VeggieBoards banner

Do you like Peta

4K views 25 replies 13 participants last post by  Debrah 
#1 ·
I read that they kill animals :( . It is awful because they are very helpful
 
#23 ·
Thank you. I talked to them and they do not randomly go looking for animals but they go rescue them and try to rehabilitate them for their new life. There are certain circumstances where they are to traumatized to heal so they let them go peacefully. (Euthanize) I'm not one for taking an animals life in any way but this is what they do. Better that they don't suffer in a cage I guess.[emoji55]

Sent from my SM-S327VL using Tapatalk
 
#3 ·
LOL above 2 have bizarrely similar name and both brand new members but probably only coincidence.

AAAAAnyway you should usually put up a link when making such comment, but I found some reports. Yes it's a worry; maybe cos of where I live I never knew PETA actually had shelters and were involved in (apparently sometimes zealously) euthanising animals.

I don't see how any vegan could ever do that to any but the sickest dog or cat. It would haunt my dreams for life.
 
#5 ·
Yes, it´s just coincidence :)

I also read about such things and I couldn´t do it, too. I value life itself alot. That taken aside, I think they make a difference, like bringing problems into the media with undercover footage material. Sadly many people quickly forget about such things after the next movie. There are also thankful thoughts when I think about Peta, that they made me think enough....with such undercover footage which brought me to this decision.
 
#24 ·
Yes, it´s just coincidence :)

I also read about such things and I couldn´t do it, too. I value life itself alot. That taken aside, I think they make a difference, like bringing problems into the media with undercover footage material. Sadly many people quickly forget about such things after the next movie. There are also thankful thoughts when I think about Peta, that they made me think enough....with such undercover footage which brought me to this decision.
If it wasn't for PETA lots of animals would still be suffering but laws are not helping. There's not enough strict laws for animals

Sent from my SM-S327VL using Tapatalk
 
#8 ·
Vegan means no exploitation, no causing suffering.

My own mother would have wished for euthanasia rather than spending her last years in alzheimers. I recently had another cat euthanized with rapidly growing cancerous nasal tumor before prolonged suffering. Abortion is conscious choice for the woman affected.

Funny how no one against these options has alternative options that do not involve exploitation or suffering
 
#7 ·
I am a member of PETA.

First of all, I owe them for becoming Vegan. Sure I had heard of veganism. and I even knew a couple of vegans. But it was an article in the newspaper about dairy farms that a "PETA stunt" had inspired, that created interest in me. From there it was sort of like a dam breaking. First I became interested, then curious, then motivated.

Plus PETA seems to be my #1 source of info.

As far as the animal shelters go, and the killing of dogs and cats. Its a lot more complicated than it might first look. And although I don't' jump up and agree with PETA's stance, I actually have even MORE respect for PETA for doing it. It's an unpopular stance, and among vegans and non- vegans, t has been responsible for a lot of loss of popularity. They must have known that going in but they still did what they thought was right. And I have to respect that. ( I wonder what it cost them in donations and membership)

So the controversy has to do with a movement in America called the No-Kill shelter. I don't remember all the details (there was a Huffington Post article about it - that I can't find right now). But something like 90% of shelters are now no-kill. (and this didn't use to be the case - it's a popular trend). As PETA sees it, there are at least two problems with no-kill shelters. One is that when they become full, they turn away animals. and two is that some "un-adoptable" animals spend years in the shelter.

I still can't find the Huffington Post article. but here is the Washington Post article I just found
https://www.washingtonpost.com/loca...61284a573f8_story.html?utm_term=.e7c6881044b2

And here is PETA's views
https://www.peta.org/features/deadly-consequences-no-kill-policies/

The other thing that PETA recognizes is that the "Homeless animal problem" has now become a "homeless animal crisis".

Cities like Houston, New Orleans, Los Angeles, and Chicago have tried to survey the number of dogs and cats. Each one of those cities estimates that there are like one million homeless dogs in their city. I have seen one report that estimates 70 million dogs in the USA. And they can't even estimate the number of cats. I sometimes watch the YouTube channel Hope For Paws. Or that Animal Planet show about the dog rescuers in New Orleans. And I love it. Its so heartwarming. but these guys are really bailing out the boat with a teaspoon.

http://www.onegreenplanet.org/animalsandnature/12-alarming-facts-about-pet-homelessness/

The thing that PETA has done is recognize that there IS a problem. And the problem is NOT getting solved. Although I may not agree with THEIR solution, I applaud them for taking a stance and trying to do SOMETHING.
 
