PETA – Is It Really Ethical? - Debat - Fanpop

26

posted by DarkSarcasm

Pamela Anderson goes PETA.

Originally telah dihantar for school on December 6, 2006.

PETA – Is It Really Ethical?

Who would think twice about questioning the motive of a nonprofit animal-loving organization with the word “ethical” in its title? The word “ethical” usually refers to someone who is doing the right thing. After all, who wouldn’t want to treat Haiwan ethically?

I sat behind an avid PETA supporter one tahun in my high school English class. PETA, as I was later informed, was an acronym for People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals, and was an organization dedicated to saving Haiwan and promoting veganism. Hardly a hari went sejak that this girl wasn’t talking about that oh-so-wonderful organization, atau passing out leaflets, catalogues, and stickers. Early on, I didn’t care atau know much about this organization, but it got harder and harder to ignore the countless leaflets shoved under my nose. Finally, one hari when I ran out of things to do, I decided to look through one of the ever present PETA catalogues. I wasn’t very impressed; it seemed to me that it was a pathetic attempt to make money. The catalogue was filled with juvenile-looking stickers, books, and a bloody Colonel Sanders model with a pisau getting ready to murder a chicken… This was getting annoying, and some of the products looked like they were created sejak someone deranged.

PETA, atau People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals, is everywhere. Ads for it are seen on TV, the Internet, billboards, in schools, and at concerts. What isn’t seen sejak the general public are the facts. The facts have been pushed out of PETA’s limelight sejak the imej of half-naked celebrity spokespersons and shocking images. PETA is a corrupt organization, and Ingrid Newkirk, the president of PETA, has lebih things on her mind than saving animals. PETA is merely a front for Ingrid Newkirk’s Cinta of the press, and a way for her to make money. People for the Ethical Treatment of Haiwan is attempting to turn this country’s children into mindless, militant vegans, and something needs to be done about it.

In the introduction of Ingrid Newkirk’s book, You Can Save the Animals, she explains how PETA started. PETA, atau People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals, was founded sejak Ingrid Newkirk and Alex Pacheco in 1980. At the time, Newkirk was working in a Washington, D.C. animal shelter. Pacheco volunteered his services there, and told Newkirk the story of how he and a crew, members of the group Fund for Animals, hunted down and sank a pirate whaling ship. Pacheco lent Newkirk his copy of Peter Singer’s Animal Liberation, which had changed his way of thinking about animals. In a review sejak Judy Quinn of “Library Journal,” she calls Animal Liberation a “bible for animal rights activists.” Newkirk’s way of thinking about Haiwan was also swayed sejak this book, and so they formed People for the Ethical Treatment of Haiwan (Newkirk xv-xviii).

On the official PETA website, it is stated that “PETA is dedicated to establishing and protecting the rights of all animals. PETA operates under the simple principle that Haiwan are not ours to eat, wear, experiment on, atau use for entertainment… PETA works through public education, cruelty investigations, research, animal rescue, legislation, special events, celebrity involvement, and protest campaigns.” Nowhere in that statement do they mention supporting convicted arsonists, working with terrorists, corrupting children, killing adoptable animals, atau offending the general public.

According to an artikel titled "Animal Rights Activists Are Terrorists" sejak Helen Cothran, as well as numerous other sources, PETA has been linked with the group ALF, otherwise knows as the Animal Liberation Front. Several of ALF’s illegal acts have been declared terrorist incidents sejak the Federal Bureau of Investigation. Rodney Coronado, who is an affiliate of ALF, bombed a Michigan State universiti lab in February of 1992. He pleaded guilty and was convicted of arson for that crime, sentenced to 57 months in prison. Coronado’s support committee received $45,200 from PETA, which was 15 times lebih than the amount PETA spent on shelters that year. PETA denies any connection to ALF, but perhaps they operate under the same violent principle. Alex Pacheco, chairman and co-founder of PETA, stated that “Arson, property destruction, burglary and theft are 'acceptable crimes' when used for the animal cause.” (Cothran).

