For or against PETA?

I'm all about animal rights, I pretty much see red when an animal is beaten or neglected, and recently i saw that PETA isn't actually as for animals as I thought.... I found this article.. I'm sure you've probably seen it, but to those who haven't..
http://www.petakillsanimals.com/

 

Wait what .. this is true? I mean I was for almost everything the PETA did.

But I did wonder about this one thing I saw that they sent me. The where doing a photo shot with simple plan, and the guy brought in this animal and said he had to skin it in a parking lot. i was confused I mean why the hell did he skin the animal if he was part of the PETA? I know he was trying to make a statement but, I didn't quit get that. I never asked anyone.

 

I was all for PETA too, until I read these articles.
Skinning an animal? jesus christ.

 

I wouldn't take it all on face value. PETA is a very strong public group so it's bound to generate enemies and controversy. As for 'killing animals' - you bet they do. PETA is one of the largest (if not the largest) animal associations in the world. Imagine how many animals and pets they encounter on a day-to-day basis. And imagine how many of them have been severely abused or neglected... and that is usually grounds for humane euthanasia.


I don't profess to know anything for sure but I'd give them the benefit of the doubt. Just because some 'members' of PETA do crazy things does not mean the whole organization is nuts. They have made some serious progress with factory farms and stores that 'carry cruelty' so to speak. Why would a charity devoted 100% to the welfare of animals for years be 'secretly disposing' of as many as possible? I certainly can't think of anything...

 

I will not be for the peta anymore until they prove other wise. IF whats said is true, there a fuckin contradiction.

 

Im kinda just laying neutral right now, don't really know what to believe. I'm hoping that whole site against PETA is just one big propaganda scheme to get more attention, thats what people seem to do, take something thats good, and shit all over it, not worrying about the problems its causing other people and or animals. It's kind of like the whole lockheed martin scam.. meh, i'm not really sure about anything anymore.

 

But what exactly makes someone a PETA employee? Giving them money? Painting their logo on your truck? Just saying it? I'm sure there is a formal denial somewhere. I don't know where to look but even if they were rooting for these lunatics, you think they'd want the public to know about it? I understand your concern, definitely. It seems almost like a danger to support any group these days. If you want to change something you have to do it yourself.

 

I am totally opposed to PETA as well as the Animal Rights movement. Peta and other AR groups have clever marketing and enough "causes" that just about anyone could at least some what agree with them, on the surface about something. They have celebrities to support them (although I doubt the celebs have any clue what they are really supporting). IMO it is important when supporting such organizations to look at the whole picture - not just pick parts that you agree with and ignore the rest. So many times people tell me they support Peta/AR because they hate to see animals suffer abuse or because they "agree on some of the causes".

What I find is most people who feel they support animal rights actually support animal welfare - two fairly different viewpoints. Animal rights groups wish to in time take away people's rights to own animals in any form - they are totally opposed to the idea of having "pets". Animal welfare groups are supportive of pet ownership but promote proper care of animals - such as not beating your dogs, providing proper care and the such.

Since I breed and show dogs as well as just plain like having pets there is no way I could be supportive of a group which would like to take those things away from me. Animal Rights groups are not supportive of service animals or working animals either including search and rescue dogs and seeing eye dogs. They support keeping ferrets illegal in CA and breed banning. Peta aims campaigns at children in hope I suppose to shock them into thinking the AR way. They also advocate violence in the name of the AR movement.

At the very least I would urge anyone who *thinks* they support Peta or Animal Rights to look further into it before promoting them or worse sending them donations or "joining".

Here are a few links which show the truth behind Peta and/or the AR movement:

http://www.workingpitbull.com/truthaboutpeta.htm (one of my personal favorite truth about Peta sites)

http://www.activistcash.com/organization_overview.cfm/oid/21

http://www.nokillnow.com/PETAIngridNewkirkResign.htm

http://www.doggiedefenders.com/27.html

http://www.animalrights.net/quotes.html

And some quotes to make you think:

“There is no hidden agenda. If anybody wonders about -- what’s this with all these reforms -- you can hear us clearly. Our goal is total animal liberation. [emphasis added]”
— “Animal Rights 2002” convention http://www.activistcash.com/organization_quotes.cfm/oid/21


“Crimes of compassion that every animal advocate should support.”
— Coronado’s description of two 1991 arsons at Oregon State University and the Northwest Farm Food Cooperative in Edmonds, Washington, as described in his 1995 Federal Sentencing Memorandum http://www.activistcash.com/organization_quotes.cfm/oid/21

“Did we euthanize some animals who could have been adopted? Maybe.”
— PETA's Domestic Animal Issues & Abuse Department director Daphna Nachminovitch, in The Virginian-Pilot http://www.activistcash.com/organization_quotes.cfm/oid/21

"BREED SPECIFIC LEGISLATION (WITH A GRANDFATHER CLAUSE FOR THOSE
DOGS ALREADY IN EXISTENCE) CAN BE AN IMPORTANT TOOL IN ENDING
THE TRAGIC EXPLOITATION OF THESE BREEDS" Ingrid Newkirk http://www.workingpitbull.com/truthaboutpeta.htm

"People have no idea that at many animal shelters across the country, any "pit bull" who comes through the front door goes out the back door -- in a body bag...This news shocks and outrages the compassionate dog-lover. ..Here's another shocker: People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals, the very people who are trying to get you to denounce the killing of chickens for the table, foxes for fur, or frogs for dissection, supports the pit bull policy. Those who argue against the euthanasia policy for pit bull dogs are naive. I have scars on my leg and arm from my own encounter with a pit. Many are loving and will kiss on sight, but many are unpredictable.
People who genuinely care about dogs won't be affected by a ban on pits. They can go to the shelter and save one of the countless other breeds and lovable mutts sitting on death row through no fault of their own.
We can only stop killing pits if we stop creating new ones. Legislators, please take note." Ingrid Newkirk (same site as above)


"I don’t use the word "pet." I think it’s speciesist language. I prefer "companion animal." For one thing, we would no longer allow breeding. People could not create different breeds. There would be no pet shops. If people had companion animals in their homes, those animals would have to be refugees from the animal shelters and the streets. You would have a protective relationship with them just as you would with an orphaned child. But as the surplus of cats and dogs (artificially engineered by centuries of forced breeding) declined, eventually companion animals would be phased out, and we would return to a more symbiotic relationship – enjoyment at a distance."
-Ingrid Newkirk, PETA vice-president, quoted in The Harper's Forum Book, Jack Hitt, ed., 1989, p.223 http://www.animalrights.net/quotes.html

"Let us allow the dog to disappear from our brick and concrete jungles -- from our firesides, from the leather nooses and chains by which we enslave it."
-John Bryant, Fettered Kingdoms: An Examination of A Changing Ethic, PETA, 1982, p.15.

"The cat, like the dog, must disappear..... We should cut the domestic cat free from our dominance by neutering, neutering, and more neutering, until our pathetic version of the cat ceases to exist."
-John Bryant, Fettered Kingdoms: An Examination of a Changing Ethic, PETA 1982, p.15.
(same site as above)

 

Actually in the dead animal case the animals were surrendered to PETA. They were charged with disposing of the bodies of the animals in dumpsters. Peta paid all their legal fees. There is really no way to defend them here - they were in the wrong. Here are articles about it:

PETA Kills Animals -- And It's A Felony Consumerfreedom.com

Lincoln Tribune - PETA Employees Face 31 Felony Animal-Cruelty Charges for Killing, Dumping Dogs - State News - News

ARTICLE: PETA workers face 25 felony counts in North Carolina (The Virginian-Pilot - HamptonRoads.com/PilotOnline.com)

The Center for Consumer Freedom, which represents the food industry, a frequent target of PETA campaigns, released data filed by PETA with the state of Virginia that shows PETA has killed more than 10,000 animals from 1998 to 2003. "In 2003, PETA euthanized over 85 percent of the animals it took in," said a press release from the lobby, "finding adoptive homes for just 14 percent. By comparison, the Norfolk (Va.) SPCA found adoptive homes for 73 percent of its animals and Virginia Beach SPCA adopted out 66 percent." Better dead than fed, PETA says

Judge refuses to toss felony animal cruelty charges against PETA employees

 

There are a few points you made which I would like to address. First of all, it is not fair to lump all animal rights groups into one category or assumption. Animal rights differ from person to person. I believe animals have the right to be treated as the creatures they are and receive love and respect from us as intelligent life forms. That doesn't mean I think animals should have the right to vote or the right to a fair trial... to animals, the most important thing is living in their natural habitat with their companions and eating what they were meant to eat.


