So, how about that PETA, huh?

[Pendragon9]

You know how they say the meat companies are evil for using propaganda and sex ads to sell products?

And you know how Peta uses propaganda and sex ads TO DO THE SAME THING?!

Yeah, that's the "beef" I have with them.

And don't even try and tell me I'm off subject. Peta admits and even loves to use sex ads to promote veganism, then condemning everyone else that uses such ads. And of course they spit in the face of proven scientific studies and try and claim that Jesus, early cavemen, and even the dinosaurs were all vegans.

Tell you what, Peta. I'll lay off the meat when you stop spoonfeeding me horse crap.

Oh, and I've been to their website. After telling my opinions, hmm... what did they say? Something along the lines of "personally wishing to murder my whole family and feed it to some starving lions in Afrika, simply because we ate meat." Not too friendly.

 

[PurpleRain]

I'm just wondering what you're saying? I understand all that. But did someone in PETA say that? Was it in their mission statement to claim meat will give you cancer?


I'm saying that some guy in Chicago, wearing a PETA t-shirt, gave me a huge pamphlet with all kinds of bs fact, one of them being the aforementioned meat=cancer fact.

Ah, okay. That's strange. Hmm, I hope people don't believe it. I don't know what other facts he was giving.

They bought an abandoned prison building (which was trying to be purchased by a group who would use it for a homeless shelter) and turned it into a Lobster Sanctuary, a museum all about how we torture lobsters. Fuck those guys.

Why? A lot of people still don't know how lobsters are cooked. It is horrible.

No its not. They don't feel pain. Also, they are FUCKING SEA BUGS, A BILLION TIMES LESS IMPORTANT THAN HUMAN BEINGS.

I didn't know they didn't have nerves. I should check it out on the interwebs.

EDIT.

Ugh, claw binding causes atrophy; secondly:

Due to the ambiguous nature of suffering, the issue of lobster pain may be approached using an argument by analogy ? that lobsters are similar to human biology or that behavior warrants assumptions that lobsters can feel pain.[15]

The Norwegian Scientific Committee for Food Safety tentatively concluded that "it is unlikely that [lobsters] can feel pain," though they note that "there is apparently a paucity of exact knowledge on sentience in crustaceans, and more research is needed." This conclusion is based on the lobster's simple nervous system. The report assumes that the violent reaction of lobsters to boiling water is a reflex to noxious stimuli.[16]

However, review by the Scottish animal rights group Advocate for Animals released in the same year reported that "scientific evidence ... strongly suggests that there is a potential for [lobsters] to experience pain and suffering," primarily because lobsters (and other decapod crustaceans) "have opioid receptors and respond to opioids (analgesics such as morphine) in a similar way to vertebrates," indicating that lobsters' reaction to injury changes when painkillers are applied. The similarities in lobsters' and vertebrates' stress systems and behavioral responses to noxious stimuli were given as additional evidence for their capacity for pain.[15]

A 2007 study at Queen's University, Belfast, suggested that crustaceans do feel pain.[17] In the experiment, when the antennae of prawns were rubbed with sodium hydroxide or acetic acid, the animals showed increased grooming of the afflicted area and rubbed it more against the side of the tank. Moreover, this reaction was inhibited by a local anesthetic, even though control prawns treated with only anesthetic did not show reduced activity. Professor Robert Elwood, who headed the study, argues that sensing pain is crucial to prawn survival, because it encourages them to avoid damaging behaviors. Some scientists responded, saying the rubbing may reflect an attempt to clean the affected area.[18]

In a subsequent 2009 study, Prof. Elwood and Mirjam Appel showed that hermit crabs make motivational tradeoffs between shocks and the quality of the shells they inhabit.[19] In particular, as crabs are shocked more intensely, they become increasingly willing to leave their current shells for new shells, and they spend less time deciding whether to enter those new shells. Moreover, because the researchers did not offer the new shells until after the electrical stimulation had ended, the change in motivational behavior was the result of memory of the noxious event, not an immediate reflex.

 

[CoziestPigeon]

They bought an abandoned prison building (which was trying to be purchased by a group who would use it for a homeless shelter) and turned it into a Lobster Sanctuary, a museum all about how we torture lobsters. Fuck those guys.

Why? A lot of people still don't know how lobsters are cooked. It is horrible.

No its not. They don't feel pain. Also, they are FUCKING SEA BUGS, A BILLION TIMES LESS IMPORTANT THAN HUMAN BEINGS.

I didn't know they didn't have nerves. I should check it out on the interwebs.[/quote]

True fact, I spent some time growing up in the Maritimes, those things don't feel pain.

 

[slarrs]

I'm beginning to wonder the purpose of this thread.

OP seems to be quite adept at ignoring the more valid arguments all together, commending and all supporting posts, pointing out all the stupid posts are stupid, and, when unable to rebuke a valid argument simply say "I never said I supported PETA".

A few valid points in the mix, but the fact of the matter is, you'll probably ignore this post, judging by current trends. Maybe you just need attention?

 

[Delicious]

Vets and Pounds don't firebomb people now do they?

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.

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?

You asked for an alternative to putting down 80% of the animals under PETA's care, and I gave you one. Also, I implied that you should not compare PETA to the hard working Vets and Pounds that actually do help animals.

You seem to possess a preternatural ability to misinterpret my posts.

I was saying how talk to your vet. I didn't say I was comparing them. I meant see how many animals they've put down. I've have talked to them, and there is little other option.

As for the alternative, I meant one to putting down animals. You still haven't given me one? So my question is, what do they do with all the animals they claim? They can't find them all homes. So what then? Your last post changed the subject and I wanted an answer. So let's please continue.

You implied that there were two reasons why PETA kills animals: to end it's misery if it's life is deemed to be not worth living and to ease budgetary constraints.

My argument is that if PETA were to ease up on the massive hate campaigns, they could relocate their considerable funds to lessen the chances of the latter occurring.
I've no issue with the former reason, but in all honesty do you actually believe that 80% of the animals that PETA "rescues" are in so much suffering that they need death?

In the end putting down animals is unavoidable, but I'd like to see it happen far less than it already does starting with PETA.

 

[cavsfan69]

tl;dr
but I'm assuming the basic idea of what you're trying to say is that PETA is a bunch of crazy nut-bags, and if thats the case then I agree with you.

 

[Pendragon9]

tl;dr
but I'm assuming the basic idea of what you're trying to say is that PETA is a bunch of crazy nut-bags, and if thats the case then I agree with you.

And if that's the post you're sticking with, then I'll agree with you too. They are nuttier than chinese chicken, which would unfortunately earn the makers of said chicken a bucket of blood over the head, thanks to a few PETA zealots.

 

[PurpleRain]

tl;dr
but I'm assuming the basic idea of what you're trying to say is that PETA is a bunch of crazy nut-bags, and if thats the case then I agree with you.

Get out.

You implied that there were two reasons why PETA kills animals: to end it's misery if it's life is deemed to be not worth living and to ease budgetary constraints.

My argument is that if PETA were to ease up on the massive hate campaigns, they could relocate their considerable funds to lessen the chances of the latter occurring.
I've no issue with the former reason, but in all honesty do you actually believe that 80% of the animals that PETA "rescues" are in so much suffering that they need death?

In the end putting down animals is unavoidable, but I'd like to see it happen far less than it already does starting with PETA.

Ah, I see. But we know that with those promotions, PETA gets their fame and funding so, it's sort of unavoidable for them. I wouldn't know what to do about it.

I'm beginning to wonder the purpose of this thread.

OP seems to be quite adept at ignoring the more valid arguments all together, commending and all supporting posts, pointing out all the stupid posts are stupid, and, when unable to rebuke a valid argument simply say "I never said I supported PETA".

A few valid points in the mix, but the fact of the matter is, you'll probably ignore this post, judging by current trends. Maybe you just need attention?

I need a hug. I'm so unstable *cries*
Reread the OP. I just want people to stop acting like jerks and for a lot of these arguments to be abolished. The larger claims I'm actually looking up right now. I find it all interesting. I find myself in the middle grounds here.

True fact, I spent some time growing up in the Maritimes, those things don't feel pain.

See above.

 

[PurpleRain]

They hurt my ears everytime they see me eating beef.

You see them often? Also, do you eat beef out in public areas?

tl;dr
but I'm assuming the basic idea of what you're trying to say is that PETA is a bunch of crazy nut-bags, and if thats the case then I agree with you.

And if that's the post you're sticking with, then I'll agree with you too. They are nuttier than chinese chicken, which would unfortunately earn the makers of said chicken a bucket of blood over the head, thanks to a few PETA zealots.

Read the OP again. You're only helping my main point.

 

[slarrs]

I'm beginning to wonder the purpose of this thread.

OP seems to be quite adept at ignoring the more valid arguments all together, commending and all supporting posts, pointing out all the stupid posts are stupid, and, when unable to rebuke a valid argument simply say "I never said I supported PETA".

A few valid points in the mix, but the fact of the matter is, you'll probably ignore this post, judging by current trends. Maybe you just need attention?

I need a hug. I'm so unstable *cries*
Reread the OP. I just want people to stop acting like jerks and for a lot of these arguments to be abolished. The larger claims I'm actually looking up right now. I find it all interesting. I find myself in the middle grounds here.

Read it all once, skimmed it again now. Basically you've tried to take up the position to defend PETA while saying you don't support it.
Yes, people often hate PETA without give a legitimate reason for it, perhaps not even knowing why. That doesn't mean there isn't a good reason to. (such as);

1. No one wants animals to suffer. Okay, The vast majority of people don't want animals to suffer. They do, however, think that people come first. People always have, and always should come before animals. PETA seems to believe that the vast majority of us are unaware of animal suffering or simply wish it upon them. They seem to be of the opinion (in my opinion, of course) that they're saving the world, which no one appreciates, when you're not saving the world.

2. Their methods are rash and foolish. They seem to have better results because they get more publicity, but they also have destroyed any credibility the organization ever had, and, in the end, are less effective than doing nothing. Passing laws and regulations can improve animal conditions better than insane protests.

3. People don't like being told what to do or to be treated like idiots, murders, or horrible people. All of these are chief among PETA Propaganda. Mama kills animals. Throwing buckets of blood. Almost everything they do is an insult to non-members.

4. They do more harm than good. If there was a reasonable Animals Rights group, with legitimate (non-violent) protests, who convinced through facts, rather than shock and gross-out propaganda, it could be a far larger, more productive organization.

They get a few things right, such as funding to actually help animals, but all in all, they no longer represent what they're supposed to.

 

[PurpleRain]

I'm beginning to wonder the purpose of this thread.

OP seems to be quite adept at ignoring the more valid arguments all together, commending and all supporting posts, pointing out all the stupid posts are stupid, and, when unable to rebuke a valid argument simply say "I never said I supported PETA".

A few valid points in the mix, but the fact of the matter is, you'll probably ignore this post, judging by current trends. Maybe you just need attention?

I need a hug. I'm so unstable *cries*
Reread the OP. I just want people to stop acting like jerks and for a lot of these arguments to be abolished. The larger claims I'm actually looking up right now. I find it all interesting. I find myself in the middle grounds here.

Read it all once, skimmed it again now. Basically you've tried to take up the position to defend PETA while saying you don't support it.
Yes, people often hate PETA without give a legitimate reason for it, perhaps not even knowing why. That doesn't mean there isn't a good reason to. (such as);

1. No one wants animals to suffer. Okay, The vast majority of people don't want animals to suffer. They do, however, think that people come first. People always have, and always should come before animals. PETA seems to believe that the vast majority of us are unaware of animal suffering or simply wish it upon them. They seem to be of the opinion (in my opinion, of course) that they're saving the world, which no one appreciates, when you're not saving the world.

2. Their methods are rash and foolish. They seem to have better results because they get more publicity, but they also have destroyed any credibility the organization ever had, and, in the end, are less effective than doing nothing. Passing laws and regulations can improve animal conditions better than insane protests.

3. People don't like being told what to do or to be treated like idiots, murders, or horrible people. All of these are chief among PETA Propaganda. Mama kills animals. Throwing buckets of blood. Almost everything they do is an insult to non-members.

4. They do more harm than good. If there was a reasonable Animals Rights group, with legitimate (non-violent) protests, who convinced through facts, rather than shock and gross-out propaganda, it could be a far larger, more productive organization.

They get a few things right, such as funding to actually help animals, but all in all, they no longer represent what they're supposed to.

I know their main website is a swamp of propergander, but they have helped change a lot of laws.
Also, I've met PETA memebers and haven't been attacked. So many people claimed they have been, but I've asked some and not many have gotten back to me about it.

Really, I just want to stop a repeat of yesterdays thread. Imagine 16 pages of people saying, "I hate PETA!" So I went to do some study on it and found a lot of people were so grossly missinformed or just acted like idiots for the hell of it. I just want to stop that!

There are heaps of reasons someone may hate PETA, but there are many reasons not to as well. People choose the first because... I don't know. It's fun for them?

 

[Kuchinawa212]

I like animals and I like anyone that likes animals.
But I don't like people that make us follow their every order so we can be better to the animals.
Ehh Must still be that cooking mama game

 

[Charli]

I don't hate them, I do however think they incite dangerous behaviour with mob mentality.
They quickly loose sight of their true goals once they start and turn it into a propaganda, hate spewed nightmare for which the only counter is impasse or equally hate filled attacks back.

I do not hate those who support PETA with the understanding of what they truly wish to accomplish. What I do hate is the manipulative types inside the organization that will truly stop at nothing to see their ends and to the most extreme measures.
Personally Im a supporter of those in organizations like RSPAA or a group that understands that there are limitations between the capacity for human understanding and animal understanding and seek to bridge those gaps with the patient mentality that needs to be applied to such situations.

PETA on the other hand takes these measures to a very totalitarian-like way, an 'If you're not with us you're against us' type state if you will.

Not all humans are the same, neither gender is the same, and each and every animal speicie is unique to it's own capacity for understanding. What PETA 'intends' is nothing but a pipe dream a bit like animal communism if that sparks even the slightest idea of what their 'master plan' is... and such a thing combined with fanatic masses and dangerously edgy tactics? They cannot help but incite hate... It's inevitable.

It's ironic that they so support animals and loathe the very food chain those animals ahere to. I gather Humans are not 'animals' to them. To me that just seems reckless.

Please try and understand why people dislike PETA just as you would understand why there are those that support it and just move on....

 

[PurpleRain]

PETA on the other hand takes these measures to a very totalitarian-like way, an 'If you're not with us you're against us' type state if you will.

Not all humans are the same, neither gender is the same, and each and every animal speicie is unique to it's own capacity for understanding. What PETA 'intends' is nothing but a pipe dream a bit like animal communism if that sparks even the slightest idea of what their 'master plan' is... and such a thing combined with fanatic masses and dangerously edgy tactics? They cannot help but incite hate... It's inevitable.

Hehe, sorry, I find that funny. The red army of animals under one banner to conquer all! There leaders are the nazi sith, etc.

I like animals and I like anyone that likes animals.
But I don't like people that make us follow their every order so we can be better to the animals.
Ehh Must still be that cooking mama game

They order you?

 

[slarrs]

I know their main website is a swamp of propergander, but they have helped change a lot of laws.
Also, I've met PETA memebers and haven't been attacked. So many people claimed they have been, but I've asked some and not many have gotten back to me about it.

Really, I just want to stop a repeat of yesterdays thread. Imagine 16 pages of people saying, "I hate PETA!" So I went to do some study on it and found a lot of people were so grossly missinformed or just acted like idiots for the hell of it. I just want to stop that!

There are heaps of reasons someone may hate PETA, but there are many reasons not to as well. People choose the first because... I don't know. It's fun for them?

I think most people hate them because the organization comes across as extremely preachy. A "I don't eat meat so I'm better than you" attitude permeates the website, which is where the vast majority of people get their information. It's pretty much the fault of the organization that it catches so much flak.

Honestly there are few positions easier to be loved as than a defender of animals. I have seen complete strangers hug police units who deal with animal cruelty and rescue. They could be a massive, effective and helpful organization, but they're not, because they don't seem to think that's a good way to go about things. That's why I hate them, personally. They have a chance to be all they claim to be and more, to be liberators and saviors of animals, but instead they just tell you they are.

 

[Kuchinawa212]

I like animals and I like anyone that likes animals.
But I don't like people that make us follow their every order so we can be better to the animals.
Ehh Must still be that cooking mama game

They order you?

Good point

Strongly encourage

 

[PurpleRain]

I think most people hate them because the organization comes across as extremely preachy. A "I don't eat meat so I'm better than you" attitude permeates the website, which is where the vast majority of people get their information. It's pretty much the fault of the organization that it catches so much flak.

This is a good point. This point can't be argued either because it all comes down to how the individual feels about it.

 

[londelen]

PETA killed my father.

Please don't. You're only helping my points.

No, seriously. PETA killed his father. I was there man...I WAS THERE.