TranceAddict Forums (www.tranceaddict.com/forums)
- Political Discussion / Debate
-- PETA: What were you thinking?!?
Pages (3): [1] 2 3 »
PETA: What were you thinking?!?
Is it me or has PETA been loosing their brains in the last couple of years?
They really started getting my goat with thier cartoons aimed at small kids showing mommy graphically killing animals and now this...
What the hell are they thinking??? 
If this is some ploy for attention they definately got it, but how anyone can think they have any shred of credibility left is beyond me...
(don't mind the source, it does happen to be a 'conservative' site but it was more the story I was after...)
| quote: |
Unethical Treatment of Humans PETA display draws hostility; condiments thrown Story by Andrew R. Quinio Posted March 23rd, 2006 PETA display comparing animal treatment to lynching  PETA display comparing animal treatment to slavery  Students from PETA, People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals, drew an angry crowd on Sproul after displaying images that compared animal treatment to the lynching and enslavement of black Americans. About a dozen Berkeley students furiously engaged the PETA members, accusing the animal rights group of racism. The situation intensified when one member of the crowd threw ketchup and mustard on the PETA display and another tore down part of the exhibit. One image presented by PETA featured a chained elephant foot juxtaposed with the chained foot of a slave. Another showed black individuals hanging from a tree by their necks contrasted with the image of a cow being hung by its hind legs. Several black students shouted down the PETA students and called for the display to be taken down. One student who was upset by PETA�s comparison of slavery to animal mistreatment shouted amid tears, �I�m not trying to say that people should eat meat. I understand you, but the way you�re depicting our history, the way you are depicting the things that happened to us, the thing that happened to our ancestors, it�s not ok, it�s not ok!� Another student, identified as Autumn by her peers, tore down one of the images in a fit of rage. Dominique Nisperos, a third year Cal student, was also upset by PETA�s display and argued with one of the group�s members. When asked if tearing down the display was appropriate on a campus that touts its free speech history, Nisperos responded, �I can see why they did it.� She added that bringing up the free speech issue �isn�t getting to the root of the problem. The means at expressing [PETA�s] message was racist.� Veronica Nisperos, a Berkeley student also incensed by the exhibit, stated that the group did have a point, but the way in which they made it, �created opposition among people who should be allies.� Sengeeta Kumar, who led the PETA group, was surprised to have encountered such a reaction at UC Berkeley. �I was really hoping that people would think critically�it became very emotional and almost dangerous in the sense that people were threatening and pulling things down and it just became unsafe,� she said. Kumar noted that her group has taken the exhibit to 13 different schools and never faced a hostile reaction. PETA eventually gave into the pressure and dismantled their display. Kumar expressed disappointment in her organization�s inability to get their message across. �When emotions are risen, people can be closed to dialogue.� She added, �We are all part of oppression, of beings who can�t speak for themselves. Animals are enslaved in our hands. This exhibit isn�t about demeaning any people, it about uplifting humanity.� PETA members spent the rest of the afternoon wiping off the ketchup and mustard that was sprayed on their display. Video 1: An unidentified student shouts down a PETA member. Video 2: A student identified as Autumn by her peers is calmed down after tearing down a PETA display. Video 3: Unidentified student explains the ketchup throwing incident. |
Everytime I see PETA I want to eat chicken and steak. 
Seriously though, those pictures are ridiculous.
| quote: |
| Originally posted by Sunsnail Everytime I see PETA I want to eat chicken and steak. Seriously though, those pictures are ridiculous. |
+1
PETA's ads aren't so bad.
>>Kristin Cavallari<<
they should hire this agency more often
| quote: |
| Originally posted by Sunsnail Everytime I see PETA I want to eat chicken and steak. Seriously though, those pictures are ridiculous. |
Yeah that will work.
| quote: |
| Originally posted by Q5echo PETA's ads aren't so bad. >>Kristin Cavallari<< they should hire this agency more often |
You know every time i hear about peta i cant help myself but picture them like those wackos in the south park episode. Makes taking them seriously even harder, not that i took them seriously before that episode aired.
