PETA Rethinks Ads Comparing Abuse, Slavery

[meganmonkey]

RICHMOND, Va. (AP) - People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals is reconsidering a campaign comparing images of animal abuse with those of slavery after complaints from civil rights groups and others.

The animal rights group's ``Animal Liberation'' campaign included 12 panels juxtaposing pictures of black people in chains with shackled elephants and other provocative images.

---snip---

One panel showed a black civil rights protester being beaten at a lunch counter beside a photo of a seal being bludgeoned. Another panel, titled ``Hanging,'' showed a graphic photo of a white mob surrounding two lynched blacks, their bodies hanging from tree limbs, while a nearby picture showed a cow hanging in a slaughterhouse.

--snip--

``There was one man who began shouting that the exhibit was racist,'' Carr said. ``Then, there was a lot of shouting.''

more...

http://www.guardian.co.uk/worldlatest/story/0,1280,-5208016,00.html

[madeline_con]

1. "Behind PETA's lettuce curtain"

Behind PETA's lettuce curtain
By Bob Barr
July 23, 2005

Here's what the People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals wanted you to see this week: two Playboy Playmates -- clad only in lettuce -- handing out vegetarian hot dogs on Capitol Hill Wednesday as cameras clicked away.
Here's what PETA didn't want you to see: two PETA employees attending a court hearing Tuesday in North Carolina on charges they killed and dumped 31 cats and dogs in a shopping center's trash bins. While the court case is pending, the controversy swirling around PETA and associated animal rights extremists, is again Page One news.

http://www.washingtontimes.com/commentary/20050722-085338-5284r.htm

For more information on PETA hypocrisy, go to

http://www.petakillsanimals.com

[Skip Intro]

7. oh brother

:eyes:

[madeline_con]

11. I kinda thought that, but...

there's usually two sides to every story.

I like to explore the angles before making a decision on which horse to back in any particular race. :)

[dissent1977]

8. Bob Barr is not exactly a progressive source

I don't support everything PETA does, but they have put out a statement on this issue and very few people take the time to listen to their side of the story before attacking them.

Bob Barr is an extreme right-winger, you may remember him from his time in Congress. He is not a neutral source by any stretch of the imagination.

[madeline_con]

13. I'm not vouching for the guy....

I'm just presenting a rebuttal for anyone interested in reading.

If PETA's so concerned about the warm fuzzies, is arson really a good position to take? I'm just weighing the pros and cons. :shrug:

[yewberry]

20. So you know

...that "petakillsanimals" group is the CCF, Center for Consumer Freedom.

www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Center_for_Consumer_Freedom


I wouldn't believe them if they said that water is wet.

[Catchawave]

75. The Washington Times ?

:rofl:

[henslee]

2. A good idea for PETA would be to visit outdoor malls, parks in this

blistering weather and educate people who drag their dog around in the heat without any thought for the dog's discomfort. I am in Miami right now and it bugs the crap out of me how people sit and have an iced coffee while their dog is panting and bummed out. Sure they may give their dog water but when its 90 plus... man, these pets are miserable.

[arwalden]

5. Thank You!!

It's sad that they would rather make headlines than make a difference.

[Catchawave]

98. I think arwalden doesn't know that PETA

helped make leaving pets in hot cars a felony in most states. What more do you want them to do?????

Really, peeps, go visit their website www.peta.org. Alot of ignorance in this thread (generic observation, not you personally ar).

[arwalden]

102. Nice Personal Attack There, Catchawave...

despite your half-hearted disclaimer that it was a "generic" insult... your careful parsing of words, the hair-splitting, combined with the SUBJECT line, along the fact that you felt compelled to disclaim it all only serves to convince me that you knew EXACTLY what you were doing and how it would be interpereted. Fact is, your little slam was directed squarely at me.

A link to Peta's home page does not prove your assertions that they were instrumental in making this type of animal neglect a "felony" in most states. I think you're exaggerating their influence and importance.

But even if it were true, why would they stop there? Wouldn't their efforts at continued public education of this problem be a better use of their time and money instead of all the trouble they go through to make themselves look ridiculous with scandalous headlines?

Exactly where are their priorities?

If there's any IGNORANCE to be found, it's with the Peta organization and its supporters... NOT with their critics.

[livinginphotographs]

104. So you demand they do something,

Someone shows them that they are doing it, and you still aren't happy.

Methinks that PETA isn't all that concerned with someone like you who is just 100% determined to smear them no matter what.

[arwalden]

106. Peta Would Rather Make Headlines Than Make A Difference.

<< "So you demand they do something," >>

I demanded that? Really? When? Where?

<< Methinks that PETA isn't all that concerned with someone like you who is just 100% determined to smear them no matter what. >>

Someone like me? Oh dear!

I think it's clear to anyone with a lick of sense what Peta is actually concerned about: money and headline grabbing. Whatever "cause" they adopt, if Peta shows up they are guaranteed to turn more people OFF than they are to sway others to share their concerns.

Their reputation precedes them. Peta is run and funded by a bunch of kooks, and most of the world knows it. When the Peta name is associated with a particular "cause", people just roll their eyes and ignore it. Even if it's a LEGITIMATE concern, the fact that Peta gets involved makes people turn away.

They do more harm than good when it comes to advocating for animal welfare. They should fold up and call it a day.

[Name removed]

116. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Catchawave]

114. I really didn't mean to offend YOU....

but your comment:

"It's sad that they would rather make headlines than make a difference."

Deserved a little snark, don't you think? I'm a PETA supporter, and I called you...and generic others...OUT, you don't know diddly about PETA, so stop treating those of us who do, like freepers, 'k?

:toast:

[arwalden]

138. Horses hit!

<< "I really didn't mean to offend YOU...." >>

I sincerely doubt there's much you could do or say that would offend me. Go ahead and try if you want (and then claim that you didn't mean it) but such attempts would definitely be against DU rules.

<< Posted by Catchawave but your comment: "It's sad that they would rather make headlines than make a difference." Deserved a little snark, don't you think? >>

Your ability to "snark" needs work.

<< I'm a PETA supporter, and I called you...and generic others...OUT,>>

No... you only single me out in the subject line and then cleverly discuss "ignorance" in the thread. But that wasn't directed to me, was it? Riiiight. :eyes:

<< you don't know diddly about PETA >>

I don't? Really? How do you know this? On what authority can you make such a statement ABOUT ME.

<< so stop treating those of us who do, like freepers, 'k? >>

Oh brother! Yes... you're the "victim" here. :eyes:

[Catchawave]

154. No, the animals are the victims, d'oh....

....feel better for letting all that guilt out? It's ok, I understand...'nite sweety :)

[arwalden]

156. That Response Makes No Sense At All

<< "No, the animals are the victims, d'oh...." Posted by Catchawave>>

Victims of what?

<< ....feel better for letting all that guilt out? >>

What on Earth are you talking about?

<< It's ok, I understand...'nite sweety :) >>

:eyes: See ya!

[livinginphotographs]

22. They already do that.

But we wouldn't want the usual PETA-bashers to actually do research before shooting their mouths off.

[henslee]

29. Whoa.... I'm not bashing. And I am glad they do that.

[livinginphotographs]

97. That wasn't necessarily directed towards you.

More towards the anti-PETA usuals.

[BamaLefty]

3. PETA:

What a bunch of frikkin yahoos. :eyes:

I saw on the news last night that PETA was going after The Florida Aquarium in Tampa, FL over a fundraiser they will be having to generate money for the aquarium and educate kids about marinelife. The aquarium is hosting a dinner in which fish will be served in front of the actual, living fish. PETA charges that this fundraiser is unnaceptable because the fish will be served in the presence of other fish. I'd like for them to explain how fish know the difference!

I kid you not.

[Teaser]

4. An interesting fact

Animals can detect stress in conspecific animals (same species) even when those animals cannot be seen. For example, at my institution one is encouraged to not perform animal surgeries in the same lab where same-species animals may live. Some kind of stress pheromone, I suppose. Although it is doubtful a cooked fish radiates anything but the odor of lemon juice.

[Kipling]

6. Mmmm... lemon fish sauce.

[madeline_con]

16. "Animals can detect stress in conspecific animals ..."

I can assure you, dead, cooked fish emit no stress for others of their kind to detect. :eyes:

[Teaser]

68. That's what I said.

nt.

[China_cat]

9. What else do you expect from people

who claim that fish have 'delightful personalities'?

[arikara]

39. Just because someone doesn't take the time to see it

doesn't mean that it isn't true.

I get really weary of all the Peta bashing.

[expatriot]

36. that is a bunch of crap. do you really believe that?

I will take your word that PETA is "going after" this fundraiser and without even knowing anything about it I can tell that your reasoning as to why PETA has a problem with it is a bunch of crap. PETA is "going after them" in order to point out the IRONY of the event. To honor the fish by eating the fish.

Answer me this: Do you honestly believe that we believe that all creatures have the same amount of cognitive abilities? That we think they are rational creatures? Do you honestly think we are worried that the fish will know that the people are eating their own kind at the event? I am very sorry if you do.

[LisaL]

40. How sensitive of them! When the two Peta members killed 31 dogs

and cats in their van, why weren't they worried dogs will see other dogs being killed in front of their eyes?

[flvegan]

44. I didn't realize that they'd been convicted. They WERE convicted, right?

You're not just spewing hatred, right?

[LisaL]

64. No, they haven't been convicted, but considering they were

caught in the act of dumping the bodies, with some dead bodies still in their van, I imagine it's just a matter of time.
:eyes:

[flvegan]

73. Nice liberal ideal, there.

[dissent1977]

129. To make it clear they (as in PETA) have not been directly linked to that

A couple of their members were caught doing that, but PETA condemned their actions and there has been no link to the organization as a whole found. You may not like PETA and I can understand that, but please remember they are innocent until proven guilty and there is not much proof against them at this point. There have been many cases in the past of people infiltrating activist groups in order to discredit them, and I would not be at all surprised if that is what happened here. Just think about it, what possible motive would PETA have for doing something like this?

[LisaL]

182. The only thing Peta condemned is them dumping the bodies

into the public dumpster.

[livinginphotographs]

81. I hope you feel the same amount of compassion

For the hamburger you're probably chowing down on tonight.

[LisaL]

113. WTF does that mean? That if I eat hamburger, I should also go

kill cats and dogs left and right?
:spank:

[livinginphotographs]

119. No, it means you're a hypocrite.

You screamed bloody murder about the "cute" animals, but you could give two shits about any other animal.

But keep posting. You're only proving my point.

[LisaL]

169. And what does it make you?

Do you think that killing cats and dogs for no apparent reason is fine as long as Peta employees do it?
:eyes:

[livinginphotographs]

171. Do you think eating meat is okay

As long as large corporations do it?

[LisaL]

174. Other animals eat meat. Humans have always ate meat.

We are omnivores. If we were sweet butterfly loving species that only ate grass we would have been history a long time ago.
Do you think it's o'key for a tiger to eat meat, or would you put him on a grass diet? Are meat eating animals evil because they kill for food? HTF do you know the plant you want to eat doesn't feel a thing? Maybe you should stop eating altogether because plants want to live as well.
:eyes:

[shockra]

191. Humans are not omnivores.

http://www.earthsave.bc.ca/materials/articles/health/comparative.html

See chart, if nothing else.

[flvegan]

173. No apparent reason? Wow, you're stretching there.

Oh, right...you bought the spin about how PETA allegedly promised to find all those animals great homes. Who alleged that, again? Wasn't it someone involved with the $15,000 grant from Consumer Freedom?

[LisaL]

186. Nice game. Everything is alleged and nothing is true

because it's damaging to Peta in your view. Were there murdered dogs and cats?
Maybe there never were.
:sarcasm:

[flvegan]

187. No game. There were euthanized animals, yes.

Would it appear that they were being dumped illegally? Yes, it would appear as such from what I've seen/read.

See, that's our difference. I can see truth. You filter it through your hatred, and see things how you WANT to see them. Lots of folks do that, though.

[Catchawave]

78. That same aquarium got the Worst Person award on

Keith Olbermann last night. Think about it :crazy:

[Deep N RedLand]

10. People Eating Tasty Meat.

They always have been deserving of the negative publicity they have garnered.

They used to make the rounds were I worked to protest the tiger show.
One of these bean-curd heads would stand on the sidewalk shouting with a megaphone how the animals were being tortured and exploited and would actually ask the guests "Don't you care about your children? If they go to the show, they animals will escape and chew their arm off. Do you want that to happen?"

When the RW always screams about the "radical far-left", these are the ones who the label really applies. These dumbasses have never been anything other than domestic terrorists, equal to Operation Rescue on the right, and do not represent real progressive groups despite they RW attempts to lump them in.

[madeline_con]

14. "... animals will escape and chew their arm off. "

I find it fascinating that this same person probably wants the cage door thrown open, so the tiger can roam freely about the neighborhood.

:popcorn:

[BamaLefty]

19. I Have To Agree

People like to associate Democrats and liberals with the whackjobs that control/belong to PETA.

Nothing could be further from the truth, as evidenced by this thread.

[livinginphotographs]

82. Good to know I'm not a Democrat.

At least according to you.

After all, I worry about other creatures suffering. Sorry if I didn't realize that this was not a concern of Democrats.

[kestrel91316]

137. When I express an opinion about animal issues here in DU

I get visciously attacked just as if a Freeper were doing it. It seems that the Veggie-fascists have a little trouble with self-control.

Disclaimer: I am opposed to factory farming and its attendant abuses but am NOT a vegetarian. I oppose militant vegetarianism which seeks to force others to bend to its will, typically via intimidation tactics more commonly seen in Dominionists.

[livinginphotographs]

144. How's it goin', Dr. Nick.

Are you "medical types" doing okay?

[kestrel91316]

198. ??

[AuntieM1957]

162. What's with the name calling, here? *&*)*&!

Just because it's not your "thing" - back off, wouldya?

Some of us consider ourselves sane, rational people who also want the very best for all creatures on the planet.

Whack that!

[Catchawave]

91. PETA's right you know.....

not to mention those "tiger shows" are horrible and inhumane.

Since when do you believe the "RW" spin?

[fujiyama]

12. They also claimed animals being killed

was like the holocaust. This is what I dislike about extremists at both ends of the spectrum (though those on the right are more prone to violence). They always liken everything they dislike to the holocaust of slavery. The RWers do it with abortion.

I'm sick of the hyperbole. If you have something to say, quite comparing absolutely everything to two of the greatest crimes in the last half millenium.

[madeline_con]

15. "I'm sick of the hyperbole"

Me, too. I like to stay firmly in the middle on some things. Both sides can be wrong and right to some extent.

[livinginphotographs]

25. But that's why you quote CCF, right?

Because your (supposedly) sick of the hyperbole?

For the record, PETA euthanizes animals. And they've probably killed less animals than most meat-eaters do.

[madeline_con]

35. No. We don't all have to support domestic terrorism....

So fish can have long, healthy lives. If you agree with setting fire to science labs and the like, what can I do about it?

BTW, I'm a "meat eater", and have never euthanized an animal.

I'm sure PETA euthanizes animals. I'm even convinced that some of it's done to stop the animals' suffereng.

I don't necessarily believe that people turn over half-dead animals to PETA for disposal, when there are authorities whose purpose is the welfare of animals, and they remove them from harmfull situatios when an abuser is reported.

I have yet to see a headline that says animals were removed by PETA, and they're now living in a healthy, happy area where they can roam free.

[livinginphotographs]

79. So you don't see it. I guess that means it doesn't exist.

Many of the animals PETA rescues are adopted by their own employees (this is from personal experience).

But back to my original point, you quote "PETA Kills Animals" from a right-wing front group that represents, for instance, Outback Steakhouse. Gee, I'm sure animals are what they're concerned with. That's why they make their living off of killing them and eating them.

The constant attacks on PETA seem to stem mainly from, "See! They're just as rotten and disgusting as we are!" Sorry if that doesn't move me too much.

[livinginphotographs]

90. And my point still stands.

As a meat-eater, you've probably killed way more animals than PETA has.

I'm sure world net daily has some great anti-PETA links too. Why don't you go check them out?

[expatriot]

31. when you compare two things, you are not saying EVERYthing is

the same.

billions of animals are slaughtered every year for food consumption. most people believe animals have the ability to suffer and these animals suffer horribly at the hands of this industry.

So tell me again why comparisons to the holocaust are not legitimate?

Chickens are not humans, fine. PETA is not saying they are. If you want all things to be equal in every historical analogy, let's outlaw historical analogies.

[fujiyama]

37. Many historical analogies ARE stupid

I'm sorry, animals are not humans. By comparing the killing of animals to the holocaust that is EXACTLY what they are saying. This does not mean I'm in favor of animal cruelty (in fact I rarely eat meat myself and despise circuses) but I don't view the killing of an animal for food the same as genocide.

If PETA wants to expose animal cruelty and the problems with the meat processing industry I'm all ears and the more power to them. But once they start claiming those eating meat are the equivalent of Nazis or slaveholders (which is what they are basically saying by equating anumals killed for food with the holocaust or that of slavery), well I turn them off as being quacks.

Look, the RWers do the same shit with abortion. They claim that what's happening is genocide. It's equally idiotic.

[expatriot]

47. animals are not humans but humans are a kind of animal.

just because we have cognitive abilities far beyond that of any other animal there are many similitaries between animals and humans, you should research it sometime.

But once they start claiming those eating meat are the equivalent of Nazis (which is what they are basically saying by equating anumals killed for food with the holocaust),

There you go again! you are

Why are we quacks?

For believing that animals suffer horribly by the billions just as Jews and other "undesirables" suffered by the millions under Hitler?

Do you have a problem with Mike Malloy comparing Bush to Hitler? Because, basically, he is saying that everyone who voted for him is a Nazi and every American who has not taken up arms against him is a Nazi, since they are an accomplice to his rule, right? I say this to prove a point. historical analogy is a rhetorical device that, like all analogies, break down at some point. The original and immediate connotation is all that was intentionally implied. People who have a problem with the original implication grasp for straws by trying to dismiss it with extensions on the analogy.

[Spinzonner]

51. Where is it that you draw the line ?

What level of cognition is sufficient for you to make an exception that animals may have rights that are not solely restricted to being protected from cruelty ?

Where do primates and especially chimps, bonobos, gorillas, and orangutans fit into your framework ? How about dolphins and whales ?

Yes, animals are not humans, but by what moral standard other than 'they can' should humans get to have superior rights ?

[President Kerry]

190. just my two cents..

humans are more intelligent, and through that have the ABILITY to kill/eat other animals. This doesn't mean we have the right to impose any suffering on animals. I am very much opposed to inhumane killings or hunting for sport. But I'm not a vegetarian, and that's just the natural food chain, where humans are at the top because of our intelligence.

[flvegan]

42. No they didn't. People just like to think that.

What they said (the intent of that campaign) was that the treatment of certain farm animals is much like the treatment of the Jews or the slaves in their respective past tragedies.

Treatment compared to treatment, not animals compared to people.

For the record, Ingrid Newkirk apologized for the Holocaust campaign.

[arikara]

46. Factory farming is cruel and disgusting

We should never tolerate inhumane abuse of these animals.




This looks pretty much like a holocaust to me. Enjoy your KFC

[Endangered Specie]

17. God these people are a bunch of loonie tunes

:eyes:

[expatriot]

32. why am I loonie tunes?

For believing animals suffer from exploitation and injustice just as blacks do/did?

Am I racist for believing this?

[LisaL]

43. Why are you loonie tunes? I don't know, why don't you tell us.

[Name removed]

126. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Endangered Specie]

141. PETA is an extremist and rather nutty organization.

animal rights debate aside; being an animal rights supporter does not equal PETA.

Its like being a gun owner, but not belonging to the NRA.

[alarcojon]

18. More from the article...

``PETA operates by getting publicity any way they can,'' said John White, an NAACP spokesman. ``They're comparing chickens to black people?''

Mark Potok, director of the Intelligence Project with the Southern Poverty Law Center, in Montgomery, Ala., called the exhibit ``disgusting.''

``Black people in America have had quite enough of being compared to animals without PETA joining in,'' he said.

PETA officials apologized earlier this year for a campaign that compared the suffering of Jews during the Holocaust with that of factory animals.

I respect the fight for animal rights, but this is another example of PETA's tin ear for the sensibilities of most people. Whatever their intentions, the result of their work is greater hostility to their cause.

At least they are willing to reconsider this ill-advised ad campaign. May they scrap it as soon as possible and apologize as they did for the Holocaust ads.

It is possible to call attention to the very real, unnecessary suffering of animals without this offensive hyperbole.

[DenaliDemocrat]

21. PETA hurts the Democrats

They are radical and over the top for most people. As a biologist, I totally agree that any animal with a developed nervous system should be handled in humane manners. However, I also like meat, fish, etc. and think that turning a bunch of tame mink into the wild to starve to death or torching medical facilities is freakin sicko!

[livinginphotographs]

24. "Freakin sicko." I'm in awe of your debating ability.

You think they should be handled humanely, but fuck-all if someone tries to interfere with your taste buds.

So selfishness is the reason you disagree with PETA. Gotcha.

[DenaliDemocrat]

107. Nope, not "Gotcha"

I think causing undue pain such as spraying hairspray in an animals eyes is cruel.

I don't find a fast death (within miliseconds)particularly cruel, and believe it to be humane.

The simple fact is, if you eat meat, somethng must die...period. Dead is dead, but how you get there matters, at least from my standpoint.

[livinginphotographs]

120. But you eat meat because it tastes good.

Not because you care about the fact that these animals are not here to serve us anymore than african-americans are or women are.

Selfish. Period. Gotcha.

[DenaliDemocrat]

196. Last I checked,

I do not eat african americans or women. What a silly analogy. Are you still in high school?????????

[expatriot]

28. PETA does not burn down anything or release minks into the wild

I think you are thinking of the Animal Liberation Front.

[BikeWriter]

50. No, they just support ELF and ALF who do.

[flvegan]

54. This is where you dredge out that crap about Coronado, isn't it?

You got any GOOD examples to prove up that post?

[BikeWriter]

59. You don't call donating to his defense fund supporting them?

I do.

[flvegan]

60. So to you, folks really ARE guilty before proven so? Got it.

Is that it?

[BikeWriter]

62. "convicted animal-rights arsonist Rodney Coronado...

and a $7,500 payment to Fran Stephanie Trutt, who pleaded guilty to trying to kill a medical research executive

http://www.consumerfreedom.com/news_detail.cfm?headline=2563

[flvegan]

65. Good for you and CCF.

Now, please tell me the facts behind the donations. When they were "given" to these folks, etc. Oh, wait...they were given to them, right, and after they were convicted of their crimes, right, and given to promote/assist in that particular terrorist act, right?

Google away!

[BikeWriter]

66. Did PeTa support them or not? My sources say yes.

Please include your sources in your rebuttal.

[flvegan]

69. Your source is a joke that also campaigns against others, like

MADD, Greenpeace, Adbusters, the Sierra Club and the Organic Consumers Association.

Okay, since you're too lazy, here's a tidbit on Fran Trutt (who I'll wager you knew NOTHING about until you read the CCF's shit site), who you've dragged out a couple times now:

From publiceye.org (Political Research Associates, a rabid anti-right wing group)...
http://www.publiceye.org/liberty/greenspy.html

"The zealousness of these snoops can lead them to break the law in pursuit of their quarry. Earth First activist Dave Foreman says his unfortunately intimate knowledge of FBI informant-provocateurs leads him to not rule out the possibility that the California bombing incident was the result of a covert operation....a charge that reflects an accurate historical awareness of how far some agents are willing to go in an attempt to trap their target.

An example of this involved Connecticut animal rights activist Fran Trutt, charged with attempting to plant a bomb she says was meant to scare an offical of the U.S. Surgical Corporation which uses animals for medical tests and sales demonstrations. Her accomplices, not charged with any crime, turned out to be private security agents hired by U.S. Surgical. Trutt's attorney, John Williams, says there is "absolutely no question that Trutt was enticed" into considering the bombing by agents from Perceptions International." Furthermore, several months prior to the attempted bombing, according to Williams "the entire situation was reviewed at a meeting that included representatives of the federal Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms, the Connecticut States Attorney's office, the security director of U.S. Surgical and at least one representative of Perceptions International...and the topic of the meeting was Fran Trutt."

According to Williams, it was the agents of Perceptions International, working for U.S. Surgical but posing as Trutt's friends, who suggested the bombing, paid for the purchase of the pipe bomb, and drove her to the U.S. Surgical parking lot. When Trutt had second thoughts while on her way to the parking lot, she called a trusted friend, and was encouraged to proceed--that "friend", too, was a private undercover agent from Perceptions International. Although Trutt was clearly set up, under Connecticut law she needed to show substantial state involvement to use entrapment as a defense, a problematic tactic given the available evidence. Trutt reluntantly accepted a plea bargain and will serve a short prison term rather than risk a lengthy sentence on more serious charges."

Sounds like something the ACLU would involve themselves in...

[livinginphotographs]

99. And here's where the crickets will start chirping.

[yewberry]

86. Since you seem to have missed it up-thread

...this is your source:

www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Center_for_Consumer_Freedom


They are a front.

[BikeWriter]

61. Arsonists Terrorize Utah, PETA Pays The Bills

http://www.consumerfreedom.com/news_detail.cfm?headline=2563

PETA's other financial support of terrorists includes a $45,200 gift to convicted animal-rights arsonist Rodney Coronado and a $7,500 payment to Fran Stephanie Trutt, who pleaded guilty to trying to kill a medical research executive. PETA also paid $2,000 to David Wilson, who was the ALF's "spokesperson" in 1997 when it claimed responsibility for firebombing the Utah Fur Breeders Agricultural Co-op -- an institution that's (literally) just down the street from Monday's arson target. Wilson, incidentally, cut his teeth on animal rights as a PETA intern.

PETA's $1,500 gift to the ELF may have bought a lot of mayhem. Just last year, Rodney Coronado himself demonstrated how to build an incendiary firebomb -- in front of an American University activist crowd -- for "about two dollars." PETA, of course, denies that its gift was earmarked for anything violent. When asked by reporters to explain the purpose of funding America's biggest domestic terrorist threat, PETA reps have given eight different and contradictory answers.

[flvegan]

63. ConsumerFreedom? Oh, man.

Stay away from Free Republic. You might start believing their shit too.

Do you even know what the "Rodney Coronado Support Committee" is? Go on, go wear Google out with it.

[BikeWriter]

67. Prove they're wrong. It's substantiated many places.

[flvegan]

70. Substantiated? You need to look that up.

It's "substantiated" by the same spin from the same idiots you're quoting here.

[flvegan]

80. AND since you've suddenly gotten so quiet, I'll offer these last 2 items

1. The IRS conducted a 20 month investigation into PETA (at your beloved CCF's bequest). They found NOTHING that links PETA with supporting domestic terrorism. Now, if the IRS saw these "donations" as being okay, then I'd say it's been proven.

2. The entire CCF "link" from PETA to Coronado is based on inference from a return, and a story that John freaking Stossel did on 20/20. It was very unbiased...I assure you.//end sarcasm.

[livinginphotographs]

84. A bunch of CCF sites doesn't mean "many places."

Shouldn't you be out protecting songbirds?

[flvegan]

87. But there are TONS of other sites and webpages and citations out there

They just ALL link back to the same CCF garbage. But, since Google shows umpteen bazillion references to it, it must be true.

[expatriot]

33. So tell me... why do you think PETA is associated with Democrats?

and not Republicans?

[LisaL]

41. Beats me. Democrats support research, or so I thought.

[expatriot]

49. You're right, PETA & Dems both support research, but also...

people with a strong convictions of compassion are drawn to the Democratic Party. People like Cesar Chavez, Albert Einstein, Ghandi, and other progressives were also animal rights activists.

Do you want to debate how effective animal-testing is in providing medical research that is applicable to humans?

[LisaL]

56. Peta supports research? You can not support research

and be against animal testing. Without animal testing, you will eliminate most of the research.