PETA is a tax-exempt organization. Examples of other tax exempt organizations include universities, churches, and social service organizations. PETA’s income totals lebih than $25 million a year, much of that coming from donations that are believed to be helping animals. Since they are a tax exempt organization, their tax returns are a matter of public record. Their tax returns prove that they donated money to the convicted arsonist Rodney Coronado and his support committee. If this organization can afford to pay legal fees for a domestic terrorist, shouldn’t they also be able to pay taxes?

Petakillsanimals.com declares that, “Hypocrisy is the mother of all credibility problems, and People for the Ethical Treatment of Haiwan (PETA) has it in spades. While loudly complaining about the "unethical" treatment of Haiwan sejak restaurant owners, grocers, farmers, scientists, anglers, and countless other Americans, the group has its own dirty little secret. PETA kills animals. sejak the thousand.” PETA killed lebih than 14,419 Haiwan from July 1998 to the end of 2005. They took in 17,806 animals, and only 3,047 were adopted. That means about eighty percent of the Haiwan PETA took in were killed. Newkirk says that it costs lebih to keep the Haiwan alive than to euthanize them. PETA’s income last tahun totaled about $29 million. That should have been enough to keep a few Haiwan alive for a while. Instead of using this money to help animals, PETA uses it on advertisements and protecting criminals (PETA’s Dirty Secret).
The following is an excerpt from a comic book distributed to children from PETA, titled “Your Mommy Kills Animals.”

“Ask your mommy how many dead Haiwan she killed to make her bulu clothes. Then tell her that anda know she paid men to hurt and kill the animals. Everyone knows. And the sooner she stops wearing fur, the sooner the Haiwan will be safe. Until then, keep your doggie atau kitty Friends away from mommy—she’s an animal killer!” (PETA comics).

Would anda like for someone to hand a copy of this to your child? When this comic was distributed, many parents were unaware of its contents, atau even the fact that their child had the book. Many of PETA’s attempts to shock and terrorize are aimed at children. Children are naïve and impressionable, making them easy targets, and pawns in the hands of People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals. Since it is illegal for unauthorized visitors to be on school property, PETA activists have been known to linger just outside school grounds to distribute literature, such as the “Your Mommy Kills Animals” comic book to children coming and going to school. Another place that PETA activists gather is outside restaurants such as KFC and McDonalds, handing out “Buckets of Blood” and “Unhappy Meals” to children exiting the restaurants.

PETA runs many websites that are directed at certain groups of people. Petakids.org is directed at children, offering features like games, homework help, and information on vegan celebrities. Peta2.org is aimed toward teens, with information on PETA scholarships, celebrity vegans and animal rights supporters, e-cards, discussion boards, offering suggestions on how to “veganize” your cafeteria and detailed instructions on how to avoid frog dissection. Teachkind.com is the education program of PETA, and is geared toward teachers, specializing in offering free teaching supplies and tips. People for the Ethical Treatment of Haiwan is brainwashing and scaring children and attempting to use teachers to assist them.

Perhaps the most offensive campaign PETA has ever presented is “Holocaust on Your Plate,” according to a news artikel entitled “Group Blasts PETA 'Holocaust' Project” from CNN.com. This campaign, launched in 2003, consisted of 60 sq. ft. panels of pictures of Jews in Nazi concentration camps alongside pictures of Haiwan in slaughterhouses and factory farms. The “Holocaust on Your Plate” campaign was meant to rally the Jewish community alongside PETA in the fight for animal rights, but it angered a great number of people, including Holocaust survivor and Anti-Defamation League national director Abraham Foxman, who issued an angry statement toward PETA. “'The effort sejak PETA to compare the deliberate, systematic murder of millions of Jews to the issue of animal rights is abhorrent… PETA’s effort to seek approval for their 'Holocaust on Your Plate' campaign is outrageous, offensive and takes chutzpah to new heights.'”(CNN)

Nancy hari includes a quote from PETA’s president, Ingrid Newkirk, in her book Animal Experimentation: Cruelty atau Science? . “Animal liberationists do not separate out the human animal so there is no rational basis for saying that a human being has special rights. A tikus is a pig is a dog is a boy. They’re all mammals.” (59). If all the animal liberationists and rights activists achieved their goal of “total animal liberation,” what do they think would be the outcome? Total animal liberation would mean that all animals, including pets and zoo animals, would be set free. Life isn’t a Disney movie, where all living creatures live in harmony. There would be serious consequences to this. Haiwan would be killing other Haiwan as well as humans, destroying property, spreading diseases uncontrollably, and overpopulating. Would human laws apply to other animals, since apparently, we’re all equal? atau would laws be abolished altogether, resulting in utter chaos? There is no way it would, atau could, ever happen. I’d like to see Ingrid Newkirk share a taxi with an anaconda, atau an elevator with a grizzly bear. That might cause a bit of a change in the minds of a few animal rights activists and liberationists.

This “ethical” organization is obviously targeting children, sponsoring highly offensive campaigns, and funding domestic terrorists. People for the Ethical Treatment of Haiwan has already gotten away with enough wrongdoing, and it’s time for it to stop. The truth must be exposed.

Works Cited
"About PETA." PETA. 15 Nov. 2006 <peta.org>.

"Animal Rights Activists Are Terrorists." Animal Experimentation. Helen Cothran. San Diego: Greenhaven Press, 2002. Opposing Viewpoints Resource Center. Thomson Gale. Piedmont Virginia Community College. 10 Nov. 2006
<link>.

Day, Nancy. Animal Experimentation: Cruelty atau Science? Hillside, N.J.: Enslow, Inc., 1994. 59.

"Group Blasts PETA 'Holocaust' Project." CNN. 28 Feb. 2003. 10 Nov. 2006 <link>.

Newkirk, Ingrid. You Can Save the Haiwan : 251 Ways to Stop Thoughtless Cruelty. USA: Prima, 1999. xv-xviii.

PETA Comics Presents: Your Mommy Kills Animals. Norfolk: PETA Comics, 2003.

"PETA's Dirty Secret." PETA Kills Animals. 05 Dec. 2006 <link>.

Use of Outside Sources
Paragraph 1: None
Paragraph 2: None
Paragraph 3: None
Paragraph 4: Summary of anda Can Save the Animals. Direct quote from "Library Journal" review.
Paragraph 5: Direct quote (mission statement) from official PETA.org website.
Paragraph 6: Summary from "Animal Rights Activists are Terrorists."
Paragraph 7: None
Paragraph 8: Direct quote from "PETA's Dirty Secret." Summary of statistics from "PETA's Dirty Secret." Paraphrase from "PETA's Dirty Secret"
Paragraph 9: None
Paragraph 10: Block Quote from "Your Mommy Kills Animals" comic book.
Paragraph 11: None
Paragraph 12: Summaries of different PETA sponsored websites.
Paragraph 13: Summary and quote from the artikel "Group Blasts PETA 'Holocaust' Project"
Paragraph 14: Direct quote from Animal Experimentation: Cruelty atau Science?
Paragraph 15: None

BellaMetallica, -sapherequeen- and 24 others like this

ThinkPink20 Wow that was very... informative. Seriously, it was very well written, well organized, and well presented. I've never been an animal activist or an activist of animal activists, but after reading this article, it definitely puts me over the edge. I can hardly believe PETA would do things like this if you didn't have your sources at hand. Definitely a great article. :D

