Why "no kill" and 90% of what P.E.T.A says is bullshit

[Despanan]

I don't use the word "evil" very often.

Because of the way they take advantage of a human's natural compassion and pervert it into a weapon, PETA is downright evil.

[Godslayer Jillian]

Someone should tell Alec Baldwin to get out of PETA

[badteccy]

PETA really sucks. I love animals, I don't eat meat (because it's gross, but I'll eat fish), and I won't wear animal products. I love animals, but PETA values the life of an animal more than a human and will inflict violence on people to "save" animals. They also use cheap methods like using sexy woman for their campaign. If someone wants to eat meat and wear fur, for fucks sake let them and stay out of their business. I don't want animals to be treated cruelly, but...if say using an animal for a medical experiment will further the discovery of a cure for a human condition, I am all for that.
PETA is absolutely ridiculous.

[PortraitOfSanity]

Originally Posted by Godslayer Jillian

Someone should tell Alec Baldwin to get out of PETA

Why? Alec Baldwin is the perfect poster-child for PETA: a self-righteous celebrity asshole.

I'm glad he supports PETA, otherwise he might actually try to associate with a legitimate organization.

[Cicero]

I read somewhere that Siouxsie is in PETA =[

[Pineapple_Juice]

Originally Posted by badteccy

PETA really sucks. I love animals, I don't eat meat (because it's gross, but I'll eat fish), and I won't wear animal products. I love animals, but PETA values the life of an animal more than a human and will inflict violence on people to "save" animals. They also use cheap methods like using sexy woman for their campaign. If someone wants to eat meat and wear fur, for fucks sake let them and stay out of their business. I don't want animals to be treated cruelly, but...if say using an animal for a medical experiment will further the discovery of a cure for a human condition, I am all for that.
PETA is absolutely ridiculous.

PETA doesn't value the life of an animal more than they value the life of a person.

They're trying to dissuade people from thinking that humans are more important than animals by law. It's odd to me that you think it's weird for someone to hold animals higher than humans when you're holding humans higher than animals. They're two extremes on opposite ends of the spectrum.

PETA promotes animal rights, vegetarianism and veganism. It's extremely difficult to impossible to be part of those groups if you assume you're better than an animal just because you exist as a person. That just seems so pompous and assy to me. There's no respect. You can't respect the value of anything if you think of it as a lesser being than yourself. It works the same with person to person interaction.

PETA's methods are ridiculous and extremist because they're appealing to youth. Most older people are set in their ways and won't even consider an alternative point of view.

I'm vegan and I'm an animal rights activist. I am not a part of PETA because I don't think it's smart to sign my name onto a group or organization unless I know everything about it, and I don't. I appreciate PETA for what they were created to do, and I agree with some things they advocate. Some.

[PortraitOfSanity]

Theoretical situation:

If someone you loved were bitten by a raccoon thought to be infected with rabies, and the doctors asked you permission to cut off the raccoon's head to test for rabies, and that this was the only way to save your loved one, what would you respond?

If you answered no, you're a liar.

If you answered yes, you're a hypocrite.


Don't give me that tired ass argument for equal rights under the law, because you and I both know it's wrong, and that it goes against every instinct hard-wired into the brain of every species. From the second shit hits the fan, preservation of the species comes first no matter what.

[Pineapple_Juice]

Originally Posted by PortraitOfSanity

Theoretical situation:

If someone you loved were bitten by a raccoon thought to be infected with rabies, and the doctors asked you permission to cut off the raccoon's head to test for rabies, and that this was the only way to save your loved one, what would you respond?

If you answered no, you're a liar.

If you answered yes, you're a hypocrite.


Don't give me that tired ass argument for equal rights under the law, because you and I both know it's wrong, and that it goes against every instinct hard-wired into the brain of every species. From the second shit hits the fan, preservation of the species comes first no matter what.

I hate theoretical questions, they're all bullshit. First off, if you think your loved one had rabies then why not just treat the loved one instead of waiting to find out? That'd be my response, so yes and no is irrelevant.
I never said anything about species being into self-preservation. I said people should understand that they're not the goddamn big kahuna just 'cause they're scared to croak. Everything is scared to croak, so that's sort of a Russian doll situation right there.

[PortraitOfSanity]

Stop it with the self-righteous bullshit already. People are afraid to croak? Do you really think that justifies protesting against medical research on animals that has the potential to save human lives? I'm not going to argue this when it comes to other animal testing with negligible benefits to humans, because I do agree that that's wrong. But there are more situations than I even want to know about where the interests of animals come after the interests of human beings. Is it sad? Yes. Is it immoral in those situations to put the life or well-being of a human before the life or well-being of an animal? No.

[Pineapple_Juice]

You speak as if your opinion is solid fact. Furthermore, you're neglecting my point. Your entire post is can be summed up as such:

Humans are more important than animals. If you don't agree with me, you are wrong and you are being a self-righteous idiot.

You talk about what's moral and what's immoral as though it's a black and white issue. Judging by our debate it's quite obviously not.

My point was that apathy isn't something that should be accepted as the norm just 'cause.

You know, there are people that would consent to give themselves away to science. Why not do that? Oh wait, sorry. That's horrible and wrong. Who would subject a PERSON to such things?
That's fucking hypocritical.

[PortraitOfSanity]

You can repeat your argument as much as you want, but when the time comes that you get prescribed that same medication that got tested on the poor piggies, you'll take it without another thought.

I guarantee it.

[Pineapple_Juice]

Again with your theoretical situations. You don't have a clue what I'd do.

[Godslayer Jillian]

Originally Posted by PortraitOfSanity

Theoretical situation:

If someone you loved were bitten by a raccoon thought to be infected with rabies, and the doctors asked you permission to cut off the raccoon's head to test for rabies, and that this was the only way to save your loved one, what would you respond?

If you answered no, you're a liar.

If you answered yes, you're a hypocrite.

Let's talk about hypothetical clichés.
What if you needed to kill a man to save your loved one? Would yo do it?
What does that imply? Are not all people equal? What makes this scenario different than that of an animal? If it were a black guy you kill could I accuse you of racism?

[Joker_in_the_Pack]

Originally Posted by PortraitOfSanity

Theoretical situation:

If someone you loved were bitten by a raccoon thought to be infected with rabies, and the doctors asked you permission to cut off the raccoon's head to test for rabies, and that this was the only way to save your loved one, what would you respond?

If you answered no, you're a liar.

If you answered yes, you're a hypocrite.


Don't give me that tired ass argument for equal rights under the law, because you and I both know it's wrong, and that it goes against every instinct hard-wired into the brain of every species. From the second shit hits the fan, preservation of the species comes first no matter what.

Your argument sucks, and here's why.

First, to stick with your hypothetical: Saying yes is not hypocritical. When put in a situation where the life of someone you love is in jepordy, then you do what needs to be done. It's a sad choice, but a necessary sacrifice. Vegans don't argue that you shouldn't defend yourself if an 800 lb Grizzly bear went fucking ape shit out of no where and is trying to eat your baby. If they do, they're full of shit. No rule in the world can be set up by man that doesn't have exceptions. We're not all like Plato.

Now, to bunk your hypothetical with actual facts:

If someone is bitten by an animal, they get the rabies treatment FIRST. They don't chase the animal, they just do it, and fast. They don't have time for seeing maybe. They take you and give you the shots.

[Drake Dun]

IMO extreme hypothetical situations are not a problem unless one has a naive view of ethics. Our morals break down under sufficiently intense pressure precisely because they are constructs, and not reflections of objective reality the way we think we're mirroring objective reality when we say "the sun is more massive than the Earth", for example. I think we simply need to accept that yes, ethics will break down when people are put into extreme situations. That doesn't vitiate the usefulness of ethics in the same way that a single logical flaw will defeat an entire syllogism, because once again, ethics are practical rather than objective.

[PortraitOfSanity]

Originally Posted by Joker_in_the_Pack

First, to stick with your hypothetical: Saying yes is not hypocritical. When put in a situation where the life of someone you love is in jepordy, then you do what needs to be done. It's a sad choice, but a necessary sacrifice. .

You and Jillian both agreed with me....

You wouldn't kill a man to save a loved one, but you wouldn't think twice if an animal had to die to save the same life.

Yes, it is hypocritical. If you say animals should have the same rights as humans, and you still agree with the above statement, you're a hypocrite.

[Godslayer Jillian]

When did I say I agree with you?

[Albert Mond]

I like penis. Equal rights for cocks rock.

[Xombie]

Originally Posted by PortraitOfSanity

You and Jillian both agreed with me....

You wouldn't kill a man to save a loved one, but you wouldn't think twice if an animal had to die to save the same life.

Yes, it is hypocritical. If you say animals should have the same rights as humans, and you still agree with the above statement, you're a hypocrite.

But the legal consequences of killing a human are FAR greater than those of killing an animal, if there are any at all. Even if one believes that animals should have equal rights, that's simply not how the law sees it. I'm all for animal rights, but basing my decision solely on the legal system, there's no way I'd kill a human before an animal.

I know, if you're hardcore about it you won't care about the legal consequences, buuuuuut being charged with murder isn't really my bag. You dig?

[Albert Mond]

Originally Posted by Xombie

buuuuuut being charged with murder isn't really my bag.

Ha ha. Pussy.

[Saya]

Originally Posted by PortraitOfSanity

You and Jillian both agreed with me....

You wouldn't kill a man to save a loved one, but you wouldn't think twice if an animal had to die to save the same life.

Yes, it is hypocritical. If you say animals should have the same rights as humans, and you still agree with the above statement, you're a hypocrite.

Who said animals should have equal rights? I don't think an animal should have the right to vote, and if I had to make a choice to save the life of an animal or a human, of course I'd save the human, but that would not make the animal's life void of value and I wouldn't have an epiphany that because I value the life of a fellow human more than the life of an animal I should start eating meat and support the exploitation and enslavement of animals. Like Jillian said, if you had to chose between a loved one and a stranger, who would you pick? If you don't save the stranger, then are you a hypocrite because you are agaisnt slavery and mass murder? Its really a nonsensical situation you thought up, those of us who value life place value on those who we call kin, be it our family, friends, fellow man or fellow earthlings. In dire one-or-the-other situations one will normally choose the one that we are more related to, a human is closer kin than an animal, we'll save a brother over a stranger.

[Beneath the Shadows]

I wish humans and animals had equal rights. Then we could have people burgers, too.

[Saya]

Originally Posted by Beneath the Shadows

I wish humans and animals had equal rights. Then we could have people burgers, too.

Only if they were labelled free range and weren't slaughtered in public like the savages in the Middle East do it. I'd rather my humans get a bolt to the head and have their throats slit in a slaughterhouse where I can't see it, thank you.

[Slap Your Love]

Originally Posted by Saya

Only if they were labelled free range and weren't slaughtered in public like the savages in the Middle East do it. I'd rather my humans get a bolt to the head and have their throats slit in a slaughterhouse where I can't see it, thank you.

Fuck that. I'd rather see my humans throats slit. Especially if their ones
I don't like.

[blackwater1110]

Originally Posted by Drake Dun

IMO extreme hypothetical situations are not a problem unless one has a naive view of ethics. Our morals break down under sufficiently intense pressure precisely because they are constructs, and not reflections of objective reality the way we think we're mirroring objective reality when we say "the sun is more massive than the Earth", for example. I think we simply need to accept that yes, ethics will break down when people are put into extreme situations. That doesn't vitiate the usefulness of ethics in the same way that a single logical flaw will defeat an entire syllogism, because once again, ethics are practical rather than objective.

I like you.

Originally Posted by Slap Your Love

Fuck that. I'd rather see my humans throats slit. Especially if their ones
I don't like.

It's high time we brought back the gladiators. Glorious entertainment, population control, a healthy new food source, AND equal treatment of animals and people! What's not to like?