(ala Fark.com)
PETA continues its quest to win friends and influence people with its new ad campaign: "Avian Flu: It's Your Fault"
>Link<
I thought this comment was funny...
| quote: |
Can't decide which of the three is stupidest: This, the campaign where they gave tofu turkeys to the homeless or the college campaign urging students to binge drink because alcohol is healthier than milk. |
| quote: |
| or the college campaign urging students to binge drink because alcohol is healthier than milk. |
Lets go one step further then, if alcohol realy is healthier lets start feeding it to babies when they are born, and lets start with children from these people..just in case they might be wrong
i think the porn industry should invest in peta.
please spoil their reputation.
make them go nude as a lifestyle.
Animal protestors really make my blood boil and the original article is one of the reasons why. They put the value of animals above that of humans. In the UK recently, animal protestors dug up the remains of some old woman who's family were linked to a lab that tested on animals. I have no problem with animal rights and of course I support it but they go to far, they fail to see that these aren't humans!
| quote: |
| Originally posted by George Smiley Animal protestors really make my blood boil and the original article is one of the reasons why. They put the value of animals above that of humans. In the UK recently, animal protestors dug up the remains of some old woman who's family were linked to a lab that tested on animals. I have no problem with animal rights and of course I support it but they go to far, they fail to see that these aren't humans! |
*sigh*
It just never stops with these guys does it?
| quote: |
Crucified lamb billboard 'blocked' April 14, 2006 A BILLBOARD depicting a bloody, crucified lamb has been refused space above Sydney's roads this Easter, an animal rights group said today. People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals (PETA), which has been running an international campaign against sheep mulesing in Australia, wanted to mount the confronting image for motorists to see over the Easter long weekend. But the group says billboard owners have refused to lease out the space. "PETA had hoped its new billboard opposing Australia's cruel treatment of sheep � which shows a blood-soaked lamb on a crucifix with the tag-line `Have mercy on them, stop mulesing and live exports' � would be up in time for Easter. "But outdoor advertising companies want no part of it," the US-based group said in a statement. Mulesing, widely practised by Australian sheep farmers, is the surgical removal of folds of skin from the backsides of sheep to prevent the painful and sometimes fatal condition of fly strike. PETA's worldwide campaign against Australian producers who practise mulesing has damaged the industry. The group said the billboard was designed to pressure Australian authorities to outlaw the practice and end live sheep exports. "The lamb on a crucifix reminds us that these gentle animals are mutilated, tormented and killed every day in Australia for nothing more than very un-Christian greed," it said. "If Christ were here, he would show mercy to these lambs, so we're asking the Australian government to follow his compassionate example and bring an end to these two hideous abuses." A spokeswoman for PETA said the group had tried unsuccessfully to place the advertisement in Canberra before approaching billboard companies in at least three different locations in Sydney's centre. "We were going for CBD locations but we actually in the end had it rejected in any location," she said. The image was designed by British cartoonist and caricaturist Ralph Steadman, PETA said. |
So this mulesing thing, is to prevent the sheep from dying?
| quote: |
Mulesing, widely practised by Australian sheep farmers, is the surgical removal of folds of skin from the backsides of sheep to prevent the painful and sometimes fatal condition of fly strike. |
| quote: |
| Originally posted by Sunsnail Everytime I see PETA I want to eat chicken and steak. Seriously though, those pictures are ridiculous. |
| quote: |
| Originally posted by George Smiley Animal protestors really make my blood boil and the original article is one of the reasons why. They put the value of animals above that of humans. In the UK recently, animal protestors dug up the remains of some old woman who's family were linked to a lab that tested on animals. I have no problem with animal rights and of course I support it but they go to far, they fail to see that these aren't humans! |
| quote: |
| Originally posted by shaolin_Z Exactly! @ Fir3starter: I'm in total agreement with you once again. |
| quote: |
| Originally posted by Fir3start3r Wonders never cease |
| quote: |
| "If Christ were here, he would show mercy to these lambs, so we're asking the Australian government to follow his compassionate example and bring an end to these two hideous abuses." |
To often do people associate PETA with all vegetarians. That's like associating all Christians with Pat Robertson. As long as I don't see a bloody steak on a road sign by the highway, I couldn't give a shit. They shouldn't push their values on you in unreasonable manners, and the same for the opposite.
wow, I can't believe no one is actively supporting PETA on this forum. You first have to realise that PETA has an extremely sound argument:
We should, at all cost, prevent un-necessary suffering
Animals suffer un-nessecarily
We should, at all cost, prevent un-necessary animal suffering
We are doing harm onto these animals because they are a difference species, not because they feel pain. It's like saying, I'm going to cuz you pain because you are native americian, or I'm not going to let you vote because you are female. Race and Sex have nothing to do with pain or the right to vote. Animals can feel pain, yet we continue to hurt them. Sure, we like to eat me, we like the taste, but you forget that that steak was once a 'sentient' being. A being capable of pain and suffering. The analogy of Racism and Sexism are quite clear. Many un-educated people will reply, "I like steak" or "mmmm... steak". So childish, grow up, mature. Look at the argument, look at the arguments, and it's easy to see the right answer. I'm convinced that in our lifetime, we will see a great movement towards more animals rights, and all of you opposed, will be just like those that took lightly and supported Racism.
To anyone that cares to enlighten themselves, "In Defense of Animals: The Second Wave" by Peter Singer is a great book. There are numerous essays outlining the bases of these arguments. I doubt anyone can read that book and deny his conclusion. The only way to do so is thru ignorance
Im sorry, but what I dont understand is where do you draw the line. You say you want more animal rights, then as long as we are providing rights for other species, where is the line drawn. Is swatting a fly all of a sudden cruel and forbiedden? Personally I dont see the difference between stepping on an ant and killing a cow, but I think some would disagree. If so, why?
The argument is with regards to pain and suffering. Flys, ants and most insencts lack the biological complexity required for physical pain. The line is then drawn only where suffering begins. Fish, for example, feel little/ no pain when they are killed (it's not like finding nemo here). This is what the entire argument hinders on; the ability to feel pain. We used the same deductive reasoning when considering if slavery was really justifiable. My question, is why is slavery wrong? Your response, because they are members of our own species. Then comes my crucial, and most contraversial point, why should species determine who gets to suffer? My point is, why should animals, when they clearly are capable of suffering, be subjected to it? I'm not against eating meat, only factory farmed meat where conditions are appalling. I hope this answers your concern... I look forward to more 
| quote: |
| Originally posted by kush paintings Im sorry, but what I dont understand is where do you draw the line. You say you want more animal rights, then as long as we are providing rights for other species, where is the line drawn. Is swatting a fly all of a sudden cruel and forbiedden? Personally I dont see the difference between stepping on an ant and killing a cow, but I think some would disagree. If so, why? |
Im sory, what?
| quote: |
| Originally posted by -])ark-Maverick wow, I can't believe no one is actively supporting PETA on this forum. You first have to realise that PETA has an extremely sound argument: |
| quote: |
| Originally posted by -])ark-Maverick We should, at all cost, prevent un-necessary suffering |
| quote: |
| Originally posted by -])ark-Maverick Animals suffer un-nessecarily |
| quote: |
| Originally posted by -])ark-Maverick We should, at all cost, prevent un-necessary animal suffering |
| quote: |
| Originally posted by -])ark-Maverick We are doing harm onto these animals because they are a difference species, not because they feel pain. |
| quote: |
| Originally posted by -])ark-Maverick It's like saying, I'm going to cuz you pain because you are native americian, or I'm not going to let you vote because you are female. Race and Sex have nothing to do with pain or the right to vote. |
| quote: |
| Originally posted by -])ark-Maverick Animals can feel pain, yet we continue to hurt them. Sure, we like to eat me, we like the taste, but you forget that that steak was once a 'sentient' being. A being capable of pain and suffering. |
| quote: |
| Originally posted by -])ark-Maverick The analogy of Racism and Sexism are quite clear. |
| quote: |
| Originally posted by -])ark-Maverick Many un-educated people will reply, "I like steak" or "mmmm... steak". So childish, grow up, mature. Look at the argument, look at the arguments, and it's easy to see the right answer. I'm convinced that in our lifetime, we will see a great movement towards more animals rights, and all of you opposed, will be just like those that took lightly and supported Racism. |
| quote: |
| Originally posted by -])ark-Maverick To anyone that cares to enlighten themselves, "In Defense of Animals: The Second Wave" by Peter Singer is a great book. There are numerous essays outlining the bases of these arguments. I doubt anyone can read that book and deny his conclusion. The only way to do so is thru ignorance |
Just the unnecessary? I figure if your goal is to stop suffering migh as well go all out and stop the necessary suffering(which supposebly exist based on this argument) as well. No reason to get the job half done.
The argument in no way points to the elimination of all suffering. Besides, it's a totally different argument. Some suffing is necessary, that's what makes it necessary. To wish to eliminate 'necessary' suffing is a contradiction.
So do people, whats your point?
Why focus just on preventing animal suffering when you included them in in the first sentance? Oh, right. PETA doesnt care about people.
My point isn't to not help people around the world, in fact, I give 10% of my total net income to charitable causes, most being for humans. Just because I have compassion for animals, and thier suffering does not mean that I do not care for my own 'kind'. This would go against the one of the bases of human nature (we always take care of our own kind first). If this is your outrage, where is your support?
So whats your point? Its not like only animals get killed or feel pain daily? Other sention beings, like people for instance get killed or have pain inflicted on them by other people on the daily basis also, and they are the same species. So much for the racism argument.
Read about speciesism. It's a neat new word, not really in common use. It should explain this mix up. You have to ask more fundamental questions, like why should we treat our own species better then anothers? There aren't any strong arguments for it. Any argument you give, I will give the same argument back, but in the form of sexism or racism. Favoring your own species is just a more general use of favoring your own race or sex.
Must remember to pick up a new pair of glasses becouse i even though this analogy is so clear i still fail to see it.
Perhaps you should.
What arguments? You havent given a single valid one to support your cause. With arguments like yours you will not only fail to see any great movement tawards animal righs in your lifetime, but it is much more likely that people in general will stop listening to you all together on the count that some day they will get fed up with all the BS you are throwing into their faces.
I scream because it's an outrage. I have to deal with people everyday that think and act like you do. My argument is simple. If something is capable of feeling pain, we should try our best to reduce that pain. I can then ask, why do you eat meat? Because of the taste? oh, so minor taste takes preference over horrific pain and suffering? Go watch a video on what animals go thru. I doubt you'll stomach it; you will feel bad, and there is a reason for that feeling. People don't want to hear the truth, they are ignorant. I'm just a guy that choose to voice my opinion. I've studied both sides, my minor was in applied ethics. And everything I've read has lead me to this conclusion, and there is no doubt that it is sound. I don't have the space to write out the full book, or ever argument, only the basic forms of it. Then I encourage you to find out for yourself. Self-educate.
Ill try to pick that one up just for the fun of it but i doubt any library aound has one.
If you want the first essay in the book, I'm sure I can forward a copy of it to you. Just one essay, I'm sure it's like 20 pages, which shouldn't be too hard of a read. There are many other books too: "Practical Ethics: any edition" by Singer is also a good book, and I'm sure you'll find it at any library, and surely at any University library.
One final comment: This is what they are teaching in university now. This idea of animal liberation, isn't going to go away. It's been growing for years, and it's growing faster every year. There are so many reasons to not eat meat, health for one. This isn't to say that some people don't need meat, or that free range animal meat is bad. My argument, along with PETA's is that suffering is bad, not the actual killing.
Hope that answers some of the concerns
Powered by: vBulletin
Copyright © 2000-2021, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.