Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Animal Rights Group Targets NIH Director's Home (sciencemag.org)

Posted by timothy on from the where-do-you-stand dept.

sciencehabit writes: Late last month, hundreds of people in two Washington, D.C., suburbs received a letter in the mail claiming that one of their neighbors was tied to animal abuse at a government lab. Science has learned that the letters, sent by People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals (PETA), targeted U.S. National Institutes of Health (NIH) Director Francis Collins and NIH researcher Stephen Suomi, revealing their home addresses and phone numbers and urging their neighbors to call and visit them. The tactic is the latest attempt by the animal rights group to shut down monkey behavioral experiments at Suomi's Poolesville, Maryland, laboratory, and critics say it crosses the line.

127 of 222 comments (clear)

  1. It shows how powerful misinformation is by damn_registrars · · Score: 5, Insightful

    The PETA folks occasionally have valid points, but this is not one of those times. They latched on to some information that is - at best - partially true and now they are trying to destroy someone's career over it. These people are no better than the "Earth Liberation Front" that "released" a bunch of study animals only for them to be quickly run over by cars.

    --
    Damn_registrars has no butt-hole. Damn_registrars has no use for a butt-hole.
    1. Re:It shows how powerful misinformation is by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Interesting

      PETA is a PITA. Their aims may be noble, but their methods border on criminal. They once picketed a hospital I worked at for doing animal research - which had never been done there. They apparently based the idea on the fact that there were some dog pens behind the hospital. Those were for guard dogs that had been used at the boiler plant many years ago and are all overgrown with weeds now.

    2. Re:It shows how powerful misinformation is by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Interesting

      What planet are you on? PETA rarely has any valid points. They are complete fuckwits and should be treated as pariahs.

    3. Re:It shows how powerful misinformation is by jcr · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Their aims may be noble

      Nope. Not even close.

      PETA is a criminal nut-cult, run for the sole purpose of propping up the ego of its crazy founder. It might as well be scientology.

      -jcr

      --
      The only title of honor that a tyrant can grant is "Enemy of the State."
    4. Re:It shows how powerful misinformation is by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

      So you ok with assaulting people in their homes if they do something you don't like.

      I am glad I live in a country where shit like this does not fly.

    5. Re:It shows how powerful misinformation is by Immerman · · Score: 1

      And your justification for that claim, beyond speciesism?

      --
      --- Most topics have many sides worth arguing, allow me to take one opposite you.
    6. Re:It shows how powerful misinformation is by I'm+New+Around+Here · · Score: 1

      So PETA should simply shoot those two people in the head and then burn down their houses. That's what I would do to someone who kidnapped and tortured my child. You are saying the response is valid in the case of the doctors, if I feel it is valid in the case of my own child. So encourage PETA to do some animal rights sniping and arson.

      For what it's worth, I would not do that in response to your child being treated so. If you don't care enough about your own child, why should I?

      --
      If you think I voted for Trump because of this post, you're wrong. I voted for Dr. Jill Stein of the Green Party. Again.
    7. Re:It shows how powerful misinformation is by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      You know who wanted to treat animals well? Hitler. His party passed the first animal rights laws in Germany, which were also among the first laws of the kind in the world.
      If you're against animal abuse you're a Nazi. I bet you'll invade Poland next, Hitler.

    8. Re:It shows how powerful misinformation is by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Yes, I dispute the statement that "humans treat animals really really badly". This groups all humans together, thus making it incorrect since not all humans treat animals badly.
      Also, you're missing a comma after the first "really". If you are going to argue a point, at least be competent in the language you use for your argument.

    9. Re:It shows how powerful misinformation is by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Insightful

      What do you think was the point of posting his address and phone number, at the very least it was to encourage verbal assault. Posting his physical address is encouraging more then verbal assault though, it is encouraging harassment and and possible bodily harm. Seriously what other use is there for posting his physical home address? So people go over there and have a polite conversation with him? Yeah right.

    10. Re:It shows how powerful misinformation is by Dog-Cow · · Score: 5, Interesting

      PETA are hypocrites because people are animals too, and they don't give a shit about how humans are treated by others, or even what they themselves do to humans.

    11. Re:It shows how powerful misinformation is by phishybongwaters · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Destroy someones career? They are basically asking their followers to murder these people.

    12. Re:It shows how powerful misinformation is by Dog-Cow · · Score: 2

      Nature. All species prey on weaker species. If you don't want to be part of nature, please immolate yourself.

    13. Re:It shows how powerful misinformation is by phishybongwaters · · Score: 4, Interesting

      I don't think anyone disputes that some humans treat some animals badly. PETA puts more animals to death each year than they save. But I guess their moral superiority gives them that right. The right to "euthanize" my pet because it's better to be a dead cat than to be "forced to live in captivity" PETA is a joke and I put them in the same bin as the nutso "pro-life" murderous thugs.

    14. Re:It shows how powerful misinformation is by The-Ixian · · Score: 1

      Yep, you know what else Hitler did?

      Breathe air and eat food...

      Obviously anyone who does those things are like Hitler too...

      --
      My eyes reflect the stars and a smile lights up my face.
    15. Re:It shows how powerful misinformation is by Immerman · · Score: 1

      Actually, you could extend that to "Most "first-world" humans treat some animals really badly" at least by proxy. After all, pretty much every time you eat meat that isn't specifically labeled as being raised and slaughtered humanely you are personally commissioning the horrendous treatment of the source animal in a factory-farm.

      --
      --- Most topics have many sides worth arguing, allow me to take one opposite you.
    16. Re:It shows how powerful misinformation is by Immerman · · Score: 1

      That does not justify a claim that people are more important than monkeys, only that people have a natural right to prey on others (technically including other humans - apes routinely engage in cannibalism).

      --
      --- Most topics have many sides worth arguing, allow me to take one opposite you.
    17. Re:It shows how powerful misinformation is by wonkey_monkey · · Score: 3, Informative

      If more than one person treats an animal badly, then it is proper English to say that "people treat animals badly"

      It might be "proper English," (as are many misleading statements) but it's disingenuous because "people" would usually be taken to mean humanity as a whole in that context, rather than "more than one person."

      People, on the whole, or even on average, do not treat animals badly*.

      *which is subjective, anyway.

      --
      systemd is Roko's Basilisk.
    18. Re:It shows how powerful misinformation is by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      http://i1.kym-cdn.com/photos/i...

    19. Re:It shows how powerful misinformation is by rahvin112 · · Score: 4, Informative

      And the irony is that PETA puts down dogs that could otherwise adopted because the head of Peta doesn't believe in pets.

    20. Re: It shows how powerful misinformation is by bill_mcgonigle · · Score: 2

      Actually, you could extend that to "Most "first-world" humans treat some animals really badly" at least by proxy.

      Not to mention the mass slaughter of millions of animals every year by trucks hauling California vegetables cross-country.

      Obligate-localvore vegans I give an ethical pass to, though.

      --
      My God, it's Full of Source!
      OUTSIDE_IP=$(dig +short my.ip @outsideip.net)
    21. Re:It shows how powerful misinformation is by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Insightful

      And the irony is that PETA puts down dogs that could otherwise adopted because the head of Peta doesn't believe in pets.

      Peta once "discarded" a dozen dead cats on the cars of a fast food joint I was at. Really creepy that was.

    22. Re:It shows how powerful misinformation is by Anonymous+Cow+Ward · · Score: 2

      Medical research on monkeys is worth doing, iff it's done properly. I fully agree it should not be done lightly, but I also really disagree with calling it torture. Especially with monkeys, every effort to reduce their suffering is made that can be, without changing the results. There are stringent guidelines for determining when an animal is suffering too much and has to be removed from an experiment.

      --
      Examine even your most deeply held beliefs. Nobody is always right.
    23. Re:It shows how powerful misinformation is by Immerman · · Score: 1

      Yes, but by that logic, as an extremely intelligent human, I am "more important" than most, and thus by the same logic torturing them for my benefit is morally acceptable.

      --
      --- Most topics have many sides worth arguing, allow me to take one opposite you.
    24. Re:It shows how powerful misinformation is by Anonymous+Cow+Ward · · Score: 1

      Well, it depends on what research the released animals were being used for. Many research mice have much better lives than their wild counterparts; they often get to mate, don't have to work for food or water, and don't worry about traps or predators. Any procedures that are likely to cause significant pain have to be done under anesthesia, and while there is probably pain afterwards as well, for the most part they're safe and well-fed. If they have to be killed, it's fast and painless, which is probably better than they'd get outside.

      --
      Examine even your most deeply held beliefs. Nobody is always right.
    25. Re:It shows how powerful misinformation is by AK+Marc · · Score: 2

      Humans treat people animals poorly, yet PETA doesn't ever speak out on that. Why? Does PETA hate humans? PETA, because "misanthrope" isn't hipster enough.

      --
      Learn to love Alaska
    26. Re:It shows how powerful misinformation is by AK+Marc · · Score: 1

      The plural of person is people. There is no other way to word it. That you attach so much emotion and subtext to words doesn't invalidate when someone else uses them correctly, and you don't like the implications. "The people", "humanity", "human kind" and hundreds of other ways can be used to include everyone. What would you have them use for the plural of person? Persons? That's no longer in common usage.

      --
      Learn to love Alaska
    27. Re:It shows how powerful misinformation is by Coren22 · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Their animal shelters also kill more animals than any other shelter. They are not for treating animals well, they are for destroying things. They love to pour oil on people's "fur" coats, without even checking if it is animal fur or manufactured fur, and without even considering that the people who wear a fur coat will just replace the coat if it is destroyed, therefore killing another animal.

      --
      APK likes to ask for responses to the same things over and over. Maybe he just likes the responses?
    28. Re:It shows how powerful misinformation is by Coren22 · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Vegitarians are monsters, they kill plants! They hack them apart, and grind them into mush, then swallow them! How disgusting can you get?

      --
      APK likes to ask for responses to the same things over and over. Maybe he just likes the responses?
    29. Re:It shows how powerful misinformation is by Coren22 · · Score: 1

      I put them in the same bin as the nutso "pro-life" murderous thugs.

      If you knew someone was committing murder on a massive scale, wouldn't you believe it is your moral imperative to put a stop to it? If that person is cutting babies apart on a daily basis, wouldn't you feel the same way?

      The difference of a couple months in your mind excuses murder, in my mind, and many like me it does not.

      --
      APK likes to ask for responses to the same things over and over. Maybe he just likes the responses?
    30. Re:It shows how powerful misinformation is by Calydor · · Score: 1

      All it takes is one mentally unstable person getting it into his or her head that it's his or her 'duty' to save the world from this evil person PETA is talking about.

      --
      -=This sig has nothing to do with my comment. Move along now=-
    31. Re:It shows how powerful misinformation is by Immerman · · Score: 1

      I never made the claim that humans are more important than monkeys, in fact I'm arguing against it.

      And yes, I confess that I have been known to mangle a sentence in an inane online discussion when distracted by real-world concerns. I'm clearly an idiot.

      --
      --- Most topics have many sides worth arguing, allow me to take one opposite you.
    32. Re:It shows how powerful misinformation is by wonkey_monkey · · Score: 2

      The plural of person is people. There is no other way to word it.

      My point - which you seem to have missed entirely - is that "people" doesn't always just mean - and isn't always only inferred to mean - "more than one person."

      That you attach so much emotion and subtext to words

      I'm simply talking about the way people actually use words, which is what defines English.

      "The people", "humanity", "human kind" and hundreds of other ways can be used to include everyone.

      Yes, they can. So can "people."

      What would you have them use for the plural of person? Persons? That's no longer in common usage.

      I wouldn't have them say anything. I'd suggest they say "some people," which mitigates the ambiguity.

      Also see AC's reply here which sums it quite nicely as well.

      --
      systemd is Roko's Basilisk.
    33. Re:It shows how powerful misinformation is by easyTree · · Score: 1

      Wow, the shills are out in full strength today.

      --
      Requiem for the American Dream
    34. Re: It shows how powerful misinformation is by thegarbz · · Score: 1

      I somewhat disagree - a sudden end to a good life is the most anyone can really hope for.

      Very few car accidents involve sudden death, both for occupants as well as roadside fatalities. I'd personally rather be decapitated in a slaughterhouse than die slowly of internal bleeding on the side of the road.

    35. Re:It shows how powerful misinformation is by khellendros1984 · · Score: 1

      What would you have them use for the plural of person?

      It depends on how clear you want the meaning of the statement to be. You can always add further clarifying information. "Humans" in the phrase "Humans treat animals really, really badly," could be meant to refer to "All humans" or "Some humans", but I would tend to parse it as a general statement about all humans (because in the usages that I've seen the most, if the speaker meant "some, but not all", they would've said so). Regardless, it's silly to use ambiguous wording, then act surprised when someone chooses the meaning that matches what they wanted to see or the meaning that's easiest to argue against.

      --
      It is pitch black. You are likely to be eaten by a grue.
    36. Re:It shows how powerful misinformation is by spazzmo · · Score: 1

      Yes, as far as PETA seem to be concerned, the only ethical treatment of animals is leaving them completely alone or killing them. The first one I get.

      --
      The cheese stands alone...
    37. Re:It shows how powerful misinformation is by jcr · · Score: 1

      If Ingrid Newkirk told me that the sun will rise in the morning tomorrow, I would seek confirmation from a competent astronomer.

      -jcr

      --
      The only title of honor that a tyrant can grant is "Enemy of the State."
    38. Re:It shows how powerful misinformation is by jcr · · Score: 1

      Newkirk once wrote a letter to the terrorist leader Arafat, complaining because some of his goons had loaded up a donkey with explosives to try to kill people. She whined at him about killing the donkey. Not a word about killing PEOPLE.

      To hell with that crazy bitch.

      -jcr

      --
      The only title of honor that a tyrant can grant is "Enemy of the State."
    39. Re:It shows how powerful misinformation is by Immerman · · Score: 1

      You are only stating your own preconceptions, not some natural truth. Yes, IF intellectual capacity is the definition of importance THEN humans are among the most important species on the planet. But what is your justification for that definition?

      --
      --- Most topics have many sides worth arguing, allow me to take one opposite you.
    40. Re:It shows how powerful misinformation is by khallow · · Score: 2

      The problem with that thinking is we shouldn't fight injustices by whatever means are at our disposal if they are illegal.

      It depends on the degree of injustice. It's worth noting here that no one has actually demonstrated that injustice is going on with medical research or that it matters to PETA, if it were. Further, minor injustices would not justify the law breaking.

    41. Re:It shows how powerful misinformation is by amiga3D · · Score: 3, Insightful

      This isn't a crime like jaywalking or littering. It's an activity that possibly puts people and their families at risk. Just because you feel animals have equivalent rights to people doesn't make it so. To attempt to terrorize people who are simply performing a legal job because you have some extreme view of animal rights is not acceptable. This is why PETA will never be effective. Their actions discredit their message.

    42. Re:It shows how powerful misinformation is by amiga3D · · Score: 1

      I doubt their neighbors will but then that wasn't who PETA is trying to prod into action is it? PETA knows that it has a following of extremists who think their views are more important than the majority and that breaking laws can be justified by the purity of their cause. Posting of physical addresses in that manner is meant as a threat no matter who does it. If you think that kind of action in any way advances the cause that PETA espouses then you are a fool.

    43. Re:It shows how powerful misinformation is by amiga3D · · Score: 1

      I dispute their view that it is wrong to use animals for experiments to advance the cause of science.

    44. Re: It shows how powerful misinformation is by easyTree · · Score: 1

      Surely the majority view on any topic is a combination of inertia (keep it as it is because it's easier) and deferral (it is the way it is because someone more qualified to make a decision wants it so?)

      Or, is that unkind?

      --
      Requiem for the American Dream
    45. Re: It shows how powerful misinformation is by david_thornley · · Score: 1

      Not to mention all the insects killed by having vehicles crash into them. They're animals too!

      --
      "When you have eliminated the unacceptable, whatever is left, however improbable, must be the truthiness" - Holmes
    46. Re:It shows how powerful misinformation is by david_thornley · · Score: 1

      You are using the word "murder" in a non-standard and non-traditional way. I am aware of no culture that treated abortions as if they were murders, including ones that made abortion illegal. I dislike people who use loaded words in made-up ways in their arguments.

      Most abortions take place in the first trimester. A large majority take place before the fetus have recognizable human brain activity. Almost all abortions after the first trimester are for medical reasons, and are not optional. The Supreme Court allowed restrictions on abortion, and to the best of my knowledge no anti-abortion legislatures passed laws up to what the Supreme Court expressly permitted.

      In other words, you're making things up to make your arguments sound better. I can respect people with different views than mine, but not when they make not-entirely-truthful emotional arguments for their views.

      --
      "When you have eliminated the unacceptable, whatever is left, however improbable, must be the truthiness" - Holmes
    47. Re:It shows how powerful misinformation is by Coren22 · · Score: 1

      http://www.merriam-webster.com...

      So, you are claiming that a fetus is not a human being? Genetics would tend to disprove that point of view. I was explaining the POV of those "nutso "pro-life" murderous thugs" to you. You are the one who is redefining things, not I. A human being is a human being, it doesn't matter if it is before the first trimester. From the point of view of those "nutso pro-life murderous thugs", people who are performing abortions are committing murder.

      --
      APK likes to ask for responses to the same things over and over. Maybe he just likes the responses?
    48. Re: It shows how powerful misinformation is by thegarbz · · Score: 2

      Not to mention all the insects killed by having vehicles crash into them. They're animals too!

      Don't get PETA started on that too

    49. Re:It shows how powerful misinformation is by weweedmaniii · · Score: 1

      Until about a decade or so ago. PETA was on the FBI list of terrorist organizations. Then suddenly washed up actors and musicians started pouring money into the organization and "Presto" they are now seen as this animal rights champions....no. The ASPCA is an animal rights organization, not PETA. They are and will remain a terrorist organization, since they have to threaten anyone to get folks to listen to them. I'm certain good folks see Sarah Mclachlan on late night tv and donate thinking they are helping to save animals....

      --
      "If stupid things work...then they are not stupid."
    50. Re: It shows how powerful misinformation is by amiga3D · · Score: 1

      Maybe not.

  2. Maybe PETA is angry... by mamono · · Score: 5, Funny

    Because the monkeys have better behavior than they do and they are jealous.

    1. Re:Maybe PETA is angry... by reboot246 · · Score: 1

      They believe in being dumb to kind animals.

      And being dumb is pretty much all they have going for them.

  3. When does it become "terrorism"? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    Since this is a hot topic in today's society, at what point do their tactics cross that line? This sort of doxxing seems rather close. Given the nature of their close friends and allies, it's hard not to see this as a call for more direct action.

    1. Re:When does it become "terrorism"? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Since this is a hot topic in today's society, at what point do their tactics cross that line? This sort of doxxing seems rather close. Given the nature of their close friends and allies, it's hard not to see this as a call for more direct action.

      Terrorism requires violence or at least excessive harassment. Sending a letter to your neighbours, however annoying or stupid is not terrorism. It's no different than me sending a letter to everyone on the block telling them that the guy living next door is a porn star. Sure it's an invasion of privacy but clearly falls under freedom of speech.

    2. Re:When does it become "terrorism"? by phishybongwaters · · Score: 1

      Not a fair comparison. Handing out a porn starts info likely means they get harrassed and stalked in person. Handing out "doctors who mistreat animals" info to PETA followers has 1 purpose. And no, it;s not for the followers to "call them up and say hi" and you know it. Your comparison fails.

    3. Re:When does it become "terrorism"? by tazan · · Score: 1

      I could be wrong but I think this was already decided the other way when an anti-abortion site posted names of abortion doctors.

  4. Humans are animals, too! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Humans are animals, too. How is this treating these victims ethically?

    1. Re:Humans are animals, too! by sims+2 · · Score: 1

      Peta tends to forget that. However so do most people.

      I think the ACLU and OSHA are the main ones but you would think someone would start PETP people for the ethical treatment of people. Or I suppose you could name it PETH if you wanted to be specific.

      --
      Minimum threshold fixed. Thanks!
    2. Re:Humans are animals, too! by Vegan+Cyclist · · Score: 1

      Exactly - they do the vegan and animal rights movement an injustice with these actions. Their logic is flawed, and may as well be harassing lions because they kills zebras.

    3. Re:Humans are animals, too! by phantomfive · · Score: 1

      How do ACLU and OSHA abuse people?

      --
      "First they came for the slanderers and i said nothing."
    4. Re:Humans are animals, too! by ColdWetDog · · Score: 1

      I'm not so sure about the ACLU, although their funding drives are close. Pretty much anyone who has to deal with OSHA regulations on a regular basis ends up being treated for PTSD at one time or another.

      --
      Faster! Faster! Faster would be better!
    5. Re:Humans are animals, too! by phantomfive · · Score: 1

      I'll bet some bulls would still find a way to dismount people

      --
      "First they came for the slanderers and i said nothing."
  5. Easy by sycodon · · Score: 4, Insightful

    All PETA members and their families should be identified.

    If they should ever turn up needing medical services, they should only receive services that were not devised/tested via animal experimentation.

    I expect they'd quickly be whistling a different tune.

    --
    When Fascism comes to America, it will call itself Anti-Fascism, and tell you to give up your guns.
    1. Re:Easy by mamono · · Score: 1

      Yes, and they should only go to purely vegan hospitals.

    2. Re:Easy by quantaman · · Score: 4, Insightful

      All PETA members and their families should be identified.

      If they should ever turn up needing medical services, they should only receive services that were not devised/tested via animal experimentation.

      I expect they'd quickly be whistling a different tune.

      I don't think that's entirely fair since their belief is those same medical services could have been produced without animal experimentation.

      I think they're mostly wrong of course, and more than a bit loopy, but I'd rather treat them with well deserved scorn than trying to saddle them with our version of what we think they want.

      --
      I stole this Sig
    3. Re:Easy by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

      > I don't think that's entirely fair since their belief is those same medical services could have been produced without animal experimentation.

      Could have been, but weren't. Do they have courage of conviction?

    4. Re:Easy by grimmjeeper · · Score: 4, Insightful

      I don't think that's entirely fair since their belief is those same medical services could have been produced without animal experimentation.

      Then let the PETA members volunteer to be experimented on in place of the animals.

    5. Re:Easy by wardrich86 · · Score: 1

      "...and their families should be identified."

      What if it was like the crazy outcasted sibling that went batshit and joined PETA? Why should the rest of the family be punished?

    6. Re:Easy by Aaden42 · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Given that PETA’s former director of research Mary Beth Sweetland is an insulin dependant diabetic, I’ll go with a “nope” on that one.

      http://www.humanewatch.org/per...

      That said, she constructed a convenient out for PETA members whose lives rely on animal-tested or derived treatments. Because she’s working for animals, it’s for the greater good. So as long as you’re a PETA member, you can benefit from animal testing and stay alive with modern medicine so you can keep fighting to make sure no one else can. Everyone else has to die though. Wouldn’t be ethical for them to receive treatments that they’re not fighting to prevent anyone else from getting.

    7. Re:Easy by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      One of the higher-ups received surgery already... something akin to a heart valve from a primate. "They gave their life so I can keep fighting for their family" or some such nonsense. It was on Penn & Tellers BS on PETA.

      Oh, and lets not forget they euthanize most of the animals they take in.

    8. Re:Easy by sconeu · · Score: 1

      PETA members should be denied medical treatment for anything that isn't an injury.

      Won't SOMEONE think of the bacteria and viruses!!!!

      --
      General Relativity: Space-time tells matter where to go; Matter tells space-time what shape to be.
    9. Re:Easy by AK+Marc · · Score: 1

      For not euthanizing the rabid animal when they had a chance.

      --
      Learn to love Alaska
    10. Re:Easy by nytes · · Score: 1

      Letters should be sent to hundreds of their neighbors telling them that one of their neighbors is connected with an organization with ties to terrorism, along with the person's picture, name, phone number and address.

      --
      -- I have monkeys in my pants.
    11. Re:Easy by amiga3D · · Score: 1

      My wife's grandmother received a heart valve from a pig that helped her live another 20 years. I guess that animal model translated well enough. I guess all those research facilities just decided to waste millions of dollars using animals for testing just for the sheer joy of it? Not to make money like evil capitalists always do?

    12. Re:Easy by david_thornley · · Score: 1

      Excuse me, but I like being the good guy. This means I want to act so my actions are distinguishable from those of the bad guys. I'm not going to suggest withholding treatment for anyone based on their beliefs.

      Also, I have some unpopular opinions (not all of which I reveal in public). If PETA members don't get properly treated, what's to stop "them" from extending it to people who don't have "unmutual" thoughts? I like to defend the rights of assholes, since I never know who "they" will start on once they've dealt with the assholes.

      --
      "When you have eliminated the unacceptable, whatever is left, however improbable, must be the truthiness" - Holmes
    13. Re:Easy by david_thornley · · Score: 1

      Why not? Just because I disapprove of something doesn't mean I won't take advantage of it. There are tax breaks I strongly disagree with, but still take when relevant. If I could create some publicity by paying additional taxes, and help get the tax law changed, sure, but in fact it would just result in me paying more taxes than other people would in my circumstances.

      --
      "When you have eliminated the unacceptable, whatever is left, however improbable, must be the truthiness" - Holmes
    14. Re:Easy by beastofburdon · · Score: 1

      Well, in less than a generation we would be rid of them by natural selection if that were done.

  6. Crossed the line by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    "...and critics say it crosses the line"

    This is PETA we are talking about. They don't even care that a line exists.

  7. Not news. by msauve · · Score: 4, Funny

    "...People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals (PETA), ... crosses the line..."

    Stating a tautology is not news.

    --
    "National Security is the chief cause of national insecurity." - Celine's First Law
  8. Science learning? by keith_nt4 · · Score: 1, Insightful

    Science has learned that the letters ...

    Really, science learned something? Science is an entity now? It goes around learning things?

    --
    "UNIX is very simple, it just needs a genius to understand its simplicity." -Dennis Ritchie
    1. Re:Science learning? by Immerman · · Score: 4, Insightful

      No, but Science IS the title of a magazine. The one linked to for the article in fact.

      --
      --- Most topics have many sides worth arguing, allow me to take one opposite you.
    2. Re:Science learning? by Orgasmatron · · Score: 1

      Well, Science is the title of a magazine.

      Once upon a time, there existed an entire profession devoted to finding and fixing problems like that in written works. Perhaps Slashdot should start calling their employees by some title other than "editor".

      --
      See that "Preview" button?
    3. Re:Science learning? by keith_nt4 · · Score: 2
      Perhaps it should have read something like

      Science Magazine has learned...

      You know, some kind of indication that "Science" in this context is some kind of organization or group people versus a "method of study". Too much to ask?

      --
      "UNIX is very simple, it just needs a genius to understand its simplicity." -Dennis Ritchie
    4. Re:Science learning? by PvtVoid · · Score: 2

      No, but Science IS the title of a magazine. The one linked to for the article in fact.

      It's a pity the magazine wasn't Nature. GP's head would have exploded.

    5. Re:Science learning? by Immerman · · Score: 1

      Ah, but nature *does* learn things - it tends to be slow and random, with the results being stored as DNA changes rather than in a cognitive mind, but just look how it learned to make bald apes with minds sophisticated enough to debate the subtitles of communication through abstract symbols with individuals half a world away. All starting with just some single-cell organisms. (or less, but we many never know the details for sure)

      --
      --- Most topics have many sides worth arguing, allow me to take one opposite you.
    6. Re:Science learning? by tbannist · · Score: 2

      Why? To prevent snarky cynics from embarrassing themselves with stupid rhetorical questions? Where's the fun in that?

      --
      Fanatically anti-fanatical
    7. Re:Science learning? by AK+Marc · · Score: 1

      Nature doesn't "learn". Nature adapts. Those are different. A river that changes course doesn't have a memory of the old path. It didn't learn a new way. The new way happened, so it took it.

      --
      Learn to love Alaska
  9. PETA is worthless by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Interesting

    https://www.petakillsanimals.com/

    PETA's "animal shelters" would do Auschwitz proud.

    1. Re:PETA is worthless by AK+Marc · · Score: 1

      There are lots of no kill shelters that would survive. They would just do what a full no kill shelter does, and refuse new animals. The no-kills near me cherry pick "adoptable" breeds from the regular shelters and advertise those. They increase the capacity of the kill shelters, but don't offer a different or better service. You should only adopt from a kill shelter, the animal you save is saved. To be "no kill" you must not kill, or release to those who would (directly or indirectly).

      --
      Learn to love Alaska
    2. Re:PETA is worthless by david_thornley · · Score: 2

      The "no-kills" near me just have very long waiting times. You have to wait for them to either get enough animals adopted or die of natural causes to get down to your name on the list.

      --
      "When you have eliminated the unacceptable, whatever is left, however improbable, must be the truthiness" - Holmes
  10. Hypocrites by Nemyst · · Score: 4, Insightful

    How about you start by treating people ethically, PETA?

    1. Re:Hypocrites by kencurry · · Score: 1

      How do you think veterinarians get their training?
      Animal research does not just benefit people. It benefits many different species. Also, a lot of clinical research is done on human volunteers. Your ivory tower has blocked out an important part of this landscape.

      --
      sigs are for losers (except to point out that sigs are for losers)
  11. Goose meet gander by fred911 · · Score: 4, Informative

    PETA President's home address
    Ingrid Newkirk
    40 Rader St Apt 407
    Norfolk, VA 23510

    --
    09 F9 11 02 9D 74 E3 5B - D8 41 56 C5 63 56 88 C0 45 5F E1 04 22 CA 29 C4 93 3F 95 05 2B 79 2A B2
    1. Re:Goose meet gander by AmiMoJo · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Is this really what Slashdot has become? Flamebait stories that cause commentators to start doxing people?

      How is this even news for nerds, stuff that matters? It's clickbait of the worst kind.

      --
      const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
      SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
    2. Re:Goose meet gander by Anonymous+Cow+Ward · · Score: 1

      I'm not sure "PETA harasses the head of the NIH" is a flamebait story. The doxxing is still wrong, of course, but knowing what shitty thing PETA has done isn't necessarily flamebait.

      --
      Examine even your most deeply held beliefs. Nobody is always right.
  12. There is a solution by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    We must replace the chimps with the animal rights activists for all the research purposes.

  13. Unavailable for comment by Dwedit · · Score: 1

    Mrs. Brisby unavailable for comment.

  14. Re:./ logic by jedidiah · · Score: 1

    You probably owe your existence to "animal torture".

    --
    A Pirate and a Puritan look the same on a balance sheet.
  15. Re: ./ logic by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    Medical research isn't torture. Look at it this way: PETA doesn't think we should use a few generations of mice to figure out if a treatment might be effective. They apparently think we should use a few generations of people for that.

  16. End tax-exempt status... by MikeRT · · Score: 4, Interesting

    The only thing they've done is further prove the case for abolishing all tax exemption for political activism and making contributions to the same not a valid deduction on the income tax.

  17. More subjects by wkwilley2 · · Score: 1

    I think we should just experiment on PETA activists....that'll shut em up.

    --
    Have you ever fallen asleep at the keybhanusdiog?
  18. This is brushing the lines with actual terrorism.. by RevDisk · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Trying to influence government officials with threats is a very good way to end up with prison sentences.

    Sure, PETA is trying to outsourcing harassment of government officials by misleading information and probably omitting very pertinent information. If anything happens to them, I sincerely hope the responsible folks at PETA are charged as accessories. PETA may or may not have decent points. But the crazies in their leadership negate any possible positives.

  19. Bad Example by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Interesting

    Since PETA claims the Holocaust wasn't wrong.

    Since eating a hamburger or a chicken sandwich is perfectly fine, morally speaking, by comparing eating a chicken sandwich or a hamburger to the Holocaust, they are saying that there was nothing wrong with said Holocaust.

    1. Re:Bad Example by Immerman · · Score: 1

      I think you're misconstruing the message there. Actually, I'm certain of it, as you state your preconceived bias openly "Since eating a hamburger or a chicken sandwich is perfectly fine, morally speaking". According to what absolute moral authority? Have you never had a pet? If I killed and ate that pet in front of you, would your only objection really be that I hurt your feelings?

      --
      --- Most topics have many sides worth arguing, allow me to take one opposite you.
    2. Re:Bad Example by wonkey_monkey · · Score: 1

      According to what absolute moral authority?

      Pick one. There's loads of 'em posting on here!

      --
      systemd is Roko's Basilisk.
    3. Re:Bad Example by Harlequin80 · · Score: 1

      I'd probably have an issue with you destroying my property.

    4. Re:Bad Example by alexgieg · · Score: 1

      Since eating a hamburger or a chicken sandwich is perfectly fine, morally speaking

      Why, every moral person knows that, if it is for their own enjoyment, causing pain to another being is fine. For example, what's wrong with setting cats on fire? It's pleasurable to my eyes to see them running alight, to my nose to smell their burnt fur and flesh, and to my ears to hear them screaming. Ditto for, without anesthesia, burning chicken beaks, ripping pigs testicles and ripping cattle tails, then painfully slaughtering them. It makes their corpses' taste more pleasurable to my tongue, and that alone makes it right.

      Right?

      --
      Conservatism: (n.) love of the existing evils. Liberalism: (n.) desire to substitute new evils for the existing ones.
  20. The E in PETA should be I, for idiot. by whitroth · · Score: 3, Interesting

    First of all, this is harassment.

    Second, all of them are ignorant idiots. Anyone who wants to discuss this, let me know, and I'll post a link to the official NIH book on the ethical design of experiments, including both human and animal guidelines.

    Third... have *any* PETA members *ever* volunteered themselves to replace animals in medical trials, bearing in mind that if they don't work, the side effects could be dangerous?

                      mark

    1. Re:The E in PETA should be I, for idiot. by Anonymous+Cow+Ward · · Score: 1

      Third... have *any* PETA members *ever* volunteered themselves to replace animals in medical trials, bearing in mind that if they don't work, the side effects could be dangerous?

      Now there's an idea...

      --
      Examine even your most deeply held beliefs. Nobody is always right.
  21. Re:./ logic by Sumus+Semper+Una · · Score: 2

    So doxing is completely unethical but torturing animals is OK?

    Actually, the only logical inconsistency would be saying that either both doxing and animal experimentation are ethical or that both are unethical.

    Doxing is unethical because it is an single person or small group anonymously inciting a larger group to retaliatory action against an individual. Did the individual deserve it? It's possible, but not important because the larger issue is that there is no oversight or consequence to those who incite action if they are wrong. If doxing is ethical, then the individual is the ultimate determinant of the moral justification to cause a chain of events.

    Institutional animal experimentation is ethical because it is a group performing potentially harmful acts upon living beings for the possibility to prevent or alleviate further harm to other living beings in the future. Was the research worth the suffering? It's possible that they weren't, but that's part of the reason why peer review and government oversight exist in the realm of animal testing. If animal testing is ethical, then the collective is the ultimate determinant of the moral justification to cause a chain of events.

    PETA believes that doxing is ethical but animal experimentation is unethical. The slashdot community appears to mostly believe that doxing is unethical but animal experimentation is ethical. Both positions are logically consistent. They just come from opposite views on where moral authority should ultimately lie.

  22. misinformation by mschaffer · · Score: 1, Insightful

    Gee, I thought that PETA stood for "People Eating Tasty Animals". I guess I was misinformed.

  23. Re:How is this not terrorism? by Aaden42 · · Score: 1

    Because writing a letter (just a letter, no anthrax, no bombs) and mailing it to somone isn’t terrorism.

    Kind of sad to see a word’s meaning so dilluted that blowing people up and sending a piece of paper with words on it through the mail are the same thing now.

  24. I'd give a neighborly visit.... by dfenstrate · · Score: 2

    ....and offer my support and ask if he needed anything. I'd also stand watch on his porch for a few hours a week to chase off loons if necessary.

    --
    Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms should be the name of a store, not a government agency.
  25. Re:Unbelievable by phishybongwaters · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Considering you'd be putting their lives at risk, I think the law would beg to differ. And that's why Doxing is a big deal and "the gubment" is actively engaged. PETA knows their supporters are batshit crazy. They know exactly what the outcome would be after releasing names numbers and addresses of people PURPORTED to be involved with animal testing (behavioral testing?). Threats, harassment and violence. To follow your analogy, you send out the personal information about your neighbor, enabling their insane internet stalker to find where they live. While you likely wouldn't be liable once that porn start got murdered, I'd hope you'd feel a little guilty.

  26. Re:Unbelievable by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    Maybe if you win, you can buy a goddamn spell checker.

  27. Redundant by Major+Blud · · Score: 1

    Today it was announced that the NIH has decided to retire all of their research chimps:

    http://www.cnn.com/2015/11/19/...

    --
    If you post as Anonymous Coward, don't expect a reply.
    1. Re:Redundant by Anonymous+Cow+Ward · · Score: 2

      Most studies that use non-human primates don't use chimps. Macaques are much more common, as they're cheaper, easier, and safer to work with. PETA is upset about all non-human primates, not just the chimps - although they are undoubtedly happy about that news.

      --
      Examine even your most deeply held beliefs. Nobody is always right.
    2. Re:Redundant by Major+Blud · · Score: 1

      "Most studies that use non-human primates don't use chimps".

      That's a good point, that's for bringing that up.

      --
      If you post as Anonymous Coward, don't expect a reply.
    3. Re:Redundant by AK+Marc · · Score: 1

      Why did I want that link to be to an Onion article about congressional term limits?

      --
      Learn to love Alaska
  28. Medical research by Anonymous+Cow+Ward · · Score: 1

    Of course this crosses a line. Medical research absolutely needs animals for research purposes. Sometimes, monkeys are the only way to learn something. It's expensive, and the requirements for doing monkey experiments are understandably much more stringent, so scientists try to avoid using them whenever possible, but they are necessary in some cases. It's unfortunate, and nobody likes doing it, but is something medical research needs to succeed.

    --
    Examine even your most deeply held beliefs. Nobody is always right.
  29. Animal research can save animals as well! by WinterBeard · · Score: 1

    I worked for an organization that did cancer research on mice and other small animals. The animals were always treated with respect and had some of the best living quarters an animal could ask for. While trying to find cures for cancer in humans from time to time they would find treatments for animals as well. I can specifically recall one drug that was discovered to treat a very debilitating form of cancer in dogs that up until that point had very little effective treatment. On a side note most medium to large research institutes have training on how to be on the watch for members of PETA, ALF, etc. and they take the training extremely serious.

  30. Priorities by onthemightofprinces · · Score: 1

    Haven't PETA got kittens and puppies to kill? Those dumpsters don't fill themselves!

  31. Re:Don't be an idiot by easyTree · · Score: 1

    The Nazis were far more reasonable than the US government / military-industrial-complex.

    --
    Requiem for the American Dream
  32. Save the monkeys by reboot246 · · Score: 1

    Replace each monkey with a member of the Animal Rights Group!

    They're not exactly like human beings, but they're closer than monkeys.

  33. If you ACTUALLY care about animals... by jcr · · Score: 1

    Then contribute to the Humane Society, the SPCA, or any of a dozen other organizations that don't sponsor criminal activity.

    -jcr

    --
    The only title of honor that a tyrant can grant is "Enemy of the State."
  34. Re:./ logic by nytes · · Score: 1

    So, you wouldn't mind if I just post your name, address, email address, and phone number here on /. would you?

    --
    -- I have monkeys in my pants.