DarkSarcasm Thanks, ThinkPink! =D

Cinders My friend often said that PETA REALLY stood for People Eating Tasty Animals. ;o) I've only read about half of this now-- up to where you introduce ALF-- but I will finish in the morning. Very articulate and well-researched it seems. I agree with animal rights, but I also believe in differentiating between animal and human rights. First of all, our digestive system was designed for an omnivorous diet-- I see nothing wrong with eating animals as animals eat other animals all the time. This doesn't mean I agree with the mistreatment of some farmed animals. I'm always bothered when a holier-than-thou vegan tells me I'm evil. It reminds me of another group that often tells me I'm evil and going to hell. And they also have televangelists who profit from telling people they're going to hell! I wonder if these two groups are linked... Anyways, more on your article when I finish it tomorrow. Sleep now.

cg277 That was a very interesting article. I always like to hear both sides of organizations such as PETA. You really don't know who to trust anymore or where to donate money. It's sad and makes me feel a little helpless.

blisslikethis i don't believe in differentiating between animal and human rights.. at least not to the extent that most people feel is necessary. i think the comment about riding in a taxi with an anaconda was a bit ridiculous. the point of animal rights and animal liberation isn't to make them "equal" to humans, it's to give them rights equal to human rights like shelter, food, and humane treatment. i agree that PETA's tactics are often over the top, but i do believe in the cause. and Cinders, our physiology is quite different from that of most natural omnivores, which is what leads a lot of scientists to question whether we are, in fact, naturally inclined to eating meat.

Cinders Yes, my point is, since they don't have the same level of consciousness as humans, what good is the right to free speech for animals? Animals have the right to live, and not be tortured. But I fish, and I gut, fillet, and cook all that I catch. Animals nourish other animals. Bears eat fish. Hyenas eat gazelle. It's the natural cycle. I like my meat. I'm sorry, but I'm not going to give that up. I think animals should be well-treated, and I'm against farms that have them in poor conditions, but that doesn't mean I'll stop eating meat all-together. Inevitably, animals ARE different from humans. Sure, they share some basic rights with us, but all human rights would be ridiculous for an animal to have. You can be vegetarian if you want, and more power to you. Go ahead and be vegan, too. I used to bring vegan cookies to my friend in drama every day. But I'm going to eat meat. So there.

kateliness2 I've never liked PETA. They do drastic things to get people on their side.

dazl Brilliant article. I hope you scored high for this. Agree with what Cinders is saying, but am too lazy to restate in my own words.

ThinkPink20 Haha, I'm with dazl on this one. But I will elaborate a little more. Cinders is absolutely right when she says animals have the right to live and to not be tortured and she was also right when she said it would be ludicrous for animals and humans to have the same rights. We've got the voice box, upright walking, and opposable thumbs for a reason; we are superior to the animals, so why shouldn't we use this?

blisslikethis being "superior" to animals absolutely does not give us the right to mistreat them. i'd also like to point out that the rights animal rights activists fight for are not things like freedom of speech, that would be silly. the point is that most people either are, or choose to be, unaware of the gross mistreatment of animals for all sorts of unacceptable reasons. there is no reason that animals should be confined and tortured so that people can eat as many hamburgers as they want for $0.49. that is what organizations like PETA are fighting against.. although, as i said, i do think PETA often takes it too far. "liking" meat is fine, but choosing to ignore the ramifications of that choice is not. that doesn't mean i think everyone in the world should be a vegetarian, by any means. i just can't help getting really pissed off when people think that enjoying the taste of meat is a good enough reason to dismiss the fact that being blase about its consumption has hugely negative effects on animals, the environment, and even your own health. surprisingly, i'm not anti-hunting. i think hunting for food (not for fun, mind you), is generally a humane, sustainable way of feeding oneself. mass consumption and factory farming are the opposite. my being a vegetarian is way more about boycotting the industry than it is about feeling that humans shouldn't eat meat as a rule. reading the comments here makes me see why i've had so little response to the soapbox i wrote. i love this site, and i'm usually really impressed at how open everyone is to other view points, but i have to say i'm pretty disappointed that people seem to be especially closed minded about this particular issue. i've done huge amounts of research on this topic, and i've found tons and tons of credible sources that back up my argument.. but so far, all i can tell is that people like their steaks too much to care about where they come from, and that makes me really sad.

