| User | Comment |
|---|
| mrmarm | | posted 10-Dec-2007 9:26pm |
I think we have PETA over here, but instead they're (so maybe an Australian equivalent) called RSPCA but I consider them quite highly to be honest. |
| ausfox | | posted 10-Dec-2007 10:00pm |
I don't have any problems with them and I'm wondering why the question is phrased this way? |
| darkshadowsseeker | | posted 10-Dec-2007 10:04pm |
This... http://www.petakillsanimals.com/petasdirtysecret.c...
I'll also reiterate what I said in Forum...I also suggest viewing Penn & Teller's "Bullcrap" episode about PETA. It's quite revealing. PETA president, Ingrid Newkirk advocates, amongst other things, seeing a day when all dogs & cats are set free & returned to the wild. Never mind that they wouldn't survive for very long since most have lost the ability to fend for themselves. Those that did survive would either end up as feral or form packs. Oddly enough, she has no problem with taking insulin for her diabetes. Insulin that was made possible by animal research.
In short, they are a lying, hypocritical organization that uses deceptive, underhanded tactics to push their agenda, even on young, school age children. Not to mention that they are led by the chief bull goose looney herself, Ingrid Newkirk. |
| darkshadowsseeker | | posted 10-Dec-2007 10:06pm |
RSPCA (in the U.S. it's called SPCA) is a separate & different organization from PETA. |
| mrmarm |
I think I've heard about PETA actually on the Simpson's once and got the assumption that PETA is a little over the top. |
| darkshadowsseeker | | posted 10-Dec-2007 10:11pm |
Correction...they are a LOT over the top. Read my post in this survey & click on the link I provided. |
| mrmarm |
Okay thanks,
I just read that, that's weird. |
| JessicaWoman99 | | posted 10-Dec-2007 10:17pm |
i have no issues with PETA at all and i do not even know them |
| thecomic22 | | posted 10-Dec-2007 10:40pm |
I've heard their bat crap crazy before, but really nothing else.
I just read the article posted. Man what a bunch of sick twisted fudges. |
| llamamama | | posted 10-Dec-2007 10:54pm |
Why don't I dislike PETA would be a better question.
In a nutshell, PETA to me is like a whiny little kid. They have to make up lies and do things way over the top to even get your attention. They say things that aren't even true or relevent to get people to think the way they think.
Milk causes zits? Um, I'm pretty sure not. I'm pretty sure being 15 is what causes it. That's like saying certain things cause cancer..can ya prove it?
PETA is a joke. PETA is a cult..Maybe not like the really creepy ones..but think about it..
Ugh, PETA irritates the crap out of me..I am completely unable to form very good sentences anymore..PETA is a waste of money..PETA is a waste of land..PETA should fall into the bay..
PETA kills animals..and tricks stupid pre-teen girls into believing everything they say..
I love chicken nuggets. |
Galomorro   | | posted 10-Dec-2007 11:26pm |
I have no problems with PETA. |
southernyankee  | | posted 11-Dec-2007 12:39am |
1) Their tactics and 2) Some of their views
and 3) occasional hypocrisy. |
kcthedog  | | posted 11-Dec-2007 12:47am |
 Other
This is a trick question, right? You start off with assuming that I dislike PETA I do not dislike (that’s a double negative?) PETA! I am for animals having rights!
|
LindaH   | | (reply to kcthedog) posted 11-Dec-2007 1:04am |
 The way you worded that made me think of the right to arm bears. |
| kcthedog |
I went to the link and read it! Bologna! The article is not validated in anyway who wrote it? How is the information confirmed? There is no name on it, is “hearsay” at best! Even the documentation presented does not constitute anything that points to an inhumane way to deal with animal control. Animals are put to sleep all over the country every day, because “people” do not except their responsibility of having them, ether they do not care for them, or allow them to breed unresponsively. Society needs to come to grips with their own motivations on how they deal with animals; they are not a commodity to be treated as if the were a mineral. They are living entities as you and I! We are the intelligent species on the planet we should act in an intelligent manner!
|
| darkshadowsseeker | | (reply to kcthedog) posted 11-Dec-2007 2:17am |
That's why I also referenced Penn & Teller's Bullcrap episode about PETA. You get to see & hear the insanity that PETA leader Ingrid Newkirk is advocating. |
| kcthedog | | posted 11-Dec-2007 2:26am |
|
| Otter | | posted 11-Dec-2007 3:18am |
I don't have any problems with PETA as long as I can still eat animals. |
| judgescratch | | posted 11-Dec-2007 7:34am |
Dislike-too extreme. |
cloudhugger   | | posted 11-Dec-2007 10:09am |
Other.
I like them as much as I like seeing soldiers killing each other. |
| Enheduanna | | posted 11-Dec-2007 10:25am |
Because they are fanatics and I dislike fanatics of any stripe. |
| bill | | posted 11-Dec-2007 10:30am |
I don't have any fresh dislike for PETA in my head right now. In the past, I've heard stories of them using unacceptable or unfair dirty, under-handed tactics. Also, I think they may be wrong-minded about some stuff, like they don't see the big picture of how things work. They go after the wrong people. They're too extreme, denying the food chain. Also, they may have a naive (non-scientific, emotional-based) or impractical view of nature, wildlife, the environment, and politics.
On the plus side, I think they often have naked women in their protests, and there's nothing wrong with that. |
| they | | posted 11-Dec-2007 10:40am |
I guess my question is....
If they weren't fanatically loud and outrageous.....
Would they do any good? |
| Frostbrand | | posted 11-Dec-2007 12:41pm |
Their methods and tactics bug me. I support most of their goals, but unfortuantely they are going about it entirely the wrong way. |
| labjog | | posted 11-Dec-2007 12:51pm |
I don't dislike PETA, although I have never given them money, ASPCA is the one I give to, I would love to do what the officers on animal cops do. That would be my ideal job.  |
| Biggles | | posted 11-Dec-2007 1:34pm |
I have a problem with a lot of animal rights activists because they seem to prioritise animals over people, and are often fairly unconcerned about the human suffering they themselves cause to try and achieve their goals. |
| cerealkiller | | posted 11-Dec-2007 2:34pm |
they're wackos
I disagree with the negative slant in the question. |
| RGirl | | posted 11-Dec-2007 4:01pm |
There are things I like about PETA- dedication, intensity and things I don't like- militant, extreme, unrealistic. I know some of those contradict but I am right in the middle with PETA. I have more respect for groups like the Humane Society and ASPCA. |
| RGirl |
|
| Amanda | | posted 11-Dec-2007 11:36pm |
They take things way too far and seem to be a bunch of whack jobs. They also try to push their ideas onto everyone. But, I do like the nifty address labels they send. |
| Pomeranian | | posted 12-Dec-2007 3:36am |
When did you stop being your wife (who is made out of fur)? |
| jettles | | posted 12-Dec-2007 9:25am |
i have no problem with them |
| autumnlight | | posted 12-Dec-2007 11:04am |
I don't dislike PETA. I think sometimes they're a bit too militant for my liking, but I like generally what they stand for. |
| Melf | | posted 13-Dec-2007 8:01am |
[Even if animal research produced a cure for AIDS], we'd be against it.. — Ingrid Newkirk, PETA President
What a real fudging twinkie. |
| Melf | | posted 13-Dec-2007 8:04am |
Haha, the RSPCA is the Royal Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals. They save injured animals. PETA, People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals, are idiots who think that animals are better than humans. |
| cantilever | | posted 13-Dec-2007 5:08pm |
Like all fanatics, they're unable to see balance. |
| mrmarm | | (reply to Melf) posted 13-Dec-2007 6:18pm |
Ah ha. |
| cloudhugger |
> When did you stop being your wife (who is made
> out of fur)?
I actually had spit come out of my mouth when I laughed at that.
|
| cloudhugger | | (reply to they) posted 14-Dec-2007 9:43am |
> I guess my question is....
>
> If they weren't fanatically loud and outrageous.....
>
> Would they do any good?
Good point...not as much. They are on the far end of the scale of reasonable, their tactics and their screaming. If it wasn't for them, the genera public wouldn't be aware tthat sub cultures in their haste and greed are very cruel to animals to bring every day items to the table. Clothes, makeup, blah blah...have you ever seen a truck deliver a load of turkeys? That was very upsetting to me, far more offensive than PETA. PETA brings out emotions in people who may other wise be apathetic to animals lives. They are important to justice, even tho they are injust in their actions. It's their motives that ought to be questioned. I would think most would agree with the motivation, but may act differently to be heard.
It's always the brattiest kid in the bunch that gets the most attention. Nice is appreciated and liked more, but the screamers are heard.
So, your original question is worded right, on a scale of one to ten, most here would say they agree with PETA stands for, but are offended by htem. I guess that would be the other side of offensive. Like for like gets the job done. |
| Iseult | | posted 16-Dec-2007 10:54pm |
They're bunch of self-righteous jerks. I want to eat meat and wear leather. Sure, Jennifer Lopez doesn't need another fur coat and people do eat too much meat in our socity on average, but you don't have to be such an asswipe when addressing issues. |
| Iseult |
> 1) Their tactics and 2) Some of their views
>
> and 3) occasional hypocrisy.
Occasional? I would've opted for consistent.
|
