It's not their intentions, it's that they act utterly retarded pretty much constantly. They rely on scare/gross-out tactics, make annoying protests that involve throwing fake blood on people, and they criticized Obama for swatting a fly.
So, how about that PETA, huh?
- Thread starter PurpleRain
- Start date
Recommended Videos
Vets and Pounds don't firebomb people now do they?PurpleRain said:
Here's an option: Cut the massive smear campaigns and use those resources to help the animals they claim to protect. I'm not going to give them credit as a legitimate organization if they can't get their priorities straight. Animals first, "awareness" (propaganda) second.
http://www.consumerfreedom.com/downloads/reference/audio/010501_bruce_friedrich.wav
"Official ?Animal Rights 2003? National Conference program, describing Dr. Jerry Vlasak as a representative of the Physicians Committee for Responsible Medicine. Speaking at this event, Vlasak endorsed the "political assassination" of doctors whose medical research requires the use of lab animals. "I don't think you'd have to kill -- assassinate -- too many vivisectors," Vlasak said, "before you would see a marked decrease in the amount of vivisection going on. And I think for 5 lives, 10 lives, 15 human lives, we could save a million, 2 million, 10 million non-human lives."
http://www.animalscam.com/references/peta_alf1.cfm
"Official ?Animal Rights 2003? National Conference program, describing Dr. Jerry Vlasak as a representative of the Physicians Committee for Responsible Medicine. Speaking at this event, Vlasak endorsed the "political assassination" of doctors whose medical research requires the use of lab animals. "I don't think you'd have to kill -- assassinate -- too many vivisectors," Vlasak said, "before you would see a marked decrease in the amount of vivisection going on. And I think for 5 lives, 10 lives, 15 human lives, we could save a million, 2 million, 10 million non-human lives."
http://www.animalscam.com/references/peta_alf1.cfm
I disagree with you on this.A homeless shelter seems MUCH more helpful than a lobster shrine.PurpleRain said:
I wrote a nice big fat college paper on this not so long ago and i know more about PETA than i'd like to ever admit to. They were founded upon a good cause, used a situation to break through into the world with enough shock to make the world realize their cause was a real problem and people are fighting for it. They wanted to see that animals where treated fairly but over the years their good intentions have gone astray, as it always seems to do. Alex Pacheco, co founder, has left PETA for this EXACT reason. What does it tell you when the co founder himself leaves because he can no longer stand behind his own companies actions? sad sad things.
^_^
^_^
This might be that I count hunters in they want to get the best out the animals they are hunting so make sure not to wipe out the animal so they can still hunt them. Indians are these. Now for the point of hurting animals, I am not going from facts and figures. I am not looking to defend myself these are my opinions based on what I have seen.
When I lived in New York such thing happen. Focusing such regulation to save unendangered animals, take with some dears awhile back. Hunters were killing these deers, making a nice living on it so kept to what they wanted. A PETA member got upset and got them to shorten the hunting season and the allowed number. It lead to too many deer with not enough resorces, so the deer were dieing like crazy. This lead to wolves(I think wolves, they looked like coyotes so couldn't say for certain) getting more meet so there were more wolves, which lead to more attacks on people that were living in the nearby area. So hunters were allowed to hunt the wolves. Now they didn't know how many more there was at the time. They simply put the number real high, and hunters ended up killing them. The next season couple of seasons there was more deer, but this lead to them just dieing off. The area ended up with no wolves and no deer for the area. Now this is in one area so the figures can be denied as only a rare occurence. Now this is the PETA idea to save all the animals, don't care if they are good as they are keeping a good balence, no they want to f**k it up.
That is just one story I know of, now that could be a bit to far back in my memory for someone to count as that. I live in a new area so that could just be an isolated area of crazies. How about at the nearby animal shelter who try to turn away animals so they can be allowed to live, this may be more up you alley. Now various PETA members come by there dropping off cats. Now the guys at the animal shelter have more then the city allows normally because these PETA member turn them there because they want to help the animals. The animal shelter keeps telling them no they have too many, that the PETA members weave there card around saying they will bring down all short of hell with regulators if they don't. Now the kind people there can't deal with that, because that means they have to kill more animals since they have more then the regulators allow to be alive. So they have to find more room for these animals, which means they have to kill more animals because they were brought there instead of being brought home. These PETA members force more animals to die because they like having a nice mind set.This mind set keeps them outside or reality to see in the end game they are hurting and killing more in the end then in the short they are saving. No I won't name where this is because that will mean they have to kill more on a daily amount then they do right now if they were found out then they do now. Sure they can't end the fact they have to kill animals to make room for new animals to take care of. SO they make sure the number is as little as possible, something PETA members don't care about.
This is the mentality of PETA, now if they were less on making themselves feel like good people and more on the actual animals I might give a flying s**t about PETA. They don't truly care about animals. Sure it isn't any facts or figure, but this has been what I seen. So you can deny that it is true if you for the defending of PETA, cause what I am talking is personal experience. These can be said to be isolated incidents, even though it keeps happening daily by card caring, bummer sticker dumb asses that make the KKK look good. The difference between the two is PETA gets hail for its actions.
When I lived in New York such thing happen. Focusing such regulation to save unendangered animals, take with some dears awhile back. Hunters were killing these deers, making a nice living on it so kept to what they wanted. A PETA member got upset and got them to shorten the hunting season and the allowed number. It lead to too many deer with not enough resorces, so the deer were dieing like crazy. This lead to wolves(I think wolves, they looked like coyotes so couldn't say for certain) getting more meet so there were more wolves, which lead to more attacks on people that were living in the nearby area. So hunters were allowed to hunt the wolves. Now they didn't know how many more there was at the time. They simply put the number real high, and hunters ended up killing them. The next season couple of seasons there was more deer, but this lead to them just dieing off. The area ended up with no wolves and no deer for the area. Now this is in one area so the figures can be denied as only a rare occurence. Now this is the PETA idea to save all the animals, don't care if they are good as they are keeping a good balence, no they want to f**k it up.
That is just one story I know of, now that could be a bit to far back in my memory for someone to count as that. I live in a new area so that could just be an isolated area of crazies. How about at the nearby animal shelter who try to turn away animals so they can be allowed to live, this may be more up you alley. Now various PETA members come by there dropping off cats. Now the guys at the animal shelter have more then the city allows normally because these PETA member turn them there because they want to help the animals. The animal shelter keeps telling them no they have too many, that the PETA members weave there card around saying they will bring down all short of hell with regulators if they don't. Now the kind people there can't deal with that, because that means they have to kill more animals since they have more then the regulators allow to be alive. So they have to find more room for these animals, which means they have to kill more animals because they were brought there instead of being brought home. These PETA members force more animals to die because they like having a nice mind set.This mind set keeps them outside or reality to see in the end game they are hurting and killing more in the end then in the short they are saving. No I won't name where this is because that will mean they have to kill more on a daily amount then they do right now if they were found out then they do now. Sure they can't end the fact they have to kill animals to make room for new animals to take care of. SO they make sure the number is as little as possible, something PETA members don't care about.
This is the mentality of PETA, now if they were less on making themselves feel like good people and more on the actual animals I might give a flying s**t about PETA. They don't truly care about animals. Sure it isn't any facts or figure, but this has been what I seen. So you can deny that it is true if you for the defending of PETA, cause what I am talking is personal experience. These can be said to be isolated incidents, even though it keeps happening daily by card caring, bummer sticker dumb asses that make the KKK look good. The difference between the two is PETA gets hail for its actions.
mostly i think peta is a pretentious, self-righteous, and in general they believe that the end justifies the means and anyone on a ''crusade'' is automatically exempt from basic moral logic. for example PETA supports firebombings and gang beating anyone who works in the dairy industry, meat processing industry, or animal shelters that euthanize pets that cant find homes.
http://www.activistcash.com/organization_overview.cfm/oid/21
oh and of course peta is banning the use of animals in medical research to find cures for diseases and disorders in humans. including research that might help the aids epidemic.
anyone stupid enough to support and fund someone who firebombs a medical research lab thats trying to cure aids is a complete and utter waste of human space. and anyone who wants to abolish the use of seeing eye dogs... i cant... i just... pretentious pricks.
http://www.activistcash.com/organization_overview.cfm/oid/21
oh and of course peta is banning the use of animals in medical research to find cures for diseases and disorders in humans. including research that might help the aids epidemic.
anyone stupid enough to support and fund someone who firebombs a medical research lab thats trying to cure aids is a complete and utter waste of human space. and anyone who wants to abolish the use of seeing eye dogs... i cant... i just... pretentious pricks.
Well considering PETA fights for an end to all animal tested medicines, and insulin used in treatment of diabetes was originally tested on dogs and pigs, yeah, it's really hypocritical of her.PurpleRain said:
If you're going to sit there and tell everyone that it's really sad that they won't listen or learn, maybe you should take a listen, dear. Many of the people here have made valid points. However if you are going to be blinded by the "nice face" that PETA puts on, so be it. Just don't tell people that we aren't the ones trying to learn and change.
I used to be a PETA supporter. I have learned and changed. So please stop trying to make everyone else look like idiots. It's making you look worse.
No, it is no longer tested on animals. The fact remains, however, that she owes her life to a product that was once tested on animals. PETA wants to stop all animal testing. It is hypocritical for them to demand this yet enjoy the benefits of animal testing. How dare they deny future generations from enjoying the same benefits. If a cure to AIDS could found but only due to animal testing, what right have they to say no.PurpleRain said:
People don't expect her to stop taking her medication. People expect her to stop being a hypocrite. Obviously animal testing has some benefits. Her own life is an example of this. Instead of being against animal testing, perhaps they should concentrate of things that don't save lives.
Generally, people don't like hypocrites or extremists. As soon as PETA stop being both then they will receive less hate from people.
Cooking a lobster hurts as much as shooting it with an EMP wave. Anthropoids do not have an advanced enough nervous system to feel pain.
And when you send a letter to the president telling him "that is no way to treat an animal" when he swats a fly on his hand, you lose your credibility.
Lastly, don't tell me that meat causes cancer, because some of the amino acids are "one molecule away from being cancer (sic)". Really. Some PETA shouter in Chicago told me that as I was heading back to my hotel.
And when you send a letter to the president telling him "that is no way to treat an animal" when he swats a fly on his hand, you lose your credibility.
Lastly, don't tell me that meat causes cancer, because some of the amino acids are "one molecule away from being cancer (sic)". Really. Some PETA shouter in Chicago told me that as I was heading back to my hotel.
The reason PETA is detested is, they shove their beliefs down everybody's throats, well that's my reason anyways
WOAH! That's fucking funny! And original! I have never heard that- *punches self for being a sarcastic asshole*JoeKickAzz said:
That is a god awful rebuttal. You'd rather see people have no where to sleep at night than have people know how lobsters are cooked. They basically say the needs of other animals are above, or at least equal to that of humans, which very few people agree with.PurpleRain said:
A note I just thought of. we are Animals. Ethical treatment of ANIMALS. That includes humans. So attacks against animals testing that prevents medicine from being developed? Against animals. They're not only insane, they're also counter productive. yaaayy.
I don't like them. Infact, I find them childish. Survival of the Fittest takes their arguement and *poof* its gone.
We are the fittest. We will survive(Longer then them really) and the others will die. That is the way of life.
We are the fittest. We will survive(Longer then them really) and the others will die. That is the way of life.
Ok, I agree with the majority in that animal rights are great, but PETA can sometimes be to extreme and/or annoying, etc etc. However, one thing that really bugs me is the Canadian seal hunt is mostly portrayed. To start off with, about 98% are killed humanely, not put through horrible pain and skinned alive or whatever. Also, there are somewhere around 5 and a half million seals off of Atlantic Canada, so it's not like its making a huge dent in the population. One thing that really gets me is that they PETA pushes the images of them hugging the cute little baby seals or whatever. The little white-coated baby harp seals have been illegal to hunt since 1987.
That wasn't the topic we were talking about. It was about putting down the dogs and cats in its care. Now please, would you like to begin again?Delicious said:
Please don't.JoeKickAzz said:
Don't think I'm not learning here. I just want to counter all these lowly points that are so blantly obvious so people don't act like jerks about it in the future. I don't agree to everything PETA does and I never said I did. I'm not promoting them, I'm just trying to give people a different view point for later.timeladyinsane said:
As for the hypocritic part at the top, I've already discussed it. No one has made a come back for it yet sadly.
EDIT
Just was. Yay!
Ok, this is getting kind of stupid. You have to admit, that PETA does put out a TON of propaganda for their cause, and end up looking like preachy hippies trying to make the world "a better place."PurpleRain said:
Yes, I'm sure their intentions are good, but the fact of the matter is, most of the PETA members anyone ever hears about are the crazy ones who do idiotic, hypocritical things. They are the people that are are seen and talked about, thus PETA has the reputation it does. Because nobody cares about the nice nature loving chap who goes around doing good things. No, people care about the crazy ultra vegan who want on a rampage in a butcher shop trying ot scare all the customers away. Thats good news and that's what people see.
Screw PETA.
They're a bunch of offensive eco-terrorist-supporting self-righteous idiotic hypocrites.
I am pro the ethical treatment of animals just like anyone else, but I am not pro PETA. The only thing I feel I need to post is this:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=l9ijLulwUTY
It's an episode of Penn & Teller: Bullshit where they examine PETA. If you can spare fifteen minutes, watch it. I present this and rest my case.
They're a bunch of offensive eco-terrorist-supporting self-righteous idiotic hypocrites.
I am pro the ethical treatment of animals just like anyone else, but I am not pro PETA. The only thing I feel I need to post is this:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=l9ijLulwUTY
It's an episode of Penn & Teller: Bullshit where they examine PETA. If you can spare fifteen minutes, watch it. I present this and rest my case.