response to eating greens
Posted by chirsch  |  September 28, 2009 5:42:48 AM

Eating green also involves eating locally and seasonally. Take into consideration the amount of gas, packaging and storage energy/supplies needed to preserve and ship your veggies to you. Think global...eat local

global warming and vegetarianism
Posted by KittyK  |  September 16, 2009 7:02:05 AM

PETA is correct that vegetarianism is environmentalism.

The post the vegetarians contribute more to global warming makes absolutely no sense. Vegetables are consumed by livestock, which are consumed by meat eaters. Cutting out the "middleman" is more efficient. It takes less land and water to grow vegetables than to raise livestock. Millions of people are starving - using those resources to feed the hungry plant-based foods is more efficient. Furthermore, the amount of waste products (i.e.: feces) that livestock generate is enormous. This is simple logic.

PETA
Posted by natalie  |  September 16, 2009 6:04:02 AM

I support PETA because they have made the public aware of what happens in the slaughter houses, fur industry, and animals in entertainment (circuses, dogfighting). For those who care and did not know, it makes a difference. Of course, some people do not care. They have opened up the crypt to let the light shine in for all to see. Some have a financial reason to oppose PETA and do not want what they are doing to animals exposed.

PETAkillsanimals.com
Posted by ern  |  July 27, 2009 6:29:03 AM

By PETA's own admission in public documents filed in the state of Virginia, they kill thousands of animals every year. The truth is out there!

vegetarians contribution to global warming
Posted by ern  |  July 27, 2009 6:28:42 AM

If you eat nothing by green leafy vegetables are you not contributing to global warming? Seeing as how green leafy vegetables convert carbon dioxide to oxygen, then it makes sense that if your diet is to kill those green leafy vegetables you must me a major contributor to global warming. However, on the converse, if you eat beef, which produce large amounts of methane gas - a greenhouse gas, are you not helping to keep greenhouse gases in check by keeping the population of these producers of methane in check??? Moderation is the key...!

Hypocrisy
Posted by ern  |  July 27, 2009 6:28:20 AM

prevent extinction, prevent extinction, prevent extinction....this is the animal rights mantra....however that only applies to cute cuddly animals...sorry pit bulls, you are dead by this hypocritcal mentallity...

The Power of PR
Posted by Lome  |  July 13, 2009 12:51:25 PM

I wrote my master's thesis on the anti-PETA/animal rights PR tactics of agribusiness and pharmaceutical companies. These companies spend billions each year trying to convince the public that PETA and the HSUS are "anti-animal". Looks like their efforts are working based on the comments below.

Pit Bulls
Posted by dizzydame  |  May 28, 2009 6:26:22 AM

Don't ban the breed because some people can't raise them as they should be. Lots of love always works....I've had lots of dogs, pits, rotts, chows, rescues.....Every dog has an amazing capacity to love if given a chance. I feel sorry for those who don't know this. To raise a dog to be mean is an awful thing and it's the human who should pay the price, not an innocent animal. We need all kinds of help in this world from Peta to Adventure Unlimtied. More people should try to help instead of complain. The world would be a better place.....

Get The Whole Story
Posted by patchman  |  May 21, 2009 10:39:31 AM

PET-Alternative... It makes no difference if you work(ed) at PeTA or support it. If you believe people have a right to own a pet, then PeTA isn't for you. PeTA IS AGAINST PET OWNERSHIP.

They may claim to be for 'responsible pet ownership',but that's a prepared statement for the alternative of 'irresponsible ownership'. When questioned directly on national TV, the PeTA representative side stepped the question 4 times.

Though Ingrid Newkirk accepts an extremely low salary, she's like the President of the USA. She travels around the world receiving perks and benefits from speaking which moves her well into a 6 figure range compensation.

Of the several groups we found speaking against Peta, including the meat and fur industry, an outspoken group are owners of the American Pit Bull Terriers.Other dog-breed groups were discontent, however Pit Bull owners seemed more educated on PeTA. Though we should include, some owners seemed down right ignorant.

'IN THE UNITED STATES WE FOUND' an unbelievable coordinated effort along with the HSUS and ASPCA to render this breed into extinction. After a pit bull attack in Germany (some years back), the police were pulling pit bulls out of any owners hands and killing them in a mass slaughter.

This isn't unlike PeTA, HSUS, and the ASPCA. They accuse a kennel of dog fighting, get court permission to get the dogs (not PeTA directly) and often within less than a week they kill all the dogs. In some cases there were over 100 dogs, all healthy and adoptable.

Videos show healthy dogs wagging their tails, despite the accusations that some may have been used in a dog fight. Even if some were used to fight, shouldn't the animal welfare groups SAVE THE DOGS?

Though the Pit Bull extinction policy is nationwide, we looked into two cases in (2005) in Louisiana. Almost 200 healthy dogs were slaughtered. http://bluedogstate.blogspot.com/2008/10/pit-bull-breeder-floyd-boudreaux.html

Contribute elsewhere

PETA operates a dog and cat slaughterhouse
Posted by SteveR  |  April 1, 2009 9:03:40 AM

When I learned that PETA kills thousands of animals every year, I was outraged. Here is an oeganization that takes in millions of dollars every year and doesn't spend one dime on trying to find good homes for these poor and deserving animals. I'm with a rescue group and we have a strict No Kill policy. The only exception to this is if the dog is suffering and beyond help. Furthermore, we educate the public on where to go to get their perfect pet. There are so many animals available for adoption that if the general public were aware of this, puppy mills would be out of business in no time at all. We scratch and beg for every dime we bring in and to learn that PETA is sitting on over $18MM in assets is the biggest crime of all.

Get real
Posted by Dashbastrd  |  March 4, 2009 6:43:59 AM

Some people are too wrapped up in online smear campaigns and factually unsound Youtube videos. PETA is an advocacy group, and supplies information to people regarding animal abuse. They are not an animal shelter- they take in no dogs, cats, birds, etc. Wherever these claims come from that PETA rounds up animals and euthanizes them, they are unfounded.

pit bulls
Posted by BaltimoreR  |  February 14, 2009 8:10:12 AM

PETA is 100% right with their position on Pit Bull bans. Go to any big city and you will find out why. PETA may be a little radical for some people but overall they do a lot of good and are worth supporting.

Ingrid Newkirk
Posted by JD  |  January 29, 2009 7:09:37 AM

I would like to point out that Ingrid Newkirk of PETA only makes $34,000 a year. Compare that to some of the other CEOs of nonprofits. I have heard her speak and she is wonderful.

PETA
Posted by RedFlash  |  January 14, 2009 6:45:28 AM

Just my two cents...

The radical perception of PETA in the public's eye is primarily because PETA is a somewhat radical organization. That said, people do some pretty radical things to animals. In the end, PETA exposes some things that perhaps wouldn't otherwise be exposed and I think that's definitely a good thing. Whether or not PETA deserves the negative labels it receives is debatable (although if there were not PETA some other organization would take its place). The one thing I object to with an organization like PETA is that by some of their extreme measures, they may end up actually causing more harm to animals than if they'd not done anything. For instance, they have gone after conservation groups like WWF and EDF for supporting animal testing even though the links of those organizations to the 'crime' are dubious. In so doing, PETA may have driven funds away from deserving organizations who on the whole exist to help animal welfare

Irish PETA Member
Posted by John Carmody  |  January 12, 2009 7:16:09 AM

I felt i also needed to put my thoughts about PETA in here too. I think PETA are a fantastic organization, although no one in this world gets everything right, if it was not for them i would of never got involved with animal rights almost ten years ago, now i am running Ireland's national animal rights group www.ARAN.ie. PETA are an amazing group, they put out a professional image, have colouful, creative events that grab the press attention, get celebrity involvement and respond to everyone's email for campaign materials to educate people, help you with questions, queries or concerns and will even help you organize a peaceful protest and their president Ingrid Newkirk is not on a massive wage unlike other animal charities. All in all PETA are doing a great job, there is no one or no group that gets everything right but you must admit they put a professional and modern image to the word 'animal rights'. Thank you PETA and long may you last, from an Irish PETA member.

No support for Peta from me
Posted by auntie4ever  |  December 26, 2008 4:04:34 AM

I stopped supporting Peta when they started coming down on Pit Bulls. I own a Pit and he is a wonderful dog. I now support Best Friends Animal Society who took in and rehabilitated a good portion of the Michael Vick dogs. All animals deserve a second chance especially when they were never given one in the first place.

inhumane animal farming
Posted by juanita  |  December 15, 2008 6:50:44 AM

If PETA did nothing more than use its funds to video and then "out" inhumane treatment/conditions of animals during the food preparation process it's accomplished 99 per cent of its mission in my opinion. That's a realistic focus that usually gets results especially when the media get hold of it.

Neutral
Posted by kattastic  |  December 12, 2008 9:12:57 AM

I support PETA in most of their efforts, but I still eat meat, because by the time it hits my table, it's way to late to help the animal. Also, as for the "NO KILL" policy, there's a charity animal shelter called ARF, the Animal Rescue Federation, and they have a no kill policy, yet strangely, the dogs are taken care of as if they were beloved pets, the cats I see one day are usually gone the next time I go there, so around every month, and they are SO happy. They let you play with cats, there's an outside play room for the summer, the metal cages are HUGE, especially the dogs' cages, and accourding to PETA, these happy, well-cared-for, cute, beloved animals, should be murdered.

No Kill Shelters
Posted by mrrutan  |  October 7, 2008 6:52:37 AM

I have some real heartburn with the "no kill" or "never kill" posters. I work with the public shelter in N. Virginia and I know the vast majority of euthanasia cases are for animals that are very ill or badly injured (where vet care would be very expensive) or old animals near the end of life where owners are too cheap to pay a vet. They leave them with us and we have no choice. Sometimes animals are too wild or un-socialized for adoption and they sometimes have to be euthanized. "No kill" always have the luxury of turning away animals when they are full. We do not. We always try to place animals with rescue groups or fosters but sometimes there just are not places, especially for cats. Also, we get stuck housing some animals for many months in court cases--animals we cannot adopt out. This further stretches our ability to hold animals for long periods. The idea that we just put animals down for no reason is a flat out lie.

Read more about PETA
Posted by sigma  |  August 22, 2008 11:00:32 AM

I'm not sure why some people have such violently negative reactions against PETA; the only answer I can fathom is that they are influenced by inaccurate hearsay and that they have not bothered to spend the time researching the organization. Or maybe they misquote the Christian direction that man have "domination" over animals. The word used is "dominion", not "domination". Dominion means "the care and protection of". PETA is one of the organizations most directly responsible for animal cruelty laws on the books today. Its brave volunteers who work undercover in animal labs to expose cruelty do something I never could, but needs to be done. It does not promote destruction of private property (furs, mink farm facilities) although it does stand against the premise behind such properties. Sometimes PETA needs to use shocking or riskee demonstrations/photos/ads to catch the public's attention, so maybe that's where the "uneducated-about-PETA" person's impressions come from. I firmly believe in the future, when humans (IF humans) have evolved into the ethical beings we should be, we will look back at man's use/abuse of animals and cringe....very much like how we are appalled at the beatings/torture of early suffragettes who were imprisoned for trying to get women the right to vote.

euthanasia
Posted by Nosey  |  August 18, 2008 6:35:02 AM

I have been a PETA member for years, and didn't know until now that they kill healthy rescued animals. I agree they must dedicate some of their donated $$ (mine, certainly) for the care and comfort of all rescues that are healthy and adoptable.

To Kathryn
Posted by StaciCat  |  August 15, 2008 7:21:17 AM

The problem I have with SOME no-kill shelters and rescue operations are the over-crowded and often filthy conditions that the animals live in. I'm glad your shelter is "nice" as you put it and I'm thankful that animals are finding good homes there. What concerns me is when no-kill shelters have to STOP TAKING NEW animals because they are full. What happens then? What are people to do with a stray the are truly trying to place somewhere? On the flip side, what about no-kill shelsters and rescues that will keep taking animals even though their volunteer staff is limited and the foster parents have too many animals to take proper care of them and the animals suffer as a result - like in a hoarding situation.

THESE are the times when I do agree with euthanasia because THESE circumstances do not provide any quality of life for those animals.

I can't speak for anyone else on here, but I would bet that the others who share my view on euthanasia don't believe in killing an animal.."just because".

Living in a cage is not suffering
Posted by Kathryn  |  August 7, 2008 5:30:43 AM

Clearly no one here has ever been to a nice shelter. Just because an animal is 'living in a cage' doesn't mean it's better off dead. I volunteer at a NO KILL shelter and the cats AND dogs AND rabbits are perfectly content in their cages. We have good volunteers that actually go and visit each and every animal though, talk to them, pet them, clean their cages and feed and water them. The cats purr and meow, the bunnies hop around a bit and the dogs jump up and lick you. CLEARLY they are unhappy and we should murder them instead.

It's not that hard to run a no kill animal shelter and to keep the staff AND animals all happy. It just requires some effort!

There is a cat at my shelter that has been there since early March. I am in charge of the "Feline-ality" program for Meet Your Match by the ASPCA. I took her out of her cage, brought her to the test room and once in there she passed the test with flying colors. Purred, played, loved the hug etc. When I put her back in her cage she was just as content. Clearly we should murder her though because right now she's in a cage.

There was another dog there for several months who finally found the perfect home. I mean until then she lived in a cage. I mean even though she jumped up and played and stuff, clearly we should have murdered her instead of giving her time to find a loving home.

Pet overpopulation is real, killing is not the answer though.

PETA claims to care about animals, but yet they would rather kill pets then give them a chance at life, but in the same breath would save a downed cow. Right then, these people make alot of sense.

Donate to your local shelter instead of PETA if you REALLY care about animals.

i agree with farah
Posted by StaciCat  |  August 6, 2008 10:52:34 AM

I have no problem with euthanasia when the only other choice is life in a cage. i have no problem with "kill" shelters for the same reason. until PEOPLE learn to control the animal over-population, there isn't much choice.

Peta's bad press
Posted by abbycakes  |  August 4, 2008 5:30:27 AM

For some reason, PETA gets very bad press in newspapers and with the general population. Why do some people absolutely hate this organization? I have been a member for years, and have found them to be sincerely dedicated to animal welfare. Is this a politcal issue? I don't criticize them for euthanasia, Newkirk is clear about stopping the suffering, and living in a cage is suffering.

peta and euthanasia
Posted by farah  |  July 17, 2008 1:18:07 PM

I do not criticize peta for their policy on euthanasia. lets be realistic, there are far too many animals than there are LOVING homes to take them in. i'd rather the animals go to heaven than suffer here.

I am a member of PETA
Posted by truthrules  |  July 9, 2008 5:40:09 AM

Some of their "old" photos may have to be used because of the number of times they've been sued for volunteering and photographing etc.. Abuse of animals at research facilities, universities etc..I have first hand experience with the abuse that can go on in research labs. I volunteered at Baylor College of Medicine and it was shocking how people with PhD degrees etc. have no respect for the poor animals that are sacrificing their lives. Not even decent cages. But they do some bold stuff. And, some of that old lit. maybe because that's what they have and aren't being sued. Other photos, they can't release etc..

Posted by S.  |  July 3, 2008 6:38:47 AM

For an organization that receives 28 million dollars a year, why does PETA not spend it on the animals directly under it's care? In 2007, PETA euthanized 90% of it's "rescues." And no, they were not "broken beings" as PETA says, most were highly adoptable pets. The national average rate of euthanasia is about 56%. The best shelters (most of which are no-kill) boast an incredible 6% euthanasia rate. PETA has shaming 90% rate, and says that their numer one priority is the welfare of animals. Wow. Please, animal lovers, donate to the SPCA or your local shelter. Know that your money will benefit animals, not to the purchasing of lethal drugs. Thank you.

Grain of salt
Posted by Oceana  |  June 16, 2008 7:52:46 AM

I currently support PETA and I think they mean well. However, I read the information they send me with a large grain of salt. I notice that some of the pamphlets contain the same pictures and stories that they sent me nearly 20 years ago. Hmmmm..... In addition, sometimes they opt for hyperbole rather than accuracy in their articles etc., All in all though, I think their hearts are in the right place.

Check Out Their Webiste
Posted by doggiedom  |  June 11, 2008 5:52:28 AM

I have been a PETA member for the past year and have found their website to be the most up to date source of animal rights information out there. They embody so much thought, truth, detail and passion. They answer emails in a timely manner and actively try to get me involved beyond my donations. They have been nothing but respectful in regards to the number of mailing updates they send. They mail me any piece of info I am interested in. There stats say it all, it all goes to the cause. The founder lives for the cause! I am very impressed and pleased with this organization.