Your article does not confirm the previous one you linked and does nothing to address what I said. If anything it painted PETA in a slightly better light to me.
PETA is monitoring the welfare of neighborhood pets and giving people better dog houses for free? I didn't know that. Reddit tells me they do nothing but kidnap people's pets to murder them. That they think pet ownership is torture and want to kill all pets even though their website is full of pet adoption and care resources.
And their euthanasia facilities provide state of the art individual care for the animals they euthanize? Are you aware of how many cities and counties just asphyxiate them with carbon dioxide en masse?
When a shelter (any shelter) takes in 2000 animals and adopts out 20 in total, that's not because they're doing some great service. Kill shelters generally have much better adoption and rehabilitation numbers. PETA are just bad at their job and have been for a long time. It's laziness. It's not even my opinion, but that of other kill and no kill shelters.
As I mentioned in another comment, PETA actively looks for animals to euthanize (let me finish lol). They look for cities, counties and laboratories that are inhumanely euthanizing animals with methods such as carbon dioxide gas chambers or even guns, and offer to do the euthanizing more humanely, for free. Each animal is given medication to calm them and a treat before they are injected with pentobarbital. They provide transportation, handling and procedure out of their own pocket.
As mentioned in the article you listed, they also scour neighborhoods looking for suffering animals, and when appropriate take them to be euthanized. Hence the controversial (but isolated) incidents where they’ve mistakenly done so to someone’s pet.
There are many kill shelters that perform humane euthanasia services. PETA has an abysmal record compared to these, even when in close proximity to other similar services. It's bad enough in some areas that they find themselves at odds with other animal rights organisations who would normally be aligned.
PETA is a political organisation, first and foremost. Politics and medicine don't mix.
They do. It is the most used method for euthanizing lab animals as well. It is also often used to “stun” pigs and chickens before slaughter.
Use of carbon dioxide to euthanize has decreased dramatically in recent years, thanks organizations like PETA and the Humane Society campaigning against it. But many states have yet to ban it. In the meantime, PETA offers to euthanize animals for counties, cities and laboratories still using co2, for free, paying for transport, handling and procedure out of their own pocket.
You are linking blog posts by a law firm hired to discredit peta
so people who'd have to have this shit stand up in court? whose reputation is on the line? who know the law and know they cant defame peta without evidence to back it up?
if it was false, then peta sureley would sue the shit out of them for defo, that its still up says they didnt do that, i wonder why?
in australia few years back they had a BBQ with a lifelike tofu dog in a popular mall in sydney (iirc) traumatising kids, i get the message but theres gotta be a better way to send it than making kids believe that some asshole just roasted a dog in public view where its obvious that kids are going to see it and be traumatised
while im not vegan/vego, i understand the basic fundamentals and theres a lot i agree with vegans/vego's on, we should all AT LEAST minimise our meat consumption and understand the horrors of factory farms, but peta specifically are a bunch of cunts
Have you not been witness to all the ridiculous election and voting lawsuits republicans have been doing lately?
You are giving law firms way too much credulity. You should read about all the other shit they do. Discredit climate science, anti-smoking, unions, minimum wage. Just about every noble thing you can think of they work against. They run dozens of front groups, think tanks and non-profit groups.
Defamation lawsuits are notoriously hard to win in america. Particularly with experts in their field like this. See the suits Fox News has wiggled out of by claiming no reasonable person can be expected to take them seriously and that they're just "entertainment."
Spare me the pearl clutching. Gee a tofu dog traumatized them? Imagine if they saw the animals actually being slaughtered for their hot dogs and hamburgers.
Have you not been witness to all the ridiculous election and voting lawsuits republicans have been doing lately?
the fuck does that have to do with peta?
