Huh? What?!? Peta blog article

  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Aug 08, 2008 3:49 AM GMT
    http://blog.peta.org/archives/2008/08/we_got_your_hat.php

    I don't understand this. I personally think people have a right to be vegan or vegetarian for moral reasons, but is this just going a little too far? How can someone compare an animal's life to a human life?

    If some of you are unfamiliar of what this is referring to, a few days a ago, a 22 year-old man on a Greyhound bus was stabbed repeatedly, decapitated, and cannibalized.

    My question is, "How can someone think an animal's life is worth just as much as a human life?"

    I'm not trying to start a flame war, but to me, the two are entirely different. I did some research, and it seems to better to have a face to a name, so here are some links in reference to the deceased.

    http://www.spock.com/Tim-McLean-3AO2y1BZ


    http://www.myspace.com/108390479


    http://www.timmclean.org/

    Surprisingly, when the person who wrote this blog on Peta, they forgot his picture.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Aug 08, 2008 3:57 AM GMT
    Peta just uses shock factors to illustrate their point. I recall one ad I read on the DC Metro that said we should use infants and children for cosmetic and medical tests, since they would give better and more accurate results. And it wouldn't harm animals. I would say that they were making a "Modest Proposal" type point, but who knows. They can be just as militant as any other group out there.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Aug 08, 2008 4:52 AM GMT
    Watch "I Am An Animal: The Ingrid Newkirk Story."


  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Aug 08, 2008 9:12 AM GMT
    I think PETA explained themselves quite well in the article. However, it is unfortunate that they had chosen to use this particular heinious crime to compare with people when they eat meat. Most people, I think, are not aware of the horror that animals must go through when entering a slaughter house or the pain they suffer when being killed. Therefore, this comparison is illogical.

    As far as comparing animal life to human life, life is life and humans are animals.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Aug 08, 2008 10:37 AM GMT
    I agree with Alexander7. Animals have feelings, they feel pain, and they have emotions. We could learn a lot from animals. For example my dogs love me no matter what. They are always happy to see me. There love is unconditional. I am not a vegan. I wish I was, but I don't like most vegetables. I hate what we do to animals. People can be so cruel, not only to animals but to each other.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Aug 08, 2008 11:54 AM GMT
    God put us on this earth along with every living thing here... and He put us over them. Personally, I don't think we can equate ourselves to animals... however we do have stewardship over them. How we treat them, just like how we treat each other, is a reflection of how we honor God.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Aug 08, 2008 1:20 PM GMT


    We're omnivores. The way animals are killed for food is inhumane. There has to be a HUGE push before this will change. PETA is handy this way, but extremist and blatantly opportunistic, which turns people off and discredits them.

    Animals are just as nasty when they kill for food. Ever watch a cat kill a mouse or a bird? The torture goes on and on. We can't consider ourselves above the aminal kingdom if we behave the same way, can we?

  • Aug 08, 2008 2:05 PM GMT
    If life is life then why is it acceptable to kill plants but not Ok to kill animals? The only people who have any right to take issue with eating animals are the Jains. They at least have the integrity to say that ALL life is sacred, and will only eat things like fruits, where the plant also does not die.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Aug 08, 2008 2:09 PM GMT
    cougarwalker79 saidIf life is life then why is it acceptable to kill plants but not Ok to kill animals? The only people who have any right to take issue with eating animals are the Jains. They at least have the integrity to say that ALL life is sacred, and will only eat things like fruits, where the plant also does not die.


    What is it about this conversation that makes people say the most idiotic things?
    (on both sides)
    In this case , Peta is attempting to shed light on the inhumane treatment and processing of animals, not arguing the "sacredness" of life. You're creating a dialogue that just isn't there.
    I think that ad is beyond offensive and insensitive.


  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Aug 08, 2008 2:14 PM GMT
    As omnivores, it is in our best interests to integrate with our habitat, not conquer it. The Native American approach to killing and eating animals is one I can respect. This is where I think PETA misses the whole point. Ecology is so much more important than the suffering of one subway rat.

    Sometimes I wonder if PETA-ites are on some sort of life-long guilt trip that they simply cannot shake.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Aug 08, 2008 2:26 PM GMT
    XRuggerATX saidAs omnivores, it is in our best interests to integrate with our habitat, not conquer it. The Native American approach to killing and eating animals is one I can respect. This is where I think PETA misses the whole point. Ecology is so much more important than the suffering of one subway rat.

    Sometimes I wonder if PETA-ites are on some sort of life-long guilt trip that they simply cannot shake.


    If you are concerned about "ecology" , it is not just PETA that has it wrong, we all do.
    If you hunt for a majority of your food or eat wild game instead of animals from factory farms, grow your food in a garden, then I will buy your interest in ecology, otherwise it is just a word and an excuse to justify bad behavior.

    Everyone is quick to demonize a group that isn't harming you at all or making anything worse or harder for you.
    We are confronted with offensive images every day that largely go unnoticed. I am not sure why PETA gets everyone so suddenly concerned with what is "natural".

  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Aug 08, 2008 6:45 PM GMT
    mnjock2003 said
    XRuggerATX saidAs omnivores, it is in our best interests to integrate with our habitat, not conquer it. The Native American approach to killing and eating animals is one I can respect. This is where I think PETA misses the whole point. Ecology is so much more important than the suffering of one subway rat.

    Sometimes I wonder if PETA-ites are on some sort of life-long guilt trip that they simply cannot shake.


    If you are concerned about "ecology" , it is not just PETA that has it wrong, we all do.
    If you hunt for a majority of your food or eat wild game instead of animals from factory farms, grow your food in a garden, then I will buy your interest in ecology, otherwise it is just a word and an excuse to justify bad behavior.

    Everyone is quick to demonize a group that isn't harming you at all or making anything worse or harder for you.
    We are confronted with offensive images every day that largely go unnoticed. I am not sure why PETA gets everyone so suddenly concerned with what is "natural".



    But this thread was about PETA. Would you like me to cite every ecological injustice? OK...fossil fuels, factory farms, golf courses, killing off grey wolves...OK I think that's enough to start a good dozen tangents. I've done that enough already on other threads though. I'm surprised anyone would actually encourage it.

    For what it's worth, I am doing my best to follow the ideals that Micheal Pollan portrays in The Omnivores Dilemma. Much of what you're proposing is what I am already doing. But I don't hunt yet. Maybe never. Still, let's not slam someone for doing his best, even if it is not perfect. Getting there though.

    Oh...and I make a living doing ecological restoration. Buying it yet?

    No pun intended, but PETA is not seeing the forest for the trees. They're placing the moral point of origin on neurologically advanced species, even if those species may be either part of a food chain, or destructive to another major moral point of origin...namely ecological balance and the earth's equilibrium. I argue that the latter trumps the former, and should be what we strive to protect.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Aug 08, 2008 7:22 PM GMT
    PETA, as far as I know, has done absolutely nothing to destroy the Earths ecology , so I am not sure why that or subway rats were brought up.If you have facts to show otherwise, I would love to see them.
    Factory farming, testing on animals and zoo's have zero to do with the actual restoration of the Earths natural balance. In fact, over fishing and livestock production have led to dead seas, de forestation and disease outbreaks.

  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Aug 08, 2008 7:34 PM GMT
    mnjock2003 saidPETA, as far as I know, has done absolutely nothing to destroy the Earths ecology , so I am not sure why that or subway rats were brought up.If you have facts to show otherwise, I would love to see them.
    Factory farming, testing on animals and zoo's have zero to do with the actual restoration of the Earths natural balance. In fact, over fishing and livestock production have led to dead seas, de forestation and disease outbreaks.



    I never said PETA destroys ecosystems. I thought you were more grown up than to turn statements into hyperbole in order to make your own point seem more sensible. If that's how you want to play, I'm checking out.

    PETA would not appreciate my support for deer hunting. But deer voerpopulation ruining my local ecology (granted, if you want to get into a deeper philosophical discussion, we can talk about encouraging the return grey wolves instead of hunting). PETA would not support my spot in the food chain, even though my body chemistry needs animal protien. That's all I was really getting at.

