So, how about that PETA, huh?

[Cid Silverwing]

PETA should all be collectively arrested and tried for humanitary crimes, among them illegal euthanization, endangering of freed captive animals, outrageous condemnation of simulated animal violence (remember the high school brats who whined about shooting guard dogs in Call of Duty or what it was again?) and much much more.

 

[Cortheya]

Uh, they USED cooking mama. They deserve to be punished horribly. Or at least get sued.

I disaproved of the Cooking Mama propoganda but I must say that they have a right to believe what they believe and do what they want to do, even if I would never participate in their practices.

That being said, I also don't think it's right that they're attempting to force their unorthodox views on everyone else. That of course DEFINITELY doesn't mean I have a problem with people having unorthodox views; they're the foundation of everything great in this world. However I think they shouldn't force it on other people.

 

[mrpenguinismyhomeboy]

I was done with PETA as soon as they did the Sea Kitten thing. As a wiser man on these very forums once said before me:

People
Enjoy
The
Attention

PETA does nothing but makes fools of themselves, and I highly doubt there's any sophistication behind it.

If someone dumped animal blood on me I'd call the police. The ends don't justify the means.

There's this book called Life of Pi; I'm sure some of you here have read it. Anyway the boy (Pi) talks about animals and zoos and he makes this really compelling argument which I can only agree with.

I've heard nearly as much nonsense about zoos as I have abut God and religion. Well-meaning but misinformed people think animals in the wild are "happy" because they are "free". These people usually have a large, handsome predator in mind, a lion of a cheetah. They imagine this wild animal roaming about the savannah on digestive walks after eating a prey that accepted is lot piously, or going for calisthenic runs to stay slim after over indulging. Then it is captured by wicked men and it's "happiness" is dashed.
This is not the way it is.
Animals in the wild lead lives of compulsion and necessity within an unforgiving social hierarchy in an environment where the supply of fear is high and the supply of food is low and where territory must constantly be defended and parasites forever endured. What is the meaning of freedom in such a context? Animals in the wild are, in practice, free neither in time nor in space, nor in their personal relations.

This next part I find particularly interesting.

If you went to a home, kicked down the front door, chased the people who lived there out into the street and said "Go! You are free! Free as a bird! Go! Go!"-do you think they would shout and dance for joy? They wouldn't. Birds are not free. The people you've just evicted would sputter, "With what right do you throw us out? This is our home. We own it. We have lived her for years. We are calling the police you scoundrel."

I've abridged it, because the whole thing takes up a couple of pages, but basically what Pi is saying is that, saying that animals shouldn't live in zoos is like saying people shouldn't live in houses. A house is just like a zoo cage for people. The only reason we leave it is to get food from the super market. Animals don't need to leave their cage because all the things they would normal take care of for themselves are being taken care of. They don't need to hunt cause foods being brought to them. They don't need to fight cause they are by themselves. They don't need to worry about predators, because there are none. Pi then goes on to say later, in a part I didn't write down, that if an animal had the ability to vocally say whether he wanted to be in the wild or the zoo, the animal would pick the zoo. If you asked a human if he/she wanted to live out on the streets or in a house, which one do you think he/she would pick. Just like most people, animals don't really care about freedom. They just want a nice place to settle down, with which they can call their own.

I'm sure PETA has their own opinions on this subject, and I don't know whether or not it's really on topic but it has to do with animal rights so I posted it.

 

[Razorback0z]

I think in almost every area of life you have extremes at both ends of any scale.

On this scale you have PETA at one end and seal clubbers and whale shooters at the other end.

Like all scales though the parts at the end generally represent the fringe. They are small, noisy and generally unrealistic in their values and beleifs and ideas of what can be acheived. They lie, cheat and manipulate the facts to suit their arguments and generally spekaing only find support from similarly extreme members of the public.

They are however very necessary at both ends.

If you didnt have PETA the zeitgeist of attitude toward animal rights would not move as far and as fast as it has or does. Lets keep in mind that we still have dog fighting in the western world and far worse things in the developing world. The moral environment on the topic of animal rights has a tremendously long way to travel yet.

You need extremists to make the moderates more paletable. As the extremists push the boundries, the moderates move into the space and the whole cause advances.

So careful what you wish for when you point out the faults with the people pushing the envelope. They might be doing more good than you realise.

 

[HandsomeJack]

Well, Purple Rain, let me be blunt about this. The reason that people react in such a crass way to PETA is because they themselves are very crass in the delivery of thier message. Flagrant use of nudity, demeaning those you dissagree with publically via characature, and omitting details to make the other side of the isle's behavior seem even more unreasonable / evil are not great ways to win an arguement. They are good at getting attention, but that attention causes knee-jerk reactions against them as often as for them. Also, they are very inconsistant in choosing of venues, leading me to believe that though they are passionate, they can all to often be opportunistic; choosing safe, weak targets to vent on instead of being like the real revolutionaries of the world and be willing to put themselves at risk instead of bullying those who wont/cant fight back. Case in point: One of PITA's more aggressive tactics for a while (I am uncertain if this is still in practice, been a while since I heard of an incident) was to throw buckets of acryllic red paint on people in fur coats (representing blood). This is basically assault and destruction of property. Given the age/wealth groups most likely to employ fur clothing, it is a safe bet that these people are unlikely to reply with violence. I have never heard of PITA holding a rally, behaving similarly at oh say the Stergis Biker Rally where they would be guaranteed to see many able bodied men of less gentle temperment in an abundance of animal derived clothing in the form of leathers.
I respect about 60-70% of PETA's goals (Saying humans, a natural omnivore, cannot ethically eat meat is a little contrived and extremist...but animals raised for food should not be unduely discomforted in the process of raise or slaughter), but too many of thier members and organized events do not get my respect. Here's hoping things change (both PETA's behavior and the current state of animal rights).
I am assuming you are a member. This thread seems like little more than a posterboard for them. Not that I object, this is an open forum. But when starting a thread you are this invested in, it would show more courage and honesty to declare your alliegence (or lack of one). I have no affiliations to any groups myself. I must point out, I do enjoy that you are endeavoring to remain civil throughout this thread. That is how true progress is made.
I appologize for my attrocious spelling and any implication of condecention or insult is not intentional.

 

[Simon Hadow]

I think the complaints you're making, link just as much to the internet as to PETA. The internet lets people say or do whatever they want. Give them anonimity with that, and you have an unstable cesspool of those few hanging on to logic, and those relinquishing all restraints of contemporary society to go mad with power like a nudist parade. And yes, I was also laughing at PETA in the previously mentioned thread, so I'm completly aware of my hipocrisy here, so there's no reason to point it out.

 

[WolfMage]

I'm cool with PETA doing their little thing, as long as they stop yelling at me in a way that would make any Scientologist proud just because I want me a fucking Big Mac, or some KFC, or to go shoot 'walking food', a.k.a. animals.
I understand their cause, I like not killing puppies and kittens and the like, but for fuck's sake, my good man, the extremist bullshit has gotta stop. That's why I'm not a Christian, or a Muslim; They don't know when to shut up, sit down and keep quiet.
Also, why are we protesting the hunting of animals for food?
We've done that throughout our existence, and not once did someone stand up and say "Hey! Go eat lettuce, not that deer! They have feelings too!" Which, yes, yes they do, right up until they die a quick and painless death.
I just can't stand people who can't coexist, and leave everyone else to their own damn devices.

 

[Credge]

On this scale you have PETA at one end and seal clubbers and whale shooters at the other end.

You do realize that both seals and whales have products that humans enjoy and use, right?

It's absolutely, positively, no different than hunting, raising cattle, or fishing.

 

[garfoldsomeoneelse]

Addressing the OP : Mission statements are supposed to sound professional, so that when their extremist followers get out of hand, they can say "oh, well, hey, look, we never intended for that to happen, just look at what we stand for!"

Claiming that an organization gets unwarranted ire and citing their mission statements as proof of their legitimacy really does nothing at all to convince me that they're not off their fucking rockers.

You haven't changed my mind at all.

 

[Anarchy In Detroit]

I watched a video of PETA members rescuing turkeys from a slaughterhouse. They took them to a room and played classical music for the turkeys. Yes, for the turkeys (I guess they like it?). "Well Mr. Gobbles I know you love the 1812 Overture! Nyuk nyuk nyuk!"

It isn't that I love hurting animals, it's just that I hate dumbasses. PETA to me are similar to say... whiney left wingers who make me embarassed to be a left winger. Irrational, ridiculous, and stupid. Enjoy your goddamned tofu.

 

[SsilverR]

sea kittens .. that is all ...

LOL jk jk .. while do believe alot of their stuff makes sense .. it's how they go about saying it that pisses me off

 

[Timbydude]

I dislike them because there are just clearly better causes in the world to fight for (starving kids in Africa, to cite a commonly-used one), yet they attempt to shove down your throat that theirs is the most important.

Getting away from "open-mindedness" and "political correctness", tell me whether a child's life or an animal's life matters more. PETA chose the latter, and that's why I personally just can't respect them.

 

[Ajna]

As I read this article, I am reminded of something I recently read by Scott Adams. Something to the extent of (paraphrasing): "It doesn't matter who's smarter, because if someone disagrees with you, you'll think they look like a moron. Most people's definition of smart is: 'thinks the same as me, but MORE'".

I'd be lying if I said that I don't do the same thing. As I read your comments throughout this article, 9 out of 9 of them make me not like you. I get that your opinions aren't *just* these, but I still find them ignorant. Odds are you find my comments ignorant. (Though, one GENUINE thing I can criticize you on (and I do this too), you're almost only addressing the people who agree with you. You're also doing the classic "sit there and hit refresh, waiting for a reply" thing.)

I myself? I have an unusual stance on animal rights... I love my meat. When my father went to Texas for work, my souvenier gift was a shirt from a BBQ place that reads: "I didn't claw my way to the top of the food chain... To eat vegetables!" I refer to salad as "rabbit food", and the only condition I'll eat it under is if it's drowned in Ranch dressing (Saying I demand a 1:1 ratio of dressing to lettuce would be an exaggeration. There's usually a lot more dressing. It disgusts most people.). Yet, pets? Dogs, Cats, and the occasional pig?

I'm all for treating them nicely. My mom works at a kennel for a living. My dog, adopted from a shelter, was wriggling about under the blanket on my lap as I typed that last sentence. If I ever need to put in volunteer time for some class, I go straight to a kennel.

But that's because I was raised with those as pets. If you raised me on a diet of cats, dogs, and chicken, I'd eat it up, and think it odd that in China, people eat cows, of all things. Fact is, I think that cannibalism is perfectly acceptable as, say, a post-mortem (that's the term, right?) choice (as opposed to being buried, cremated, or having your body frozen and launched into space).

I'm tackling Megapenguinx's record of 85 hours w/o sleep at the moment (15 hours left!), so please forgive the fact that what I typed meanders on and off topic. I think I'm starting to lose coherency. Maybe tomorrow I can get back to you with something that makes more sense.

 

[Ajna]

I dislike them because there are just clearly better causes in the world to fight for (starving kids in Africa, to cite a commonly-used one), yet they attempt to shove down your throat that theirs is the most important.

Getting away from "open-mindedness" and "political correctness", tell me whether a child's life or an animal's life matters more. PETA chose the latter, and that's why I personally just can't respect them.

I'll give them this: Their cause is way easier to get behind.

If I want to help animals, I donate time at the local shelter. Tossing in a Sunday or something isn't a huge pain for me, and though it won't do anything major for them either, I feel good about it.

If I want to help kids in Ethiopia, though... That's expensive. And hot. Have you *been* to Africa, lately? It's a pain in the ass to fly there every Sunday.

 

[Timbydude]

I dislike them because there are just clearly better causes in the world to fight for (starving kids in Africa, to cite a commonly-used one), yet they attempt to shove down your throat that theirs is the most important.

Getting away from "open-mindedness" and "political correctness", tell me whether a child's life or an animal's life matters more. PETA chose the latter, and that's why I personally just can't respect them.

I'll give them this: Their cause is way easier to get behind.

If I want to help animals, I donate time at the local shelter. Tossing in a Sunday or something isn't a huge pain for me, and though it won't do anything major for them either, I feel good about it.

If I want to help kids in Ethiopia, though... That's expensive. And hot. Have you *been* to Africa, lately? It's a pain in the ass to fly there every Sunday.

Well, you don't have to actually FLY to Africa to help. You can donate money so that the people associated with an organization can buy foodstuffs and fly them over there in your stead. Basically you're donating money rather than time, and time is money anyway.

But "getting behind" a cause, which I understand to be equivalent to "sympathizing" with it, is much easier for me with dying kids over abused puppies. Did you mean "help with", or am I just misinterpreting?

 

[Ajna]

I dislike them because there are just clearly better causes in the world to fight for (starving kids in Africa, to cite a commonly-used one), yet they attempt to shove down your throat that theirs is the most important.

Getting away from "open-mindedness" and "political correctness", tell me whether a child's life or an animal's life matters more. PETA chose the latter, and that's why I personally just can't respect them.

I'll give them this: Their cause is way easier to get behind.

If I want to help animals, I donate time at the local shelter. Tossing in a Sunday or something isn't a huge pain for me, and though it won't do anything major for them either, I feel good about it.

If I want to help kids in Ethiopia, though... That's expensive. And hot. Have you *been* to Africa, lately? It's a pain in the ass to fly there every Sunday.

Well, you don't have to actually FLY to Africa to help. You can donate money so that the people associated with an organization can buy foodstuffs and fly them over there in your stead. Basically you're donating money rather than time, and time is money anyway.

But "getting behind" a cause, which I understand to be equivalent to "sympathizing" with it, is much easier for me with dying kids over abused puppies. Did you mean "help with", or am I just misinterpreting?

When I say "help", I mean "help". When I say "support", I mean "support".

I support the AIDS fight. I don't do anything for it, but it's a good cause. I support it.

I helped clean up dog shit for 8 hours a few Sundays ago. I helped out my local kennel.

EDIT: I actually find it easier to sympathize with puppies over people. I could blame it on Asperger's (I have a, get this, genuine diagnoses), where "sufferers" often have more empathy for animals, but...

Honestly, the puppy is way cuter. Really.

 

[CouchCommando]

I recall an argument I had at a party with a peta member here in oz, they were railing against the national past time of horse racing, and the sheep industry (for spaving the sheep to prevent fly strike)I mentioned that if there was no profit to be had from these animals then large numbers of them would in all probability be put down. Peta=blind leading the blind. Guess people come to conclusions like peta people when they over simplify complex scenarios into childish, good vs evil arguments and jump up on their high horse band wagons.

 

[Matzilla]

I just dont like the way they make people who eat meat look like monsters just look at that cooking mama thing they did there way out of line id rather be a meat eating monster than a damn dirty hippie

 

[Pendragon9]

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.

Wait, so you refused to read my first post, but read this one instead? Sounds like you're n denial.

 

[vultureX21]

PETA repeatedly advocates the death of people over the deaths of animals, that's not a good way to promote oneself.