![]() “Why do you try to force vegetarianism on others? Isn't it a personal choice?”įrom a moral standpoint, actions that harm others are not matters of personal choice. I would like to bring up one of their slogans:Īnd here's the first question on their Vegetarian FAQ: Did the tiger in your example torture the other animals with complete disregard for their feelings? No, but that's what humans are doing. Secondly, there's a difference between eating out of necessity and unethical treatment of animals. ![]() I've never seen them try to stop people from eating meat that is raised properly and ethically. People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals. In response to this, I'd first like to point you to the title of the organization. I mean, they have two million members and supporters, there must be at least a few on this site. Now, I’m just stating what I see in the organization, I would certainly like to see a defense put up for them, if such a thing is possible. They irreverently compared his gruesome murder and beheading, followed by cannibalism, to killing an animal for food. When asked by the Washington Post if she had considered asking him to stop blowing up people as well, she stated “It's not my business to inject myself into human wars.” ( )Įven worse is their use of the murder of Tim McLean in Manitoba, Canada (July 2008), to persuade people to their standpoint. My first point here is the letter sent by Ingrid Newkirk (President of PETA) to Yasser Arafat pleading for his organization to cease using animals in warfare (case in point, a donkey laden with explosives being used as a weapon). PETA has been known to take advantage of the deaths of humans to drive a point across. This is supporting the destruction of the private property of others, which is clearly against the law, but it would seem that PETA believes so firmly in their cause that they deem themselves above it. And the worst part of this is that PETA openly supports this! Just look at this game hosted by ( ). The most well known of these is the vandalism of fur clothing by members of this organization (paint, tomatoes, etc.). PETA’s actions frequently end in the destruction or vandalism of the private property of others. Neither one is preferable to our current situation. PETA becomes PETP (People for the Ethical Treatment of Plants) and thousands of animals starve to death due to hastily assembled Plant conservation movements. All plant life on earth is eventually consumed due to out of control population increase and we all suffocate. What happens? There are two possible outcomes. ![]() Can you label a tiger a “bad “ animal because it consumes other animals for sustenance? If so, what are we to do about it? Let’s say, hypothetically, that all carnivores on the planet are trained to eat plant derivatives rather than animal matter. Even herbivores kill plants when they eat them. Things have to die for other things to live. And it’s usually humans that end up fronting the bill, monetarily or otherwise, for PETA’s refusal to think rationally. They started out with good intentions (disrupting inhumane and cruel animal testing or keeping), but have since descended into fascist single-minded jihad against anything they see that violates their concept of animal rights. I am opposed to this organization for many reasons. The following is Skreeran’s opinion, and is open to discussion. But are they too fanatical in their fervent beliefs? They claim to be protecting the environment and its inhabitants, but have they gone too far over the gaping chasm of radical opposition? It has supporters all throughout Hollywood and celebrities everywhere. ![]() PETA (People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals, for those who do not know) is allegedly the largest animal rights group in the world.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |