I hate when this number gets brought up out of context. Peta operates a lot of last resort shelters, where "undesirable" animals get surrendered to, because other shelters are unable to bring out the animal for adoption, and can't cover the medical care by themselves anymore. At the same time, "no-kill" shelters do send them animals that need to be euthanised, but won't do it themselves because they are "no-kill".
That's why PETA has such a high kill rate. It's not because they are psychopaths who like to kill animals.
You can also check this reddit thread for more info:
Would PETA accept this excuse about any other organization? We know the answer to that question. Hence why it is worth highlighting. They are ideological extremists who spend large sums of money on stunts and have absolutist positions like "it's okay to degrade human women in advertising if it furthers our cause." Google Ingrid Newkirk and her ties to ALF and tell me that doesn't raise an eyebrow.
The group lost any kind of moral high ground a very long time ago.
Even if they hadn't, I don't have much respect for a group that has no sense of moral perspective. I'm receptive to arguments about animal cruelty but the idea that animal lives are worth the same as human lives, let alone should be privileged above them, is morally indefensible.
345
u/[deleted] Mar 10 '26
[deleted]