PETA: Sinking to New lows

They have hit bottom and started to dig

Published on August 1, 2005 By Dr Guy In Current Events

In another show of callous disregard to the human race or anything approaching humanity, PETA has a new Ad Campaign against people. Except this time they really have gone too far! Instead of enobling their cause, which I am sure was their aim, they just demonstrate how callous and inhumane they are.

In the latest Ad campaign, they are equating selling breeding cattle and horses to the horror of the slave trade 200 years ago! They are not enobling their cause, they are cheapening the plight of the blacks of that age! And that is just plain sickening!

If there was any shred of humanity or compassion in those clowns before, it is apparent that they have none now. It is too bad that they take what is arguably one of the most tragic times in American history and belittling it by comparing it to the selling of Cattle!

They are beneath contempt! They do not deserve even the effort for spitting on them, for that would be to acknowledge them as contemptable, and that is too good for those creeps.

Comments (Page 5)

KarmaGirl

on Aug 09, 2005

we are the SINGLE greatest predator on the planet, the apex of all predators, and why?

Where would we be without weapons? What if you could only eat what you could kill with your own two hands? We're really pretty pathetic without our clothes, shelter and tools.

No, why humans are at the top of the food chain is because we have the ability to reason. With that, we should have the ability to treat animals humanely, but we don't always do that. Eating meat is one thing- inhumanely slaughtering animals is completely different.

drmiler

on Aug 09, 2005

See the problem here Karma is that PETA makes NO distinction between the 2. There are people out there that do kill animals just for the heck of it. But killing for eats is a different story.

And btw what would "you" consider inhumane slaughtering?

stutefish

on Aug 09, 2005

Karma, we do have the ability to treat animals humanely. People do it all the time.

Anyway, what if the cheetah could only eat what it could kill without using its claws, or its unique ability to run really fast?

What if the eagle could only eat what it could catch between its legs, with one eye closed?

What if the ant had to make do without chemical trail markers?

What if the buffalo were only allowed to use one of its stomachs to digest grass?

What if the black widow weren't allowed to poison its prey? What if the orb weaver spider had to make do without its net?

Reason is the natural tool of human beings, just as the trunk is a natural tool of elephants and sonar is a natural tool of bats and dolphins.

And that's why we're at the top of the food chain: because the ability to reason, and to choose our course of action rather than obeying blind instinct, trumps all other survival characteristics we know of.

Of course, it's the ability to choose the wrong thing instead of the right thing that gets us into so much trouble and may spell our eventual doom. I'm telling you, instinct never looked so good--where can I get some?

philomedy

on Aug 09, 2005

So far some "well free speech" and some "got your attention", but no one seems to be defending them in this instance.

That's because it's indefensible and wrong.

I was simply saying that if we took PETA's feelings into account, and the people who believe plants have souls into account, we'd starve.

If there are people who believe plants have souls, who are alive, doesn't that disprove your whole statement?

The whole "mocking" thing was directed at me by Champas. I just pointed out that to lambast my "mocking" and ignore PETA's is pretty hypocritical.

How does "Meat is murder" mock you? It may be inflammatory, but it's not mocking. I don't think meat is murder either, and I don't feel mocked. I feel disagreed with, but not mocked.

PETA doesn't just insist we allow THEM to be what they are, they expect, nay PROTEST that we adopt their ways, too. WE are not allowed to kill animals for food, and WE are not allowed to kill animals for leather and fur. They are the ones running roughshod over other people's way of life.

That's the point!!! They're trying to convert people!!! They're going about it the wrong way, certainly, but if they simply insist that we leave them alone they're not doing anything to achieve their goal.

They would be far better served to tell people how happy they are not eating meat, as opposed to berating people who happen to eat meat, but you can't expect them to just want to be left alone, just like you can't expect Jehovah's witnesses to stop going door to door.

philomedy

on Aug 09, 2005

Philo, you are one person that I have never seen use profanity. But you get your zingers in!

Thanks, I try.

Now, Baker, Philo, can we get back to the subject at hand? PETA's stupidity? So far some "well free speech" and some "got your attention", but no one seems to be defending them in this instance.

I don't think PETA's stupidity was ever in question here. That's been a subject we've all agreed on since we started. You can't dispute that they're wrong, and that if they keep going about things in their current manner, they won't be getting many converts.

msladydeath

on Aug 09, 2005

The main problem with PETA is that you really can't reason with them, or even come to a common ground with them. I tried for over a year when I was an AOL member. There is a forum on AOL that is specifically for people to debate those belefs, always ongoing, and never changing. Unfortunatally, they are not the most extreme group. That title goes to ALF.

Animal Liberation Front (ALF), a violent, underground group of fanatics who plant firebombs in restaurants, destroy butcher shops, and torch research labs. The FBI considers ALF among America's most active and prolific terrorist groups, but PETA compares it to the Underground Railroad and the French Resistance. More than 20 years after its inception, PETA continues to hire convicted ALF militants and funds their legal defense. In at least one case, court records show that Ingrid Newkirk herself was involved in an ALF arson.

Oh, and PETA did a campaign comparing Cattle and other animals to Holocost victoms in 2003. Link

The only add I could find about slavery on their site was one about circus animals. Oops, my bad! I found the one I think you were talking about on their site.
Link

Champas Socialist

on Aug 10, 2005

Well, bs, if it wasn't your intention to mock, I apologise, but it did read to me like you were trying to use hyperbole to mock them. If it was a serious question about what we would eat, then I guess I answered your question: we would eat fruit and vegies that have already died/fallen from the tree. (LW, I take no issue with the mocking you did there, it was actually very funny. The difference is you didn't seem to be mocking their beliefs as being silly. However, I put that bit in bold, because I think you missed the important part of the belief and practice).

However, I think Phil pointed out quite well that PETA was not mocking anyone, they just have really irritating and poor methods of converting people. But surely, you have all sunk to their level by indulging in this "PETA are all fanatics who can't be reasoned with, don't think about what they have to say because they're just terrorists" stuff. (Incidentally, is that 'terrorists' in the same way Maggie Thatcher described Nelson Mandela as a terrorist?).

msladydeath, if you follow the link I provided many comments ago, you will see an example of people being able to reason with PETA:

"CHARLES OLSSON: So after two days of giving them as much advice as possible as to what was a real case regarding mulesing and fly strike, you could see that we'd got through to them that it was a national problem and you just really couldn't stop mulesing tomorrow. ...So they realised all of a sudden that not to mules was going to cause more pain and suffering than it was worth...

KERRY LONERGAN: Were they prepared to listen?

CHARLES OLSSON: They seemed to do a pretty good job of it. They were pretty silent and asked a lot of pertinent questions. They had unfortunately talked to certain groups in Australia that may not have put the right point of view across. ...PETA didn't see why that couldn't be rolled out across Australia.

KERRY LONERGAN: And you had to explain that to them?

CHARLES OLSSON: Absolutely...

KERRY LONERGAN: Did they accept that?

CHARLES OLSSON: I believe they did in the end, yes. I think they did."

Dr Guy

on Aug 10, 2005

That being said, PETA actually causes more harm than good towards that end, because their extreme stances alienate people like me, who might actually be on their side if they weren't so militantly damning of those who do choose eat meat and use animal products. (like myself.)

That is exactly how i feel! Have a PU cookie!

Dr Guy

on Aug 10, 2005

Thus, their ads end up saying, "if you already agree with us, then, well... you already agree with us. And if you don't already agree with us, please respectfully consider our total disregard for your cherished values and personal beliefs. We think you are stupid and wrong, and your concerns are irrelevant, and we pretty much hate you for not seeing things the way we do. Please convert to our beliefs immediately!"

You should write copy for their ad agency!

Dr Guy

on Aug 10, 2005

Nothing to add from me...Whip and Stutefish said it quite eloquently!

Ah, but your visiting my blog is the easter egg! Thank you.

bakerstreet

on Aug 10, 2005

"However, I think Phil pointed out quite well that PETA was not mocking anyone, they just have really irritating and poor methods of converting people."

The idea that they can liken the killing of animals to Jews in the holocaust, and you guys can say that we aren't disrespected or mocked is asinine. Had the German people EATEN the Jews killed in concentration camps, would they have been bystanders who could overlook condemnation of the holocaust?

What a load. They have every intention of mocking and insulting, as evidenced by the way they operate. YOU can't say "Meat is Murder" without villifying meat eaters. As far as I am concerned, if I ever survive a plane crash in the mountains, the PETA members get eaten first.

Dr Guy

on Aug 10, 2005

I wonder how a nice PETA member would taste. uhhh hnmmmmmmmm

Check with some of IG's ancestors. They may still have recipes.

Dr Guy

on Aug 10, 2005

As soon as dolphin-eating becomes fashionable, I'm gonna get my cannibalism on.

Remind me not to accept any dinner invitations where I may be the main course!

Dr Guy

on Aug 10, 2005

I agree with both parts of your post. However I would add that the opposible thumbs, and hence the ability to use tools has a large part to do with it as well.

Dr Guy

on Aug 10, 2005

And btw what would "you" consider inhumane slaughtering?

To purposefully cause pain with no apparent gain. Death should be as quick as possible.

Welcome Guest! Please take the time to register with us.
There are many great features available to you once you register, including:

Richer content, access to many features that are disabled for guests like commenting on the forums.
Access to a great community, with a massive database of many, many areas of interest.
Access to contests & subscription offers like exclusive emails.
It's simple, and FREE!