DarkSarcasm My point was, PETA has lost sight of the real issue. This article wasn't about animal rights in general, but more about the things PETA has done in the name of the cause. And blisslikethis, I'll be the first to admit that I am closed-minded about this issue. I've done my research, as have you, and we've decided where we stand.

kateliness2 This is the point that I try to get across to people, it's mostly what blisslikethis has been saying: Eating meat is not a "sin" or whatever in my book, but please educate yourself about what the flesh that is sliding down your throat has gone through to come to you at such a low price. The industry is wrecking our environment and, animals being kept in cages so that the cannot even turn around or ever see the sun in their entire lives is to me, cruel. I differentiate in animal and human rights, but they deserve better than what our country and many others are currently giving them.

blisslikethis precisely :) i don't think anyone is arguing that cows should have the right to bear arms, but that doesn't mean they don't have others. no animal should be mistreated in order to feed, clothe, or entertain a human simply because we think we're superior; nor should the meat industry be allowed to continue polluting our planet and our bodies to the degree it is now.. and you don't have to research very hard to figure that out.

DrDevience This is a very good article... ... and that is as far as I am willing to wade at this time ;)

Cinders Like I said, I'm against the poor conditions that humans put animals in. In general, I don't eat fast food. And I pay upwards of twenty dollars for a New York Strip Steak. But you're right, I don't often know where that New York strip comes from. But if I paid twenty dollars for it, I damn well hope it came from somewhere good. I already said that I believe animals have the rights not to be tortured and to live healthy lives, but I will admit that it's not an issue that is close to my heart. I'm sorry, but I'm far more concerned about the child abuse in Uganda, and I spend my research and campagning time on that. I don't mean to belittle your cause-- I think it's a fine cause. It's just not one that I am interested in and maybe that means I'm not a perfect person, but there are just too many issues and I can't be passionate about all of them. That's not to say that if I knew that a company gets its meat from abusive places I would still eat there. But I don't go out of my way to find out, and I'm sorry. I do eat at Chipotle. And they advertise that they have free range meat.

blisslikethis i can respect that, Cinders. environmentalism just happens to be my issue :). i actually just had a big discussion about having to pick your fights. what i really take issue with is people who ignore all this because not thinking about it makes their lives more comfortable. that's what really gets me. however, i do understand not being able to fight every fight... although i do have to go one step farther and say that developmental issues in third world countries are impossible to solve without first solving the environmental ones. aand i can't help myself from commenting that the regulations about what constitutes "free range" in North America are practically useless. but that's another issue all together ;)

renrae That was really interesting and it's good to hear and understand both sides of the concept. I support some PETA ideas, but some of it is downright... messed up. So it was interesting to read this well thought article.

cjniya We are Not Alone Recently I received a letter from my friend Linda. That is a letter original from PETA, in which the PETA asked the animal protectors to write emails to the Australian designer Alannah Hill who uses fur in her works a lot keep the certain press on her. I am an animal lover but I am not as crazy as Linda. She runs an animal shelter in the countryside. She is now trying her best to take part in the activities the PETA organization holds because the animal right in China and Asia is what she cares best. And the reason why Alannah Hill raises her attention so much is the furs in Alannah Hill’s works “are most likely come from China---- where there are no regulations for animal welfare.’’ But I think the problem of animal welfare does not exist in China only. In Asia, many countries have no regulation for protecting animals’ welfare. Such as in Japan, dolphins are the special dishes in the restaurant. In our country, the invasion of animals also exists. Many noble families spend their hunting season together and enjoy the pleasure of killing together. Every hunting season is the nightmare for animals. The so called ladies and gentlemen kill almost everything they can see, from the rabbits to deer. This action is very rude, but they consider it as the elegant activity. I am angry with that and Linda is mad for that activity. In my opinion, the human being is just one race in this planet, but not the master of this planet. We share everything with other races. Without them, we could not survive; without us, they may have a better place. I could still remember the activity Linda hold for the World Animal Day. She organized the volunteers in her animal protectors’ association to bring out the event. They had an exhibition down town and showed the pictures of abused animals in order to gain passers-bys’ mercy to animals. I took part in it. As I know more about the situation of the abused animals have in Asia and other places, I know more about the definition of the hell. I kept the rubber wristbands we had for that event. And every time I see it, I could hear the scream of abused animals and the praise. We, human beings, should know one thing and keep it in our mind; we are not alone in this planet and we are not the master of this planet.

tigerclaw04 I Agree with Peta about the stop puppymills and circus and stuff. but i think forcing you to be come vegitarian as well as saying stuff like steak eggs milk ect arent healthy

natulle I'm mostly agians PETA. The celebritys just uses it to get publicity to say "I'd rather be naked then wear fur". And PETA lets them be spokes persons. Sorry, but mostly it's crap. I don't know how many of them I've seen wears leather- which is the same thing it's still an animal I don't mind people waering fur, I sometimes do too but you have to know that the animals where treated right. Some places you know that. My mom deals with fur and she's an animal lover and she would never use any animals that's had a bad life! Only the ones with good lifes. They will just have maybe a short life but they won't notice that and then they haven't suffered through life and then I don't see the big problem. But of course some people do. I would never wear fur from people who didn't treat them right. I just hate those PETA people who are so two faced that they say no to fur and either likes it or waers leather. But if they can give me some arguments I can use I totally respect that. It's all or nothing and don't be obbsessed is my opinion. Like Khloe Kardashian was on a campain "I'd rather be naked then waer fur" and 4-5 moths earlier she was standing in a fur saying how much she loved fur. (I know this for a fact it's not just crap the press lets out)And it was just to get some fame. I so don't approve of that and I get so angry d; This is one of theese topics that people with diffrrent opinion never will never agree, and some will disagree with me d;

rosie23 I've never heard of PETA before reading this, ( mainly because I live under a rock, ) I'm all for treating animals fairly, but giving little kids " Buckets of Blood " & " Unhappy meals " is just pissing me off. I do make jokes with my mom about her "eating Bambi" in collage, ( eating deer meat) but telling first graders that Bambi is gonna die unless you tell your mom that she should stop wearing fur is uncalled for. " I'd rather be naked than wear fur," Well you most likely still like it or wear leather. Leather is made from the skin of cows an is therefore made of animals. Stop being two-faced! And if any of them if my 4 year old sister a " Unhappy meal" I'm taking Bambi, Mickey Mouse, and Wilbur hostage and sueing PETA for stalking!

MissKnowItAll When I was little, I loved all charities like the RSPCA and PETA, because I adored animals and thought any charity trying to help them had to be good. I am a vegetarian, but I don't force my beliefs on others.

4

fox news is the most racist tv tunjuk

added by tamore

Source: tumblr

Biggest Difference Between Bad Art and Great Art sejak UCLA Professor Richard Walter

added by filmcourage

Biggest Difference Between Bad Art and Great Art sejak UCLA Professor Richard Walter via link For lebih videos, please visit link

video

art

Debat

film

Televisyen

Penulisan

screenwriting

ucla

artist

2

HAARM.org - Community Outreach

added by Cinders

HAARM takes their message of anti-health care reform to the streets.

video

politics

Debat

community outreach

health care reform

healthy americans against reforming medicine

haarm.org

15

Did anda Know

added by greekthegeek

a mezmerizing video on the technology of the human race and what is yet to come. intense. it really made me think. we've gone so far but really..we're nowhere.

video

facts

did anda know

technology

united states

china

india

Liberal Logic

added by KarbonKopy

Source: http://liberallogic101.com/