i like PETA but sometimes their tactics can be extreme

[isabelle_guns]

I like PETA and support their morals and beliefs even though I'm a carnivore/meat lover. However some of the tactics and approaches that PETA go to in order to prove their point can be extreme, disrespectful and tacky.

I drew the line a few months ago when PETA went to various elementary schools and a man dressed as a cow handed out pens that looked like syringes filled with blood.

PETA's pamphlets was that they were trying to bring awareness of hormone and drug injection in cows. They could've handed out non graphic pamphlets instead of syringes in heavy drug neighborhoods. It sent the wrong message to young kids under the age of 13 and was plain tacky.

I also disagree with PETA's protesting tactics. It is no wonder they are so hated.

Don't get me wrong, I am all about animal rights if the protest/awareness is done in a reasonable manner.

 

[Lilac]

I totally agree! I am also an animal lover but meat eater (as long as I don't have to cook it and see the blood) But I believe they hurt their cause more than they help it by handing out 'Unhappy Meals' to kids coming into McDonald's featuring toy calves with bloody axes in their heads, or when they throw blood on fur coats. It's like the anti-abortion activists (and I am against abortion myself) who throw bloody fetuses and yell 'baby killer' at people. It does nothing to help win anyone over to the cause it only serves to brand and label all of those beliefs as extremists, zealots and weirdos with no credibility which is not the case at all. The PETA activists have come to the support of the tactics used by anti-abortion groups because they do things like that too and want to defend the right to do it. While they do have a right I do not feel it is in the best interest of their cause.

Another thing that upsets me about PETA is they care more about cows and chickens than they do dogs and cats. Where were they when Athens was poisoning all those strays? You almost never hear about them doing anything to save or protect dogs and cats. I think it's because they don't like them because they are hunters and carnivores by nature and cannot be trained to be vegetarians! On the other hand, cows and chickens and deer are natural vegetarians and that's why they care more about them! I even heard a vegan girl who worked for PETA once say that it was too hard to get cats to eat those soy meat substitutes and that even if a dog did eat them it was too expensive to feed them enough to fill them up! So that shows me they don't want dogs or cats around because they eat meat! They are also very against dogs and cats being let outside because cats eat birds and mice and dogs eat squirrels and rabbits, and that they'd rather see them all put down if they didn't belong to a person who was going to keep them exclusively indoors and feed them vegan diets, which is not realistic in most cases. So I belong to The Humane Society instead since they are more pet oriented and aim to stop abuse of domestic animals too.

 

[Lilac]

There is far too much intentional cruelty and abuse of domestic animals in the world today, and there need to be tougher laws to discourage these sick acts. But PETA seems much more concerned with pushing a vegan diet on everyone rather than stopping animal cruelty to all species. Not just vegetarian, but total vegan, no eggs or milk, not even mixed into bread or pasta. I have gotten several of their pamphets and know this is true. I wonder what they expect people to do with millions of cows, pigs, and chickens if the meat industry is shut down, I don't see them being kept as pets or being allowed to live free on large farms at great cost to the owners, it is not realistic.

 

[Tomer]

whats peta?

 

[Lilac]

People for the
Ethical
Treatment of
Animals

http://www.peta.org/

 

[Lilac]

so today there is more dog and cat stuff on their site, maybe they are changing, I hope so.

 

[Liesje]

PETA

That one ad they had with the cat orgy was hilarious though

 

[LoveTown]

Well I've been a vegetarian for 17 years in Novemeber...yep, turned when I was 11 for animal rights reasons and even I think PETEA is extreme sometimes!!

Afterall, you will attract more flies with honey than with vinegar

 

[Sheltie]

Im a vegetarian but I do use dairy products. However I only use organic dairy products which are really on the rise now. Organic farmers have certain guide lines they must follow in order to be considered organic. For example, the animals must be able to graze and are only fed organic feed. These products also taste very fresh.
Check out: organicvalley.com
I agree that PETA does get a little extreme but I also believe when it comes to animal rights and animal abuse it is apropriate to get a little extreme to make a point.

 

[kobayashi]

in talking about it, you prove the effectiveness of PETA.
few disagree with animal rights, whether you like the tactics used by PETA or not, they get talked about and thus keep animal rights a front-of-mind issue for many.

 

[anitram]

I'm a very liberal, very leftist person, who grew up with parents who were like Dr. Doolittle. I've owned all sorts of pets, from birds, to turtles, to rabbits, to dogs. I'm a huge animal lover.

However, I consider PETA to be borderline domestic terrorists. I have little to no respect for them and their tactics. And I'm sick to death of getting bomb threats at work, because the facility I work in houses an animal research laboratory. It is also the 3rd best children's hospital in the world, but hey, it's not like animal activists give a shit when they threaten to bomb the bunnies underneath the leukemia ward.

 

[Liesje]

However, I consider PETA to be borderline domestic terrorists. I have little to no respect for them and their tactics. And I'm sick to death of getting bomb threats at work, because the facility I work in houses an animal research laboratory. It is also the 3rd best children's hospital in the world, but hey, it's not like animal activists give a shit when they threaten to bomb the bunnies underneath the leukemia ward.

That is pretty disturbing. My mom always says people react more to animals than humans. If an animal is in trouble, the world stops to help it, but when thousands of people are needlessly dying every day, no one much cares.

I got my kitten from a lab on my college's campus and I'm so sick of explaining to people that there's nothing wrong with him and neither he nor any animal there were used for harmful experiments. Basically, they take rejected kittens or overflow cats from local shelters, put them under anesthesia and use them for an intubation demonstration for med students. So the cat gets a tube down his throat, but he's out so he doesn't know and never feels it, then they neuter the cat and give him away for free. They've never euthanized a cat there, which most animal shelters can't even say.

 

[Sheltie]

I support PETA on their views regarding animal research. I think any kind of animal research is wrong and not needed. In todays tech advanced society, I am sure there are other ways to conduct research. I cant say what ways because I am not a scientist, but I am sure it can be done.
I do not support any groups such as the American Cancer Society, March of Dimes, or any group which uses animal research.
Its my personal choice and I understand everyone does not feel that way. However, that is the way I feel and what I believe to be humane as well as responsible.

 

[verte76]

I think this stuff is terrible. It's way too graphic. When I think of PETA, quite frankly I think of nutty tactics and such.

 

[anitram]

I support PETA on their views regarding animal research. I think any kind of animal research is wrong and not needed. In todays tech advanced society, I am sure there are other ways to conduct research. I cant say what ways because I am not a scientist, but I am sure it can be done.

Without using animals, there is essentially no research. It really is as simple as that.

You can never do research without animal models for certain things. People think that scientists cut up mice and all they should do is instead do a dissection on the computer. We are working on drugs against lymphomas, drugs to battle leukemia, blockers for women with highly invasive breast cancers, blockers for prostate cancers, etc.

You can synthesize drugs and test them in vitro. If you do not support animal research, then you essentially support human research, because there are no sound ways to conduct in vivo toxicity tests without model animals. What I am saying to you is that you are advocating we shoot cancer kids up with drugs that could kill them with toxicity, because we did not first test in vivo systems in say, a rabbit.

Also, there is NO WAY to synthesize A SINGLE antibody without producing it in a host animal. Rabbit, goat, donkey and mouse are the most common. Without antibodies, you can shut down 95% of research completely tomorrow morning. No vaccines, no antibiotics, no painkillers, no mutations, no diagnostic tests for your bloodwork, etc.

You don't even need to get this highly technical. Any shampoo that you buy, any soap, any lotion will have been tested on animals or it would not be on the market. Animal research therefore doesn't just apply to high science, but to how ordinary people live their lives. Don't belive The Body Shop's bullshit about "no animal testing." All that means is that their end product has not been tested on the animal, but EVERY SINGLE COMPONENT of that shampoo, or lotion has been tested on the animal or it would not be allowed on the market.

 

[Lilac]

I do not see any point in testing shampoo or lotion on rabbits to see if it will hurt your eyes or not. Chances are, it will, so just say, don't let it get in your eyes, and that should cover it all!

 

[anitram]

That isn't why they test it. Obviously it is common sense not to get shampoo in your eyes, because it is basic enough that it will sting regardless

They test it to see how abrasive the chemicals are to your skin or your scalp. If you were buying a shampoo that said "May burn your scalp resulting in hair loss and hair shaft damage" do you seriously mean to tell me you would buy it and take that chance?

 

[Leeloo]

Haven't we been making shampoos long enough to know from experience which chemicals burn and which ones don't? Aren't they basically the same formulas over again with different colors and fragrances added?

 

[Angela Harlem]

Is PETA about mistreatment or an anti science mob?

 

[RockNRollDawgie]

PETA turns me off. I'm all for the ethical treatment of animals, but PETA's methods
cross the line a lot.
Also not surprised Paul McCartney is distancing himself from that organization.

 

[Sheltie]

I still believe animal research is wrong. There are products on the market which are not tested on animals. For example, Berts Bees products are all natural and not tested on animals.
Also, scientists in research often try to justify research on animals because they want to continue to get funding. Being that they are supposed to be so intelligent, why cant they come up with a better way?

 

[Liesje]

I support PETA on their views regarding animal research. I think any kind of animal research is wrong and not needed. In todays tech advanced society, I am sure there are other ways to conduct research. I cant say what ways because I am not a scientist, but I am sure it can be done.
I do not support any groups such as the American Cancer Society, March of Dimes, or any group which uses animal research.
Its my personal choice and I understand everyone does not feel that way. However, that is the way I feel and what I believe to be humane as well as responsible.

Well I can say with certainty that my cat was used for a demonstration in a research lab and he came out just fine. Not only that, but now the people who watched the demonstration know how to save the life of a baby. You say you don't know of another way to do the research b/c you're not a scientist, here's the answer: a cat's throat is the same size as a human baby's so that's why they use a cat to teach med students how to intubate children. If you don't support this type of animal research, then when your child is sick and dying you can tell the doctor he's not allowed to use a tube. I bet there's hardly any drugs or medical products or even cosmetics out there that weren't in some way tested with animals. I don't think people who are absolutely against animal research have any clue how many products they use daily that were tested with animals. I love animals, but I can't feel more sorry for the life of a few bunnies than millions of sick and dying people all over the world. I respect your opinion, but I think you might feel differently if you ever had cancer or AIDS or another life threatening condition.

