Essentially, PETA are people who have too much time and money on their hands worrying about how we should treat animals on an equal level to humans, rather than doing work on the prevention of cruelty to animals or the protection of endangered species. Westerners who are easily affected by fads and trends are drawn to PETA because it's trendy. Vegatarian celebrities support it. It's similar to Scientology in a way. Celebrities go for it because it's different and trendy, and young middle class normal people go for it because celebrities are in it. If one wants to make a real difference for the protection of animals, support the RSPCA/ASPCA and organizations like the World Wildlife Fund or Greenpeace or something. They do far more for animals than PETA ever will.
Doesn't this thread title and sentiment go against the 'no politics', 'no trolling' and to a lesser extent 'no religion' rule as it's purpose is to laugh at a political pressure group and peoples beliefs or does that only count when it's a popular belief that's being 'bwar har har-ed' at? I don't like guns, would it be okay for me to post news articles about hunting accidents and go LAWL at the NRA? Though I agree with some of their sentiments, I know PETA aren't the best folk on the whole, but they have nothing to do with this article, they're not mentioned in it so this whole thread's basically trolling and even if they had, it'd still be borderline on the board rules as I see them as they're a political pressure group.
NO it only counts when its a recognized religious belief ^yes just as long as you don't post threads about gun rights and especially laws proposed or enacted that challenge them.
Rubbish, if I posted anything basically out to mock another political pressure/lobbying group in this manner even if I never commented on it in a serious political tone, I'd be accused of trolling and rightly so. Why is it okay for people to post anti PETA threads, but not anti Halliburton, or NRA or right wing religious pressure groups? Politics is politics and trolling is trolling.
And this wouldnt be so bad if they didnt complain about anyone else doing it. There's a great deal of hypocrisy involving PETA and its leaders, and that's what fuels a lot of the anger. If it wasnt for that (And the property damage they sponsor) most of us would limit it to just eye rolling.
I'm inclined to agree. It's an issue like any other. Much like abortion or gun rights or any number of issues, there will be political pressure groups that take things to extremes. If someone were to start a "Screw the NRA" thread, I'm not sure that would be so readily tolerated.
Unfortunately even when PETA acts to do something right, their reputation and wing-nuts screw things up for them and anyone actually TRYING to do good for individual animals...like the recent roundup of the Pryor Mountain wild horses. The Cloud Foundation, the people who actually give a shit about the individual horses (they've made PBS documentaries, named every one, have kept a census and records of genetics for YEARS...), were trying to negotiate peacefully with the Bureau of Land Management for access to the captured horses when someone brought PETA in. It was about a day before the BLM regional office started receiving threats. I won't be at all surprised if PETA protestors show up to the adoption event and sale on the 26th, and ruin the Cloud Foundations' chances at saving several of the older horses (through adoption and purchase) because the BLM decides to shut the event down. Heck, if I can make it there, I might shove some of them out of the way so people can get in to adopt horses. --Moony
Signed 100%. I suspect that its because this board kinda seems to have a right leaning tone. That lean kinda seems to have led to the no-politics-or-serious-disagreements rule that we have now. I suppose it could be argued that PETA is not political, but the counter for that is simply that PETA stands for People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals. I would be interested in hearing a mod's take on this.
Wow there are really good points being raised in this thread. Other then the normal banter of this website this thread has done nothing but improved.
Because PETA is so far out of the mainstream, no logical person takes them seriously and, ergo, they aren't really seen as political. There are plenty of legitimate animal rights group, but those aren't mocked because they don't resort to using naked chicks to get noticed. Also, we used to have a political forum and it's obvious from there that the board is pretty evenly split. We have the no politics rule because of people throwing a tantrum and generally acting like children instead of acting civil on certain issues.
Hey, I'm pretty left-of-center. I support various socialist policies that I suspect most Americans would consider to be "big government interference" (even if these policies are the status quo in democratic free nations such as the UK, Canada and Australia). It's just that PETA rubs me up the wrong way. If I am to support animal welfare causes, I'd rather help more practical organizations than these headline-grabbing loons.
Oh yes, more things. PETA flat-out lies when they say things like there are always alternatives to animal experimentation and that it is completely unnecessary. Thanks To Gene Therapy, Monkeys See In Full Color : NPR How about that one? Using gene therapy to cure red/green colourblindness. There is literally no way to test the results without testing the animals' behavior. - Coeloptera
Yes there is. Like drug trials, we can use people. They can volunteer too. Animals don't require compensation though. I say if no volunteers, we can use people like Charles Mason. Heck, if we can waterboard them surely we can run drug test. But if one every get superpowers...
Why aren't PETA members volunteering then? And waterbboarding is illegal under international law, as is testing a completely untested drug on anyone but yourself, consent or not.
Technically, humans are animals, so, like I said, there's no alternative to using animal testing in a case like this. PETA likes to pretend that there are, like so: PETA Media Center > Factsheets "To date, several non-animal test methods have been formally validated and accepted by some countries as replacements for an existing animal test. Examples include the following: • An embryonic stem cell test, using mouse-derived cells to assess potential toxicity to developing embryos, has been validated as a partial replacement for birth-defect testing in rats and rabbits.(9) • The 3T3 Neutral Red Uptake Phototoxicity Test uses cells grown in culture to assess the potential for sunlight-induced (“photo”) irritation to the skin. • Human skin model tests are now in use, including the validated EpiDerm™ test, which has been accepted almost universally as a total replacement for skin corrosion studies in rabbits.(10) • The use of human skin leftover from surgical procedures or donated cadavers can be used to measure the rate at which a chemical is able to penetrate the skin. • Microdosing can provide information on the safety of an experimental drug and how it is metabolized in the body by administering an extremely small one-time dose that is well below the threshold necessary for any potential pharmacologic effect to take place.(11)" Hmm...I don't see any method in there that could be used to test the gene-therapy colorblindness treatment. Lying. Sacks. - Coeloptera
why would you expect them to want to contribute to the development of drugs that would extend the life of humans - the same miserable species responsible for exterminating and dooming to extinction numerous other species? Not to mention all the nuclear bombs, the Chernobyls, the deforestation, the stinging poison and pollution, the relentless gallery of horrors produced by human ingenuity. There's billions of us, and let's face it, there's no end to human suffering. Test away. Medical science is ultimately just a mad quest after immortality...
