VeggieBoards banner

1 - 20 of 20 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
16,090 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 ·
In response to Friday's "20/20" broadcast on ABC where John Stossel talked with PETA about the ALF, a message board was created for viewers to talk about PETA...<br><br><br><br><a href="http://boards.abcnews.go.com/cgi/abcnews/request.dll?LIST&room=stossel" target="_blank">http://boards.abcnews.go.com/cgi/abc...T&room=stossel</a><br><br><br><br>
Have fun.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
155 Posts
How sad. I think there were only one or two people who were for animal rights. The people against AR really didn't seem to know what they were talking about
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
155 Posts
I saw that episode. Stossel was dead set against Peta.<br><br>
Probably because it was the "Give me a break" segment.<br><br>
If it was a regular story, he might have been more open (is that the right word?).<br><br>
But i don't know. I'm just guessing. Stossel never seemed to be too bright, anyway <img alt="" class="inlineimg" src="/images/smilies/smiley.gif" style="border:0px solid;" title=":)">
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
8,451 Posts
i'm against peta.<br><br><br><br>
and, it's my experience that people for animal rights have very little clue about the issues, the legal and social implications of their proposed solutions, and their shared methodologies (and the violence therein).<br><br><br><br>
Granted, i would say that both pro and anti AR people tend to act purely on emotion and limited facts and knowledge--almost knee-jerk reactions to each other. This is poor rhetorical technique and should be seriously considered by both sides.<br><br><br><br>
The fact is, the issues are extremely complex and a simple emotional appeal is not enough to address the issues.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,192 Posts
Encouraging and funding violence and destruction of private property are a couple of things they do. PETA is an organization that has really taken a good basic idea and turned it into a farce. They have almost singlehandedly created a notion that ALL AR folks are militant whackos not to be taken seriously.<br><br><br><br>
It's not about animals with PETA, its about politics and money. That's it.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
6,902 Posts
Well, said, zoebird and Robert. I didn't look at the link, bc that sort of thing gets me mad and stressed out for the rest of the day.<br><br><br><br>
One thing PETA can be useful is for finding certain little caches of info, like Ringling Bro's list of violations, for ex.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
0 Posts
I think that before anyone speaks up for or against Animal Rights, they need to do some research and get the facts before making many of the statements I saw on that board, I heard Mr. Stossel make, or I have read here.<br><br><br><br>
The finacial status, salaries and such for PETA are free for the asking. No one who works for them is getting rich! That Includes Ingrid Newkirk.<br><br><br><br>
Any of the information you hear coming from PETA investigations is neither "knee jerk" or based only on emotions. It is based on many months, in some cases years, of in depth investigation. The facts are there before facts are made public. Does anyone really think they would open themselves up to the lawsuits by those only too eager to file them, by presenting false information based on nothing more than emotion?<br><br><br><br><br><br>
One of the central beliefs shared by most animal rights people is rejection of harm to any animal, human or otherwise. However, any large movement is going to have factions that believe in the use of force.<br><br><br><br>
Should Animal Rights activists be more concerned over whether they look like wackos, or whether they end the suffering and torture of animals now. Letter writing, phone calls, demos are all great and have their place for making changes in the long run, but how many animals die while people only do those things?<br><br><br><br>
Huntingdon Life Sciences kills 500 animals in their labs daily doing testing that is redundant, outdated and nothing more than junk science and for which alternatives exist.<br><br><br><br>
In the time it has taken to write this, about 1 and 1/2 million animals have died in slaughterhouses and factory farms.<br><br><br><br>
The ALF," which is simply the name adopted by people acting illegally in behalf of animal rights, breaks inanimate objects such as stereotaxic devices and decapitators in order to save lives. It burns empty buildings in which animals are tortured and killed. ALF "raids" have given us proof of horrific cruelty that would not have been discovered or believed otherwise. They have resulted in officials filing of criminal charges against laboratories, citing of experimenters for violations of the Animal Welfare Act, and, in some cases, shutting down of abusive labs for good. Often ALF raids have been followed by widespread scientific condemnation of the practices occurring in the targeted labs.<br><br><br><br>
In the history of PETA or the ALF not a single person has been harmed.<br><br><br><br>
Throughout history, some people have felt the need to break the law to fight injustice. The Underground Railroad and the French Resistance are both examples of people breaking the law in order to answer to a higher morality.<br><br><br><br>
If anyone has ever toured a Research Lab or Factory Farm or Slaughter House, it is very hard not to support whatever it takes to stop this insanity, without causing further physical harm to an animal or Person.<br><br><br><br>
Couple good books to read on the subject are:<br><br><br><br>
Slaugherhouse by Gail Eisnitz<br><br><br><br>
Free the Animals, the story of the Animal Liberation Front which is by Ingrid Newkirk with foreword by Chrissie Hynd.<br><br>
Both are excellent.<br><br><br><br>
And if ya have the opportunity take a tour of one of the facilities near you, it's a real eye opener but be prepared not to sleep that night.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,192 Posts
Veggiemyte, <b>no one</b> has the right to destroy another person's property, no matter which way you, or PETA or ALF try to spin it. Destruction/burning of other people's property is a crime. These people are nothing but lowlife criminals and should be charged and treated as same.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
0 Posts
I agree Robert. If some nutty neighbor of mine decided to do something to defile my property, I'd have to take'em back to school and learn'em a thing or two! Hmph!<br><br><br><br>
Destroying others property is not justifiable.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
0 Posts
Not to mention destroying someone's property is not going to make them say or think, "You know, maybe those AR people were right all along...funny how it took the blowing up of a building for me to discover it." If anything, it will make them feel that much more justified in their actions thinking that AR people are crazy.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,192 Posts
Herself: exactly. I think these people do more harm than good. They need public support in order to futher their cause. Being seen as extremists only serves to alienate them from a large majority of the population.<br><br><br><br>
Its unfortunate that the few extremists are responsible for the widely negative public perception brush used to paint all AR folks.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
0 Posts
On this I think we will have to agree to disagree. It gets results and that is what matters. Huntingdon is proof of that and that is what is important.<br><br><br><br>
The Animal Rights people I know are not terribly concerned with how they appear to the public. They are concerned with the issue at hand and that really is all that matters. If public perception were the concern very little would ever be accomplished.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
8,440 Posts
So what is acceptable to do for animal rights?<br><br><br><br>
Some people might say that demonstration has an effect on companys and might destroy their brand name. A brand name is commonly accepted as property.<br><br>
So am I allowed to say: dont go to MacDonalds because..<br><br>
I might damage their brand name and damage their potential profit?<br><br><br><br>
Edited: I'm not 100% sure ALF is "the right way" I can't make up my mind.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,192 Posts
1Vegan, you are free to express an opinion... you are not physically damaging another person's property by setting it on fire, or cutting brake lines or any other such criminal act. Expressing an opinion is legal... vandalizing, burning, or otherwise destroying someone else's property is a criminal offense. That's the difference.<br><br><br><br>
Veggiemyte's opinion seems to be that it is perfectly acceptable for the ALF or other AR activists/extremists to engage in criminal activity.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
8,440 Posts
What's the opinion on "stealing animals", like "liberate" a number of animals from a lab or farm when you have alternative accomodation for them?
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
10,763 Posts
I am not against breaking the law or destroying property, if it is necessary. But I am only for using such tactics in certain well-planned and thought-out situations, where it can be predicted that it will probably do more good than harm. In the case of animal-rights, I am generally against it.<br><br><br><br>
I like to point out the the American revolution involved breaking the laws made by the British Colonial Government and destroying property belonging to Brits. When the Brits tried to use force to prevent such things from happening again -- the Rebels used physical violence against humans (Loyalists) in order to gain independence from control of their affairs, by them.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
0 Posts
Soilman,<br><br>
why are you against these types of actions in relation to animal rights? Just curious, under what circumstances you do support the use of direct action?<br><br><br><br>
What is being overlooked it that criminal activities are being commited in the labs, slaughterhouses and factory farms all across the country. The laws that govern the practices and procedures in these facilities are being willfully violated many times over each and every day. The breaking of these laws is endangering the workers who work in these places as well as brutalizing the animals housed or processed there, and in many cases, the consumer as well.<br><br><br><br>
Many people, who some may consider this country's greatest patriots and social activists, have espoused the idea that it is sometimes necessary to break a law to change a more unjust law or rectify an unjust situation.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
15,684 Posts
Someone please transplant this to the Compost Heap...
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
16,090 Posts
Discussion Starter · #20 ·
<div class="quote-container"><span>Quote:</span>
<div class="quote-block"><i>Originally posted by 1vegan</i><br><br><b>What's the opinion on "stealing animals", like "liberate" a number of animals from a lab or farm when you have alternative accomodation for them?</b></div>
</div>
<br><br><br>
I do not think it's unethical to steal animals who are being abused. I think we should work to rescue any animal (human or otherwise) who is in an abusive situation.<br><br><br><br>
Though sometimes I wonder if there's a point. IF the abuser is simply going to get another animal to replace the one being abused, then you're not really helping. Though replacing the animal would incure a minimal cost to the abuser, and maybe send a statement that someone knows they are mistreating animals.
 
1 - 20 of 20 Posts
Top