 

[Sheltie]

PETA believes that animals deserve the most basic rights-consideration of their own best interests regardless of whether they are useful to humans. Like you, they are capable of suffering and have interests in leading their own lives. Therefore, they are not ours to use- for food, clothing, entertainment , or experimentation, or for any other reason.

Visit www.PETA.org
Click on living and you will be provided with a list of products and companies that do not use animal research.

 

[BAW]

Whether I agree with PETA's mission or not, I can't give my support to an organization that destroys and vandalizes other people's property to get their message out.

 

[Liesje]

Therefore, they are not ours to use- for food, clothing, entertainment , or experimentation, or for any other reason.

I don't want to get into a religious debate, but I guess my response is that I believe mankind was created in the image of God and animals were not. I do not support cruelty or unnecessary use of animal experimentation, but when it comes down to curing cancer, preventing AIDS, etc, I just don't believe animals have the same rights as humans.

And like BAW said, I'd give PETA more respect and maybe show some interest in their cause if they didn't trade one right for another and literally destroy someone else's cause.

 

[ThatGuy]

I don't think it necessarily has to come down to a religious debate. I think humans have the "right" to eat animals simply because we are at the top of the food chain. Does a bear have the "right" to eat a poor defenseless salmon? Does a lioness have the "right" to eat a zebra?

I respect anyone who feels that they do not want to eat animals or use them for clothing. That's their decision. But when they start telling me that I shouldn't either then I'd have to ask them for evidence to back that up.

This is not to say that people shouldn't treat animals better. Corporate farms are terrible places for animals to live, and should be run in ways that show more respect for the animals. In that respect, I do agree with PETA.

Regarding animal testing ... I don't think that any researcher that uses animals for testing particularly enjoys hurting animals. But I look at it this way, would I rather have them test out a new vaccine on a bunny, or me and my family? Cruel or no, I put my family and most other people at a higher level than a bunny.

This was ramble-ey.

 

[Lilac]

Animal testing gets far out of hand when much of it is done unnecessarily or excessively, especially in cases where holding onto funding is the main objective and not the cure for any disease. There have also been cases where peoples' pets were being stolen and sold to research labs for money. The reasoning behind stealing pets as opposed to using pound animals was that they were more docile, intelligent and worked better with humans. Some of these beloved dogs and cats suffered terribly as hideous operations and dissections were performed on them while still alive in the name of science. I don't know where to begin to look for links to this, but I have heard so much about it I don't doubt it. Not every bit of animal research is saving someone's life from a dreaded disease. A lot of it is the useless and cruel waste of life that no innocent creature should have to suffer. I have read many reports of trivial tests causing many animals much torture. I have also seen reports of people locating their lost dogs after having been in one of those labs and the sad condition they were in. Others were too late and were appalled at the way their pet had suffered and died. Some labs offered as much as $300 for a tame, intelligent large breed dog. They may not have known where the dogs came from, and they may not have encouraged or supported the stealing, but I don't think they asked any questions either. It was a big racket, and may still be for all I know. But I haven't heard any stories on this in several years.

Do the scientists want to hurt the animal, I don't even think that's a question. I don't believe they look at it with that kind of emotion and reach a point where they don't think about it. They have become so desensitised to it it's no more than changing shoes to them. It's the same as the way doctors and medical school students are able to handle such disturbing and grosteque situations that would put an ordinary person under the table. They look at it a different way. But in that way they lose all feeling for the animal and look at it as a thing.

 

[ThatGuy]

Anecdotal evedence is nice, but completely unprovable. And are you suggesting that all animal tests are run this way? And if yes, then wouldn't the solution be to place some restrictions on testing rather than just banning it outright?

You're making a lot of unfounded claims about what animal research is really all about. I'd be more inclined to believe you if you presented some evidence.

 

[nbcrusader]

PETA lives by their own morals and they are horribly inconsistent.

 

[Lilac]

Anecdotal evedence is nice, but completely unprovable. And are you suggesting that all animal tests are run this way? And if yes, then wouldn't the solution be to place some restrictions on testing rather than just banning it outright?

You're making a lot of unfounded claims about what animal research is really all about. I'd be more inclined to believe you if you presented some evidence.

I knew that was coming, that's why I said I had no idea where to look for links to this, or even what to google it under, and honestly I don't have several hours to figure it out. I have seen these stories on TV, read them in publications complete with pictures, and heard first hand accounts. It has happened. As a matter of fact several years ago it was such common knowledge that whenever someone's pet went missing this was the first thing they feared. Most animal orgainizations will tell you to screen who you give a 'free' pet to as this is also a common way labs are supplied besides the stealing.

No, of course I'm not saying 'all' experiments are using pets gotten under false pretenses, but it happens, it has happened, and if you want to call me a liar and disregard this that's your stupidity. You can take hours to google for the story, I don't have time and I don't have to prove it to you.