|
Post by Insane_Zang on May 21, 2010 1:15:10 GMT -5
^I worship you, dude
EDIT: Fucking new page, that was at newschooled
|
|
lydia
Meteor
MOTS
Posts: 58
|
Post by lydia on May 21, 2010 19:30:16 GMT -5
I support PETA I just think some people take it way to far. For example the people who throw blood on people who wear fur. That's too far.
|
|
FranticProdigy
Planet
[AWD:1c]
Im classy because I use words like touch
Posts: 312
|
Post by FranticProdigy on May 22, 2010 18:29:59 GMT -5
People Eating Tasty Animals? Thats what I thought it ment.
|
|
|
Post by KipEnyan on May 23, 2010 12:21:54 GMT -5
Extremists deter support from any cause, whether that be vegetarianism, animal rights, feminism, religious faith, etc. That's why PETA2 is the non-n00bcake version of PETA.
|
|
|
Post by ladystardust on Jun 3, 2010 1:02:09 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by ladystardust on Jun 3, 2010 1:02:49 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by krzych32 on Jun 3, 2010 1:23:01 GMT -5
"Their lives are restricted to human homes where they must obey commands and can only eat, drink, and even urinate when humans allow them to."
The alternative, to be hunted down by a larger predator.
|
|
|
Post by KipEnyan on Jun 3, 2010 16:26:23 GMT -5
Umpteenth try: PETA2, PETA for non-crazies.
|
|
|
Post by ladystardust on Jun 4, 2010 9:52:35 GMT -5
Yes, but has PETA simply ceased to exist now that PETA2 has launched? If so, then this argument is indeed moot. But if not . . .
|
|
|
Post by KipEnyan on Jun 5, 2010 22:07:19 GMT -5
No, it's true, PETA still exists, but any sane person disregards them wherever possible, and anyone who wants to be active for their cause on less insane terms... PETA2.
|
|
|
Post by ladystardust on Jun 6, 2010 9:47:45 GMT -5
I agree that PETA2 is a more . . . feasible option for those of us with a firm grasp on reality, but I don't think that this would render discussion on the original PETA obsolete, since it is still in operation.
|
|
|
Post by thejourney on Jun 6, 2010 13:55:04 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by risingphoenix89 on Jun 8, 2010 0:52:46 GMT -5
Thanks for posting that, thejourney. Quite nicely sums up why PETA is an utterly reprehensible organization.
|
|
Nakor
Star
Non-Prophet
Posts: 991
|
Post by Nakor on Jun 8, 2010 13:32:03 GMT -5
I wonder if PETA2 wouldn't have been better off totally separating themselves from PETA -- even in name. Why take the name of the prior charity when you're specifically trying to avoid the stigma it caused.
Also I looked at PETA2 a while ago and it seems to be more "PETA for Kids" than anything else.
|
|
|
Post by KipEnyan on Jun 8, 2010 18:04:03 GMT -5
Not really. I mean, PETA2 DOES try to appeal to a younger demographic, but it's really meant for anyone who supports "the ethical treatment of animals", but doesn't support PETA's crazies.
|
|
j
Moon
Posts: 127
|
Post by j on Jun 8, 2010 19:05:58 GMT -5
I typically don't agree with PETA. Because of their extremist stance, it puts people off of associating themselves with anything to do with PETA. While animal abuse is wrong, PETA is going about it the wrong way. And no pets cause we treat them like slaves? I'm sorry, but I don't think my pets would know what to do with themselves if they were suddenly released. Most likely they'd get eaten by coyotes. PETA2 is just another branch of PETA as far as I can tell. Maybe a little less with the blood splattering to attract the young crowd, but they still answer to PETA. Even on their website it says that they were founded when PETA was going to expand their animal rights group. They are still apart of the same organization and, therefore, I do not support them.
|
|
|
Post by kreacherxluver on Jun 9, 2010 19:28:16 GMT -5
In response to your video, I agree with the paint as blood thing. I mean, that is out of the box. But I think that Peta does those types of things because they want action. They want people to notice them and know who they are, and what they'll do. However I think that they went over board at some point, and just stayed that way. So now everybody does know who they are, what what they are willing to do to get what they want, raising awareness and changing the ways animals are treated. But I also think that just talking to some people will not change their views, so Peta supporters went a little wacko.
Myself I'm a veg and I do support Peta, but you for sure won't be seeing me throwing paint on anybody. I know that you cannot change the mind of a meat-eater if they aren't willing, so I don't try. I do think that Peta is hurting themselves and lowering the chances of having more vegan/vegetarian/cruelty aware people by these measures, and it seems like their least drastic ones work the best. Like the McDonald's campaign, the Canadian Seal Slaughter, and the Kentucky Fried Cruelty.
|
|
|
Post by KipEnyan on Jun 9, 2010 20:18:28 GMT -5
To the best of my knowledge, PETA2 doesn't answer to PETA. They were initially formed off a branch of PETA, but I believe since then they have broken off.
|
|
j
Moon
Posts: 127
|
Post by j on Jun 9, 2010 21:37:00 GMT -5
PETA2's website makes no suggestion of any break with PETA, and, if anything, makes it seem like they are very much still apart of PETA.
|
|
|
Post by kreacherxluver on Jun 10, 2010 15:13:22 GMT -5
Yes, PETA2 is, from what I know, still very much a part of PETA. They have internships and opportunities to work with the company, protests of their own, campaigning ect.
|
|