Slashdot Mirror

PETA on pets: http://origin.www.peta.org/campaigns/ar-petaonpets.asp PETA on service dogs: http://blog.helpinganimals.com/2008/01/exploiting_mans_best_friend.php http://blog.helpinganimals.com/2008/02/to_serve_man.php PETA is against crating (crating is actually a helpful traing tool, as well as giving the dog its own private space): http://origin.www.peta.org/campaigns/ar-cratingdogs.asp PETA wants dogs and cats to be fed vegan/vegetarian diets (which is not good for the animals): http://www.peta.org/mc/factsheet_display.asp?ID=34 PETA tries to make children fear their their parents: http://www.furisdead.com/pdfs/mommykills.pdf http://www.fishinghurts.com/pdfs/DaddyKillsAnimals.pdf In short, they're a bunch of nut-jobs. Doesn't matter if you're democrat or republican, if someone really cares about or is involved with animal welfare, they shun PETA. I know plently of liberals as well as republicans that hate PETA. From pet owners, to shelter workers, to reputable breeders. Seriously, just read through their site, read between the lines, and research their claims. They aren't what they seem to be on the surface.

Adopting a cat or dog from a shelter and providing a loving home is a small but powerful way to prevent... suffering. The most important thing that animal guardians can do is to spay or neuter their animals and avoid buying animals from breeders or pet stores, which contribute to the overpopulation crisis... If you have the time, energy, space, and money to care for a dog (or two), please visit your local animal shelter and adopt. Mixed-breed dogs are typically healthier and more even-tempered than purebred dogs, but if you're determined, you can usually find purebred dogs at shelters.

PETA, like most animal-rights groups, are opposed to exotic and non-domesticated pets, but there is a big difference between opposing the confinement of wild animals and opposing keeping dogs and cats, who actually like being with people, in the home. The latter is something that has been made up to discredit them. I challenge you to find any animal-rights organization who has a stated goal of "ending all interaction between humans and animals." I've never heard of such a thing, outside of right-wing talk radio.

Peta may be concerned about the treatment of all animals--
http://blog.peta.org/archives/2008/08/six_flags_calls.php yes-- even cockroaches..

but I think even they would draw the line at first posters

While nerds in momma's basement are untangling cables, as part of THEIR competition,
Chinese folk are trying their best to untangle THESE!

Golly! Don't you wish you could be there? LOL!
No matter. They will be here soon enough!
.
.
.. ... .. - From vegetarian Pinoqachole comes enlightenment.

Are you with PETA? Kinda reads like it. http://www.peta.org/
I've always enjoyed the bumper stickers that said: "PETA - People for the Eating of Tasty Animals"
We must have cured hunger in the world 100% in order to justify eliminating entire tasty food groups and then to also make fuel out of our edible grains.

FYI, BSE (AKA 'Mad Cow Disease') infects nervous system and spinal column tissues NOT MEAT (AKA 'muscle tissue'). BSE is caused by defectively folding proteins called Prions. These Prions can cause similar protein mis-foldings in the brains and nervous tissues of people or animals who eat the infected nervous tissues. (It makes the Alpha-helix fold into a Beta-sheet which causes the protein to malfunction/cease to function) See: http://www.hhs.gov/news/press/2001pres/01fsbse.html and http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bovine_spongiform_encephalopathy

I believe you are also referring to the Polonium 210 poisoning and murder of Alexander Litvinenko?... http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Polonium

Considering that PETA thinks bees are exploited victims, I don't think the 'ugly animal' approach will fly...

I was thinking of adding a PETA reference to the story when I submitted it, but considering they already have a Fish Amnesty Day I'd hate to be forced into a Pledge if they ever found out who I was!

I was thinking of adding a PETA reference to the story when I submitted it, but considering they already have a Fish Amnesty Day I'd hate to be forced into a Pledge if they ever found out who I was!

You can be sure that all those PETA-bytes are vegetarian!

PETAphiles?

Every time I see a bunch of blowhard diatribe against PETA, I wonder, "What's the problem here?"

Yeah, I wondered that too - I figured they were just obnoxious carnivores and they liked winding up Peta, which seemed to be composed of cute but naive teenage girls. But then I saw the Penn and Teller episode and read the wiki pages.

If PETA IS just a bunch of clowns, why are you so upset then?

Did you read what I posted? They supported some ALF psycho who firebombed laboratories that did animal research. My dad worked in a lab, close to one that did animal research. The ALF actually threatened his university, and the police took it sufficiently seriously that they were advised to spend a load of money on increasing security.

Using or threatening violence against civilians to further a political agenda makes them terrorists not clowns.

Do you have... ummm, some sort of problem?

Yeah, I don't like organisations that take money from well meaning but naive people and hand it over to terrorists who target my family. That's kind of an issue to me.

We have a responsibility to teach our animal friends basic human rights. If we could, perhaps, show those chimps what REALLY happens with meat, perhaps we could convince them to go back to vegetarianism. Ya know, eat a banana like they're supposed to. We have perverted chimps. They see us, with our corndogs, beef jerky, egg mcmuffins and -- of course -- monkey see monkey do. We have to set an example.

To that end I've been feeding my cat oats and corn. The result is that she's thinner and healthier than ever! She was twenty two pounds before -- a total blubber cat -- yet now on this new diet she's down to less than five pounds and friendlier than ever! I mean -- like, duh -- of course cats want to join in with man and help the environment! Eating meat KILLS!!!

All we have to do is turn the animal kingdom vegetarian and not only will we have 'uplifted' them to ethical eating, but mother earth will love us back too. Hey, don't you love your mother?

First things you don't need a vista, music, movies, or anything else of that sort.
No I don't. I may want it. I may really desire it. But I don't need it in the sense I need air, water or food. Is that your point ?

Second piracy is NOT an answer. (...) Stealing it instead of supporting that industry is theft, not "your right".
Piracy is not an answer to which question ? It may be an answer to several questions, like, how does one kid who cannot afford an specific computer game (operating system, spreadsheet, compiler, graphic program) gets one ? Of course piracy is an answer to THAT question. You may say you think that's wrong because the law defines that as stealing. The kid may say, who writes the law, and for whom ? Certainly the law was not written for THAT kid. Theft is a concept which applies to phisical things -- if I take an object from you, you no longer have it. Electronic content is not stolen in the same sense. If you light your candle on my candle have you "stolen" or "pirated" my fire ? Nonsense.

Prices for content have to go down enough to make it *less convenient* to pirate than to buy original. So in this sense piracy IS an effective answer to fix industry behavior. As effective, and more realistic, than boycotting. Content owners will find a way to still extract heaps of money from every piece of content, exactly for the "candlelight" reason I gave. BTW this month my cable TV company here in Brazil is offering payperview movies at a special R$ 1,99 price. That's slightly less than a Dollar for a movie. Sort of beats going to Blockbuster or bittorrent, doesn't it ?

But even not considering what I wrote above... Think movie content. Box Office and TV rights income will pay just fine. Think music content. Real musicians will play their music even if they have to pay for playing. There are many, many more amateur musicians than professional ones, and not so much quality as the "being paid" attribute separates them. Fear not for music. Software ? It will eventually get done, even computer games, as open source initiatives show. Anyway, net interactivity (such as MMORPG) will make the model more like the "pay a little, play a little".

Third, start boycotting.
You must be really young (or naive) to think this could work. Ask people to boycott McDonald's out of the market (did you watch "SuperSize Me"?). Ask everyone you know to break poultry farms by boicotting meat (look http://www.peta.org/). Ask people to save the earth by giving up their cars and going bike-only. That will make you a romantic, not someone who will fix the world. If you think you can move/influence so many people you should not be here at /. but rather running for president.

Large dairy farms have a detrimental effect on the environment. In California, America's top milk-producing state, manure from dairy farms has poisoned hundreds of square miles of groundwater, rivers, and streams. Each of the state's more than one million dairy cows excretes 120 pounds of waste every day--an amount equal to the waste of two dozen people.(22) Overall, animals on factory farms, including dairy farms, produce 1.65 billion tons of manure each year, much of which ends up in our waterways and drinking water.(23) The Environmental Protection Agency reports that agricultural runoff is the primarily cause of polluted lakes, streams, and rivers.

Eighty percent of all agricultural land in the U.S. is used to raise animals for food or to grow grain to feed them--that's almost half the total land mass of the lower 48 states.(24) Each cow raised by the dairy industry drinks as much as 50 gallons of water per day.(25) Along with chickens, pigs, and other animals raised for food, cows are the primary consumers of half the water in the U.S.(26)

You spelled it wrong. Take a look at their logo; it's PeTA. "Ethical" is obviously the least important part of their operations.

uhhhh, yeahhhh, So? Your point being...?

So, they have a network of recycled computers...
...being run by a generator using veggie oil...
...to render 3D images.

So the only question remaining is: What are they rendering?

My guess: PETA's new 3D logo.

__

Custom Research Paper

relatively small ( 10Tbytes) file systems

I've got a submission to this category:
When I was working at a supermarket while schooling, I got sick of the job and started mentioning the potential for faeces to be smeared all over the necrotic decomposing flesh that customers were buying...

And thanks to Australia's "unfair dismissal" laws that were in effect at the time, I got to do it twice more before they could get rid of me.


I like to think that I saved a cow or two during that week. (If only because the graphicness of my comments would have spoiled their appetite)


My next goal, to infiltrate KFC and publicise their animal rights http://www.kentuckyfriedcruelty.com/ukinvest.asp> violations to customers, as well as point out to the kiddy's that their kids meal (featuring a happy, colourful chicken character called "Chicky") is containing their favourite friend Chicky.

Of course, when I get fired by KFC for it, I expect a front page article on Slashdot. (My final punishment to KFC! Slashdot the bastards!)

Wrong dumbfuck. PETA on bees:
http://www.peta.org/mc/factsheet_display.asp?ID=12 2
PETA on silkworms, and spiders(probably the least cute insect imagineable):
http://www.peta.org/mc/factsheet_display.asp?ID=12 1

It's tempting to try to try to grasp at others imagined inconsistencies when you yourself know deep down the inconsistency in yourself. You try to tell yourself that you are against inflicting torturous suffering for no good reason, but then you can't give up your little addiction to the yummy taste of burgers or the nice feel of wearing leather shoes etc.

Wrong dumbfuck. PETA on bees:
http://www.peta.org/mc/factsheet_display.asp?ID=12 2
PETA on silkworms, and spiders(probably the least cute insect imagineable):
http://www.peta.org/mc/factsheet_display.asp?ID=12 1

It's tempting to try to try to grasp at others imagined inconsistencies when you yourself know deep down the inconsistency in yourself. You try to tell yourself that you are against inflicting torturous suffering for no good reason, but then you can't give up your little addiction to the yummy taste of burgers or the nice feel of wearing leather shoes etc.

Would a Catholic go for an post-partum (WAYY post partum) aborted pig's heart valve or mechanical valve?

Actually, PETA and various other animal rights people are against all transplants that use animal parts. No joke.

They are against experimentation on animals. They say that people like the scientists in this article are murderers.

I wonder what they thought in the 1980s about the insulin (then obtained by the slaughter of pigs) which kept tens of thousands of people with diabetes alive.

PETA stands for "People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals".

They don't care about humans except for arguably pretty, rich, famous ones that wear animal skins.

From my dead, cold back, waste, and hands will they take my leather coat, leather belt, and cheeseburger. People are so much weirder than "animals".

Again, I must reiterate with:
http://www.peta.org/feat/arafat/

It's more than close to true. Remember their letter to Arafat:

PETA: Leave the Animals in Peace
http://www.peta.org/feat/arafat/

I wonder how PETA feels about this factory. Methinks the intersection between biodiesel consumers and PETA members is nonzero.

Funny, I've personally seen PETA members out doing stupid things that could be done rationally and without making all vegetarians look like lunatics. This is the first time I've ever heard anyone says that PETA's not a bunch of crazies. Maybe it's just the local few that you hang out with...

http://www.peta.org/ provides about all of the illustration I need.

PETA seems to support microchipping. See, for example, this page and also this one.

Actually, PETA recommends killing feral cats. Yes, believe it or not, even though it's been shown time and again not to reduce or help the feral cat population, PETA thinks we should kill them. Their only other, laughably naive, solution is to release them into your house. So much for being an animal rights organization...

this is just so cruel.

Can anyone still be vegetarian if the meat is synthetic? The ethical and environmental reasons go straight out the window if it grows on trees or in a steel box.

And if you ever wanted a reason to quit: http://www.peta.org/

and join these guys! http://mtd.com/tasty/ (They originally owned Peta.org)

And if you ever wanted a reason to quit: http://www.peta.org/

Please see http://www.sho.com/site/ptbs/topics.do?topic=peta
Peta are a bunch of lying fanatics.

Honestly people, it's barbaric to eat animals.

But I'm still stuck doing it.

I tried going vegetarian for a year once but it was boring to eat meals, and it ended up costing a lot more. At least that's what I found.

I'm going to try again in a few years when I have more money and more time to learn new vegetarian recipes.

And if you ever wanted a reason to quit: http://www.peta.org/

I am calling PETA for this 'incockroachane' treatment of the cockroach.

Would you allow an experiment that would sacrifice 10 animals to save 10,000 people?"

Suppose the only way to save those 10,000 people was to experiment on one mentally-challenged orphan.

"Would you allow an experiment that would sacrifice 10 animals to save 10,000 people?"

Suppose the only way to save those 10,000 people was to experiment on one mentally-challenged orphan. If saving people is the goal, wouldn't that be worth it? Most people will agree that it is wrong to sacrifice one human for the "greater good" of others because it would violate that individual's rights. But when it comes to sacrificing animals, the assumption is that human beings have rights while animals do not. Yet there is no logical reason to deny animals the same rights that protect individual humans from being sacrificed for the common good.

Against medical testing? Because they harm animals for human profit.

Yet IIRC, isn't the Number 2 person at PETA taking Insulin that is not only a result of animl research, but contains animal products?

The fundamental philosophy of the most vocal group of "environmentalists" is that I should treat the planet (or something) as being more important than human life.
--
Kindly name them. I'd LOVE to see an official quote where PETA says that we should kill humans to make room for wolves.

Ah posit a known false statement as if it were proof. This is a twisted strawman argument. The OP claim was that some "environmentalists" value "the planet" as equal to or greater than human life. Instead of addressing it, you bring in PETA, and act as if the OP was sayign PETA says humans should be killed to save wolves. Interesting choice:

"Would you support an experiment that would sacrifice 10 animals to save 10,000 people?" is on their pager right here: http://www.peta.org/about/faq-viv.asp

And the answer was:
"Suppose the only way to save those 10,000 people was to experiment on one mentally-challenged orphan. If saving people is the goal, wouldn't that be worth it? Most people will agree that it is wrong to sacrifice one human for the "greater good" of others because it would violate that individual's rights. But when it comes to sacrificing animals, the assumption is that human beings have rights while animals do not. Yet there is no logical reason to deny animals the same rights that protect individual humans from being sacrificed for the common good."

This answer does in fact state a position that animals are mroe valuable than humans. Reverse their argument and it becomes this: 10,000 humans should die to save ten animals. That is a direct value assessment. 1 animal is worth 1000 humans in that equation.

Now they've removed the "No." from the beginning.
http://web.archive.org/web/20040416145443/http://w ww.peta.org/about/faq-viv.asp

Shows the first answer.

This merely means they place animals as equal to humans in value. They also compare hunters to Dahlmer.

They say that animals have rights that can't be sacrificed because they can't understand them. That it is wrong to declaw a cat; they have rights dammit!

Then they are in favor of "fixing" cats and dogs to prevent them from giving birth. What happened to those "rights"?

"the most important thing that animal guardians can do is to spay or neuter their animals" --PETA FAQ

If we follow their practice of comparing animals to retarded humans when asked questions, then they should believe in sterilizing retarded humans.

"Should the more intelligent animals have rights and the less intelligent humans be denied rights?" they ask, the implication beimg "hell no"

Yet ...
"However, animals don't always have the same rights as humans because their interests are not always the same as ours, and some rights would be irrelevant to animals." --same page as the question.

And back to the OP's point:
http://www.vhemt.org/
"The Movement doesn't even favor wanted pregnancies."

This specifically addresses the OP's claim. A group of "environmentalists" who value "the planet" above human life.

- thank heavens! i've got my virtual pier all set up, with the rods baited and the tide coming in!

- want to fish? browse to:

http://www.peta.org/

(betcha they didn't think of Internet fishing, right?)

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!!!

PETA likes this legislature. They pulled for it. They proclaim victory on their front page.

Ever heard of PeTA?

There are laws against animal cruelty in most communities in America. Such laws are created to prevent humans, primarily sociopathic children (it seems) from torturing domesticated pets. Laws like these are great, and remind me that humans can at least appear to care.

These laws usually don't apply to 'valid' research. See http://www.peta.org/about/faq-viv.asp for a really slanted view of it.

The hybrid animal created for research will very likely have a short life compared to its donor parent animals. However, do we know factually that it will be a painful life? Is it possible to engineer a hybrid animal that cannot feel pain?

I'm beginning to rant here. As I type, I am watching one of two puppies toss a small ball around the room and chase after it. Silly dog is making me smile without even trying. Clearly I have a strongly polarized opinion about this issue.

Yet I must say, in all honesty, I, for one, welcome our new chimera masters. :)

What we call "Turkeys" http://www.peta.org/feat/turk2004/ ain't got it real great. At least worth thinking about once a year?

If I were you I'd forward that address to the guys.

GameSpy has a funny article about this neat mod. It even made fun of the poor chickens that was on the news earlier in the week. :)

damn, and i thought this was why pam was good.. ERR wrong pam sorry lol!!

I understand it's supposed to be funny, but I honestly wonder what is wrong with PETA ?

PETA Website

One of the problems with PETA is the people push for legislation for punishment of people who hurt animals. I can see where they are coming from, but I find it rediculous all the same - everyone is guilty under laws like these. Ask yourself - how many times have you put down bug spray, sending these small animals to a prolonged, cruel and unusual (and unnatural) death. How many times have you swatted a fly, or crushed a mosquito? How many of you have hit an animal with a car and it didn't die instantly? (This includes those windshield bug guts).

Well, in order to differentiate, you have to determine which animals are "worthy", and the intention of the animal killer. Here's the PETA way : "If its cute and fuzzy, and the person was beating at it, he goes to jail. If its not cute and fuzzy, its not really an animal, its not "alive", its a bug and that don't count." I beg to differ. When I see a poisoned insect, it sure looks like it is in pain to me.

A similar issue is "hate crimes". Some one who is charged with a hate crime is being charged separately for the hate and the crime. Being charged with hate is neither being charged with a crime not being charged with planning a crime - emotion is the crime. Tie in: The basis for which animals you can hurt without penalty and those you can is stictly emotional. That is, a basis that does not belong in a fair and balanced justice system.

BTW: I'm gonna post the "CERT anti-IE" article all over the place tomorrow and see if I can get the whole office over to Firefox. :D

Q: "Would you support an experiment that would sacrifice 10 animals to save 10,000 people?"

A: No. Look at it another way: Suppose that the only way to save 10,000 people was to experiment on one mentally challenged orphan. If saving people is the goal, wouldn't that be worth it? Most people would agree that it would be wrong to sacrifice one human for the "greater good" of others because it would violate that individual's rights, but when it comes to sacrificing animals, the assumption is that human beings have rights and animals do not. Yet there is no logical reason to deny animals the same rights that protect individual humans from being sacrificed for the common good.

Plus, if one of them blows up, who's going to cry?

They will...

-B

Ahem,
Just to clarify
there are noextremists.

I didn't even voice my oppinion, moderate climate changes are to happen with the life of any planet in proximity to a star. I have not offered any moderate argument for the world-ecosystem because IANAE/B (ecologist/biologist.) The above arguments are straw-men in themselves, I don't recomend doing nothing nor do I have any clear action that the world can follow. BUT, extremism is killing any moderate arguments so, as with anything which ends up being a political hot button I say: "Why bother" since no-one listens to logic when politics is involved.