#11 ·
I dislike them. Their guerilla theater tactics bring publicity and donations, but they can be mean and insensitive.

I remember when the Iowa Pork Queen, a teenager assembled with her friends and family got a hard pie to the face and was made to cry. The McDonald's Holocaust campaign I found repulsive, also.

I live in the Midwest and I weep and pray when I pass the hog confinements...but this is not the way to make progress.
 
#12 ·
I understand your point of view. and there is really no excuse for meanness.
But it was a publicity stunt that got my attention. And I think that is the case for a lot of the vegans I know. And ... well... you can't argue with success.

And in PETA's defense, maybe some people's feelings get hurt and a teenager is made to cry... but while you were reading this, 100,000 animals were slaughtered.
 
#13 ·
In the past I thought they were extremists, then I thought they were ok, but then I've heard several bad things.
And after watching a video of Gary Francione, who worked at Peta or with Peta, I again have mixed feelings, they do some good things but they're like not fully into it as they should. For them to have shelters where they kill animals when there's others that don't,
I feel it's inconsistent with what they "preach" and quite hypocritical. I don't think the excuse of "it's complicated" as the Peta worker has said is good enough, it's only that an excuse.
 
#14 ·
Hi fellow veggies,

A handful of comments has produced some massive topics! Amazing :)

IMO, Peta does a lot of good work but then throws women under a bus. I would be more supportive if they were an intersectional organisation. Not sure about the various stunts, but perhaps in this world the message needs to be that way to penetrate people's consciousness. Different strokes, I guess.

Abortion and euthanasia... preventing the suffering of those who exist and are conscious here and now. I am in full support of people's rights to live a dignified life and make informed choices about what happens with their bodies. I've seen terminally ill loved ones die painful deaths from starvation and organ failure. A painless injection before that point is my preferred option.

My view of veganism is to avoid contributing to suffering. I have conflicting views about kill shelters because I believe imposing loneliness and isolation on a sentient being is far crueller and sadder than death, yet these animals do not deserve to die. I would rather see campaigns and funding for strict desexing, breeding and purchase laws, catch-neuter-release programs, and for education about the costs and responsibilities of caring for animal companions.

Beware taking Francione's words at face value. His arguments are attractive and seem logical, but they are self-rationalising and often lead to judgement and inertia.

We are human and by definition, IMO, imperfect. We can succeed and fail on every level, from cells to societies. I believe we should build each other up to become better, kinder, smarter, more responsible humans at every opportunity.

Have a great day y'all. :)
 
#15 ·
PETA hasn't been a decent organization since Alex Pacheco left. Right after he left, the entire organization became a joke. Ingrid is a despicable person who enjoys killing animals. Her hypocrisy is stunning. (Yes, it's true that PETA "rescuers" lied to get homeless pets from shelters and then killed them.) A lot of us in the AR movement left PETA when Alex left and we saw that PETA had become nothing more than a publicity-stunt organization for welfarism, not rights. (We also quickly realized just why Alex left and distanced himself from Ingrid.)

Ingrid's asinine campaigns that hurt and demean others are devoid of sense (and sensibility). It's a ridiculous notion that you can help one species by exploiting another. ...Such witless and stupid things to do...!

It's equally preposterous to claim that PETA saves lives, so therefore it's a good organization. Pharmaceutical research using nonhumans saves lives, too. Methods and means matter. Moreover, there isn't a way to determine whether and how many lives have been saved by PETA or any other organization, agency, person or business. It's all guesswork put together by PR people, and my guess is that it's all bull.

Nope. I support animal rights, not welfare. Animal welfare does nothing but provide a sop for those who lack critical thinking. Only rights actually serve the voiceless who are at our mercy. Rights include genuine respect for other beings that supports their independence, free from human interference. Welfare accepts the notion that humans have a right to interfere with other animals' lives.

I left PETA right after Alex left and haven't looked back. I wouldn't give PETA a dime or a moment of time.
 
#16 ·
Rather serious accusations. Please back up your claims with reputable sources.
.
 
  • Like
Reactions: silva and Mr. H.
#17 ·
I replied but my response hasn't shown up.

