake my head when people say they are against it.
Without cures and testing on rats, mice ect the human race would be so far behind and still dying of easily avoided problems.
Animal testing also helps…. other animals. Vets have been using curses for animals after they have been developed. Is that animal testing wrong too?
Oh PeTA are a bunch of hyprocrits who say to be nice to animals while supporting burning buildings, acts of assault and killing animals themselves
I agree with this article. Yes, I agree that animals should be treated humanely, but the methods that PETA uses to get this message across are offensive, radical, and flat out stupid. Frankly, PETA pushes more people away than they get people to be in favor of them. For example, posting disturbing videos and images of slaughterhouses and animals being skinned alive is NOT going to make people want to be a vegetarian, and if it does, there are better ways to do this. The animals would not even want themselves displayed in this way.
i’m vegan. But still the act of eating meat isnot the abuse, but if you saw how animals are treated before they end up on your table you would be appalled.
So next time you eat meat you can just think about how they were tortured in those sick factory farms.
I completely agree with PETA when they compare KFC chickens to the holocaust. Animals are our equals, 100%. It is naive to think otherwise. I think YOU are being insensitive for thinking there is a difference… there isn’t. It’s innocent slaughter no matter what species.
FYI Micheal Vick did not “just kill 8 dogs” even if he did one is more than enough! what is wrong with you? he taught dogs to rip each other apart! that is ok with you? He removed the females teeth so they cannot fight back as the females are gang raped for innocent puppies to be born into hell,he electrocuted,drowned,shot,and hung the innocent dogs also.He used their pain and suffering as entertainment! How dare you say that is nothing! I’ll have you know I know people personally who adopted some of the survivors they are loving and wonderful no living thing deserves what they went through! The reason they did not attack Micheal and the other humans who FORCED them to do this is because the only reason they were dog fighting is because they had no choice! He was forcing them! I am an animal activist against P.E.T.A because they support BSL You are against all animal activists in general.You obviously do not like dogs very much and support BSL I am surprised you don’t like P.E.T.A! Some of the things they do are wrong that is for sure but there are other animal rights groups you do not need to support them.You need to know how animals are treated the truth I am not going to preach that falls on deaf ears you need to see with your own eyes the way us vegetarians,vegans,and animal rights have seen so you can have a better understanding of why we protest,why we want this to stop.We are not crazy we just want the pain and suffering to stop that is all.Please watch Earthlings please watch it so you can understand. http://veg-tv.info/Earthlings
Right so lets get this straight. Soy sausage is not real sausage its not even close. Fake meat does not come close to the taste of real meat. Period it dosn’t.
Puppymills are getting rarer and rarer everyday soon there will be only shelters or perfisional breeders left to buy from.
How we kill our animals is pretty bad but i’d blame that on fast food “Which is hardly even good in the first place”.
Fur well thats also going down its just so expensive anyways. It also dosn’t even give good warmth compartivly.
Pet stores well How are we gonna get our pets? I love animals and have had several fish.
We can stop fighting and just agree somethings arn’t nesscesary while others are.
First of all, there is a definite line between caring for an animal’s rights, and equaling animals to humans. I wholeheartedly agree that cruelty to animals is wrong and should be banned, but why does anyone have to go to the extreme of “liberating” all animals from meat industries and such. Of course animals feel pain, which is why we should treat them humanely! But as Robert said, the animals in the wild have to eat too. Isn’t it even more cruel in the wild for a lion to gorge, shred, and EAT an animal while it is still alive!? Wouldn’t that inflict even more pain than humans killing chickens to survive? If we are 100% equal to animals as PETA says, then wouldn’t the lion have to be stopped from killing an innocent herbivore in such a gruesome manner? Oh, instincts. What about animals that can reason, like Chimps? They eat meat when they feel like it, even to the point of ripping limbs from each other and eating it.
Also, I am heavily against the horrifying graphic images PETA shows to young elementary school children, a bloody picture of a woman holding a bloody knife and a rabbit by the ears, and another one of a man crudely gutting fish. Both, I believe are way too graphic for a young kid. Couldn’t PETA have the decency to at least show it to an older audience or tone it down a bit?
The nudity. Being a woman I find that disgusting to showcase your nude body to make veggies and being vegan more appealing. Personally, it turns me off more than anything. How gross is it to put lettuce leaves on your body seductively when their appropriate home is on a plate? Bleh, I just don’t get it.
The holocaust comparison just makes me sick. Animals were not hurled into gas chambers and having their bodies massively burned, or having their babies used as shooting targets. What sounds more horrific, chopping a chicken’s head off (which is kinda bad) or getting two young CONFUSED INNOCENT children and sewing their backs together while they’re screaming from pain, and being hurled back into a grotesque environment that only inflames the pain. At least some of the food companies have the decency to kill an animal quickly. The Holocaust, people suffered, intense beating, mothers and wives clinging to their loved ones before they’re to be burned to their death. Living like a pack of sardines nearly sleeping on top of each other with lice and insects crawling over their bodies. I dare say, animals have been treated much better than this in the past.
I noticed, PETA only focuses on the rare places of puppy mills and inhumane fur and meat companies that have no care for animals at all. But PETA never mentions the companies that actually have treated animals humanely and kindly, giving them a good life before they die. In the wild, they would have been constantly alert and ready to flee at any sight of danger to escape being ripped to shreds by predators, at least there they could breed and relax in peace.
I also think PETA’s so called euthanasia for animals that are too feeble and cannot live a normal life is a bunch of baloney. Killing over 2,000 adopted pets per year is hardly “humane” euthanasia or not. Plenty of other adoption agencies have found loving homes for their animals, I dare say, they’ve done a much better job finding a home than PETA has. That blind, grizzled old dog could escape death and enjoy the rest of his days with a loving, caring family who’d pamper him to no end. Many “feeble” animals have found homes and been nursed back to health, so PETA has no excuse for that.
i agree peta should stop the abuse but if people really fur please just stop killing them like a savage. i dont agree that peta says no pets or anything im just with the stop killing them so violently.
There is lots of untrue stuff in this article, to make it sound better. And, one of the biggest points about ‘how bad PETA are’ is how PETA kill animals. It’s not PETA’s fault that they are the ones who have to put the needle in, it is the fault of the people who don’t spay/neuter, backyard breeders etc. There simply are no homes for these animals. Euthanasia is better than them living in cruel, horrible conditions.
I am for animal rights/welfare, but I do not like PETA either. It seems to me they are more concerned with bringing in money/publicity than actually helping animals. How much do they spend having naked or half naked women sitting in cages? I REALLY dont understand the whole euthanizing so many animals over finding them a proper home. I only want to give money to places that are trying to provide the animals a better life circumstance, not put them on the slaughter block. Sometimes I wonder if PETA was bought out by someone to make the animal right movement look hypocritical. The best way to get circumstances better for animals is education. Even most carnivores dont want done to animals what happens in the factory farms. No one wants a chicken patty stuffed with antibiotics and strange additives. And education means listing objective facts, not strange propoganda comics to kids with a mom gutting an animal alive.
peta=manipulating, money grabbing, child abusing, hypocrites, etc.
AMANDA must be from PETA.
I honestly find it horrible that PETA would compare KFC to the Nazis. They have no idea what it must have been like for victims of holocaust and it is in no way like KFC and is rather insulting to compare these peoples hardships to the production of food
Just for the simple fact that humans are superior than animals, should not act like criminals with them, i think the world is so wrong about animal industrialization, we can’t be so selfish to create so much cruelty just for our pleasure.
Just for the simple fact that humans are superior than animals, should not act like criminals with them, i think the world is so wrong about animal industrialization, we can’t be so selfish to create so much cruelty just for our pleasure.
Just for the simple fact that humans are superior than animals, should not act like criminals with them, i think the world is so wrong about animal industrialization, we can\’t be so selfish to create so much cruelty just for our pleasure.
fuck PETA they can all go die
I started reading your article, and by the second paragraph I found MAJOR mistakes you made my friend. 1st of all, animals are not ours AT ALL, to do anything with. They are free, alive, beings. So what if no zoo? no leather? no egg? no meat? I assume you are one of those people who is VERY materialistic. Animals eat other animals because they need to survive. They aren’t intelligent beings like us. We are perfectly capable of providing food for ourselves in ways that doesnt include torturing and killing other alive beings that are capable of feeling pain and misery. What PETA strives for is incredibly honorable and ethical. Perhaps they dont use the most conventional and peaceful way to get their point across, but at least they are trying to make the lives of the animals we humans destroy everyday better. Take a look at yourselves… What we do is disgusting. To make this clear, Im NOT a member of PETA… but I agree 100% with what they do. Your arguments are VERY WEAK, except perhaps the vandalism… Otherwise you need to do more thinking about this subject. And if anyone finds this offensive… then suck it, I’m sorry. This is ‘america” and I have the right to voice my opinion. And my opinion is that this article is based on extremely weak arguments (i.e If animals eat each other, then why can’t we use this “Luxury”?). Jesus people, stop being so materialistic! Have a care for what you do to other animals. They feel pain, happiness, and etc too. How would you like to be hunted and eaten???
“How insensitive does someone have to be to compare an animal whose only purpose for living was to make its way to a KFC box at the second window of the drive-thru, or an animal performing in the circus to the Holocaust where six million innocent people were killed and the millions of minorities that were snatched from their homes and forced to believe that they were inferior just because of their heritage.”
i think you are confused. it is insensitive of peta to compare the exploitation and murder of animals to the holocaust? the very fact that you said that “their only purpose for living was to make its way to a KFC box” shows that you are failing to understand the foundation of animal rights activism.
the VERY PROBLEM with animal industries is that the animals, (which ARE innocent beings, just like the the people who were murdered in the holocaust), live for the sole purpose of dying. they do not have the lives that they are entitled to because they are ENSLAVED by humans.
why is human enslavement any worse than animal enslavement?
i am a vegan, and i do not support peta in many of their campaigns/methods of spreading awareness. but there are many flaws in your argument.
“How insensitive does someone have to be to compare an animal whose only purpose for living was to make its way to a KFC box at the second window of the drive-thru, or an animal performing in the circus to the Holocaust where six million innocent people were killed and the millions of minorities that were snatched from their homes and forced to believe that they were inferior just because of their heritage.”
i think you are confused. it is insensitive of peta to compare the exploitation and murder of animals to the holocaust? the very fact that you said that “their only purpose for living was to make its way to a KFC box” shows that you are failing to understand the foundation of animal rights activism.
the VERY PROBLEM with animal industries is that the animals, (which ARE innocent beings, just like the the people who were murdered in the holocaust), live for the sole purpose of dying. they do not have the lives that they are entitled to because they are ENSLAVED by humans.
why is human enslavement any worse than animal enslavement?
i am a vegan, and i do not support peta in many of their campaigns/methods of spreading awareness. but there are many flaws in your argument.
“How insensitive does someone have to be to compare an animal whose only purpose for living was to make its way to a KFC box at the second window of the drive-thru, or an animal performing in the circus to the Holocaust where six million innocent people were killed and the millions of minorities that were snatched from their homes and forced to believe that they were inferior just because of their heritage.”
i think you are confused. it is insensitive of peta to compare the exploitation and murder of animals to the holocaust? the very fact that you said that “their only purpose for living was to make its way to a KFC box” shows that you are failing to understand the foundation of animal rights activism.
the VERY PROBLEM with animal industries is that the animals, (which ARE innocent beings, just like the the people who were murdered in the holocaust), live for the sole purpose of dying. they do not have the lives that they are entitled to because they are ENSLAVED by humans.
why is human enslavement any worse than animal enslavement?
i am a vegan, and i do not support peta in many of their campaigns/methods of spreading awareness. but there are many flaws in your argument.
“How insensitive does someone have to be to compare an animal whose only purpose for living was to make its way to a KFC box at the second window of the drive-thru, or an animal performing in the circus to the Holocaust where six million innocent people were killed and the millions of minorities that were snatched from their homes and forced to believe that they were inferior just because of their heritage.”
i think you are confused. it is insensitive of peta to compare the exploitation and murder of animals to the holocaust? the very fact that you said that “their only purpose for living was to make its way to a KFC box” shows that you are failing to understand the foundation of animal rights activism.
the VERY PROBLEM with animal industries is that the animals, (which ARE innocent beings, just like the the people who were murdered in the holocaust), live for the sole purpose of dying. they do not have the lives that they are entitled to because they are ENSLAVED by humans.
why is human enslavement any worse than animal enslavement?
i am a vegan, and i do not support peta in many of their campaigns/methods of spreading awareness. but there are many flaws in your argument.
“How insensitive does someone have to be to compare an animal whose only purpose for living was to make its way to a KFC box at the second window of the drive-thru, or an animal performing in the circus to the Holocaust where six million innocent people were killed and the millions of minorities that were snatched from their homes and forced to believe that they were inferior just because of their heritage.”
i think you are confused. it is insensitive of peta to compare the exploitation and murder of animals to the holocaust? the very fact that you said that “their only purpose for living was to make its way to a KFC box” shows that you are failing to understand the foundation of animal rights activism.
the VERY PROBLEM with animal industries is that the animals, (which ARE innocent beings, just like the the people who were murdered in the holocaust), live for the sole purpose of dying. they do not have the lives that they are entitled to because they are ENSLAVED by humans.
why is human enslavement any worse than animal enslavement?
i am a vegan, and i do not support peta in many of their campaigns/methods of spreading awareness. but there are many flaws in your argument.
you made some valid points, PETA do use some strange ways of advertising their ideas, however is this any different to the way pretty much everything else in this world is advertised? if you\’re not going to be shocked when you look at an advert, be it a naked person or a cruel scene, are you going to pay much attention to it?
how is it not justifiable to compare the holocaust to the killing of animals?! just because in your mind you think you are a better \’race\’ or \’species\’ does not mean that it is okay to kill animals purely for the benefit of another race.
you say, and i quote, \’How insensitive does someone have to be to compare an animal whose only purpose for living was to make its way to a KFC box at the second window of the drive-thru, or an animal performing in the circus to the Holocaust where six million innocent people were killed and the millions of minorities that were snatched from their homes and forced to believe that they were inferior just because of their heritage\’
you contradict yourself, your point about inferiority stemming from heritage is so valid to animals killed for meat! animals cannot choose whether they are born as non-human or human, just as you can\’t pick and choose your skin colour or your ethnicity.
killing humans is in no way any worse than killing animals.
how dare you claim their only purpose of living was to be eaten.
i know this may be hard for you, but try imagining what it would be like to be one of these animals. in your lifetime, you have provided an income for some and a source of food for others, yet what have you been given in return? injections of growth hormones, unnatural food in unnatural quantities, no space to move around, a slaughtering, a cellophane wrap, a fat narcissistic guy to eat you at a drive-thru. do they ever retaliate? even if they could, they wouldn\’t.
what makes you so much better than animals?
i don\’t know much about PETA, but i can tell arguing with you won\’t make difference. you see, i along with a lot of other people have a conscience.
you, on the other hand, don\’t.
I’m yet another person who recognizes everything you’ve done and said wrong in this big crap post. Amanda was awesome
Peta is full of idiots and so are all those who support these annoying hippy freakos
I am Jewish (have also had grand parents who were sent to Auschwitz), and I have heard other people refer to Animal farms as Death camps and other things relating to the Holocaust. It really isn’t offensive, but it is true. We breed and raise animals in appalling conditions, then murder them.
I agree that some of their methods are excessive and wrong, but they are doing it for a noble cause. Animals should be liberated, there are alternatives to meat.
I just love reading these comments. It’s [well written, educated comment with valid points] vs “peta sucks big cock and they all must die” over and over again. The writers of comments along the lines of the second one I just mentioned didn’t even make the effort to read the comments they’re opposing to. It immediately takes away their credibility and the added value of anything they say. I find that hilarious.
I don’t know much (of which I know whether it’s true or not) about PETA but I do know what I believe. I think people should stop being hypocrites and say that they’re against something when it’s convenient or cool.
What I do think PETA could have done differently are the Mommy and Daddy kill animals posters. You could also promote how great animals are so that kids can develop a sense of love and respect for animals themselves. On the other hand: when you buy a horse toy, the rider puppet probably has a whip and maybe even spurs. That sends a wrong message to young kids to. Not that I think spurs and whips are wrong, but the ways and reasons most people use them are. But that’s a discussion for a different time.
On the meat-eating issue I completely agree with Feral. I am a vegetarian though, since I lack the skills, tools, and guts to go and fetch my own dinner. I don’t know how to think about testing on animals.. On the one hand I think that it’s completely wrong and horrifying of course. On the other hand I take my ritalin every morning so I can function properly. I guess that makes me a hypocrite as well.
I am not a native speaker so please don’t go hating all over my comment because of grammar mistakes and such..