Cat Forum / Cat Anecdotes / January 2006
PETA Staffer Legally Changes Name To KentuckyFriedCruelty.com
|
|
Thread rating:  |
NMR - 31 Dec 2005 06:57 GMT Do you think PETA people are a little wacky
http://tinyurl.com/dgfmy
http://www.local6.com/news/5735192/detail.html?treets=orlpn&tid=2653055048813&tm l=orlpn_8pm&tmi=orlpn_8pm_1_07000112302005&ts=H
mlabofski@yahoo.co.uk - 31 Dec 2005 12:46 GMT They might be a tad wacky, but at least their hearts are in the right place. I've volunteered for them before in London and can testify to that, not radical enough for me though.
jXwXeXrXmXoXnXt@sonic.net - 31 Dec 2005 22:05 GMT > They might be a tad wacky, but at least their hearts are in the right > place. I've volunteered for them before in London and can testify to > that, not radical enough for me though. Well, I heard very recently that some PETA members were adopting dogs and cats out of shelters and then immediately bringing them to a van where they euthanized them. A PETA member was quoted as saying that "there are too many dogs and cats, and their lives are miserable", or some such. Police did find a van with equipment and drugs used for euthanization, and some animal bodies in the area.
I got this info from a set of emails that went around some of my local email lists. I checked on Snopes, but there's nothing about it either way, so I can't verify it. It sounds pretty far out, even for PETA, but to me, not an absolutely impossible stretch. Even if this isn't true, I think they're insane.
Joyce
Magic Mood Jeep© - 31 Dec 2005 22:15 GMT >> They might be a tad wacky, but at least their hearts are in the right >> place. I've volunteered for them before in London and can testify to [quoted text clipped - 14 lines] > > Joyce I remember this. It was in the news. Some PETA members were 'volunteering' at a shelter, and were supposed to be taking the dogs/cats to other shelters - but they never made it. They were euthanizing them and just dumping the bodies in dumpsters behind businesses. Yes, the people in question were autorized by the state (I don't remember where this was) to do euthanzia, *but* the dogs/cats being euthanized were *not* theirs to euthanize, *and* they were illegally disposing of the bodies. I think PETA ended up terminating their memberships over it.
Rob Poe - 01 Jan 2006 05:29 GMT A friend of mine lived where PETA headquarters are.
They were regularly seen in local resturaunts .. eating beef and chicken dishes. The same thing they rally on about so much.
A friend of mine is a PETA member, and they send her so many brochures per year about how they shouldn't ever eat MEAT and be vegetarians...About how they abuse the poor animals that go into making the meat products and on and on.
I'm AGAINST animal cruelty .. absolutely. But IMO Ethical Treatment != (doesn't equal) not eating animals.
> Do you think PETA people are a little wacky > > http://tinyurl.com/dgfmy > > http://www.local6.com/news/5735192/detail.html?treets=orlpn&tid=2653055048813&tm l=orlpn_8pm&tmi=orlpn_8pm_1_07000112302005&ts=H mlabofski@yahoo.co.uk - 01 Jan 2006 16:02 GMT I'm too hungover to fight, but how can you (and mass producers such as KFC) ethically kill an animal? Unless you hunt and kill all your own meat, that is? Surely when you kill an animal you're cruel to it.
NMR - 01 Jan 2006 20:39 GMT According to PETA hunting and killing your own meat is also cruel.
> I'm too hungover to fight, but how can you (and mass producers such as > KFC) ethically kill an animal? Unless you hunt and kill all your own > meat, that is? Surely when you kill an animal you're cruel to it. Cheryl Perkins - 01 Jan 2006 21:02 GMT > I'm too hungover to fight, but how can you (and mass producers such as > KFC) ethically kill an animal? Unless you hunt and kill all your own > meat, that is? Surely when you kill an animal you're cruel to it. A certain level of cruelty is natural and inevitable in a world in which organisms eat each other. And since humans have evolved as omnivores it is no more cruel for us to eat a chicken than it is for a wolf to eat a rabbit. Less cruel, in general, since we are more capable ensuring that our dinner has a quick and relatively painless death than are most omnivores and non-obligate carnivores.
Personally, after many years of observing the pronouncements and actions of various animal welfare and environmental groups, the only ones I presently support are local ones that I know spend their time and money on actually caring for individual animals, not on political campaigns. This policy clearly elminates any support for PETA, which is way too radical for me.
 Signature Cheryl
NMR - 01 Jan 2006 21:55 GMT Well said Cheryl I gave up on PETA years ago when if any one remember the Florida keys 3 toed deer. Well PETA go in front of the hunters to stop the "slaughter". What was going on was the deer had have an explosion of population almost 12 to 1 for their feeding area and had been infected by a worm that interfered with digestion plus higher water levels meant no food. The government did a special hunting term. Well PETA in their wisdom even after their own people told them that the deer were starving to death and all that could be saved had been. They got their high and mighty butts out in front of the hunters. Some were stupid enough to wear antlers and dress in deer suits; a few were shot by mistake and most were arrested for not wearing orange in an hunting area. They did their job the deer were saved till they died of starvation from being eaten alive by worms. The wildlife were walking around and having to shot the deer that were dying at their feet 80% of the population was lost while the government figured at least 40% of the pop would have been saved with the hunting term. The government had put food out but still was not enough PETA never once brought food in or tried to move the deer. They just had to show off for the camera and helped cause a species to be on the endangered list. One of PETA finest moments that was the day PETA was taken off my charity list. Their response to the situation was that they made a mistake but they were doing it for all the right reasons.
>> I'm too hungover to fight, but how can you (and mass producers such as >> KFC) ethically kill an animal? Unless you hunt and kill all your own [quoted text clipped - 13 lines] > policy clearly elminates any support for PETA, which is way too radical > for me. CatNipped - 01 Jan 2006 22:01 GMT > Well said Cheryl I gave up on PETA years ago when if any one remember the > Florida keys 3 toed deer. Well PETA go in front of the hunters to stop [quoted text clipped - 17 lines] > taken off my charity list. Their response to the situation was that they > made a mistake but they were doing it for all the right reasons. What was it someone said about the paving on the road to hell?
Hugs,
CatNipped
>>> I'm too hungover to fight, but how can you (and mass producers such as >>> KFC) ethically kill an animal? Unless you hunt and kill all your own [quoted text clipped - 14 lines] >> policy clearly elminates any support for PETA, which is way too radical >> for me. Magic Mood Jeep© - 02 Jan 2006 02:53 GMT > Well said Cheryl I gave up on PETA years ago when if any one > remember the Florida keys 3 toed deer. Well PETA go in front of the [quoted text clipped - 19 lines] > situation was that they made a mistake but they were doing it for all > the right reasons. Something along those lines happened here, in Brown County State Park. The deer were over-populated (due to us humans having eliminated their natural predator: wolves and the occasional bear, in this area), and starving. They almost destroyed most of the trees one winter, looking for food so they ate all the branches they could eat (they have a pic in the Nature Center at the park, that shows what it looked like that spring - all the foliage started all at the same level). The deer (mainly white-tail and mule) that survived to adulthood were half the size they should have been. So they (meaning legislators and parks people) approved hunting in the park. There were a lot of people that were literally outraged by this, PETA included. However, when the hunting started, there weren't very many protesters, as this was *state* property, and well, they could be hauled off for trespassing... and they had to pay to get in! Anyway, they had set it up so that the hunters could keep *1* kill each, the rest became property of the state, and after proper processing was/is sent to food banks and homeless shelters (meat is meat, ain't it?).
10+ years later, the deer are now *thriving*, are back to their normal size, and the park's foliage is back to normal.
