Jump to content
BrainDen.com - Brain Teasers
  • 0


Guest
 Share

Question

Now ive always hated PETA not for any solid reason. They just freak me out. That and there so crazy and they reinforce any opposing views by being so. Anyway I was wondering how others felt. Now for the record I love animals and hate Michael Vick (but i do hate the georgia bulldogs. if you went there fine, but why do people that have never seen the college insist on being so fanatical)

Anyway I recently came across something that reinforced my views and want responses. I realize that this is horribly formatted but i cleaned it up a little bit but the site i got it from asked to be printed as is so whatever.

The following story is from <i>This is True</i> dated 17 July 2005.

It is Copyright 2005 Randy Cassingham, all rights reserved, and reprinted here <a href="http://www.thisistrue.com/peta.html" target="new">with permission</a>:<br />

<p><font size="+2"><b>"Ethical" Defined</b></font><br />

After more than 100 dead dogs were dumped in a trash dumpster over four weeks, police in Ahoskie, N.C., kept an eye on the trash receptacle behind a supermarket. Sure enough, a van drove up and officers watched the occupants throw in heavy plastic bags. They detained the two people in the van and found 18 dead dogs in plastic bags in the dumpster, including puppies; 13 more dead dogs were still in the van. Police say the van is registered to the headquarters of People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals, and the two occupants, Andrew B. Cook, 24, and Adria Joy Hinkle, 27, identified themselves as PETA employees. An autopsy performed on one of the dogs found it was healthy before it was killed. Police say PETA has been picking up the animals -- alive -- from North Carolina animal shelters, promising to find them good homes. Cook and Hinkle have been charged with 62 felony counts of animal cruelty. In response to the arrests PETA President Ingrid Newkirk said it's against the group's policy for employees to dump animals in the trash, but "that for some animals in North Carolina, there is no kinder option than euthanasia." (Roanoke-Chowan News-Herald) <i>...Oops, my mistake: that's "Playing God" Defined.</i><br />

<p>In his author's notes section, Cassingham had more to say about this story:<br />

<p><blockquote><b>The more I learn about PETA,</b> the less I think of them. The story of them killing animals isn't even unusual. According to PETA's own filings, in 2004 PETA <i>killed</i> 86.3 percent of the animals entrusted to its care -- a number that's rising, not falling. Meanwhile, the SPCA in PETA's home town (Norfolk, Va.) was able to find loving homes for 73 percent of the animals put in its care. A shortage of funds? Nope: last year PETA took in $29 million in tax-exempt donations. It simply has other priorities for the funds, like funding terrorism (yes, really). But don't take my word for it: I got my figures from

<a href="http://www.PETAkillsAnimals.com" target="new">

http://www.PETAkillsAnimals.com</a> --

and they have copies of PETA's state and federal filings to back it up. The bottom line: if you donate money to PETA because you think they care for and about animals, you need to think some more. PETA literally yells and screams about how others "kill animals" but <i>this</i> is how they operate? Pathetic.

And you know what I wonder? PETA's <i>official</i> count of animals they kill is 86.3 percent. But if they're going around picking up animals, killing them while they drive around and not even giving them a <i>chance</i> to be adopted, and then destroying the evidence by dumping the bodies in the trash, are <i>those</i> deaths being reported? My guess: no. While 86.3 percent is awful, the actual number is probably much, <i>much</i> higher. How <i>dare</i> they lecture <i>anyone</i> about the "ethical" treatment of animals!</p> <p>(<i>This is True</i> is a weekly column featuring <a href="http://www.thisistrue.com" target="new">weird-but-true news</a> stories from around the world, and has been published since 1994. Click the link for info about free subscriptions.)</p></blockquote>

now my goal is to just read this feed and not participate as I dont beleive i can change anyone's views and no one can change mine. So....

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 answers to this question

Recommended Posts

  • 0

Well lets look at this from the view of these fanatics: Every adopted animal has the possibility of spawning new animals, leading to more foster animals. Right here they are showing that they are not as they say PETA (People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals), but rather PAUTA (People Against the Unethical Treatment of Animals). You think there's no difference? There is. PETA states that you want them to be treated right. PAUTA envelopes Ethical Treatment and No treatment at all.

Although, this seems like a large waste of fur. Seriously, if they sold the skins of those "ethically killed" animals, than people wouldn't hunt down the others.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 0

ok, killing animals is just plain wrong, but PETA overreacts way too much. everyone makes fun of it too. who hasn't heard of People Eating Tasty Animals?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Answer this question...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...