Are these people nuts or what?

http://sports.espn.go.com/espn/sportsbusin...artnersite=espn

I did not even need to read the link to answer your question in the affirmative. IMO the PETA folks are perfect examples of well organized but wacko activists. The few good things they may do are washed over by the crazy stuff.

I don't think it's nuts. It's freedom of expression. It's not even a blatant statement. I actually find it humorous - and smart - that they got away with it. And for those of you who didn't read the article, this is what PETA wrote on a brick that is in PETCO stadium:

"The message reads, "Break Open Your Cold Ones! Toast The Padres! EnjoyThis Championship Organization!" The first letter of every word spells "BOYCOTT PETCO."

Given PETA's track record, that's pretty mild. I don't agree with all of PETA's tactics, but I support the goal of treating animals humanely.

It may be freedom of expression, but these people are completely nuts! They've attacked people in front of a Neiman Marcus department store in Atlanta for buying fur, believe that cows are treated inhumanely when they're milked, and believe that people shouldn't be able to own animals.

I don't know where you "HEARD" this, but it's untrue...The following is the PETA mission statement. Perhaps you confused the entertainment part for OWNING animals. I do agree that they go overboard sometimes...Not always though....

People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals (PETA), with more than 800,000 members, is the largest animal rights organization in the world. Founded in 1980, PETA is dedicated to establishing and protecting the rights of all animals. PETA operates under the simple principle that animals are not ours to eat, wear, experiment on, or use for entertainment.

PETA focuses its attention on the four areas in which the largest numbers of animals suffer the most intensely for the longest periods of time: on factory farms, in laboratories, in the fur trade, and in the entertainment industry. We also work on a variety of other issues, including the cruel killing of beavers, birds and other "pests," and the abuse of backyard dogs.

PETA works through public education, cruelty investigations, research, animal rescue, legislation, special events, celebrity involvement, and direct action.

From the article "PETA, which objects to the sale of animals altogether, has targeted PETCO for months, written letters to Padres executives in hopes that they would..." I know about PETA, and I believe they are totally out of touch with reality. Any organization that attacks people for buying fur from a department store is not, in my opinion, good in any way.

I agree 100% with Phish's post, ( we should have beers sometime).

On top of that...


Factory farms. Yeah, cows can be mistreated for the purpose of milking. WVU - I've seen your discussions in politics. You know everything these days is about money and big business. Do you find it hard to believe that milking cows has turned into big business? Wow, that sounded really stupid. But it's the truth. How many factory farms out there have replaced good old fashioned green pastures and barns? Factory farms are literally factories. Let's cram as many cows into a "facility" as we can. We'll practically stack them on top of each other. They'll stand in one place all day and not move but a hoof up and then back. They'll stand in their own feces and urine while stuck in that same position all day 24/7. Then they'll get nasty diseases from doing it. They'll get injected with hormones so that they can pump out as much rich milk as humanly, (bovinely? ), as possible. That is their life. They aren't grazing lazily in green pastures, chewing cud to their hearts desire anymore with farmer Joe tugging on their teets every morning. Wake up! Big business isn't just Wall Street and taxes. It's not just kids and education. If affects everything on this earth.

Woohoo go Heather! It's your birthday, lol! Thank you so much for your post! Alot of people don't realize the totally inhuman conditions that go on in these so-called "farms". PETA may be a bit over the edge on some topics that they campaign against but they also have a few that are worth people's attention. Currently they are running a campaign to boycott KFC. It's getting alot of attention here in Louisville since KFC's headquarters are based here. It turns out that quite a few of KFC's suppliers have been charged with animal cruelty. Some of these charges were made as far back as 2001 & yet KFC has done nothing to make changes in their choice of suppliers. Here's a website with more info: http://www.kfccruelty.com

Yea these animals are being raised for the sole intent of becoming someone's dinner but jeez do they deserve to live such a pathetic exsistence in the short "life" they have?!

feistyirishbabe asks "How many factory farms out there have replaced good old fashioned green pastures and barns?".

Maybe PETA ought to get involved in trying to help the little farmer remain competitive so that cows CAN remain in green pastures and barns, rather than having hissy fits because the local high school is having a donkey basketball game.

They sent letters protesting the donkey basketball game at Fannett-Metal last month, in the meantime there's a bunch of little farmers around here who are having a devil of a time making it.

There's a difference between SELLING animals and OWNING animals...So they don't want them to be sold, big deal! There's enough costs associated with owning an animal, so why pay even more just to get one? THEY DO NOT BELIEVE THAT PEOPLE SHOULDN'T OWN ANIMALS...Wouldn't that be defeating their entire purpose of existence? Also...PETCO has been found to have some terrible environments for animals, not only by PETA, but other groups as well. Why here's an article just today about Petco. By the way, that was a GREAT post Heather!

http://www.wtopnews.com/index.php?sid=191584&nid=25

There may be a few reasonable things PETA does, but when they come up with insane positions like those below, who can take them seriously or believe what they say on anything?

