PETA Hypocracy... don't know whether to laugh or cry at this.

[Blade96]

Apparently this is true. I was told by an environmentalist friend of mine (everyone has some shady friends . Baby seals haven't been clubbed in a long while. PETA just cashes in on the fact that a) noone knows and b) people can't see the difference between an adult and a baby seal.

w.

One thing groups like peta love is ignorance. If you dont know, they love it because it means you're easier to influence. I know this for a fact. I was elected to student politics in university along with this guy I know who is the president of a group just as crazy as peta and who told lies and deception just like peta. They try to do this to the uneducated. This guy and his group though, they never laid a finger on me. Why? Because I already knew all about them. and the issue and already knew what my thoughts were and what was true and not true. so pointless for them to try and work on me, and they knew it.

Thats why anti sealing groups like peta and the sea shepherd society were able to influence the european union like they have with our newfoundland seal hunt. Mostly urban, mostly uneducated, who saw the pics and because blood on white ice dont look so good. and there you have it. Groups like that play up to people's emotions rather than to bilogical and realistic facts and they do not care about what the 'truth', like its illegal here in Canada to hunt white coat seals, is.

 

[Langenschwert]

As for the seals themselves: meat is meat. I can eat mince and steak, and wear leather shoes. A seal would be no different to me than a cow.

And seals are basically vermin anyway. If they looked like lobsters no one would care.

Best regards,

-Mark

 

[Flea]

What perfect timing! At least people in my home state got it right ...

Johnstown, PA (GlossyNews) – Local and state police scoured the hills outside rural Johnstown, Pennsylvania, after reports of three animal rights activists going missing after attempting to protest the wearing of leather at a large motorcycle gang rally this weekend. Two others, previously reported missing, were discovered by fast food workers “duct taped inside several fast food restaurant dumpsters,” according to police officials.
“Something just went wrong,” said a still visibly shaken organizer of the protest. “Something just went horribly, horribly, wrong.”

:bangahead:

 

[Jenny_in_Chico]

What perfect timing! At least people in my home state got it right ...



:bangahead:

That was a satirical news story, Flea honey.

 

[Tames D]

Look, whether you agree with him politically or not, the Obamas don't want to be associated with it because PETA apparently are a bunch of nutters.
We have them too here, they are called 'GAIA' and are against anything and everything involving animals. They regularly protest at pharmaceutical companies because they experiment on animals. Apparently, testing whole batches of possibly lethal chemicals on humans is much better.

They have zero respect for actual people and see no qualms in abusing and insulting them, just to get in the news. Same as some of the greenpeace crowd.

Let's just say that I'm not a fan of PETA and the Obamas. They each have their own way of disrespecting people.

 

[Flea]

That was a satirical news story, Flea honey.

And a deadpan post. Don't worry, I know satire when I see it. :angel:

 

[Nolerama]

There are extremists in every group.

PETA is no different from organized religion in terms of the way they spread their word (although a little racy in terms of their current marketing strategy), the way they are organized, and the pillars of "right" and "wrong" set by the leaders at PETA.

And then there are the crazies. They exist in every organization, carrying the proverbial "flag" to the eleventybillionth degree. And making a mess of what that org wants to do.

Not that I think PETA is an organization worth listening to, but they have a right to say what they want, and screw up when they do. In turn, we have the right to enjoy their protests, laugh at them, and ogle the models that are part of their marketing campaign (I hit on a protester once, and tried to get her to go to dinner with me... at a steak house.)

I don't think they'll get in too much trouble for using Mrs. Obama's image in one of their adverts. After a cease and desist letter (and possibly some media exposure-- the REASON why they used her image in the first place) they'll just stop using it.

What is she going to do? Sue PETA? I doubt the Presidency is going to spend time/money on something like that.

 

[JDenver]

I'm with Nolerama.

Seems folks have a hard time not lumping a few hundred thousand people supportive of an organization in with a dozen loonies.

As for the 'hypocrisy'....I don't think so. What, pray tell, is PETA to do with, say, a few thousand cats that no one will adopt? The only 'ugly little secret' is that to this day folks still refuse to pony up $20 to fix their cats. It's entirely cruel.

As for why PETA stands for ____ and not ____...again, folks seem to love masking the pain of their own inaction by expecting those who do commit to action to being saints. With limited funds and resources we expect PETA to get behind EVERYTHING. They should be puritan saints for being outlandish enough to demand that we don't test makeup in the eyes of rabbits.

Nah, I think all the anger and vitroil towards PETA is horribly overdone.

 

[Scott T]

I think it's time. Time to make a mock commercial extolling the virtues of PETA. People for the Eating of Tasty Animals. :headbangin:

Think it'll piss anyone off?

 

[xJOHNx]

I love a good steak and love fried chicken and love ham and bacon... Like I said, as long as they're killed painlessly as possible then okay. They're bred and raised to be our food. Their skins/furs can be used for our clothing along with plant by-products (cotton, et al).

They are not. In none of the slaughterhouses around the world. Not even the Hallal/Koosher ones. As the Muslim executive actually critised the slaughterhouses as not being in line with the rules for Hallal.

@ Bruno: if they had tested penecilline on Rhesus monkeys/ Urang Tangs before applying it to humans, it would have been dismissed as unuseable.
Same goes for Softenon. Monkeys were fine; humans were born with severe malformities. But let's not get to deep into that issue, as it would add another 10 pages to this topic.

To put it in someone else his words:
“If slaughterhouses had glass walls, everyone would be a vegetarian.”

 

[Nolerama]

Just to play somewhat of a "bad guy" in this thread....

Who cares what the animal feel when they die for my consumption?

When I go grocery shopping, do my thoughts drift towards how my packaged meat was killed? Nope. Do I feel the guilt over countless creatures that have some how, made it into my mouth, and into my belly, meeting their fate?

Not at all.

If animals are bred to feed us, then that's what they're there to do. My belly=manufactured animal heaven. They've been engineered for that.

The end of your last post John:

I'm happy to enjoy my roasted pork sandwich while watching PETA/Vegan slaughterhouse propaganda.

 

[Blade96]

They are not. In none of the slaughterhouses around the world.

Dr. Temple Grandin would disagree with that.

 

[xJOHNx]

@ Nolerame: I care. And a great number of people, which only seems to get bigger in time. Please enjoy your sandwich while watching said video's.

@ Blade: It's nothing personal but after 10 years of animal rights activities, I can only cynically laugh at words like Humane and Welfare when used in sentences regarding slaughter. Unless you stress laughter in slaughter

 

[Carol]

. My belly=manufactured animal heaven.

So, in other words, you are saying...

(sorry, couldn't resist)

[yt]QQWpZxi5ix4[/yt]

 

[Sukerkin]

“If slaughterhouses had glass walls, everyone would be a vegetarian.”

That's a fair enough point, I agree.

I am not vegetarian and have not been for a lot of years but my experiences of working on a farm as a youth (which included visits to slaughter-houses) had a major part to play in my deciding to be one long before it became the fashionable 'art-student' thing to do.

I reasoned it through that it was a decision primarily motivated for health but I am positive that my emotions had a role to play in it.

Nowadays, I think if people want to not eat meat or use animal products then that is their choice (if a not very sensible one) but I would rather they don't try and prosleytise their views on me or act like a persecuted Holy-Man when they are in a restaurant ("Look at me, I am so pure because I don't rip flesh!").

As with anything else, people can do as they please just as long as they don't force the rest of society into their own mould.

 

[Blade96]

@ Blade: It's nothing personal but after 10 years of animal rights activities, I can only cynically laugh at words like Humane and Welfare when used in sentences regarding slaughter. Unless you stress laughter in slaughter

That's a reasonable thing to think, I agree, if you do believe that talking about 'animal humane and welfare' while simultaneously believing in killing and eating animals for food aka slaughterhouses is worthy of a Jekyll and Hyde.

Personally, I dont agree. I think one can be an omnivore while still crusading against animal abuse and neglect. Because properly preformed, killing an animal can be much more humane than when it happens in nature.

Just my belief.

 

[JDenver]

I don't understand why things have to be so black and white.

I eat meat, mainly chicken. However, I also know that my body doesn't want to eat meat full of steroids, mass produced on an environmentally toxic farm, slaughtered in a disease infested slaughterhouse that requires meat to be irradiated to 'clean' it. I buy my chicken from a local butcher who gets it from a local free run farm. It costs a whopping $1.50 more per kilo.

Not so black and white. Not so 'never eat meat' or 'yes, slaughter everything'.

 

[xJOHNx]

@ Sukerkin: I no longer try to push my values on other people (if this still would be the case here, I apoligize). I did that 6 years ago, only to realise that it had the reverse effect. And I'm far from a holy man... whatever I have for the animals, I don't have it for most humans.

@ blade: Yes, those words are to me just inventions so that the doubting people can sooth their mind. Yes, as an omnivore you can crusade against abuse and neglect. But it's a different thing to 'crusade' for animal liberation. Also the difference lies in the fact that neglect of domesticated animals is not the same as the systematic slaughter of animals in factories. If you are against the later, it's a bit hypocritical to eat the products, no?

@ jdenver: that resembles most closely to the natural state which humans come from. Somethings in life are just black and white, the moment you add exceptions you are weakening the stance. Something which most animal rights activist can't live with. For example: I cannot be vegan and at the same time say I'm just going to eat chicken once every two months. If I would do that, the whole concept of being vegan is worthless.

edit: I know I sound very militantly. I am, but I'm able to discuss martial arts and other topics without the whole ethic polemics.
Just so you all know.

 

[Sukerkin]

Not a problem at all, John - I certainly did not mean to sound as if I was addressing you directly other than for my opening words :tup:.

 

[Blade96]

@ blade: Yes, those words are to me just inventions so that the doubting people can sooth their mind. Yes, as an omnivore you can crusade against abuse and neglect. But it's a different thing to 'crusade' for animal liberation. Also the difference lies in the fact that neglect of domesticated animals is not the same as the systematic slaughter of animals in factories. If you are against the later, it's a bit hypocritical to eat the products, no?

I can see why you would say that. yes. I'm not vegan or lacto ovo but i see where you're coming from.