Are you a PETA basher?

Question

If you think negative of PETA, why? And please supply your answer with facts and a link leading to why you believe the way you do.

As suspected, the majority of you couldn't provide links to back up your claims. First poster, you provided a link to an individual rather than a substantiated report. Regarding the Mom/Dad ads, they were much less harmful to children than having them watch Steve Irwin's practice of invading the environments of dangerous creatures, which lead to his ultimate undoing.

The truth about 'no kill' shelters means that particular facility does not have the equipment or license to euthanize. So, the animals are shipped to facilities that can. And people who think each animal is put down with a shot is mistaken, most are mass gassed in chambers; more cost effective.

Answer 1

PETA is an interesting group. On one hand, they do some good things, which gets good publicity (like coming out against the recent dog fighting issue with Michael Vick. On the other hand, they take some very extremist views (like when they boycotted several years ago because the Center for Disease Control in Atlanta wanted to kill their small pox sample ... this was the last known sample, and PETA declared because it was technically an animal, we would be destroying the last of a species).

I treat PETA just like I do the ACLU and politicians. I agree with some things and disagree with some things. And, I'll send them emails when I disagree with their positions.

Answer 2

I rank PETA right along side greenpeace. They are both based on good ideas. Sadly enough their agenda has been hijacked by the loony squad. A prime example was the Spotted owl fiasco. They crippled the economy of three states by banning
logging in this birds habitat. Guess what happened Even without
logging, THE BIRDS MOVED on their own. There are to many examples to list about their use of science fantasy, instead of science fact. Here in Arizona about 20 odd years ago, they convinced the state authorities to ban deer hunting in one of our national forests. The result was a grand disaster.
The deer population EXPLODED there were so many deer
they ate EVERYTHING from 6 feet down. Effectively killing the forest. After all this time there are still parts that you can still see that have not recovered completely . Hundreds of these animals starved to death even with a fish and game emergency feeding program. I don't trust their pseudoscience
or their emotional decision making. The long term effects usually are not considered fully. And when they are PROVEN WRONG they refuse to accept it.

Answer 3

I'm pro-animal rights but I have a very low opinion of PETA.

First example - my wife worked on the UC Davis dairy farm while she was in college. At one point PETA threatened to infect the whole herd with hoof and mouth disease if they didn't stop injecting them hormones. This would have caused the whole herd to be slaughtered. That's better than being injected with hormones? I can't provide a link - that's just a personal experience with PETA.

Then there's their position on no-kill shelters as discussed above.

Then there's the number of animals PETA kills. The North Carolina incident where they "adopted" a bunch of animals from a shelter, put them in a van, killed them, then put them in a dumpster because they couldn't stand the stench long enough to make it to the freezer in their PETA office was juts one example. They testified that they'd used that same dumpster "a couple" of times before. PETA euthanizes 80-90% of the animals they receive, and they go out to adopt them from shelters! Link below provides the evidence.

If you want to protect animals, join the ASPCA or something. PETA is hypocritical and thinks animals are better off dead than in a shelter where they might get adopted.

Oh, and PETA also makes videos of the absolute worst farms where animals are being abused and claims that this is the normal behavior of the meat industry. It's pure propaganda.

Answer 4

I'm all for animal rights...but PETA is a little, for better lack of words, psycho. I mean, I believe that if I person wants to own a pet (dog, cat, horse, etc.) it should be like adopting a child. They go through a screening process to make sure the animal will be placed in a good home. My reasoning? About 3 weeks ago my bf and I were on vacation and almost ran over an emaciated 5 wk old puppy on the road. Not far from where we picked her up, we saw a yard with dogs chained up in horrible condition. Owning an animal is a priviledge, not a right.
However, PETA goes too far. For example, when I worked at Red Lobster we saw on the news that PETA people were in front of the main Red Lobster. One dressed as a seal while the others clubbed it, and apparently is was to oppose Red Lobsters "support" of the clubbing of baby seals. This was proved to be totally bogus. I mean, they said RL was supporting it because they got some fish from a company that went through another company that supported the murder of seal babies. WTF? Red Lobster had no knowledge of this...and besides, why not attack the people that CLUB the seals? It's things like this that are totally ridiculous...and besides, ANY extremist group is crazy. Trust me, I know.

Answer 5

Well. I cant provide any links for I have none but I still have my opinions.
First, I dont believe that its right to abuse or otherwise mis-treat animals while second, I have no problem with using some of them for a food source such as chickens, turkeys and/or cattle.
Third, Ive heard about P.E.T.A.'s extreme views such as picketing out in front of KFC with buckets of blood and chicken parts while also campaigning to give animals the same rights as humans. Whether P.E.T.A. actually does these things or not is immaterial to me in regards to how I believe so I see no reason to ally myself with an organisation that I may not wholly agree with.

Answer 6

I am not a PETA "basher", but I no longer support them because of one issue in particular, regarding no-kill shelters. PETA criticizes them for adding to the problem of pet overpopulation rather than helping to solve it. I strongly disagree. We should not blame those who try to help animals for a problem caused by many different factors.

They say that these no-kill shelters don't take care of the animals they take in. While some shelters have been neglectful, there are a great many who take excellent care of the animals, have volunteers to take the dogs for walks, give them room to run around and ALWAYS spay and neuter each animal. I just don't think PETA should completely alienate the organizations who are trying to help in their own way.

This is my only criticism of PETA. I know they are just trying to help; I just don't think this is the best way to go about it. I have to credit them for teaching me everything I needed to know to become vegan 15 years ago. For that, I will always be grateful to them.

Answer 7

Yes I am.

PETA is an extremist group. They say they have the best interest of the animals in mind, but I don't believe it. Although I have no proof of it, I would suspect that many of their "under-cover videos" are even staged, which is sad.

They also don't think people should have pets. There's no way I could support that.

PETA kills animals: http://www.petakillsanimals.com/

I also could never NEVER support a group that intentionally inflicts psychological damage to children and tries to get to the parents by USING the children and attempting to make the children fearful of their own parents. They have handed out the following comics to children:
You Mommy Kills Animals - http://www.furisdead.com/feat-momfur.asp
Your Daddy Kills Animals - http://www.fishinghurts.com/feat-newcomic.asp

I don't have all the information handy, but at one point a year or so ago, I decided to read through the PETA site. What I found was a wealth of mis-information and information skewed to support their "cause".

In short, they are a destructive group that go about things completely the wrong way. They "protest" by interferring with others in ways that should not be done.
* They disrupted VS fashion show a couple years ago: http://www.smh.com.au/articles/2002/11/15/1037080913501.html
* Although they have discontinued the practice, they used to attack people with spray-paint that were wearing fur coats. (Their website now says "if you have a fur coat, donate it to a homeless person.")
(There are numerous other examples, you can do a search on the internet and find them.)

EDIT:
About: "Regarding the Mom/Dad ads, they were much less harmful to children than having them watch Steve Irwin's practice of invading the environments of dangerous creatures, which lead to his ultimate undoing."

I would love to hear how you thinking children watching an educational nature show on TV is more harmful than trying to make children see their parents as monsters.

PS: Steve Irwin's death was a freak accident. The equivalent of driving your car down the road and getting impaled with something falling off of a truck in front of you. There are risks in every line of work, even just GETTING to work is a risk. It just happened to be 'his time' that day.

Answer 8

Releasing lab animals without protecting them, bungled relocation projects in Florida. Interfering with hunting in areas overrun with game. Sorry, but all these actions, however well meaning, have been counter productive and bad for the animals these naive people want to help.

Answer 9

im not in favor of PETA, they're methods of animal freedom are extremist and unnecessary. They've been connected with groups such as ALF(animal liberation front), and ELF(earth liberation front) which are considered terrorists by the FBI.

Another example of their extremist methods would be that PETA provided $7,500 to Fran Trutt, convicted of the attempted murder of Leon Hirsch, the CEO of the United States Surgical Corporation.

Answer 10

Yes I am. I nicked named them Vegenazis. They come to the food section and insult everyone. I don't mind people who believe in animals rights as long as they don't go around insulting people.