12 replies to this topic

[sheepdog]

Today on the radio I heard them telling about PETA, or People for the Ethical Treatment of Anmimal, for those of you not familiar with the abbreviated name, newest lawsuit. They are sueing Sea World under the Thirteenth Amendment, which if you are not up on your constitution, shame on you, but it's the amendment prohibiting slavery. They claim Sea World is violating the constitutional rights of KILLER WHALES by keeping them captive and having them perform shows at the park, in other words, claiming they are slaves.

Those PETA patters are absolutly nuts. Our constitution is for HUMANS!!! Not animals. While I certainly believe animals should be treated humanly, to give them human rights is just way over the top!

The sad part of all this is that if some liberal bleeding heart judge even lets this come to trail, look at the money and effort that will be wasted. PETA gets it's money from little old ladies in part, who honestly believe they are helping poor little animals, and have no idea that PETA funds such riduculous court cases such as this one. And Sea World will have to be out thousands of dollars in lawyer fees defending their business. That just gets tacked on to the price of an admission ticket and hurts everyone who would like to enjoy the park. I hope this case gets thrown out before it ever has a chance to come to trial.

[andresf91]

They really did that? Wow! I personally feel that those organizations which are more concerned about animals than people, are for those who don't really know the world they live in. And these NGOs tend to be joined by upper class people, silly young girls who want to do something to make the world a better place to live and put their energies in this kind of things that don't question the political or economical statu quo at all.

I mean, I don't like hurting animals and all that but come on! Let me give you an example that's really exasperating.
In my country, Uruguay, some people still use horses for garbage collection. This isn't a State policy, but the local government of the capital city (where I live) lets some people, really poor people, check dumpsters on the street and take what they think they could sell (metal, plastic, wood, cardboard) or in the worst cases, what they can eat (the food people throws). This is the reality. The thing is that some people make their living of what they can find in other people's garbage, and they usually carry what they collect in a cart drawn by a horse (like in this pic).

So what do you think environment and animal rights organizations complain about?
If if thought that they complain about the poor health conditions of those who do this, you were wrong. If you thought they complain about children being involved in these activities, you were wrong too.
They care about how these recyclers treat their horses.
Yes, they care more about the animals than the 5 year old children who sometimes go with their parents getting inside the dumpsters.
Believe it or not.

[sheepdog]

Quote

Yes, they care more about the animals than the 5 year old children who sometimes go with their parents getting inside the dumpsters.
Believe it or not.

Oh yes, I absolutely belive it. I heard of one case where a PETA member had to have the court system put a stop to his attempt to donate one of his young child's kidneys to a sick baboon! I've heard countless stories of people who hassel homeless people on the street that have dogs with them, they try to take the dogs away from the homeless people and get the dogs in a "better" home. They don't give a rats hind end about the poor homeless person, just save that poor dog! There are some really sick people in this world.

[k_nitin_r]

A non-profit organization should ideally have a focus on addressing social needs based on priority. When a non-profit organization is formed with the purpose of ensuring the ethical treatment of animals, the balance in addressing social issues is lost. The principles that apply to businesses do not necessarily apply in a similar fashion to non-profit organizations because businesses are out there to make money and by offering a niche product through its narrow focus works for its purpose. However, a narrow focus does not help society as a whole.

The idea of a narrow focus is clearly observed in the quota reservations in the educational system and in government employment in India. The idea of the quota system was to provide an advantage to backward sections of society but when the system benefits the rich instead of the poor who do not belong to what is classified as a backward section, the focus becomes too narrow to do any good.

The same idea of a narrow focus can be observed when non-profit organizations seeking the ethical treatment of animals go after dogs owned by the homeless and by cart-pulling animals used by people who eat out of dumpsters. Instead of providing the ability to improve their living standards and that of the animals that they own, the non-profit organizations simply want to get the animals transferred into a better home. What good does that do for an animal that is attached to its owner other than addressing its comforts - they are probably using a scientific approach by considering Maslow's hierarchy of needs without considering the approach that in some cases emotional needs exceed basic needs.

[velma]

After reading the topic here, I decided to check out what other people and websites say about this situation, titles scream “PETA sues Seaworld for 'Enslaving' Killer Whales” on other websites which was kinda bemusing because the subject itself is so multifaceted that you cannot actually point fingers at either PETA or Sea World. One must first understand that when you have an NGO or any organization started for the sake of a cause, feeling or opinion, it is going to be biased towards its cause and be negligent towards others. You are to expect this and cannot be offended at their action. If NGO 1 supports children, they might not necessary care for the adults and so on. So I believe that PETA originally started out as a true savior for all the animals who needed love, attention and safety but as time went on, like every other opinionated cause, it reached a level of fanaticism where every sense of logic and understanding has clearly left the building.

Every action can be justified, Taking SeaWorld as an example, it is true that the killer whale is kept there against his will and the fact that we are the reason for them being in water parks and zoos BUT that is all that I can justify because it isnt like the whale is tied up there or forced to perform for food. Many parks/zoos have handlers that bond with their animals, animals like Tilikum are rare. Many animals also enjoy the interaction with their handlers and people, I also find it to be the best way for people to be educated about exotic animals

Now coming to the actual topic of PETA wanting “justice” and “constitutional rights”, I can understand the place they are coming from but its like sheepdog said, constitutional rights are for people. But if PETA wants to treat them like HUMANS, you can rehabilitate them into working for their food, shelter and health or give them only the core basic necessities... None of the fancy stuff many animals in top notch zoos get. Of course, if I were to say this to a PETA official, I might get “But they are mindless/helpless animals”.... Personally, I simply think they are attacking the big weights to simply earn some money in order to create more useless calendars and have more wacko volunteers or something.... The original sincerity involved in PETA is gone and you are left with only dumb idiots who have no idea what they are talking about.

They could help real animals by focusing on Bangkok's flood situation or other countries where animals truly need help. Taking andresf91's example, I don't expect PETA to help the owners directly and I am not upset at them for not helping but they could enlist the animal into some insurance/health program where they make sure the animal does well in order for it to serve its masters better. Simply targeting Animal cruelty is no longer the way... Sometimes the animal cruelty is because of ignorance or incapability to provide better. If an animal were to be malnourished/ill because its owner was sincerely incapable of helping, instead of seizing the animal and putting it in a dingy scary cage, I would try to help the animal. Working with the family vet took me to different organizations and hospitals, on one of my trips, I went to Parel hospital in Mumbai... It was horrifying, this hospital takes in cases of cruelty, abandonment and is as bad as the owner... The pens are dirty, animals who are sick are around other sick or healthy animals who could get sick. Though I am not sure whether I should blame them since they do run services at really cheap prices which makes them negligent towards patients(paying & non paying) but they do receive hefty donations, have their own vet college and Govt funds... Corruption is the only thing I can think of that makes those poor animals suffer.

I am a passionate animal lover but PETA who claims to be a representative for all animal lovers make me feel really ashamed of being one. Its like what Nitin said, they need to fix their priorities and focus better.

[sheepdog]

Quote

but as time went on, like every other opinionated cause, it reached a level of fanaticism where every sense of logic and understanding has clearly left the building.

Ah....I do believe you have just exactly hit the nail on the head with a hammer!

Great post by the way. Does my heart good to know that people can see threw all the hype and bulloney and see the real problem. And see that PETA is not the answer. They have such a huge budget and a slick advertising campaigne with their carefully polished half truths and some outright lies that they spend millions on, it worrys me that so many people don't realize the truth. They say if you tell a lie often enough, people start believing it's the truth, and that seems to be what PETA is doing.

[moongumery]

Argh, how we can give animals human rights? Did you want animals to nuke people with h-bombs? Life of the Earth is limited to 5 billion years so wheter or not we will die after that time. And human (nowadays) are stronger than animals and they grow faster. So we need meat, so we need plants. And we kill animal with rectom electricution (stunning) and than shot in the head, I don't know how you humanitary kill human - we never tested it, euthanasia is forbidden by law. But I heard that when there were war (second world war) japanese rape their victims while cutting of their hands and watching how they bleed. Is it humanitary? So we need to rape pig and cut off their legs? I don't think so. We kill animals like we kill animals, not humans, so be it.

EOT

[rpgsearcherz]

I had not heard about this until now, though I disagree completely with the notion of "slavery." Animals kept in places such as Sea World are treated extremely well and I would even go as far as to argue that they live a better life there than they would be in the wild. After all, it wouldn't be in Sea World's best interest to torture or otherwise treat the animals badly, as that would bring about suspicions from people who visit regularly, as well as boost the costs of their training and other things.

I do feel that some places to NOT treat their animals properly, but in a case like this I honestly don't feel that's what's going on.

[k_nitin_r]

RpgSearchers,

Keeping animals in small cages like the kind you keep rabbits in may seem like animal cruelty but when animals are kept in large cages with enough space for them to move about, it is not really as cruel. If you look at the size of the tanks used at Sea World, the killer whales and dolphins get to go about the tank unless they are performing. When performing, they have the whole tank to themselves. Are they being trained to perform as circus performers have to? Yes. Do they have a say in what they get to do and where they get to go? No. But they do get their meals regularly so they no longer have to hunt for food and they have a safe environment within which they can interact with other living beings, they get medical attention when they are sick, and the people who look after them do not use cattle prods or anything similar to cause pain or injury to the animals.

Velma,

The Parel hospital in Mumbai is probably just a temporary place for shelter and treatment of animals. I believe the animals are then released into the wild or are adopted by other owners or organizations. The veterinary clinics that are set up in the rural areas cater to the needs of cattle, though in some cases people keep elephants as cattle too, and may occasionally deal with other wild animals that were maimed or have falled sick.

MoonGumery,

Peta does not voice against the use of animals as food. They are definitely not supporters of vegetarianism. What they advocate is the procurement of meat from family farms rather than factory farms. They posted videos to show the manner in which animals are slaughtered in slaughter houses and how factory farms use hormones and other chemicals, apart from biogenetic alterations, to solely get the most of the animals that they slaughter and process for meat, other meat products, and leather.

[sheepdog]

Quote

Peta does not voice against the use of animals as food. They are definitely not supporters of vegetarianism.

Actually this is not the case. PETA does very much promote the vegan lifestyle. MANY pages of their web site are dedicated to convincing people to convert to being vegetarian. They have had in the past several different programs into which they go into schools and preach to children, telling them their mothers are murderers if they feed them meat.

Here are just a few examples.
http://features.peta...rianStarterKit/
At this one they try to get you to sign up to become a vegetarian for 30 days.

http://www.peta.org/...ally-vegan.aspx
http://www.peta.org/...od/default.aspx
http://www.peta.org/...sm&PETAOrTags=0
This one is particularly enlightening, it's their frequently asked questions where they include one page to how anyone who is pro life (anti abortion) should be vegetarian since they should not want to promote human life and not animal life. There are lots of other pages too, including some where you can purchase their cookbooks etc, but you can pretty much be all have a "please make a dontation to us" button.

While I was searching these out for you, I even watched the video by Paul MCartney, gosh what a crock of hog wash. Describing cows as "gentle?" Good grief. I get so tired of these stupid celebraties who have never been anywhere near the business end of a cow sitting there telling us about how they are such wonderful, gentle creatures. I can say with fair certainty that old Paul has never been cow kicked. I do also find it rather insulting that they compare a 3 year old human child to a pig. The video was filled with misinformation and outright lies.

Have to admit, I do prefer the way our local butcher does our occasional steer. He comes to the farm, we put out some feed for the steer, he puts his head down to eat and pop he gets a 22 cal in the head, all 4 feet jerk up off the ground and he hits the ground with a thump and it's all over. Never even twitches.