• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

I'm so angry that I could...

Yeah. I think they see domestic animals as "slaves" or something. Speaking as a big animal fan, PETA is a good example that fanaticism is bad, no matter the cause.
 
Hmm....."ethical treatment of animals", "planned parenthood"....it all sounds so pleasant on the outside.
 
I couldn't even open the link. If it shows what it purports to show, I wouldn't be able to eat or sleep for a week. :(
 
Don't worry.

They're accounted for.

Every last one of them.
 
If PETA are misrepresenting themselves, they deserve to be called to the carpet.

However, there is a vast problem in the U.S. of unwanted pets due to irresponsible owners not spaying and neutering their pets and allowing them to engage in uncontrolled breeding. I have no ethical problem with using euthanization as a way to cull the unwanted pet population.
 
understandable, Chuck, but those people make $35m a year in donations from people who would never, ever believe that this kind of behavior was going on behind the scenes.

I hope, if nothing more, people see this article and realize how PETA really is, and they donate to no-kill shelters instead.
 
No-kill charities turn into prisons for animals, where the inmates go quietly mad, pacing up and down their inadequate cages for endless years. It's not a good alternative.
 
I'd have to think it's better than being euthanized and dumped into a pile. Especially for someone like PETA.

I am stunned at this article. I've always hated PETA for their fanaticism, but this is just horrible.
 
DiAnna said:
I couldn't even open the link. If it shows what it purports to show, I wouldn't be able to eat or sleep for a week. :(
Click to expand...

Same here. I cry during ASPCA commercials... to which my children point and laugh at me. :(
 
specklebang said:
..wrap my hands around the throat of any employee, affiliate and even contributor to this vile organization. Another "tax exempt non-profit" at work.

Nathan J. Winograd: Shocking Photos: PETA's Secret Slaughter of Kittens, Puppies
Click to expand...

Kind of shocking.It would be like a pro-life group running an abortion clinic, a pro-2nd amendment group supporting gun and magazine bans, a pro-illgal immigration group opposing amnesty for illegals or any other group doing something that constridicts their group's goals or message.
 
I can smell the irony. PETA is willing to save every animal from testing, but unwilling to take care of them.
 
It's more than a little ironic that the people who tell you "Meat is Murder" and pull stunts like this -

Barbeque-demo.jpg

are all about euthanizing household pets.
 
There is no intellectual disconnect here. Ethically treating animals can encompass both not using them for food AND euthanizing excess populations.

PETA appears to be against breeding and raising animals specifically for slaughter. I disagree with that stance, but I do not find it problematic. At the same time, they advocate humane euthanization of animals which do not have adequate facilities in which to be housed. I agree with that stance, as it is a humane way to deal with animals that were bred and raised but are no longer being taken care of by their owners.

I think that no-kill shelters are absolute lunacy and an egregious waste of money. Being unable to face the reality of an animal which has no place in society isn't humane, it's cowardly. Many people who volunteer at no-kill shelters are virtual animal hoarders themselves and sometimes keep their animals in less than ideal, if not downright dirty and dangerous, circumstances themselves.
 
"I love that animal rescue commercial with Sarah McLachlan. Even the dogs in that commercial are like, ‘that’s a little heavy-handed, Sarah. We are just dogs, after all. There’s still kids starving in Africa, right?’ " – Jim Gaffigan
 
The painful thing is I have donated to them because I saw their "program" of comforting outside chained dogs. I feel that animals, particularly companion animals like dogs and cats, should be treated with kindness and not condemned to a miserable life. So, I wanted to help get them shelters and mats even if they were stuck outside. I feel like a fool now.


MaggieD said:
I can't even bear to click the link. Suffice to say, I believe you. I've never donated to PETA . . . I prefer animal shelters, especially the no-kill variety. I won't be starting now.
Click to expand...
 
So, are people upset that the animals are euthanized? PETA is about ethical treatment, not guaranteeing an extended life. It may be more ethical to end the life than support a less-than-cost-effective plan, suffering for the animal, and diseases along with the whole other host of problems, some of which Manc touched on.
 
I can tell you first-hand that there is no such thing as a no-kill shelter. There are what we call (quietly) low-kill shelters. This means that cats that are too damaged or too feral to be companions, are indeed euthanized.

However, PETAs kill rate is the highest I've ever seen. My local pound has an 83% kill rate and I've been at war with them for years. But a 98% kill rate is evidence that they aren't trying at all. A low-kill makes every effort to home adoptable cats. Even my pound sends healthy domesticated cats to adoption until they catch the usual URI. But at least they get a shot at survival and 14% get adopted.

Equating low-kills to hoarding is ridiculous. Of course, it happens but it's rare compared to compassionate, well run low-kill.

This comment is unbelievable:
[QUOTE]I think that no-kill shelters are absolute lunacy and an egregious waste of money. Being unable to face the reality of an animal which has no place in society isn't humane, it's cowardly. Many people who volunteer at no-kill shelters are virtual animal hoarders themselves and sometimes keep their animals in less than ideal, if not downright dirty and dangerous, circumstances themselves.[/QUOTE]
 
I can agree to humanely killing feral cats, or dangerous dogs who have hurt other people or animals. However, lots of the pictures were of puppies. Puppies are easy to give away. I used to run a no-kill shelter and couldn't afford to keep it running, because of the cost of spaying/neutering that was required if you called yourself an animal shelter. I never, ever had a problem giving puppies away. The article said that there were puppies that were killed in the van, between the time of pick-up and drop-off at the shelter. That puppy never had a chance to be adopted.
 
The article is over the top hyperbole written by someone who obviously has a personal grudge against PETA
 
I've never had much use for PETA.
Now, I have even less.

But, just what is the solution for excessive breeding of cats and dogs?

Let them run wild?
Put them in cages?
Euthanize them?
Dump them out in the country where you can tell the kids that they'll be "taken in", and not be run over or become coyote food?

Face it, there just aren't enough homes for them.

The problem is irresponsible pet owners. Spay/neuter your cats and dogs!

Is there another alternative?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom