Considering I can sit here and literally spend an hour typing about how absolutely ignorant and stark raving mad the brass of the organization are, I will sum my thoughts up in one brief sentence: Their actions are detrimental to their cause.
Your views on PETA.
- Thread starter Couch_Ridden_Gamer
- Start date
Recommended Videos
No, even taking viewing animal's well being as equal to a human beings... no... what the animals go through is NOTHING compared to what the Jews suffered during the Holocaust. Don't believe me? Then I think someone needs a history lesson.Maze1125 said:
KILL IT!
Kill it with fire.
I mean, come on, if we weren't intended to eat animals, why are they made of meat?
Kill it with fire.
I mean, come on, if we weren't intended to eat animals, why are they made of meat?
Though they stand for a good cause, the way they go about trying to achieve their ends is downright stupid. They advocate peace and humanity by attacking those who they disagree with, often is infuriating ways that get exactly nothing done and make them look like hypocrites.
Overall, they're well-intentioned idiots.
Overall, they're well-intentioned idiots.
That's probably one of the best fallacies I've ever seen.Couch_Ridden_Gamer said:
You make yourself sound really clever and as though you know how formal arguments work when in truth it has absolutely not substance what so ever and all you really did was say "You did this, you can't do that in an argument." without any justification at all.
Well done.
Also, I think you kinda missed my point.
Even assuming that number's true. PETA wouldn't succeed instantly. The world wouldn't go from 1/6 jobs immediately to 0. The change would be gradual, which would give time for the world to adapt.
But hey, at least you gave an objective argument that time. Much better.
I'll grant you that animals are butchered, BUT they are almost always killed as quickly and painlessly as possible (I say almost always because I bloody well know that there are a few sick bastards out there). The Nazis DELIBERATELY dragged out the Jews' suffering for as long as possible, forcing them into slave labor, beating them, raping them, and all manner of torture tactics before finally killing them outright. The other main difference between what happens to animals today is that they are killed for our continued survival, whereas the Jews were DELIBERATELY targeted for systematic extermination for no other reason than they were a convenient scapegoat that a few bastards used to get into power. Finally, with animals, since we need them for survival, we are never going to deliberately drive them to extinction, whereas the Nazis' only goal was to exterminate to Jews. And if you can't see the difference, then you are an idiot, or possibly an anti-semi.Maze1125 said:
No, they aren't.TheDoctor455 said:
The majority of the world kills animals extremely inhumanely. Most first world countries how some laws stopping that but they are often circumvented.
And that's just slaughter houses.
Scientific experimentation is much much much more prolonged and torturous.
Actually, the main reason the Jews were killed in such painful ways was for scientific experimentation which, as we discussed before, is very painful.
Yes, the Nazis wanted them dead, but the main reason for the torture was for the sake of science. In fact, quite a few medical advances we use today came out of concentration camps.
The reason for doing it is irrelevant to the pain they feel.
Or would you have thought it was okay if they'd only been killing Jews for science and food and they made sure they kept some around so they could breed more?
Obviously not, you twat. Sorry for the personal attack, but comparing what happened to the Jews to what happens to animals now is... intolerable. Because, as you clearly didn't remember, the Nazis MADE SURE THAT THE JEWS SUFFERED, while animal slaughterhouses and animal testing labs do their best to spare the animal as much pain as possible (usually). And what the intention is GREATLY influences the actions that are carried out. Like, say you kill someone (could be a stranger or someone you know). Now, tell me, if you didn't mean to kill this person (let's suppose you ran the person over with your car), I don't think you would be judged quite as harshly (both in the eyes of the law and the public) if it had been a simple accident. Now, if you murder someone you absolutely hate, and you MEANT to kill them and to drag out their pain as much as possible, I would rather like to think that you would be shown no mercy from anyone. Take that analogy for what it is... And I do apologize for the personal attack in my last post... It just isn't fair to compare the Holocaust to what we do to animals today.Maze1125 said:
