|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 Posted: Wed Nov 23, 2005 1:47 pm
Sarasan Lupine Pyrefly Callowyn of Calypso I personally do not agree with PETA's actions and procedures. Although they might have started out with a good idea, their reasoning has gone screwy. Perhaps some peaceful protest would make more sense. I mean, if they say humans are just another species of animal, whats their reasoning? I mean, other animals don't go around planting bombs in resturants.... I think something along the lines of a quiet boycott of meats and animal products would be far more effective....Although, I wouldn't participate, because I do love my steak. sweatdrop Same here. They've done some good things, but by far, the world would be better without them.
|
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Fri Nov 25, 2005 7:27 am
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Wed Jan 04, 2006 10:44 am
PETA, to me, just seems to be another program that began with good intentions and went overboard. Way overboard. I believe that no program should be created to be against specific people (such as meat-eaters). That's directly attacking a person and their lifestyle, and history has shown where hating certain types of people gets us (The Holocaust, civil rights struggles, terrorism, many genocide attempts).
For example, I heard that, years ago, PETA members would splash red paint on people wearing fur coats. Now, I'm against fur coats. I think it's a stupid waste of animal life. But throwing paint on someone else's property doesn't solve the problem, and it doesn't make your opinion look respectable. In fact, it could encourage the paint-covered person to go buy a new fur coat to replace the one that was lost and defy the paint-thrower.
If PETA wants more respect, they should focus more on the animal rights and supporting good animal treatment, rather than acting violently toward those they don't like. I'm all for animal rights, but I'm not for attacking specific people as if they're the causes of everything. That's never the case.
It sort of reminds me of those religious people who consider everything not related to God tainted and forbidden. I'm Christian myself, but the teachings of the Bible are about loving everyone, no matter who they are or what they've done. Hating people or concepts just because they don't relate to God is hypocritical. PETA is being hypocritical by saying they're for saving innocent animals while they victimize and show hatred towards other people, and even kill animals themselves (that article you had the link to was quite surprizing in that respect; I'd never heard of that before).
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Tue Jan 17, 2006 11:36 pm
*shrug* Hitlar had alot of good ideas too. PETA is a radical group taking things to the extreme. That never works out very good in the long run for any one. Personally I think its about balance. As long as the PETA is around I will view them as the anti-christ. (oh and be good to the monkeys in south africa crying take out a hippo or something and call it close enough)
-MTTP ninja
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sun Jan 29, 2006 11:00 am
Firstly, don't believe everything you read on the internet. I have no idea of what the agenda of the people writing those sites is, and so I am not going to trust them any more than I trust PETA's honesty in defending themselves.
Secondly, I support PETA. I don't believe in about 50% of the things that they do (killing healthy rescue animals if that is true, supporting terrorism (which I actually believe is counterproductive to the cause), I am not anti-pets, or even anti zoos or working animals in the correct environments, and I don't believe in veganism as a principle). However, I think animal treatment in the world at the moment is terrible, and I will (honestly) never live a completely happy day in it until it is completely vegetarian and there are some much better animal rights laws in place. With this as my current aim, I support PETA because this is what they most visibly do. They helped me become vegetarian, and a number of other people I know too. I would love to support a more moderate organisation whose aims match more closely with my own, but at present there are none that exist with nearly the same level of influence as PETA. Therefore I chose them as the lesser of two evils and will support them and continue making my donations until their aims and mine stop matching.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sun Jan 29, 2006 8:24 pm
The lesser of the two evils? How can you call PETA the lesser of the two evils? PETA, non-PETA. Terrorism, non-terrorism. Hmm. What a choice. The reason I listed so many websites that coincide with each other is because they do just that. If you find one website to say something and find 18 other websites to say the same or close to it, chances are that that fact is correct. I have not had the chance to find any books on the subject, but when I do, I'll be sure to list them. Some of those websites tend to be reputable as well. I believe the validity of them and others before I start hearing the bullshit spouting out of one website such as PETA. Here's an idea. Why don't you start your own group that doesn't promote terrorism, hating your parents, violence, or extreme and unnecessary acts of opinion? Or, well, let's see, we could search the internet or other groups to find another vegetarian group that is a little less extreme that you could devote your time and money to, not worrying about how much of your money is going to go into bombing the next McDonalds. Oh, hell, I did the work for you. Try these: http://www.soystache.com/vegorg.htmHoly crap! Here's a whole list of organizations and resources at this web address! Imagine that! http://www.vrg.org/links/OK, now that I've calmed down, I realized that I came across as a total b***h. I apologize. But just as this topic is sensitive for you, it is also sensitive for me. You can go on and like PETA all you want, but I urge you to find better things to do with your money. I understand that PETA is what caused you to live the lifestyle you have now, and that's awesome, but think about the other things PETA does. There are more valuable things your money could be going to. Saving endangered animals, helping lobbyists persuade congressman not to pass the next bill allowing thousands of acres of forest to be cut down for homes or oil, or helping out your local humane society. PETA uses all the money for itself or its extreme counterparts, like ALF and ELF. Do you want to support needless terrorism to innocent people? It's not something my conscience would like.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Mon Jan 30, 2006 8:51 pm
Ailinea......I love you. Marry me? heart
-MTTP ninja
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Thu Feb 16, 2006 7:56 pm
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sun Nov 26, 2006 9:17 am
You know why I hate PETA? When I was a little girl, every week I donated all of my allowance to the Humane Society. It was only five dollars a week, but I wanted to help. I was only ten when PETA found my name on their mailing list. Now I don't know if they knew I was so young, but doing this screwed my head up for years.