Most of my post was opinion based on my own experience and knowledge. Sadly, there are no links for that.

As for PETA killing pets, even a quick search turns up the facts. I can't post links, so it's a DIY project, which I'm sure everyone here can handle. Huffpost had a great in-depth article which I'm sure you, or anyone else, can easily find with such search terms as peta killing pets huffington post .

Edited to add: And just to be clear, I'm not a big fan of Alex anymore, either.
 
#18 · (Edited)
Hi Citrus,

I think I know why you haven't yet been able to post weblinks. For some reason, VeggieBoards doesn't allow new members to post weblinks, until they have made a minimum of 10 posts on the forum. You should be able to post links now.

I did your suggested Google search for peta killing pets huffington post. Very interesting stuff. It appears that PETA paid an out-of-court legal settlement of $49,000 to a family whose pet dog was stolen and lethal-injection-killed by PETA: https://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/killing-animals-petas-open-secret_us_59e78243e4b0e60c4aa36711 .

I can only speculate (in an partially-substantiated manner) as to why PETA would do such things. According to the Humane Society of the United States, 87% of dogs/cats in underserved (low-income) communities are not spayed or neutered: http://www.humanesociety.org/issues/pet_overpopulation/facts/pet_ownership_statistics.html . According to the Huffington Post article, PETA actively visits underserved communities, and offers spay/neuter services to these pets' families (see Huffington Post link above). However, it is reasonable to believe that many families do not accept these spay/neuter services; according to the Humane Society of the United States, 44% of dogs in Mississippi are not spayed/neutered: http://www.humanesociety.org/issues/pet_overpopulation/facts/why_spay_neuter.html. If these unsterilized animals are allowed to be outdoors without a leash (as apparently was the animal in question), they can/will generate the birth of even more animals, thus compounding the stray animal problem. (And now I speculate): PETA may be attempting to prevent the compounding of the stray dog/cat overpopulation problem, by capturing and killing unsterilized pets that are allowed to run free.

It would be much, much more ethical for PETA to capture these animals, perform spay/neuter surgery, and then surreptitiously return the animals to the families. However, the families would certainly notice that the surgery had been done, and then the community would be alerted to PETA's (ultimately suffering-reducing) activities.

The Huffington Post articles didn't say anything about Ingrid Newkirk being a person who loves killing animals. These kinds of statements can be legally-troublesome, if unsubstantiated, because they constitute libel/slander/defamation.
.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Mr. H.
#21 ·
Hi I'm new here and to being a vegan too I am with peta meaning I donate to them and they are not animal killers. They are helping as much as they can I think. Someone must have posted that because they don't like them. They are very respectful when I call and helpful. Sure some of their things can be over the top but that's how they're getting people to stop and think about their actions.[emoji4]

Sent from my SM-S327VL using Tapatalk
 
#25 ·
Ingrid doesn't enjoy killing animals. I believe that her rationale is that the killing methods in the other local 'dog pound' places, includes gassing and the heart stab method where a hypodermic needle is stabbed into the victims heart. And either of those methods are both terrifying and painful for the victims. But when Ingrid does it, it's no different than when you take your sick little Fluffy to the vet and he gives your dog or cat a sedative shot to calm them and then the followup shot that stops their heart. Ingrid is helping sick animals who need help passing on and she does it gently and with love and respect.

And I believe they only have one emergency shelter because they aren't in the shelter business. Some of their other activities include free dog houses and bedding for neglected inner city back yard dogs, educating the public and industry and free spay/neuter clinics for the poor who have cats and dogs.

While individuals in PETA have made some serious missteps and while some of their campaigns have been too close to people's 'politically correct' edge, their group heart is in the right place. I think too what you have to remember is the the Centre for Consumer Freedom and henchman, have made a real effort to spread misinformation and to skew information in a really negative direction. And why you ask? Well why does an organization who also represent the restaurant industry, the tobacco industry and have fought against Mother's Against Drunk Drivers, speak against some group who's against animal exploitation.

It's always a good idea to research for yourself rather than just accepting the opinions of other people who likewise have not made a point of researching why and organization does what it does. So with that said, here's a link to PETA's explanation of why they euthanize and related information. I can't post links at this point, but if you Google 'Why PETA euthenizes curious case of Nathan Winograd', I'm betting you'd come to the page that explains their position.
 
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Top