>>> I'm too hungover to fight, but how can you (and mass producers such >>> as KFC) ethically kill an animal? Unless you hunt and kill all [quoted text clipped - 18 lines] >> -- >> Cheryl mlabofski@yahoo.co.uk - 02 Jan 2006 16:22 GMT This always happens when man interferes with nature, and the natural predators have been taken out.
Marcia
> > Well said Cheryl I gave up on PETA years ago when if any one > > remember the Florida keys 3 toed deer. Well PETA go in front of the [quoted text clipped - 62 lines] > >> -- > >> Cheryl Enfilade - 02 Jan 2006 22:33 GMT Anyway, they had set it up so that the hunters
> could keep *1* kill each, the rest became property of the state, and after > proper processing was/is sent to food banks and homeless shelters (meat is > meat, ain't it?). Plus venison is tasty.
--Fil (was invited to a Miq'maw banquet this fall...roast moose. mmmm.)
NMR - 03 Jan 2006 03:44 GMT Tasty level of 10 specially when done as a roast
> Anyway, they had set it up so that the hunters >> could keep *1* kill each, the rest became property of the state, and [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > --Fil > (was invited to a Miq'maw banquet this fall...roast moose. mmmm.) jXwXeXrXmXoXnXt@sonic.net - 02 Jan 2006 02:22 GMT > A certain level of cruelty is natural and inevitable in a world in > which organisms eat each other. The bottom line, in my opinion! It's sad to see, but that's how it is, and we have to live with it. We live on the food chain, too.
> Personally, after many years of observing the pronouncements and actions > of various animal welfare and environmental groups, the only ones I > presently support are local ones that I know spend their time and money on > actually caring for individual animals, not on political campaigns. I don't have a problem with a political approach per se - in fact I think that in the long run, groups that work toward more far-reaching social change ultimately do more good for the most animals than those who work with individual animals. **Which is not to say that people who work in rescue, or do veterinary work, or any other work involving specific animals, aren't doing good.** In fact, I myself am best at working with individuals, and greatly prefer that over political work, but that's due to what works for my personality, rather than because of my ideals. I respect the work of political organizations that reflect my own beliefs (or those that are compatible with my beliefs). I just hate doing the actual tasks of political work, as important as I think it is. So I do what I do best, and I'm glad there are others who like the work I hate. :)
> This policy clearly elminates any support for PETA, which is way > too radical for me. The reason I can't stand PETA has little to do with their "radicalism". I have a great deal of respect for many radical ideas, and for people who put those ideas into practice. Many radicals are responsible for stepping beyond the bounds of ordinary society and spearheading changes that we now take for granted. But not all radical ideas are good ideas... and I think PETA took a detour a long time ago into an emotionally twisted, illogical set of "principles" - such as they are. I mean, they oppose the keeping of pets... so take it from there.
Joyce
Enfilade - 02 Jan 2006 03:06 GMT > > I'm too hungover to fight, but how can you (and mass producers such as > > KFC) ethically kill an animal? Unless you hunt and kill all your own [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > our dinner has a quick and relatively painless death than are most > omnivores and non-obligate carnivores. I have no qualms about eating something if 1. you hunt and kill it yourself with a minimum of suffering possible in order to eat it or use its hide 2. it is raised in a way that gives it a decent life and a clean, quick death without pumping it full of drugs, hormones, or other unnatural things (such as putting ground up cattle bones in cattle feed).
I do have ethical issues with cage raised chickens and so I buy meat and eggs from free-range chickens.
PETA is too radical for me. I prefer to concentrate my attention on the importance of speuter, combatting animal abuse and caring for strays rather than crusading against someone who likes venison.
--Fil
mlabofski@yahoo.co.uk - 02 Jan 2006 16:12 GMT > > I'm too hungover to fight, but how can you (and mass producers such as > > KFC) ethically kill an animal? Unless you hunt and kill all your own [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > our dinner has a quick and relatively painless death than are most > omnivores and non-obligate carnivores. How can you ensure that your dinner had a quick and relatively painless death, unless you are in the slaughterhouse to witness it? Not to mention the cruelty of battery farming, I think in these days of mass production, you can never be sure of that.