___________________

"To those people who say, `My father is alive because of animal experimentation,' I say `Yeah, well, good for you. This dog died so your father could live.' Sorry, but I am just not behind that kind of trade off."

- Bill Maher, PETA celebrity spokesman

"We feel that animals have the same rights as retarded children."

-Alex Pacheco, Director, PETA, New York Times, January 14, 1989.

"Six million Jews died in concentration camps, but six billion broiler chickens will die this year in slaughter houses."

-Ingrid Newkirk, President, PETA, The Washington Post, November 13, 1983.

"I don’t use the word "pet." I think it’s speciesist language. I prefer "companion animal." For one thing, we would no longer allow breeding. People could not create different breeds. There would be no pet shops. If people had companion animals in their homes, those animals would have to be refugees from the animal shelters and the streets. You would have a protective relationship with them just as you would with an orphaned child. But as the surplus of cats and dogs (artificially engineered by centuries of forced breeding) declined, eventually companion animals would be phased out, and we would return to a more symbiotic relationship – enjoyment at a distance."

-Ingrid Newkirk, PETA vice-president, quoted in The Harper's Forum Book, Jack Hitt, ed., 1989, p.223.

"As John Bryant has written in his book Fettered Kingdoms, they [pets] are like slaves, even if well-kept slaves."

-PETA's Statement on Companion Animals

"Arson, property destruction, burglary and theft are 'acceptable crimes' when used for the animal cause."

-Alex Pacheco, Director, PETA

Even if animal research resulted in a cure for AIDS, we'd be against it. -- Ingrid Newkirk, President, PETA (Vogue, September, 1989).


It would be really great if all these fast-food outlets, slaughter houses, these laboratories and the banks who fund them exploded tomorrow -- Peta Spokesperson Bruce Friedrich.

There is no rational basis for saying that a human being has special rights. A rat is a pig is a dog is a boy. They're all mammals. -- Ingrid Newkirk, PETA's President (in The Washington Times August 29, 1999

I say experiment on death row/lifer prison inmates....Put them to good use for once! I'm tired of paying for them to sit there, and would MUCH rather spend my tax dollars on that!!

I don't think anyone can disput the fact that PETA's methods are a bit extreme. I think PETA has developed a bad name for themselves, given some of the quotes you posted below, and other well-known actions they've taken. So, correct me if I'm wrong here, but I don't think anyone on the board was saying that they agree 100% with everything PETA does.

However, given what they HAVE done, (and back to the original post), I don't think that ordering a cryptic message on a brick in a stadium is that crazy.

The problem with PETA is that they look at animals as equals, whereas most people view animals as pets, who are definitely not above humans. I'm guilty of it myself. However, just because an animal is "below" us, doesn't mean they should be treated inhumanely, which is why I support PETA in SOME aspects, but certainly not all.

Oh, and by the way, I don't even trust everything the government says, let alone PETA, so with most information, a little bit of investigation usually reveals the truth.

What is that difference, if you can't SELL an animal you can't buy one so you can't OWN one. I just feel that there are better organizations around than PETA that help protect animals. Heather, doesn't the USDA inspect diary farms?

I would vote "nuts", but I think they're more sinister than crazy.

Years ago I looked at them as organized crime. Nowadays, we have a more apt description for what they do: terrorism.

Why sell animals at all? Do we sell people? No, not to my knowledge! Also, there are so many FREE pets anywhere you look, why pay for them?


LOL!!! That's funny! I know some USDA inspectors and if you really want to call them INSPECTORS, go ahead, but I wouldn't go that far myself!

Hey, if the KKK can run around spreading their POOP all over, and not be deemed a terrorist organization, why can't PETA?

Who said KKK isn't a terrorist organization? But we're talking about PETA here. Unconventional warfare, targeting innocents, . . .

A terrorist uses threat or violence to get their message across. I wouldn't define PETA as a terrorist organization. I don't think they've ever inflicted pain, physical harm, or even death to a human.

The KKK is NOT classified as a terrorist organization...Although some people would like it that way, including myself, they are NOT classified that way...They are classified as a "Radical Domestic Organization"....

Who said KKK isn't a terrorist organization? But we're talking about PETA here. Unconventional warfare, targeting innocents, . . .

You said that PETA should be classified as a terrorist organization, well I feel the same for other groups...WHO ALSO USE "Unconventional warfare, targeting innocents"

I could care less what anybody else wants to classify them or the KKK as.

The topic is PETA, with whose blessings plenty of violent crimes against both property and innocent persons have been committed. PETA encourages people to commit crimes, then stands back and denies responsibility afterwards.

Maybe the problem here is the definition of "innocent people." From PETA's perspective, individuals who torture, mutilate, abuse and murder animals are not considered "innocent."

Of course, that raises the question: What is the definition of torture, mutilate, abuse, etc.?

The thing about PETA is that they approach the animal rights campaign from all angles.

They buy stock in restaurants and food companies so they can vote at shareholder meetings. IMHO, this is a very smart way to try and create change.

They support and provide educational campaigns--humane treatment of backyard dogs, spaying & neutering, the health benefits of a vegetarian diet, etc.

They provide financial rewards for the apprehension and conviction of animal abusers.

They put stickers on packages of meat in supermarkets and they run naked through the streets to protest the running of the bulls.

None of these would be considered terrorist acts, I don't think.

On the flip side, they throw red paint on fur coats, and they've been known to support the actions of ALF. Though again, this brings us back to the definition of "innocent people."

It's a shame PETA's good and "socially acceptable" work gets buried beneath the press of their more outrageous campaigns. But in terms of making a social change, I think it's smart. They hit it from all sides. Sure... most people think "nuts" or "wackos" when they hear "PETA." But that doesn't change the fact that PETA is voting at Tyson Foods shareholder meetings or paying $5,000 for the apprehension of a puppy killer.

The central issue in this argument is going to be whether or not you believe animals rights is a worthy cause, and I doubt we'll come to an agreement on that one.

Also... people commit crimes against animals every day. Where is the justice for them? I believe (just my opinion) that someone needs to speak out for those who have no voice. PETA isn't necessarily the "spokesperson" I would have chosen, but right now they're the largest and most powerful animal rights organization in the world. From a logical perspective, if I care about animal rights, I should at least offer some support to the organization with the best change of creating change.

PETA may do some good things, but so did Hitler (autobahn & Volkswagen) but I don't think Hitler is someone we should look up to or follow his advice.

True. But I think it's unreasonable to compare PETA and Hitler... just as it's unreasonable to compare PETA and the KKK.

Both Hitler and the KKK had a definite interest in wiping out an entire race of people. I just don't see PETA's actions as being quite that horrible.

Honestly... and I'm not aiming this at anyone in particular... I find that most people only know basic "facts" about PETA's methods and motives that they've gleaned from media hype. I'm not saying this organization handles everything in the best way. I'm an animal hugger and they have quite a few "missions" in their mission statement with which I don't particularly agree. But I think some people who argue against PETA really know very little about the organization as a whole.

[quote=McGrupp,Apr 21 2004, 05:41 PM][quote=WVU-Mountaineers,Apr 21 2004, 05:27 PM] Also, there are so many FREE pets anywhere you look, why pay for them?[/quote]
Gee, you mean that dog I got last December from the Rescue Organization in Harrisburg for $300 was really supposed to be FREE?

Sorry to tell you this, but unless you buy a mutt from a private citizen, you're gonna be paying something. The dogs I got from the pound 15 and 10 years ago only cost $45 each, but I still had to pay something for them. The nice thing about getting them from a shelter is that they have to be spayed, so that cuts down on the overpopulation.

My brother has spent small fortunes for 4 different purebred shar-peis. The 2nd & 3rd ones teamed up against the 1st one and killed her, and the 2nd and 3rd ones got some "twisted stomache" ailment and had to be put down. He came home from work one day, and the 4th one was dead. Now he's just spent another small fortune for a different breed puppy that's peeing all over his house. Give me an older pound puppy, preferably for $50!

Now, if I could just find some shelter that would take all of these barn cats I inherited.....

Whereas others, such as those whose employment includes helping to assure the proper and truly humane care and use of animals in biomedical research, know a LOT more, and may therefore be said to KNOW that of which they speak. Though admittedly, the fact that they and their families and property are directly threatened with physical violence by groups such as ALF and PETA does give them particular motivation to oppose such criminal enterprises.

Yes PETA does do some good. RARELY, they do have something to say that bears saying. But there are others who are MUCH more effective because they have a more responsible overall attitude.

It does come down to ones attitude towards humans and animals. PETA is not quite genocidal in their beliefs. But they come a lot closer than most.

BMIC, sounds like you and I may have our place of employment in common. I've got to say that from what I've seen, PETA may moan and groan about how scientific animals are treated, but in our case, they have no reason to. These animals are well treated, spoiled almost!

Free dogs or cats, but what about horses, pigs, goats, etc... And yeah we don't own people, but do you want just to let domesticated animals roam around. I know I've got a better idea we can just start paying them wages!

As they ought to be of course - the last thing we want is for some critical study of a new drug to be adversely influenced because the animal subjects are all stressed out!

As the heat and humidty of the Summer is coming, it's time to make preparations to move into the animal facility - where it's perfectly comfy all year long.

Household pets have it worse than most lab animals.

I do hear that the next big thing is agriculture, however. They do indeed have the worst living conditions. I wonder how much more we're all willing to pay for chicken, beef, milk, etc. just to make the livestock more comfortable?

WVU, sure there are USDA inspectors. To be honest, I really don't know what guidelines they go by but the impression I get is that they aren't very effective or efficient.

Check out this link. It's not from this current year, but it gives you the rundown on factory farming.

factory farming

"In 1958, following overwhelming public support, the Humane Slaughter Act was adopted. In 1978, the Federal Meat Inspection Act was amended to empower USDA inspectors to stop the slaughter line on the spot if any cruelty is observed. Once the line has stopped, slaughter may not legally recommence until deficiencies, whether of equipment, or of abuses by personnel, are corrected. Since that time the public has assumed that the law has been enforced. Gail Eisnitz' s 1997 book, Slaughterhouse (see AWI Quarterly Fall 1997), was a rude awakening to the fact that deregulation had caused enormous speed-ups in the slaughter line so that animals were no longer being slaughtered in conformity with the law. On the contrary, the book revealed that fully conscious pigs and cows were being beaten, strangled, scalded, skinned and dismembered in the nation's slaughterhouses.

Two government reports, "Survey of Stunning and Handling in Federally Inspected Beef, Veal, Pork, and Sheep Slaughter, Plants" January 7, 1997) and "Special Survey on Humane Slaughter and Ante-Mortem Inspection" (March 1998) provide further documentation of the failure of slaughter plants to handle and kill animals humanely. Many apparent violations of federal law were found despite the fact that the these inspections of slaughter plants were announced in advance, providing ample opportunity for plant managers to cover-up.

The 1997 report documented excessive use of electric prods, slippery floors and hazardous ramps, citing 64% of the slaughter plants visited for ineffective use of captive bolt stunners to render animals unconscious and insensible. The 1998 report noted that "it is considered inhumane to allow an animal to regain consciousness after the stunning procedure, so the bleeding should be done as quickly as possible after stunning." Yet, 57.6% of the plants permitted a lengthy period of time between stunning and bleeding. The report concludes that 28% of the plants visited have "serious problems." A detailed resolution calling for strong enforcement of the Humane Slaughter Act was presented to the United States Animal Health Association's Animal Welfare Committee by AWI's Director Cathy Liss. The USAHA represents federal and state regulatory veterinarians throughout the nation and has done so since its founding in 1897. Seeking to quash attention to this issue, a representative of the Livestock Marketing Association objected to virtually all of the text claiming it could not be substantiated. The industry representative even objected to text cited from the two government studies, claiming that these studies, too, could not be substantiated. In the interest of obtaining the necessary votes to adopt a resolution in support of the Humane Slaughter Act, a compromise version was agreed. The final resolution, which appears in the box, was adopted by the Animal Welfare Committee of the USAHA. On the following day it was adopted by the full board of the Association. "

There are, but the USDA inspectors who check out animal care at research labs have been PROHIBITED from having anything to do with agricultural use of animals by the agency. Apparently, double standards are the rule at USDA.

NO, absolutley not, and I never said I did! I hate to see animals wandering around, but what do you do with them if you aren't willing to give funding to whom ever takes these pets (Humane Society, or whatever...)

Paying who wages, mr. random???

It was a joke about how you said we shouldn't own animals, I guess you don't find my humor funny!

LOL! But I never said we shouldn't own animals! That's why I had no idea you were "MAKING A FUNNY".....

Someone asked how much more we were willing to pay for our meat, milk, etc. so that the animals can be kept under better conditions. I'll be truthful, I only buy milk and chicken at the store - I'm not plucking feathers out of a bird, sorry. And since there's only 2 of us, a gallon of milk is at it's expiration date by the time we finish it.

But we buy the rest of our meat from a reputable, local, small farmers, and butcher it ourselves. That way, we know the animals haven't been given any growth hormones or antibiotics, so we are getting better quality, fresher meat. We are also helping our neighbors who are having a devil of a time competing with the factory farms. I've never really even given any consideration as to whether the animals we butcher are mistreated - a small farmer can't afford to mistreat his animals. As far as I'm concerned, I'm getting a better quality healthier product.

And that is why I believe that PETA should consider stopping their unreasonable whining and throw their support behind the little farmers. Maybe I'm naive, but I think that if we levelled the playing field between the little guys and the factory farms, it would make a difference.

That's a damn good idea sheash! I agree 100%!