    I'm against factory farming, animal testing, and most zoos. But from what I understand, PETA is too absolutist. They humanize that which is not human, which is a flawed approach and can lead to poor decisions about our ecology, our diet, and our health (somewhat related to the subway rat example).
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Aug 08, 2008 7:56 PM GMT
    XRuggerATX said

    I never said PETA destroys ecosystems. I thought you were more grown up than to turn statements into hyperbole in order to make your own point seem more sensible. If that's how you want to play, I'm checking out.

    PETA would not appreciate my support for deer hunting. But deer voerpopulation ruining my local ecology (granted, if you want to get into a deeper philosophical discussion, we can talk about encouraging the return grey wolves instead of hunting). PETA would not support my spot in the food chain, even though my body chemistry needs animal protien. That's all I was really getting at.

    I'm against factory farming, animal testing, and most zoos. But from what I understand, PETA is too absolutist. They humanize that which is not human, which is a flawed approach and can lead to poor decisions about our ecology and our diet.


    I apologize. I must have misunderstood where you were going with your argument. This is a thread about PETA and you brought up ecology. I thought you were trying to make a connection. My bad.
    If we lived in a world of ecological balance, there would be no PETA. They exist as a byproduct of neglect and abuse. If you are concerned about the environment and ecology, which I believe you are, it would seem your complaints should be directed elsewhere. when someone posts about eating wild fish, eating fast food and drinking factory farmed milk you remain silent. But on all of these PETA threads , you always speak out against them and I find that very strange considering how bad the aforementioned are to the natural balance of the earth in 2008, not BC. Given the state of the earth at this moment, encouraging vegetarianism and humane treatment is not damaging to the earth , at all.
    Your theories about them being so absolute as an organization are also skewed. Yes,they use a lot of propaganda and tacky images. ( 80% or organizations do), but their main concern is animal welfare, not converting every living person into veganism.
    An example....PETA worked with KFC in canada to put vegan chicken on the menu and to slaughter the chickens in a humane manner and considered that a victory. THey didn't say, stop serving chicken or we will continue to picket. They asked them to adopt more humane slaughter methods and after months of protesting, they did. Everybody wins here.

    As far as preserving the environment and restoring a natural balance, PETA is predominantly on your side. Targeting meat that was humanely raised and slaughtered is not even on PETAs radar.


  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Aug 08, 2008 8:25 PM GMT
    mnjock2003 said
    XRuggerATX said

    I never said PETA destroys ecosystems. I thought you were more grown up than to turn statements into hyperbole in order to make your own point seem more sensible. If that's how you want to play, I'm checking out.

    PETA would not appreciate my support for deer hunting. But deer voerpopulation ruining my local ecology (granted, if you want to get into a deeper philosophical discussion, we can talk about encouraging the return grey wolves instead of hunting). PETA would not support my spot in the food chain, even though my body chemistry needs animal protien. That's all I was really getting at.

    I'm against factory farming, animal testing, and most zoos. But from what I understand, PETA is too absolutist. They humanize that which is not human, which is a flawed approach and can lead to poor decisions about our ecology and our diet.


    I apologize. I must have misunderstood where you were going with your argument. This is a thread about PETA and you brought up ecology. I thought you were trying to make a connection. My bad.
    If we lived in a world of ecological balance, there would be no PETA. They exist as a byproduct of neglect and abuse. If you are concerned about the environment and ecology, which I believe you are, it would seem your complaints should be directed elsewhere. when someone posts about eating wild fish, eating fast food and drinking factory farmed milk you remain silent. But on all of these PETA threads , you always speak out against them and I find that very strange considering how bad the aforementioned are to the natural balance of the earth in 2008, not BC. Given the state of the earth at this moment, encouraging vegetarianism and humane treatment is not damaging to the earth , at all.
    Your theories about them being so absolute as an organization is also skewed. Yes,they use a lot of propaganda and tacky images. ( 80% or organizations do), but their main concern is animal welfare, not converting every living person into veganism.
    An example....PETA worked with KFC in canada to put vegan chicken on the menu and to slaughter the chickens in a humane manner and considered that a victory. THey didn't say, stop serving chicken or we will continue to picket. They asked them to adopt more humane slaughter methods and after months of protesting, they did. Everybody wins here.

    As far as preserving the environment and restoring a natural balance, PETA is predominantly on your side. Targeting meat that was humanely raised and slaughtered is not even on PETAs radar.




    I'm so sorry...did I remain silent on some threads? Look. I reply to threads when I have the time AND I can see the topic fairly easily AND I have something to say that someone else hasn't already said. But even then, contrary to my posting total after one year, I fight these battles elsewhere besides RealJock. So don't be a forum nazi. I don't have to post my opinion every time a subject that relates to my work presents itself. Christ I cannot believe you seriously made this point.

    Your (uncharacteristic for a Minnesotan) sarcasm about my bring up ecology notwithstanding, apparently I don't understand PETA after all. Yes, inclusion of ecology in the discussion apparently came from a flawed perception of where PETA stood. I thought they were for zero killing of animals by humans. I'm being serious. I need to do more homework. I guess their propaganda betrays their true stance.

    Sorry to waste everyone's bandwidth.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Aug 08, 2008 8:40 PM GMT
    XRuggerATX said


    Your (uncharacteristic for a Minnesotan) sarcasm about my bring up ecology notwithstanding, apparently I don't understand PETA after all. Yes, inclusion of ecology in the discussion apparently came from a flawed perception of where PETA stood. I thought they were for zero killing of animals by humans. I'm being serious. I need to do more homework. I guess their propaganda betrays their true stance.

    Sorry to waste everyone's bandwidth.


    I am attempting to ignore your attempt to make this personal and focus on the larger picture.
    PETA is against the killing of all animals, without a doubt. I don't mean to insinuate otherwise. These people drink the" kool aid". However , they also realize Rome was not built in a day and eliminating unnecessary animal suffering is job #1 for them right now. Humane slaughter is a goal of theirs. Just as they euthanize animals at their headquarters, they realize that eliminating animal deaths all together is not practical.
    I do not support their propaganda and ignorant comments, however, I am aware of their contributions and honor their sacrifice and the face they have given to animal abuse.
    A middle ground exists here. I can choose to not eat animals and still respect where you are coming from and understand the necessity of hunting.
    Your original assertion that we are on a life long guilt trip seems condescending and has zero relevance to my contributions to PETA.
    oh well.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Aug 08, 2008 8:53 PM GMT
    mnjock2003 said
    XRuggerATX said


    Your (uncharacteristic for a Minnesotan) sarcasm about my bring up ecology notwithstanding, apparently I don't understand PETA after all. Yes, inclusion of ecology in the discussion apparently came from a flawed perception of where PETA stood. I thought they were for zero killing of animals by humans. I'm being serious. I need to do more homework. I guess their propaganda betrays their true stance.

    Sorry to waste everyone's bandwidth.


    I am attempting to ignore your attempt to make this personal and focus on the larger picture.
    PETA is against the killing of all animals, without a doubt. I don't mean to insinuate otherwise. These people drink the" kool aid". However , they also realize Rome was not built in a day and eliminating unnecessary animal suffering is job #1 for them right now. Humane slaughter is a goal of theirs. Just as they euthanize animals at their headquarters, they realize that eliminating animal deaths all together is not practical.
    I do not support their propaganda and ignorant comments, however, I am aware of their contributions and honor their sacrifice and the face they have given to animal abuse.
    A middle ground exists here. I can choose to not eat animals and still respect where you are coming from and understand the necessity of hunting.
    Your original assertion that we are on a life long guilt trip seems condescending and has zero relevance to my contributions to PETA.
    oh well.


    Who made it personal?:

    mnjock2003 said: "when someone posts about eating wild fish, eating fast food and drinking factory farmed milk you remain silent."

    "you" means me, right? OK thought so. So stop with the double fucking standard regarding how you want these posts to play out.

    Look...I've never known a PETA person to be anything but irrationally overzealous. I thought maybe there was a guilt complex going on. I guess I need to meet more of them, assuming I don't slit my wrists from the overwhelming depression in the process.

    I'm fully capable of seeing things through a supposed adversary's eyes (see christianity thread), but something about the way you carry on does not seem to foster that sort of discourse. Then, I curse.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Aug 08, 2008 9:13 PM GMT
    XRuggerATX said
    Who made it personal?:



    "Your (uncharacteristic for a Minnesotan) sarcasm "


    "So don't be a forum nazi"

    "Sometimes I wonder if PETA-ites are on some sort of life-long guilt trip that they simply cannot shake".

    " I thought you were more grown up "




    "Look...I've never known a PETA person to be anything but irrationally overzealous. I thought maybe there was a guilt complex going on. I guess I need to meet more of them, assuming I don't slit my wrists from the overwhelming depression in the process."



    Yeah, good question... lol.icon_lol.gif

    I should have known where this was headed.
    Everything is a fucking pissing contest in this place when it comes to animals, religion and republicans.
    My approach isn't exactly fresh either, so I am sorry if I disrespected you. I am passionate about animal welfare and people putting their neck out to do what they think is the right thing.

    These conversations become so fucking tedious that it is painful and I swear I will learn my lesson.


    I saw PETA and I took the bait.


  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Aug 08, 2008 9:37 PM GMT
    mnjock2003 said
    XRuggerATX said
    Who made it personal?:



    "Your (uncharacteristic for a Minnesotan) sarcasm "


    "So don't be a forum nazi"

    "Sometimes I wonder if PETA-ites are on some sort of life-long guilt trip that they simply cannot shake".

    " I thought you were more grown up "




    "Look...I've never known a PETA person to be anything but irrationally overzealous. I thought maybe there was a guilt complex going on. I guess I need to meet more of them, assuming I don't slit my wrists from the overwhelming depression in the process."



    Yeah, good question... lol.icon_lol.gif

    I should have known where this was headed.
    Everything is a fucking pissing contest in this place when it comes to animals, religion and republicans.
    My approach isn't exactly fresh either, so I am sorry if I disrespected you. I am passionate about animal welfare and people putting their neck out to do what they think is the right thing.

    These conversations become so fucking tedious that it is painful and I swear I will learn my lesson.


    I saw PETA and I took the bait.




    Likewise. Funny thing is we'd possibly agree on 99.9% of things for all I know, but it's funny how one small difference can turn into one big fight. I'm actually so glad you took this approach because I am tired. Tired of christians and heathens, tired of bigwig crooks and small-time workers, tired of tofurkey and fois gras, tired of seeing myself think on a glowing screen. I posted a lot this week. Time to go outside and play! It's cooling off here in TX (I think).
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Aug 08, 2008 9:44 PM GMT
    Glad to see another PETA thread going off without a tussle.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Aug 08, 2008 9:49 PM GMT
    MunchingZombie saidGlad to see another PETA thread going off without a tussle.


    Nothing gets a party started like a PETA thread....

    Is it time for an Abortion 3 thread yet..?
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Aug 08, 2008 9:58 PM GMT
    alexander7 saidI think PETA explained themselves quite well in the article. However, it is unfortunate that they had chosen to use this particular heinious crime to compare with people when they eat meat. Most people, I think, are not aware of the horror that animals must go through when entering a slaughter house or the pain they suffer when being killed. Therefore, this comparison is illogical.

    As far as comparing animal life to human life, life is life and humans are animals.


    I'm starting the see that life is life, and all are precious. I still can't equate the two; I guess like you said, the comparison is illogical. I just wish activist groups would not use a families misery to make a political point. Ah well...icon_neutral.gif
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Aug 08, 2008 10:54 PM GMT
    Could we get back to the issue that was brought up first?
    PETA exploited this young man's murder to get themselves publicity and money. It was hypocritical, shameful and shocking.
    This is typical of PETA. They've also used "Holocaust on your Plate," comparing animals to victims of the Nazi atrocities.

  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Aug 09, 2008 5:59 AM GMT
    This ad is disconcerting! I have no respect for this organization, if they presented themselves professionally I would give them the time of day.

    Dingbats.