|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 Posted: Fri Dec 08, 2006 7:30 am
La Veuve Zin WatersMoon110 Are you even fully aware of exactly what PETA does? What their views and tactics are? I read the petakillsanimals site. Last I checked, killing strays was not part of PETA's official policy. I agree with them that killing healthy animals, except in self-defence, is wrong. I agree that using animals for frivolous reasons, such as for dairy products or in zoos, is wrong. But Newkirk pisses me off and I feel she doesn't speak for the animal rights community. That's why I said I agree with them 95%, not 100%. In general, I support the ALF/ELF, however, neither is an real organisation, and they don't enforce rules; all you have to do is say you're a member and you are, no one can kick you out because there's no officials or voting or anything. So when someone kills a human and calls themselves part of the ALF, no one can come forward and say "no, they aren't." But the core belief of the ALF/ELF is to defend all life, so harming a human being would be like saying you're a member of the KKK even though you married a Jewish person. Most members will consider you a hypocrite. Zoos are wrong? Tell that to the Mongolian Horse. An animal that was completely extinct in the wild, until a breeding program was started using the 15 horses that still were alive in zoos. It has been reintroduced into its natural habitat and may very soon have a stable population there. I don't see why protecting endangered, threatened, and more common animals, and keeping them in enclosures that mimic their natural habitat as possible, making sure they are well cared for, healthy and happy, is wrong. I love zoos, and think that they do a very important job, both educating the public about animals and the environment, and in many cases keeping the populations of endangered and threatened animals alive and breeding. Zoos are responsible for supplying animals to most of the reintroduction programs. And, growing up in Dairy Farm country, I can tell you that dairy cows are some of the best treated livestock out there. I fail to see how raising happy, or at least content, animals in a way that doesn't harm them and creates food for others is "frivolous"... [edit] I'm leaving my somewhat not-so-nice defense of the two fields you said were "frivolous" and "wrong" but I'm taking out my criticism of ALF. I just don't understand how you can defend PETA or ALF when the founders of both are such horrible people.
|
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Fri Dec 08, 2006 8:50 am
Put it this way: I don't think animal rehab and rescue centers are wrong. I'd prefer that zoos were reformed to resemble those, rather than sideshows where animals were kept in cages for the hell of it and subjected to metal bars and screaming kids.
I respect the Toronto Zoo and the Audubon Zoo in New Orleans for what they've done in parts--basically built paths through the forest and swamp, respectively, that were there already, and attracted native fauna with food. Those animals are happy and healthy (or at least not bothered by humans). The ones I've seen pacing in cages aren't.
And uh...I kind of grew up in dairy country too...been to a few farms, known kids who've worked on them...they're like any other business, really. Generally, the smaller the business, the better the workers are treated, but the motive is still profit, and cows don't need to be happy to produce milk. Humans don't need to drink cow milk anyways, so why bother the cows in the first place? Cow milk is for calves, let them have it.
I'd like to hear your criticism of the ALF, though.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Fri Dec 08, 2006 6:50 pm
ALF? They may not have hurt any one (yet), but destruction of property, theft, arson, defacment of property, domestic terroism. What is there to defend?
In the 16 zoos I've been too over the US and in Germany, I've yet to see an animal pacing in its area looking starved or male nurished and cramped and scared. All I've seen is animals going about doing what they would probbaly do in the wild (minus the food being provided for them): Fighting, eating, sleeping, and ********.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sun Dec 10, 2006 9:30 am
La Veuve Zin Put it this way: I don't think animal rehab and rescue centers are wrong. I'd prefer that zoos were reformed to resemble those, rather than sideshows where animals were kept in cages for the hell of it and subjected to metal bars and screaming kids. I respect the Toronto Zoo and the Audubon Zoo in New Orleans for what they've done in parts--basically built paths through the forest and swamp, respectively, that were there already, and attracted native fauna with food. Those animals are happy and healthy (or at least not bothered by humans). The ones I've seen pacing in cages aren't. And uh...I kind of grew up in dairy country too...been to a few farms, known kids who've worked on them...they're like any other business, really. Generally, the smaller the business, the better the workers are treated, but the motive is still profit, and cows don't need to be happy to produce milk. Humans don't need to drink cow milk anyways, so why bother the cows in the first place? Cow milk is for calves, let them have it. I'd like to hear your criticism of the ALF, though. I love to hear a defense of ALF. Really, is blowing up labs is something someone should be proud of? Humans don't need to drive cars either. Humans don't need computers. But we enjoy those things. Domestic dairy cows produce more milk than their calves drink. Allowing the calve to drink might lessen the milking to once a day, instead of twice, but they still need to be milked. My ancestors, both recent and long past, have been dairy farmers, almost as long as there have been domestic cows. It is just as "natural" for me to drink milk as for me to eat broccoli, and far more "natural" than for me to eat potatoes (a new world food which is far more recent to the diet of Caucasians than dairy products). My grandmother drinks milk with every meal, and still has healthy bones and teeth (her doctor said she has the boned of a thirty year old woman). I agree, smaller farms are very much preferred to larger "factory" farms, for all types of farming. The end products taste better. Feel free to not drink all the milk you like. But to say that no one should is silly, and wrong.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sun Dec 10, 2006 9:34 am
Tiger of the Fire ALF? They may not have hurt any one (yet), but destruction of property, theft, arson, defacment of property, domestic terroism. What is there to defend?
In the 16 zoos I've been too over the US and in Germany, I've yet to see an animal pacing in its area looking starved or male nurished and cramped and scared. All I've seen is animals going about doing what they would probbaly do in the wild (minus the food being provided for them): Fighting, eating, sleeping, and ******** class="clear"> There's a great quote, from the Life of Pi, which goes something like: zoo animals would be just as happy if "liberated" to their natural environment as humans would be if you removed them from their nice cozy homes and put them in their "natural surroundings" of the woods. Zoo animals are not unhappy animals, and have teams of people who make sure that they do not lack anything. If they grow up in a situation that is different than the one they would have been in without human intervention, they also have no fear of predators and never lack for food or shelter. I feel like "liberating" some yuppies into the Canadian wilderness... *wink*
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Mon Dec 11, 2006 6:18 am
I have to say, there are things that I agree with PETA on in theory (though not with their faking of videos or their firebombing or protesting about).
I hate factory farms. I think that if everyone paid attention to how their food was being raised, smaller farms would prosper and food would taste better.
I dislike that shelters are forced to put so many non-dangerous animals down, because of space reasons. While I know that shelters try very hard to find homes for all of their adoptable animals, I still think that it would be possible to not kill so many just because they need the space. Some shelters are better about this than others, and I think that higher standards need to be placed on all shelters.
I'm not very fond of animal testing. However, though I know that new ways of testing medical and commercial products are being developed to limit the amounts of animals that need to die/suffer (within very controled environments) to keep us safe, such new ways (like growing an actual liver to test liver medicine on, etc.) are no where near viable resources for this, and animal testing is, at the moment, the only option. I wish that future testing techniques got the same financial support that PETA does, or that PETA would donate to them (since they would actually cut down on the numbers of lab animals that would die by a great amount) since this research is struggling and some of the money PETA pays to people who firebomb labs would greatly help the cause of animal testing being lessened (if it can't be stopped for a long, long time, if ever). Protesting labs doesn't help a viable alternative to animal testin happen, but supporting this would.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Wed Dec 13, 2006 3:12 pm