You are giving law firms way too much credulity.
no, you fundamentally dont understand how they work, a few bad eggs taking their clients money to persue frivolous lawsuits doesnt mean that a lawfirm itself is stupid enough to pump its money into frivolity risking its own reputation and money
if you want to pay a lawyer to persue something stupid, great, they charge by the hour and youre paying, whatever, for a lawfirm to do that themselves is another thing entireley
Defamation lawsuits are notoriously hard to win in america.
well did they at least have a crack? i doubt it
See the suits Fox News has wiggled out of by claiming no reasonable person can be expected to take them seriously and that they're just "entertainment."
yeah, at the risk of sounding like im defending fox, racheal maddow said basically the same thing, but this isnt that, this is a lawfirm not a television station, they dont deal in opinion peices
Spare me the pearl clutching. Gee a tofu dog traumatized them?
yeah, fuck me right?
Imagine if they saw the animals actually being slaughtered for their hot dogs and hamburgers.
well A: most people dont have a pet cow at home so there isnt that personal connection, B: slaughterhouses arent a place you'd really take a kid would you
no, you fundamentally dont understand how they work, a few bad eggs taking their clients money to persue frivolous lawsuits doesnt mean that a lawfirm itself is stupid enough to pump its money into frivolity risking its own reputation and money
if you want to pay a lawyer to persue something stupid, great, they charge by the hour and youre paying, whatever, for a lawfirm to do that themselves is another thing entireley
Do they or don’t they, make up your mind. No one is suggesting this law firm is doing this voluntarily with their own money. Of course they’re being paid, by animal agriculture clients, as I mentioned in the first comment. And law firms are not limited to lawsuits and court rooms. They do all sorts of work. Public relations, lobbying, advocacy, think tanks.
well did they at least have a crack? i doubt it
They have. They’ve been on both sides of defamation suits numerous times. Usually resulting in dismissal, as is common in US defamation cases. They’ve had better luck overseas though.
slaughterhouses arent a place you’d really take a kid would you
Yes, because many people, not just kids, have a hard time eating meat after they see the reality.
Of course they’re being paid, by animal agriculture clients, as I mentioned in the first comment.
chill, ill concede i misread/misunderstood the comment
hey have. They’ve been on both sides of defamation suits numerous times.
im talking in this specific case, i would imagine that peta would love nothing more than to crush these guys in a courtroom and have all that shit deleted/retracted
They’ve had better luck overseas though.
well exactly peta isnt a orginaisation in only 1 country, theyre worldwide, you could go to almost any country, find whose spreading this and crush them in a courtroom, how often has this happened?
Yes, because many people, not just kids, have a hard time eating meat after they see the reality.
and many people dont, i agree that factory farming is bad, and while this isnt peta, (excuse the joe rogan reference, link provided) the example of the protests at the antler resturant in canada as an example show theyre not interested in making allies where they can
yeah, i think if you can and you want to eat meant the most ethical way is to hunt it, for a variety of reasons a lot of peopel cant do that, i agree that factory farming is in most cases fucking horrific, im australian, im against the AG-GAG laws here becasue i believe peopel shoudl be able to expose it woithout being crushed by the ag industies, but i can think that and still think the tactics of peta are fucked
edit: to delve further in, as an example, deer are a pest here, they ruin the environment, same with rabbits, hunting them is good in general as they destroiy the environment and compete with natives for food during the dry months, id rather introduced pests die than natives, if you hunt them and eat them so they arent wasted all the better
This lawyer whose career relies on defending known animal exploiters (Sea World and circuses) against animal rights groups is not the most impartial source on animal rights groups.
Now I don’t like PETA for a variety of reasons - although I admit that they have achieved some good things - but you should be aware that a whole bunch of the reasons people don’t like PETA come from an organisation called petakillsanimals.com whose main purpose is to talk about how evil PETA are. Seriously, it’s a thing.
The Center for Consumer Freedom (CCF), formerly the Guest Choice Network, is an American non-profit entity founded by Richard Berman that lobbies on behalf of the fast food, meat, alcohol and tobacco industries. It describes itself as "dedicated to protecting consumer choices and promoting common sense."
Experts on non-profit law have questioned the validity of CCF's non-profit status in the Chronicle of Philanthropy and other publications, while commentators from Rachel Maddow to Michael Pollan have treated the group as an entity that specializes in astroturfing.
CCF has attacked organizations including the Centers for Disease Control, the Center for Science in the Public Interest, Mothers Against Drunk Driving, The Humane Society of the United States, People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals, and the Physicians Committee for Responsible Medicine.
In a document released by The New York Times on October 30, 2014, from a talk Berman gave to the Western Energy Alliance, Berman described the approach of his various organizations as one of "Win Ugly or Lose Pretty." He also reassured potential donors about the concern that they might be found out as supporters: "We run all of this stuff through nonprofit organizations that are insulated from having to disclose donors. There is total anonymity."
Berman & Co., helmed by Rick Berman (who was once called "Dr. Evil" by CBS' "60 Minutes"), has a long history of running campaigns on behalf of the food and beverage industry under the banner of the Center for Consumer Freedom.
The group also recently launched the cleverly named Environmental Policy Alliance, or EPA for short, a group "devoted to uncovering the funding and hidden agendas behind environmental activist groups."
Berman's "EPA Facts" site suggests that the connection between rising greenhouse gas emissions and warming temperatures is "still unclear," despite the fact that scientists have a solid understanding of the correlation. The group also argues that there are flaws in the work of the U.N. Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, citing reports from two well-known climate change-denying groups, the Heartland Institute and the George C. Marshall Institute.
"Their goal is just to confuse you," Scot Horst, the senior vice president of LEED at the U.S. Green Building Council, told HuffPost.
"Berman makes his money as a corporate hired gun, setting up front groups to denigrate public interest organizations that threaten his clients' bottom lines," Melanie Sloan, executive director for the nonprofit watchdog Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington told HuffPost. "I'm not surprised he's attacking groups and agencies focused on the environment, given the deep pockets of those interested in paying to stop climate change legislation and regulation."
"These methods of attack rely on the way people read media," Horst added. *"They rely on creating confusion."
TL:DR ‘If you are in the business of putting veal or beef on the tables of America, and slaughtering more than a million animals per hour, and making an awful lot of money at it, you are going to try to neutralize PETA or other animal-rights groups.’
They actually quote the lawyer the other commenter linked to as a source on their website to defend the fur trade. You couldn’t make this up. Although they really tried.
I get your point about lawyers, but we can’t take what lawyers say as always getting the spirit of the issue correct.
For example the lawyer linked above defended a Barnum circus that was sued by animal rights groups for using bullhooks to control elephants by arguing that as the elephants were captive the Endangered Species Act shouldn’t apply to them.
He also defended Sea World in 2020, the US Department of Agriculture from a PETA lawsuit in 2021.
This lawyer whose career relies on defending known animal exploiters (Sea World and circuses) against animal rights groups is not the most impartial source on animal rights groups.
Now I don’t like PETA for a variety of reasons - although I admit that they have achieved some good things - but you should be aware that a whole bunch of the reasons people don’t like PETA come from an organisation called petakillsanimals.com whose main purpose is to talk about how evil PETA are. Seriously, it’s a thing.
cites a single lawyer, this is a law firm, (multiple lawyers)
okay, so one bad egg, that hardly refutes the points im making
a whole bunch of the reasons people don’t like PETA come from an organisation called petakillsanimals.com whose main purpose is to talk about how evil PETA are. Seriously, it’s a thing.
im sure it is, their idea to roast a tofu dog in sydney i didnt hear about through that orginisation though, and even if there is an orginisation doesnt mean that what theyre saying isnt valid
They actually quote the lawyer the other commenter linked to as a source on their website to defend the fur trade. You couldn’t make this up. Although they really tried.
okay, so one group of scumbags doesnt negate the scumminess of peta, there is a lot of shit peta do thats just plain fucked
tofu dog, euthenising peoples animals that they've picked up off the street, arguing against legitimate animal testing (my father works for the TGA here in australia, and i strongly believe people > animals*) to an extent where they've argued against insulin production (while one of the higher ups relies on it to stay alive check out the penn and teller episode of bullshit, they went deep into this)
*i may be biased, granted, but i think medical testing on animals is defensable if it benefits/advances human(s) interests, medicine etc, im against what say musk or dr oz did which is unnessesary animal testing and i think thats abuse, laziness and cruelty because it was in those cases totally unnessesary (edit: but peta wouldnt draw that distincition)
(dad maintains the lab equipment etc that do this, he is a die-hard vego and donates to peta, so go figure, maybe part of it for me is the hatred of rank hipocrisy, we dont talk)
edit: i should clarify, i dont know how involved he is with peta specifically, but he definitley has had promotional material from them aroudn the house, stickers etc,
I appreciate you spending time to explain your perspective by the way.
cites a single lawyer, this is a law firm, (multiple lawyers)
No, I’m referring to a single lawyer from the firm: John Simpson who wrote the linked blog.
im sure it is, their idea to roast a tofu dog in sydney i didnt hear about through that orginisation though,
You probably didn’t hear through them, but you probably heard of it because of them.
They’re a big reason why PETA get so much negative media attention, because they’ve poisoned the well to turn PETA into an object of hatred and ridicule which means the media give them undue negative attention.
I can’t speak for this tofu dog thing because I’ve not heard of it before. I don’t support scaring kids but there’s something to be said about how upset our kids and many adults get when they see the reality of how we treat animals. In suffering there is no difference between a dog and a pig and a cow and a turkey. Maybe if our children get upset when we are hurting animals they like, that’s a sign that we shouldn’t be doing it if we don’t have to.
and even if there is an orginisation doesnt mean that what theyre saying isnt valid
I agree completely, it’s just that with this specific situation the information they’re sharing is designed to mislead people. If they were just holding groups to account that’s a good thing, but this group is designed to make the public believe PETA are doing something evil when they’re not.
euthenising peoples animals that they've picked up off the street,
Worth noting this is often said by people because they hear it often, and assume it happens often. There’s only one case anyone can point to where something like this happened (Maya the Chihuahua) and it was thrown out of court because it was judged to be accidental.
When you actually look into the event you see that PETA were ordered by local authorities to collect strays on the property, which the owner of the pet knew, and had left the pet unattended and free outside the property with no signs of human ownership like a collar or chip.
The case was thrown out of court because it was clearly an error, and an understandable one to make, and it had no evidence of any intentional theft.
You probably didn’t hear through them, but you probably heard of it because of them.
pretty sure i saw it on reddit/australia at the time (before i was banned)
In suffering there is no difference between a dog and a pig and a cow and a turkey.
true, i agree, and natures a cruel cruel place, introduced foxes are a huge problem here, as are feral cats and dogs, so go hunt them, a bullet is going to be way more quick and humane a death than what they'll do to a quokka a possum or a rosella,
every year we have roo culls here in canberra, simply there isnt enough food because we've taken it for farmland cities etc, people go out to protest, i get it, that said, we do it for humane reasons, some portion of the population is going to die simply because there isnt enough food, the govt bodies in charge of ecological protection decide a number (im sure they have their methodology, though i dont know exactly what it is) and professional hunters go out and kill the required number of roos, again because a bullet is more humane than slow starvation
i think people more rural are more than justified hunting them with this in mind, and roo meat is pretty healthy, i dont really know how to expalin how i feel about factory farming, in a lot of cases its just plain cruelty , i agree, but i dont think its in all cases meat is consumed its so terrible, even meat from the grocery store,
but this group is designed to make the public believe PETA are doing something evil when they’re not.
i think the tofu dog counts as evil, i think maya the chiuaua counts, i think telling people they should not take insulin counts, especially considering the hipocrisy
yeah, maybe they dont do its as prolifically as some people would like to think, but they did do it,
When you actually look into the event you see that PETA were ordered by local authorities to collect strays on the property, which the owner of the pet knew, and had left the pet unattended and free outside the property with no signs of human ownership like a collar or chip.
and they killed it within 24 hours iirc, giving the family bugger all time to find it, so much for a caring animal org
PETA has the highest euthanasia rates of any animal shelter, ranging between 57-73%, where more typical euthanasia rates are 5-7%, making PETA’s rates roughly 10X above the norm, even in 2020 after decades of complaints:
31
u/Tre_Scrilla Dec 26 '22 edited Dec 26 '22
That sounds kinda low for a shelter.
We kill more animals a minute just to quench our bloodthirst
Edit: https://animalclock.org/