[Name removed]

85. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[expatriot]

130. Without animal testing you'd eliminate a lot of flawed research

This from the British Union for the Abolition of Vivisection...

http://www.buav.org/aboutus/index.html

"It is said that human genes are 85% similar to equivalent genes in mice and about 98% similar to equivalent genes in apes (eg chimpanzees). These are impressive statistics. However the human genome contains 3,000 million nucleotides (the building blocks of DNA) arranged into a staggering 30-35,000 genes. In addition a single gene can produce different proteins and so have different functions depending on when and where in the body it is activated. The subtle differences in genes between species, multiplied by this huge number of genes, results in the substantial morphological and physiological differences between humans and mice or humans and apes.

Two percent of 3,000 million nucleotides (the number in the human genome) is 60 million nucleotides. In humans, changes in a single nucleotide can be responsible for effects as devastating as sickle cell disease or cystic fibrosis. When set in this context, the difference in genes between humans and chimps (2%) or humans and mice (15%) seems somewhat more significant."

Alternatives to Animal Testing from the National Anti-Vivisection Society

http://www.navs.org/testing/alternatives_testing.cfm?SectionID=Testing

[BikeWriter]

52. Thank you for your opinion. I agree.

[flvegan]

55. And? There are DUers that hurt the Dem party, too.

Some dems probably call Cindy "radical" and "over the top" so she must be hurting the dems. How about Dean? Should we talk about him and how some think he's over the top? He's GOTTA be hurting the dems then, right?

[Dastard Stepchild]

72. I hurt Democrats?

But I don't even swat at flies! :cry:

No, really. I don't. :)

[Catchawave]

101. As a biologist, you should know better.......

methinks you depend on government grants for your job? Or possibly you're aware that the country of Switzerland made their humane habitat mink farming laws as strict as their zoos, which drove mink farmers out of business! I'd like to see that here in the U.S., by the way.

As a biologist how do you feel about http://www.nytimes.com/2005/08/13/opinion/13sat1.html?th=&emc=th&pagewanted=print

[Tinoire]

195. Yeah and I like human flesh

I think that turning a bunch of homeless people onto the streets to starve to death is freakin sicko!

Let's be be compassionate conservatives & barbecue them instead!



Yum Yum

[livinginphotographs]

23. Oh great, the anti-PETA DU echo chamber strikes again.

:eyes:

Enjoy your circle-jerk while I go donate a few more dollars to PETA.

[alarcojon]

27. Honest question

sticking to the topic of this thread:

Do you take the concerns of the NAACP and the Southern Poverty Law Center about THIS PARTICULAR PETA CAMPAIGN seriously?

[expatriot]

30. These concerns are, in my opinion, disingenuous.

No one actually believes that these PETA ads compare the intelligence, the competence, the "humanness," etc. of chickens to black people, do they? What is being compared is the ability for chickens to suffer at the hands of injustice and exploitation just as blacks did under slavery and Jim Crowe.

Does anyone really believe that animals do not suffer from exploitation and injustice? Or is it they don't really believe blacks didn't suffer from exploitation and injustice?

[alarcojon]

34. If that is PETA's intention

(comparing the ability of chickens to suffer to the ability of blacks to suffer under slavery) I think it will get lost to all but their choir.

Of course animals suffer, and we should do all we can to eliminate that suffering. But a comparison to slavery, like the comparison to the Holocaust before it, is counterproductive, if you ask me. And unnecessary.

[expatriot]

38. How hard is it to get that comparison?

What do people _think_ PETA's intention is?

[alarcojon]

48. PETA's intentions

include to a great extent the generating of controversy, as is quite clear from this quote:

PETA’s current “Holocaust on your Plate” campaign is generating a great deal of attention and controversy (which of course is its purpose, to make people aware of the massive suffering of animals caused by our meat-centered diet).

http://www.caringconsumer.com/c/74.html

The article goes on to say a great deal more, and I urge all interested parties to read it and form your own opinions.

Earlier, you dismissed the concerns of two major civil rights organizations as "disingenuous." That word means "insincere" or "having secret motives." Are you suggesting that the NAACP is expressing outrage insincerely? And what might their secret motives be? And how can you decide whether it is appropriate for them to be upset with this campaign, or whether they are "sincere" in their opposition?

[expatriot]

58. What I meant by "disingenuous"

is that people don't like to compare animal suffering to human suffering because if they built that bridge between the two it would be very hard for them to keep participating in the industries of animal cruelty. People have to have a wall between human suffering and animal suffering and so when people like PETA move to break down that wall the psychological defense system moves to dismiss this connection by saying:

How dare PETA compares blacks to chickens! They must be saying blacks are as smart as chickens! How dare they!

When they really know they are only comparing the two's ability to suffer.

Now my wife really needs the computer. I will respond to all later.

[livinginphotographs]

No I don't.

I think they're being particularly obtuse. For years, women and african-americans were considered to be not worthy of consideration. Now animals are considered not worthy of consideration. I fail to see the difference.

Race doesn't matter when it comes to being defensive about the cruelty they inflict upon other creatures.

[Robeson]

53. I think I'll join you and throw some their way, too....

...:thumbsup:

[arwalden]

110. Oh Dear... We're Being Punished With Peta Contributions.

<< Enjoy your circle-jerk while I go donate a few more dollars to PETA. >>

Wow! That'll show us, huh?!

Hey all you anti-peta circle jerkers... let's SHUT UP and QUIT CRITICIZING Peta!! If we continue to speak out, it looks like the hard-core Peta supporters will CONTINUE donating money to them. We can't have that now, can we? -- Horrors!

:rofl: Too funny! That's supposed to make someone regret speaking out against Peta? Oh well... enjoy making that donation while I go enjoy eating some veal Parmesan. Tomorrow, it's KFC! (I can eat more animals than your donations will "save".)

Peta has become a caricature of everything that's the worst of that organization. They are a grotesque JOKE. They are IMPOTENT to have any real effect on ANYTHING (aside from being ridiculed).

The fact that they must resort to such tactics for making headlines is proof that they just don't have what it takes to win hearts and make a real difference. The fact they they don't CARE that they turn more people OFF to the subject of animal welfare proves to me that they only care for themselves and existing only to exist. They are not interested in change.

[livinginphotographs]

121. Last I checked this was a discussion board.

Occasionally that means people will disagree with you.

Just like freepers: demand free speech unless they disagree with it.

I'm a member of PETA. I support PETA. I guess I'm a rotten Democrat then. Thanks, oh mighty Arwalden, for opening my eyes.

[arwalden]

158. WTF Are You Talking About?

<< "Last I checked this was a discussion board." Posted by livinginphotographs Occasionally that means people will disagree with you.>>

Yet, wasn't it you who recently scolded me for responding to you when you weren't originally replying to me? Wasn't it you who suggested that I return to the lounge and discuss American Idol? -- Now you want to lecture me about how DU is a place for the free exchange of ideas? Oh brother!

<< Just like freepers: demand free speech unless they disagree with it.>>

??? HUH ??? Oh, wait... I see, you're comparing those who disagree with Peta to freepers. :silly:

<< I'm a member of PETA. I support PETA. >>

Oooo-kay?

<< I guess I'm a rotten Democrat then. >>

I don't get it. How do you figure? Who said that?

<< Thanks, oh mighty Arwalden, for opening my eyes.>>

That's "oh mighty arwalden, SIR" to you. :eyes:

[kestrel91316]

200. You are not the only one having problems with this poster ..........

some people thrive on hatefulness and conflict, and like to stir up trouble for the hell of it. I have this person on ignore.

[expatriot]

26. Dick Durbin and PETA: "historical analogy criminals"

When Dick Durbin said that

"If I read this to you and did not tell you that it was an FBI agent describing what Americans had done to prisoners in their control, you would most certainly believe this must have been done by Nazis, Soviets in their gulags, or some mad regime -- Pol Pot or others -- that had no concern for human beings. Sadly, that is not the case. This was the action of Americans in the treatment of their prisoners."

was he comparing America to Nazi Germany? No. Was he saying that there are gas chambers at Gitmo and death camps in Kansas? No. But when he used this rhetorical device he was pushed through the ringer by nearly everone.

Now is PETA comparing chickens to black people? No. Are they comparing the injustice that chickens face in their constant suffering with soceity not protecting their interests (an interest in not suffering) with the injustice that faced blacks while they suffered under slavery and Jim Crow?

People say that "these people are loonie tunes" but amazingly almosdt everyone believes the comparison being made here. Everyone one I have asked or talked to believes that animal feel pain and can suffer. I think everyone would also believe that it is against the wishes of an animal TO suffer and they would avoid suffering if they could.

But people are in such denial that they are the cause of this suffering when they financially support the industries of animal exploitation that their psychological defense mechanisms will jump at any opportunity to dismiss the connection that animals suffer under our exploitation. They use the excuse that it we are biologically designed to eat meat (which is true) and since it is in our original physiogyny it is not our fault if we participate because it's "our nature, we have no choice."

Everyone knows that PETA is not comparing black people to chickens in any regard beyond the fact that they share the ability to suffer and they share a history of exploitation and injustice. But sure enough, people will use this against PETA because it makes it easier to dismiss what they know to be the truth:

1) Animals suffer.
2) The consumption of animal products causes animal suffering.
3) Even though it is in our nature and our past to exploit animals and cause suffering, there are now alternatives available to disengage from the industries of animal exploitation.
4) Even though these alternatives to causing animal suffering exist, we CHOOSE to not adapt these alternatives because we prefer the comfort and convenience of the prducts of the industries of animal cruelty.
5) In order to convince ourselves that we can be both compassionate and unrepentent participants in the industries of animal cruelty, we can not admit that our participation in these industries is one of choice but rather that we are bound to animal cruelty by our natures.

[flvegan]

45. That pretty much nailed it.

Very nice.

[flvegan]

57. Interestingly enough

PETA has once again succeeded in bringing to light the atrocities of factory farming. Although an individual's specific perception of what PETA is trying to say, or the message they're trying to convey may be skewed and have them thinking of a comparison between animals and humans, that isn't PETA's fault.

Thanks for posting, and a big, wet, sloppy kiss to the PETA haters that insist on keeping topics like this at the top of the page. The more you talk about them, the more you post about them, the more successful they are.:pals:

[Dastard Stepchild]

71. Oh,look....another PETA thread.

I can't be sure, but judging by the last 473,961,839 PETA threads, I'm beginning to think that some of the people of DU have a thing against PETA. It's just a hunch. I could be wrong.

[Catchawave]

74. Do you people ever think outside the PETA box?

There's alot more to the animal rights movement than whacky and attention getting media campaigns. (Which works, by the way, towards getting more humane laws passed !)

And you call yourselves "liberals"...tch..tch.

[MarkTwain]

76. One Hundred Years From Now...

..... when all the selfish, ignorant, and hypocritical trolls who prefer to continue the vile and evil cruelty which we perpetrate on fellow sentient beings, the animals of this earth, are dead and long gone - their hatred of PETA will seem no different than the Klu Klux Klan's hatred of the black is regarded today.

You all proclaim, with strident consistency, such fine progressive and liberal ideals. You all bleed - loudly and with thousands of posts - over injustice and pain you perceive to be worthy of your righteous indignation.

Yet when it comes to animals, you practice the same hatred, the same bigotry, and the same intolerance and ignorance that could be found in any post on any thread at The Free Republic.

Those of you who hold such hostility toward the ideals of PETA (irrespective of understandable debates over their strategy) are nothing more than Species Bigots.

You are nothing more than PETA Freepers. And you come out of your PETA Freeper closet every damn time a post appears on this board over the years specific to PETA...

....tells me that we hit a nerve to see such vitriol, such anger, and posts which are worthy only of disgust. Tells me that your soul may well be in severe conflict with your gut where that sirloin now sits.

[flvegan]

83. Wow. Just, wow.

That was...wow.

[livinginphotographs]

88. Great post.

Great great great post. I couldn't have said it better myself.

I think you need a star, my friend.

[arwalden]

108. Oh Brother!

<< You are nothing more than PETA Freepers. And you come out of your PETA Freeper closet every damn time a post appears on this board over the years specific to PETA... >>


:rofl:

Give me a fucking break! :eyes:

[Daftly]

163. One proud Species Bigot and PETA Freeper. Guilty and Hungry as charged.

PETA is nothing to but the butt of jokes throughout the country and it is due to posters like this actually take animal rights as seriously as human rights.

:nopity: :spray: :spray: :rofl: :rofl:

[Name removed]

178. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[shockra]

181. You could at least...

Acknowledge the name is appropriate. :)

[Daftly]

183. Post count will change. The sentiment won't.

I'm still laughing. The post before mine cracked me up.

[flvegan]

185. If you last. Welcome to DU, btw.

[smbolisnch]

194. Totally not worth the time.

:banghead::eyes:

[smbolisnch]

193. I wish single posts could be nominated.

Awesome, awesome post. :yourock:

[Placebo]

77. PETA — Always going just a bit too far.

I'm all for the ethical treatment of animals, but PETA always seems to come off as disrespectful, arrogant, and distasteful.

[livinginphotographs]

89. And everytime you post anything about PETA or animal rights

You come up with nothing but unsubstantiated bullshit.

Weren't you asking for help on becoming a vegetarian a while back?

[Placebo]

94. You can be a vegetarian and not like PETA.

The two do not go hand in hand.

[livinginphotographs]

96. I didn't say you couldn't.

[arwalden]

112. But Your Implication Was Clearly Understood.

[Name removed]

117. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[arwalden]

122. Hello Livinginphotographs...

Why are you faulting me for something you do yourself? I'm well within my rights to offer comments and responses to any post in this thread.

Just as you did when you responded to ME in this post (http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=102&topic_id=1699098&mesg_id=1699665) but you'll notice that *I* wasn't talking to *YOU* in the preceding post either. I was talking to Catchawave.

Funny how that works, isn't it?

[livinginphotographs]

124. Yeah, funny how that works.

I hope the anti-Veg brigade gives you a medal for this. You seem to *mysteriously* always show up in these threads.

Did you get beat up by some broccoli-throwing vegans a few years ago? I'm just trying to understand your hatred of PETA.

[alarcojon]

128. You also always show up in these threads

You both have strong opinions on this subject. What is your point?

[livinginphotographs]

131. My point is that no on ebothers to discuss animal rights on this board.

You have your usuals show up to post Lucy "Waaaah!!!" pictures and "People for the Eating of Tasty Animals" jokes.

I know who the usuals are, and he or she is one. They seem to contribute very little other than anti-PETA BS.

It's a sad state in this country where even on DU you have nothing but exclamation-point abusers and the left's version of dittoheads to discuss politics with.

[arwalden]

152. .

:thumbsup:

[arwalden]

140. But *I'm* Not The Subject, livinginphotographs... Peta Is.

<< I hope the anti-Veg brigade gives you a medal for this. You seem to *mysteriously* always show up in these threads.>>

That's nice... but try to limit your comments to the message and not the messenger. Your personal observations and suspicions about *me* are not relevant to the discussion (argument, debate, whatever.)

<< Did you get beat up by some broccoli-throwing vegans a few years ago? >>

:eyes:

<< I'm just trying to understand your hatred of PETA.>>

That's highly doubtful

[livinginphotographs]

143. Fine.

I support PETA in this effort, regardless of what the NAACP says. I've seen the exhibit online, and thought it was very moving and made a great point.

There's my answer to a thread that when I showed up, was 20+ posts of anti-PETA flamebait.

And I'm glad to know that my contributions to the Democratic Party don't mean jack shit since I support PETA.

[arwalden]

150. Is That *Really* What You Think?

<< I support PETA in this effort, regardless of what the NAACP says. I've seen the exhibit online, and thought it was very moving and made a great point. >>

But Peta foolishly preaches to the choir while alienating everyone else who might also support animal welfare causes. They work up their "base" into a frenzy of donations. They get to "be-the-victim" again... but in the end, the cause of animal welfare suffers at the hands of Peta.

As I pointed out before, even when there's legitimate cause for concern... in genuine animal cruelty cases... when Peta shows up, the general public turns away. The public automatically associates Peta with over-hyped charges, and illegal vandalism and assault.

Yet... Peta continues on this path that assures NO meaningful results except to perpetuate itself. Nice work, eh?

<< And I'm glad to know that my contributions to the Democratic Party don't mean jack shit since I support PETA. >>

I've been trying to advise you all along to stop with the personal insults and to stop trying to make this thread about me. And NOW you want to make it about YOU??

[livinginphotographs]

165. And you cherry-picked my post, didn't you?

You sure are worth the effort. :eyes:

[flvegan]

179. This post is so devoid of intelligent thought, I don't know where to begin

No meaningful results...you should do a tiny bit of research before exposing pure ignorance.

[Catchawave]

92. Sounds like the DU Lounge....

wink, wink.

Seriously, bashing Peta is exactly what the RW spin machines want you to do. I can't believe I've seen supportive sources from the Washington Times AND Consumer Freedom with hefty PETA bashing.

You have a right to your opinion, but please don't shoot the messengers. It's a fact, ANIMALS ARE TREATED HORRIBLY IN THIS COUNTRY!!!!!!!!!

In fact the Democratic Party can learn a few things from Peta Campaigns :)

[entanglement]

93. I've HAD it with PETA's extremism - and I'm a vegetarian

Enough is enough! Surely there are other ways to draw attention to the plight of animals WITHOUT this offensive, racist crap!

[Catchawave]

95. BUT, it got your attention ?

...and they did withdraw their campaign.

My Gosh, they're geniuses !

So what animal protection groups do you support? There's so many that I've never heard of :hi:

[arwalden]

111. Getting "Attention" And Getting SUPPORT Are Two Different Things...

... my gosh! Your standard for what qualifies as "genius" is extremely low.

Not only do they fail to gain support, they turn people OFF and AWAY from the cause. Peta is a kooky organization.

[shockra]

115. The right-wing media journalism about them turns people away.

Meanwhile, PETA is the largest animal rights organization in the world.

[arwalden]

118. Yet...

<< Meanwhile, PETA is the largest animal rights organization in the world. >>

... they accomplish so little. It looks as though they exist to exist.

-- Allen

Why call them an animal rights group? Why not an animal WELFARE group? Animals don't have rights, people have rights. Animals are not people.

[livinginphotographs]

123. Animals have the right to have their ability to suffer considered.

Funny, you'd know that if you actually bothered yourself to know anything about the motivations of the animal rights movement.

But you're so much more comfortable posting BS smears against PETA and other members of the animal rights movement.

[arwalden]

145. Let Me Say This, About That...

<< "Animals have the right to have their ability to suffer considered." Posted by livinginphotographs>>

What rights?

<< Funny, you'd know that if you actually bothered yourself to know anything about the motivations of the animal rights movement. >>

You misunderestimate me.

<< But you're so much more comfortable posting BS smears against PETA and other members of the animal rights movement. >>

Let's not continue to make it personal. Again, I remind you... *I* am not the subject here. And frankly... you know nothing about me or what I'm "comfortable" with. Stick to the message and lay off the messenger.

[livinginphotographs]

147. Oh, now you want to debate like a civilized person.`

You're going to have to give me a heads-up when you jump on your high horse, because it's hard to see that between computers.

"Animals have the right to have their ability to suffer considered."

What rights? The same rights that an Iraqi has, or a war protestor has, or a homosexual has, or an african-american has. There's no god that gives us that right, just simple fucking human decency. I'm sorry if that's a hard concept for you to grasp.

[arwalden]

151. Oh Brother!

<< "Oh, now you want to debate like a civilized person.`" Posted by livinginphotographs >>

The implication being--of course--that my previous posts I was an "uncivilized" person. That's a personal attack against the messenger. That's against DU rules.

<<You're going to have to give me a heads-up when you jump on your high horse,>>

As before, I was unaware that anything about this disagreement is about *ME* and I must admit that I'm a little more than perplexed as to why you continue to make personal comments towards me. What's the fascination?

<<because it's hard to see that between computers.>>

I don't understand that comment.

<< "Animals have the right to have their ability to suffer considered." What rights? The same rights that an Iraqi has, or a war protestor has, or a homosexual has, or an african-american has.>>

But animals are not humans. You act as if they are, but they aren't. Who gave them these rights you speak of?

<< There's no god that gives us that right, just simple fucking human decency. I'm sorry if that's a hard concept for you to grasp.>>

Again... you're making it personal by suggesting that I'm incapable of "grasping" the concept. That's incorrect. I grasp it fully, I disagree with you.

The fact that I disagree with you doesn't mean that I do not "grasp" the concept. Enough with the personal attacks, m'kay. :eyes:


edit: missing word.

[Name removed]

164. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Catchawave]

136. my gosh! Your standard for what qualifies as "genius" is extremely low.

Works for Karl Rove <snork>.

Seriously, lighten up and go read the peta website. I'm a bleeding heart liberal for all progressive causes, but at least I have a heart, ya bully :loveya:

[arwalden]

155. This Is Tiresome

<< Works for Karl Rove >>

No I don't.

<< Seriously, lighten up and go read the peta website. >>

I have. It changes nothing. Peta is a kooky organization run by kooks. Their reputation HURTS the causes they supposedly care about. The fact that they are oblivious to their reputation... or that they don't care... and that they do NOTHING to change it convinces me that they exist only to exist.

<<I'm a bleeding heart liberal for all progressive causes, >>

That's nice.

<< but at least I have a heart, >>

The implication being--of course--that *I* don't have a heart. Nice. :eyes:

<<ya bully>>

Name calling? Nice.

<< :loveya: >>

Passive-aggressive name-calling with little loveya smiley faces is still name-calling.

[JackieO]

172. Take a nap.

I'm sure no one will mind.

[alarcojon]

125. Offensive, racist crap is okay if it gets your attention?

:wtf:

Also, the article says PETA is postponing their campaign while they review it, which is different from withdrawing it. Since they claim to be getting far more good feedback than bad, I would suspect they will resume the campaign later. I hope I'm wrong.

Lastly, may I re-emphasize Arwalden's point - there is a big difference between getting attention and getting support. PETA gets far more of the former than the latter, or they wouldn't have to resort to offending Jewish and civil rights groups.

[livinginphotographs]

127. Oh, and Arwalden is such the authority on the subject.

What exactly is racist about this campaign? I'm really curious to know.

[alarcojon]

132. Well, since you describe the NAACP as "obtuse" on this matter

I don't know how I can do that to your satisfaction.

[livinginphotographs]

135. Because god forbid I criticize the NAACP

For mischaracterizing an issue that is very close to me.

So let me get this straight:
On DU, NAACP = can do no wrong
PETA = circular firing squad is okay.

Now I understand. :eyes:

[alarcojon]

139. Let's try this

First off, I did not say anything about the NAACP being above criticism. But, you might feel inclined to grant me that they have some say about what African-Americans might find offensive. That is what I was trying to get at. One of their spokespeople has gone on the record against this campaign. I could not find their entire quote or other statements from them on this, so that is all I have to go by at the moment.

By the way, you no doubt know that Kweisi Mfume, then president and CEO of the NAACP, supported PETA in their campaign against KFC a couple of years back:

http://www.kentuckyfriedcruelty.com/mfume.asp

So it is not as if the NAACP is somehow anti-PETA. They apparently find THIS campaign offensive. Since I am not black, I defer to their judgment.

[livinginphotographs]

142. I still disagree with them.

Someone screeching, "They're comparing black people to chickens!" is obviously missing the point.

[alarcojon]

146. That is your prerogative.

And it is mine to agree with them on this one.

Peace.

[livinginphotographs]

148. I'm still wondering why you think it's racist.

:shrug:

[arwalden]

159. No... Not An "Authority". Just A Common-Sense Observer.

But thanks for the compliment. It's fascinating.

[eggman67]

161. I'm gonna have some bacon now.

If the majority of people don't "get the point" then the "point" is being poorly communicated.

[Name removed]

166. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[expatriot]

133. how is this racist? nt

[livinginphotographs]

100. What's racist about it?

:shrug:

[OfireitupO]

103. Umm...

When you think about it, WE DO ENSLAVE animals and use them for slaughter and food.

Im not against eating animal meat because we live under survival of the fittest laws. Other animals would just as easily eat me if they could.

Im against putting them in cages, mass producing them, slaughtering them and shipping mass meat all over the world. Totalitarian Agriculture has made our population the way it is today and to sustain ourselves we have to kill more and more animals. Its a sad reality.

Dont lose sight of reality though. We do enslave other species only to kill them and eat them. If aliens came and enslaved us only to kill us and eat us, it would be the same thing.

[livinginphotographs]

105. Careful.....

You'll make the fundie carnivores defensive and they'll start calling you a racist.

[meganmonkey]

109. Well put - and

welcome to DU!

:toast:

[Catchawave]

134. Whew....and Welcome to DU....

You get it, you really, really get it, and I thank you for explaining so eloquently where I have obviously failed, in above posts, getting through to my DU friends :yourock:

[Starbucks Anarchist]

149. It's not so much racist as it is ignorant and offensive.

PETA may have worthy goals, but their approach in this case is spectacularly wrong.

[Catchawave]

153. Funny, that's just what Fox News said about

Cindy Sheehan :spank:

[shockra]

157. Yeah.

And if only PETA were run by a rational man, and not a kooky, emotional, crazy woman I'm sure they'd be more sensible and get some *real* work done. :sarcasm:

[Starbucks Anarchist]

160. You can't be serious about comparing the two.

[livinginphotographs]

167. Yes, I guess they can.

Typical fundie-carnivore response.

[Starbucks Anarchist]

168. I'm a fundie carnivore?

Are you a fundie vegetarian?

[livinginphotographs]

170. No.

I can actually explain my position. Fundie carnivores rarely can explain their positions.

[Starbucks Anarchist]

175. So you think consumption of meat is equivalent to slavery or genocide?

[shockra]

176. In other words.

You can't explain your position.

[Starbucks Anarchist]

180. My position is that it is not equal to genocide or slavery.

[flvegan]

184. Are the conditions they are kept in, and the treatment they receive

alike?

Simple question...

[Starbucks Anarchist]

188. The conditions and treatment are similar.

The moral equivalence of the two is not.

[flvegan]

189. In your opinion, that may be.

To YOUR morals. Torture is torture. The reasoning behind it is 99 times out of 100 total bullshit. There doesn't need to be moral equivalence. Abuse is abuse. Am I right?

Thank you for your honest response.

[Starbucks Anarchist]

192. Sorry, forgot to clarify.

Yes, abuse is abuse. What I meant to convey was that animal abuse is bad but not on par with human abuse. However, moral equivalence does need to be proved in this particular case of PETA's actions because of their stunt.

Of course, if by "torture," you mean eating meat, then that is a whole new argument.

[flvegan]

197. Eating meat is only torture if it's not cooked right.

See, sense of humor.

I know what you meant about the abuse v. abuse issue. My point was to get your actual opinion, PETA aside. Again, MY opinion, which we don't/won't come together on, is that abuse, torture and cruelty, regardless of whoever is subject to it, is wrong, and we should do all that we can, within reason, to alleviate and not support it.

I also don't really see this presentation of PETA's to be a "stunt" but I know that many things they do are just sort of seen that way, as they do have a tendency to go that route.

[Starbucks Anarchist]

201. I respect your opinion.

I am wary of the slippery slope that animal rights activism can lead to, but I can understand where PETA and you are coming from.

I just wish that PETA wouldn't attract such negative attention through poorly planned ad campaigns. They would be much more effective if they toned it down a bit and had a smarter approach.

Also, we can both agree that there are many more issues upon which we do agree rather than not.

:hi:

[alarcojon]

199. This is the crux of this entire debate

Some people believe abuse of non-human animals is morally equivalent to abuse of humans. This is clearly PETA's position, as evidenced in their online exhibit. And it is clearly the position of many posters here.

Others believe that abuse of humans is morally worse than abuse of animals. Hence they object to the Holocaust and slavery comparisons. That is also the position of many posters here, including myself. That does not somehow imply that I don't care about animal rights - just that I place human rights above them.

I don't see how to bridge this gulf. Nor do I see the likelihood of this issue being discussed civilly on DU.

[flvegan]

177. It's about the treatment.

The treatment of the animals, and the mindset towards them is much like the treatment of the victims of slavery and genocide. It's not animals compared to people, it's treatment compared to treatment. Intent, cruelty and violence.

[Moderator]

202. Locking

No longer latest breaking news and thread has turned into a flamefest.