WatersMoon110 La Veuve Zin I've been a non-monetary quasi-supporter of PeTA for years; I agree with probably 95% of their views and tactics, and I've considered applying for a job there, with my BA in Communications. Are you even fully aware of exactly what PETA does? What their views and tactics are? PETA kills almost all of the animals they "liberate". PETA members were found in, I believe North Carolina earlier this year throwing dead puppies in a dumpster, and had more dead dogs in their van as well as a dog "murder" kit. PETA supports people who blow up labs. PETA owns a giant walk in freezer and since they don't eat meat, it can be pretty safely assumed they are using it to store cadavers, and Ingrid has admitted "sometimes the best thing to do for an animal is to humanely put it to sleep". One of PETA's top members is diabetic and on insulin, which as we all (should) know, was created through animal testing. Ingrid has gone on record stating, "Even if a cure for AIDS were developed through animal testing, we would be against it." But almost all PETA members have used penicillin, which was developed through animal testing.PETA is against pets, they consider it enslavement of animals. They are also against zoos, guide animals for the blind, and medical animal testing (as well as commercial animal testing). They have been rumored to be faking some of their videos as well. La Veuve Zin If PeTA employees are killing animals for propaganda purposes, they've truly become hypocrites. Same with "pro-lifers" who kill adults. But just because their tactics are wrong doesn't mean their message is. It bothers me that PeTA has so many black marks because they're so well known and often considered THE animal rights organisation. I hope they reform and weed out the misguided, but I do not disagree with their beliefs. PETA kills more animals than the "kill shelters" they protest against. PETA is not THE animal rights organization, because they don't actually do s**t for animals. They are THE protest organization! I support the ASPCA, because they are the people actually out there who are sticking up for the rights of animals. They find homes for thousands of animals (daily across the country), they are the people who rescue animals from abusive or neglectful situations, and treat those animals. When was the last time PETA put someone in jail for shooting their dog? Oh yeah, never. Uh, excuse me, but insulin is needed for that person's survival. I'm diabetic too, and if it weren't for insulin I wouldn't be here today. And also, insulin is no longer made of pigs. Unless the people are allergic to synthetic insulin, then in rare cases they take pig insulin.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Wed Dec 13, 2006 5:26 pm
I think she doesn't mean she opposes the treatment, I think she means it's hypocritical for them to say they don't support treatments that come from animal abuse while at the same time benefitting from them. Not sure though sweatdrop
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Wed Dec 13, 2006 7:04 pm
lymelady I think she doesn't mean she opposes the treatment, I think she means it's hypocritical for them to say they don't support treatments that come from animal abuse while at the same time benefitting from them. Not sure though sweatdrop Sorry, I misunderstood. I apologize. D:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Wed Dec 13, 2006 8:12 pm
I'm violating my hiatus left and right ninja
Waters is in full agreement with my first statment. She is apposed to PETA, ALF, and ELF. She see's their tactics in what they want (as I do) as far more harmful to animals then helpful. PETA actualy uses 90% of its profit for campaighn adds on sceptical or blatantly false reports, such as eatign chiken will give you avion bird flu, or drinking milk will lead to nausea, heart attacks, cancer, constipation, and a whole host of other stuff (I had a friend you beleived this, it took me weeks to convince her other wise). Hardley ever do you here a report about how they actuly do somethign to benefit animals. Last I heard, they didn't build an animal sanctuary. Last i heard, they didn't build a no kill animal shelter (it would actualy seem the opposi now) last i heard, others who had nothign to do with PETA were doing all of this.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Thu Dec 14, 2006 6:01 am
lymelady I think she doesn't mean she opposes the treatment, I think she means it's hypocritical for them to say they don't support treatments that come from animal abuse while at the same time benefitting from them. Not sure though sweatdrop Yes. I think that insulin is WONDERFUL! I just feel that it is hypocritical to be against medical animal testing, but still use products that were developed through animal testing. I don't think anyone should stop using insulin, I just think that people should support animal testing for medical research.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Thu Dec 14, 2006 6:04 am
Tiger of the Fire I'm violating my hiatus left and right ninja Waters is in full agreement with my first statment. She is apposed to PETA, ALF, and ELF. She see's their tactics in what they want (as I do) as far more harmful to animals then helpful. PETA actualy uses 90% of its profit for campaighn adds on sceptical or blatantly false reports, such as eatign chiken will give you avion bird flu, or drinking milk will lead to nausea, heart attacks, cancer, constipation, and a whole host of other stuff (I had a friend you beleived this, it took me weeks to convince her other wise). Hardley ever do you here a report about how they actuly do somethign to benefit animals. Last I heard, they didn't build an animal sanctuary. Last i heard, they didn't build a no kill animal shelter (it would actualy seem the opposi now) last i heard, others who had nothign to do with PETA were doing all of this. Yes. If PETA were out there helping to rescue animals from the street or abusive homes, if PETA were funding wildlife sanctuaries and medical technologies that would help to eliminate most animal testing, if PETA were doing anything CONstructive (instead of DEstructive), I wouldn't find them so distasteful. Milk leads to cancer? That is a new, and very silly, claim.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sat Feb 03, 2007 3:48 am
I am totally pro animal rights, sometimes more so than I am pro human rights as I have a general dislike for much of my own race.
I dislike peta for making animal rights campaigners look like a joke.
I dislike the japanese whaling ships who move into icelandic territory to continue their illegal whaling. I dislike whoever lets them get away with it. If I were the british navy I would torpedo them without a second thought.
My eventual plan is to become prime minister of the uk, however unlikley, although I can try! I'm very interested in politics and I should be able to start bing more active next year when i'm 21 and can legally campaign and stand for a party.
I believe animal testing is wrong, not just from a moral veiwpoint but a scientific one too. I don't think it works well enough to be considered. For anyone who thinks animal testing provides safe medicines -
asprin and penecillin were originally thrown aside as they killed the animals they were testing on, and assumed they would do the same to humans even though there is little genetic link. They were wrong.
Phalidamide (sp?) was succesful when tested on animals. It lead to birth defects and death in humans. Once again they were wrong.
Add to that that I know for certain there are more efficient and perhaps more importantly in no way cruel methods of testing but that they are not being used because they cost more money, and It really hurts somewhere around the part that feels guilt, concience and hatred.
I think it goes without saying that if I were to achieve my political goals that I would seek to put an end to animal testing and hopefully improve medicine by leaps and bounds. Even if I don't, It is possible to join the (grossly misrepresented) UN commitee working to (apparently) move away from animal testing provided one has a PhD (which I hope to get).
Either way I intend to do everything I possibly can.
Sorry for the rant... sweatdrop
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sat Feb 03, 2007 3:22 pm
I'm very interested in what alternatives there are.
Video and computer models aren't really replacements for it, since it's just building on old experiments done on animals. With cosmetics, there's certainly been nothing new recently, just products that build off old products already tested on animals. They're actually safe to test on humans, but they're tested on animals anyway. The UK is making this illegal soon, though.
Medically...
I'm not against it. I would much rather they subject a rat to cell phone radiation than subject a human to it to find out possible harmful side effects. After a product has been deemed safe for human testing, they actually do test it on a population of humans before releasing it to the general public, usually, so that variables that didn't appear in animal subjects come up. It's not entirely safe to humans, but it's safer than doing the whole process on humans. It's also bettered and preserved incalculable human lives, as well as animal lives. The feline AIDs vaccine was developed using animal testing, as well as heartworm medication and other parasites.
Then again, I'm opposed to embryonic stem cell testing, which makes me a bloody hypocrite since other people will pose the exact same arguments I'm using now and it won't change my opinion that the cost of a human life is not worth it, just as people believe an animal's life isn't worth it. I'm sure no one here agrees with the nazis using humans as test subjects, but if there's a cure to AIDs in there, I'm also pretty sure we won't toss it away. There's a big ethical dilema in that.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sun Feb 04, 2007 12:00 pm
From all of the things I've heard about PETA I get this weird feeling that they have some ulterior motive. Like maybe they want to capture all animals and kill them since that's all they seem to do a majority of the time. And I mean seriously, stealing pets from people? wtf PETA...wtf?
I have 3 pound puppies myself. I love animals and we always rescue and adopt from shelters. We'd have some cats too but my mom and I are allergic to them sadly. (I've always wanted a kitty crying )
We rescued some quail chicks outside my house once. A neighborhood cat got their mother and so I looked online how to care for quails and where to take them. We warmed the poor dears up (they were half frozen when we got to them) and took them to a nearby quail rescue center I found online immediately. We're always rescuing some kinds of birds...we've had so many bird chicks in our yard over the years, always catching them and putting them back up into their nests and making sure our crazy dogs don't eat them. sweatdrop
PETA doesn't save any animals! EVER! mad I can't stand them at all.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