Also, if PETA is so opposed to keeping animals as pets, why does their official magazine have a columnist for pet advice? Dogs, cats... these are domestic animals. If PETA really believed all these things you say it does, why should it take another (anti-PETA) site to explain that to us? I don't personally agree with breeding animals. I think it's selfish and done for show and there are already plenty of animals out there who need a home, but I don't doubt that you love your pets and that animals rights activists would appreciate that. Just because an animals is not beaten or starved does not mean it is happy.

Show me hard evidence that PETA advocates violence. Like I said, just because some 'members' of PETA (those who send money) make bad decisions does not mean they represent the organization. I also don't think they use shock value in appealing to kids. I believe their tactics are very appropriate for children and I don't see anything wrong with reaching out to all ages, especially as they have a whole site for teens - PETA2.

This is taken directly from peta.org's faq's:


“Don’t animal rights activists commit ‘terrorist’ acts?”

The animal rights movement is nonviolent. One of the central beliefs shared by most animal rights activists is the belief that we should not harm any animal—human or otherwise. However, all large movements have factions that believe in the use of force.

“How can you justify the millions of dollars of property damage caused by the Animal Liberation Front (ALF)?”

Throughout history, some people have felt the need to break the law to fight injustice. The Underground Railroad and the French Resistance are examples of movements in which people broke the law in order to answer to a higher morality. The ALF, which is simply the name adopted by people who act illegally in behalf of animal rights, breaks inanimate objects such as stereotaxic devices and decapitators in order to save lives. ALF members burn empty buildings in which animals are tortured and killed. ALF “raids” have given us proof of horrific cruelty that would not have otherwise been discovered or believed and have resulted in criminal charges’ being filed against laboratories for violations of the Animal Welfare Act. Often, ALF raids have been followed by widespread scientific condemnation of the practices occurring in the targeted labs, and some abusive laboratories have been permanently shut down as a result.

Pit bulls? Well, I see this on Animal Planet's 'Animal Cops' all the time. People breed them to be fighters and more often than not, they will never be suitable for adoption. Some places have made it illegal to own pit bulls and believe me, that can't all be PETA's doing. Again, I am just seeing these sites talk about employees killing animals, I won't address that point again.

I do not send PETA money and I do not think Ingrid Newkirk seems like the nicest of people (just her face says a lot to me) but I am playing Devil's advocate here. Why do some select few (many probably taken out of context, nonetheless) get to represent the whole pie?

 

i'm still with the peta. i think they must've saved more animal's lives than lost or have taken away.

 

I was for PETA, but then I read their materials and saw a different reality than what they were printing. Sure, mistreatment to animals is bad, but the entire beef industry isn't what they make it out to be, there are many places ideal to support large livestock, buffalo or cattle, that can't grow other foods. All of this "bullshit" about being able to grow things that would feed more people on the land being used to grow cattle for beef, that's a bunch of bullshit, seriously. I would like to see any of those people who prech that to attempt growing a crop of potatoes in eastern Montana or Wyoming, it aint happening.

PETA is too extreme for me. I protested the circus while I was in college, but I don't think it's wrong to eat meat, and I am very supportive of the local agriculture, a lot of which is organic and I love my animals, I'm a conservationist and I am a good steward of the land of which i live on. The wildlife here is plentiful, and I host a 40 acre refuge filled with mule deer, foxes, Western Meadow Larks, prairie chickens, hawks, pheasents and a variety of other various sage brush ecoystem varmits. I work to create habitats for the red ring neck pheasent in my big backyard, I make sure the deer have a refuge and when the witners are long and hard we leave them out some hay and grain and I got no problem with enjoying a cheese burger from the local organic beef producers.

People that are really concerned with the food related issues should get into supporting American small agriculture, work towards a solution instead of just complaining about the problems. Who knows about the 2006 Farm Bill here? Does anyone here have any idea what they're doing to the local agriculture? Maybe we should examine the source of the issue instead of the symptoms of the disease.

 

Since you believe animals have a right to live in their natural habitat does that mean that you also would support the end of people keeping pets? If so than I'd say Peta is for you. The majority of people though I don't think want to see that.

I always hear the arguement "AR means different things to different people" but the truth is it is a movement like Pro Life is a movement. As a movement there are certain things which can be said about the direction they are hgeading and their goals. That is not open to your own feelings no matter how much you want to believe Peta is good.