They sent me a letter graphically detailing the worst animal cruelty ever. Things I will never, ever type up. Awful things that really messed me up. They didn't need to do that. I was already giving everything I had. They wrote up the most terrible, awful, disgusting things to scare money out of me.
Scare money out of a ten-year-old kid. How could you do that? For years I didn't trust ANY people. I never let my cats out of my sight. I cried every night, cried every time I saw an outdoor cat because I was so convinced it would happen to them too. I actually hated my fellow humans for years, and I was just a kid.
They could have been positive. They didn't need to be so graphic. Later when I actually worked at the shelter I found out other things like it but I was old enough to handle it and could actually help the animals. PETA did nothing but scare me in the most disgusting way.
If you have to support an animal rights orginization, support your local shelter. Get in there and help with your own two hands. Don't support people who terrorize innocents for no reason at all.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Wed Nov 29, 2006 8:08 am
Wow, Auf, that's pretty traumatic. It's the first real encounter I've heard about this; I had heard of other people feeling like this, but not actually heard from someone herself that she has been scarred by PETA's tactics. Sorry to hear that this led to such a horrible experience. Wish I could have hugged you when you were a kid.
Unfortunately, statistics show that scare tactics work better than being "nice." As you can see, it worked for you, and had they kept being persistent about it, you may have grown into a fellow human-hater-animal-lover and joined the ranks of PETA. Children are impressionable at a young age, and things they see or hear will make a big mark in how they think and act as they get older. It's really pathetic and quite scary, if you ask me, that PETA has resorted to going after young people. It's obvious that they know that ther tactics aren't working are more educated adults.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Wed Nov 29, 2006 9:21 am
You know, they probably have done it to a lot of other kids. I don't know how they could have known my age because it was a $5 bill every week but I imagine a bunch of other little kids have gotten that letter. They're the least ethical group out there so I bet if they could send it only to kids they would.
Their propaganda comic "Your mommy is a murderer" anyone?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sat Dec 02, 2006 10:06 am
Aufstandkind You know, they probably have done it to a lot of other kids. I don't know how they could have known my age because it was a $5 bill every week but I imagine a bunch of other little kids have gotten that letter. They're the least ethical group out there so I bet if they could send it only to kids they would. Their propaganda comic "Your mommy is a murderer" anyone? PETA, as the websites state, is a radical organization, and any radical organization is completely a**-insane. That's sad that they did that to you, Kitty-Kat. crying There are always two extremes. You see things like the north and south poles, land and water, and then PETA and NHA. Always opposites.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sun Dec 03, 2006 7:40 am
Ever since I used PETA as a referrence to a speech I did on dog fighting, I've been disgusted with the organization. They think it's wrong for things like fur trade and chaining dogs -- that's fine and understandable. Yet when I found out they thought it's wrong for people to own animals (a.k.a. pets), period, I was beyond pissed off; sorry for the language. I know a lot of homes with happy pets, so how can they argue it's in the best interest of a domesticated animal to be put back out into the wild?
Honestly, PETA needs to just take a hike and leave the topics involving animals to the professionals; like Humane Societies.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sun Dec 03, 2006 4:38 pm
Irmatu Ever since I used PETA as a referrence to a speech I did on dog fighting, I've been disgusted with the organization. They think it's wrong for things like fur trade and chaining dogs -- that's fine and understandable. Yet when I found out they thought it's wrong for people to own animals (a.k.a. pets), period, I was beyond pissed off; sorry for the language. I know a lot of homes with happy pets, so how can they argue it's in the best interest of a domesticated animal to be put back out into the wild? Honestly, PETA needs to just take a hike and leave the topics involving animals to the professionals; like Humane Societies. PETA needs to do their homework. I'm quite sure if they look back thousands of years they will see that humans had animal companions far longer than PETA itself existed. In fact, especially in Egypt, animals were often worshipped as gods among men, something no Hollywood movie ever fails to exploit. Domesticated animals are domestic, and for the most part cannot be put back into the wild and be expected to survive. I think the only domesticated species ever likely to succeed would be housecats, and even then it is iffy. Oh well. crying
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Tue Dec 05, 2006 12:14 pm
These reasons are essentially why I don't like them. Besides, any organization that views screaming protestors smearing red paint and chanting with signs outside a store as a positive thing that actually spreads a message beyond fear is wrong. In general, they rely entirely on negative marketing, and it's obnoxious, extremist, and more than a little offensive. I don't mind offensive things every now and then, but they have no respect for people, which is the ultmiate way to lose respect given from them.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