I don't support PETA any more, as they aren't radical enough for me, and I think they waste too much money on publicity. I prefer to work with local groups here in the UK, such as a group that campaigns/does actions to get rid of the fur trade which IMO has no place in this any more in a so-called civilised world. I've been a vegetarian for about 15 years now, I did it because of factory farming methods, which sickened me - and I probably wouldn't want to hunt or fish for my food now as I don't really feel the need to eat it any more, but I think hunter/gatherer is the only way I would eat it (if I absolutely had no choice for survival).
Just my 2 pence worth.
Marcia
> Personally, after many years of observing the pronouncements and actions > of various animal welfare and environmental groups, the only ones I > presently support are local ones that I know spend their time and money on > actually caring for individual animals, not on political campaigns. This > policy clearly elminates any support for PETA, which is way too radical > for me. Cheryl Perkins - 02 Jan 2006 16:26 GMT > How can you ensure that your dinner had a quick and relatively painless > death, unless you are in the slaughterhouse to witness it? Not to > mention the cruelty of battery farming, I think in these days of mass > production, you can never be sure of that. You can't be sure that your food, animal or vegetable, was obtained without cruelty of some kind, any more than you can be sure that your need for clothing or shelter doesn't result in some cruelty to animals or people. Especially if you expand 'cruelty' to include environmental problems generally.
> I don't support PETA any more, as they aren't radical enough for me, > and I think they waste too much money on publicity. I prefer to work [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > hunter/gatherer is the only way I would eat it (if I absolutely had no > choice for survival). You are entitled to your opinions, and entitled to act on them as long as you are willing to take the consequences, whether they be eating a vegan diet or going to prison if you should choose to use illegal actions to promote your beliefs, as many activists in all political arenas do.
I'm just expressing my opinions - and I'm certainly willing to act on mine under the same limitations.
 Signature Cheryl
mlabofski@yahoo.co.uk - 02 Jan 2006 16:17 GMT Well I hope they were chucked out of PETA as they were total hypocrites, when I volunteered at PETA in London it was a vegan office, they said if you couldn't bring in vegan food they would provide you with a vegan meal while you were volunteering there. There's always a few rotten apples that give the organisations a bad name.
Marcia
> A friend of mine lived where PETA headquarters are. > [quoted text clipped - 14 lines] > > > > http://www.local6.com/news/5735192/detail.html?treets=orlpn&tid=2653055048813&tm l=orlpn_8pm&tmi=orlpn_8pm_1_07000112302005&ts=H Cheryl Perkins - 02 Jan 2006 18:00 GMT > Well I hope they were chucked out of PETA as they were total > hypocrites, when I volunteered at PETA in London it was a vegan office, > they said if you couldn't bring in vegan food they would provide you > with a vegan meal while you were volunteering there. There's always a > few rotten apples that give the organisations a bad name. My understanding was that control of PETA's policies and spending was in the hands of a very small group of people at the top - a democratic or grassroots organization it wasn't; and it also didn't usually allow local supporters to set the standards or rules. But my information may be way out of date; I haven't been interested enough in them or their activities to do any research in them for some years, and at that time I decided I profoundly disagreed with their aims, methods and organizational style.
 Signature Cheryl
mlabofski@yahoo.co.uk - 02 Jan 2006 16:19 GMT Sorry to keep going on, but also aren't some people at PETA actually paid to work there, and therefore don't necessarily agree with their principals. My DH worked at an animal sanctuary once where one of the fundraisers went hunting on a weekend, and couldn't see why what was wrong with it!
Marcia
> A friend of mine lived where PETA headquarters are. > [quoted text clipped - 14 lines] > > > > http://www.local6.com/news/5735192/detail.html?treets=orlpn&tid=2653055048813&tm l=orlpn_8pm&tmi=orlpn_8pm_1_07000112302005&ts=H
|
|
|