My guess is they have a column on pet advice because most members own pets (and most have no clue what the AR movement really is). Not hard to find it on their own website either:
"In a perfect world, animals would be free to live their lives to the fullest, raising their young and following their natural instincts in their native environments. Domesticated dogs and cats, however, cannot live “free” in our concrete jungles, so we are responsible for their care. People with the time, money, love, and patience to make a lifetime commitment to an animal can make an enormous difference by adopting an animal from a shelter or rescuing an animal from a perilous life on the streets. It is important, also, to keep our companion animals from reproducing, which perpetuates a class of animals who are forced to rely on humans to survive."
PETA Media Center > Factsheets > Doing What's Best for Our Companion Animals

There you have it - right off Peta's website. Pets don't belong in our home and we should be doing everything we need to to stop future generations of pets from being born.

I see something wrong with trying to brainwash children with propaganda but that is just me. You can't really believe they'd just come out and say it on their site can you?

Breed banning laws are wrong and unconstitutional. I can't see supporting an organization which promotes pushing unconstitutional laws.
.

Ingrid Newkirk is the president of Peta - it is her job to represent them. Why ignore the fact about the dumping of dead animals? Because you want to keep your positive opinion of them?

 

This is an good video from Penn & Teller about the AR movement - worth taking 15 minutes or so to watch. http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-1913999390200944075

 

i've always hated peta's use of celebrities to voice their cause. i support my family on a small scale farm and i absolutely resent millionaire pamela anderson telling me that i'm evil. my husband and i work very hard to provide a very small income for our 3 kids.

most celebrities are too far removed from the work and money = food. they are no longer part of the struggle just to feed their children. hmmph let then eat cake, i suppose!

kathy

 

back in the 80's i went to a festival and the ALF guys took my hubby to Macdonald's for lunch, i laughed my ass off about that. hypocrites!

kathy

 

I don't know if I believe that. REAL ALF people will not tell you that they are members of ALF...because if they did...they'd let the cat out of the bag...and have a hot trail on them.

That site that the OP posted is not 100% the truth. Of course PETA euthenizes (kills) animals...like another poster already stated, the ones that are beyond help, they have to do something with them, besides letting them suffer. If you all believe what you read on the internet, I feel sorry for you.

I support PETA because they get people's attention...and that's what we need to do in order to protect animals or make a difference in any social injustice. I believe animals have the right to live and be well. Peter Singer states that animals should have all freedoms that are available to them...and I agree...they have the right to live and free from abuse and neglect. Therefore, I support PETA.

 

I believe I know which video this is and I am not going to open it because I have seen it and found it very offensive. It was an attack and a very nasty one at that. Footage of skinning animals is simply documentation of what really happens out there. The only bad part of that is that it happens in the first place.

How can I take that video seriously and with an open mind? They repeatedly called animal rights activists 'bullshitters', with no exceptions, and used words like 'fucking' and 'slut'... How can I be OK with that attitude?


One of the last comments they made was, 'We're all for ethical treatment of animals, but...' and what were they wearing from head to toe? Leather! You can talk to me about medical research and what it might require and we can discuss alternatives and whether or not there are any, but how is there an argument for leather and fur? These guys don't care. They don't sound like sensitive people in the least!


Again, with this 'total animal liberation' thing which keeps coming up. I don't see anything wrong with PETA's stance on pets. They are not built for living in the wild! And calling for the spaying and neutering of pets so that no more have to roam the streets than already do - I think that's pretty obvious. And yes, most zoos are pretty bad, a lot of people's pets are unhappy, and all circuses are deplorable. That may be why so many animal rights activists call for animal liberation.


And of course, Penn & Teller went for the argument against humanely euthenized animals. We've beat that one to death. All in all, I don't think it matters what your stance is on the matter, that video was vindictive and makes them no better than the people they claim to be battling.

 

"don't know if I believe that. REAL ALF people will not tell you that they are members of ALF...because if they did...they'd let the cat out of the bag...and have a hot trail on them."

well it's your choice to believe it or not. i was there i can't prove that to you.
but how would people get involved with the ALF if everyone was sworn to secrecy? only members committing incidents of direct action would need to be secretive. any ways their website is loaded with names. obviousily they aren't all worried about legalities.

this was in 1986 or 87 and they were doing a workshop for the event i was at.

of course ALF has no central orginization so anyone could claim to be a member really. what qualifications would they need to have to be a real member?

 

ive always been against PETA. they suck. and they target children. and they are crazy radicals. if they were crazy radicals theat targeted adults, then fine. but they target children, who dont have the tools to do thier own research.