Before I even start, this thread is NOT just about PETA, so don't worry about being off topic by bringing something else up, that would be a good thing to do .
I notice this has a tendency to come up alot in other threads, then we all end up off topic and it's just blah. So I made a thread for it.
In here you and discuss the pro's and con's of differnet activist groups, and your opinions on them and if you feel that they accomplish what they actually set out to do.
Baby, I'm an Anarchist in the "ban animal dissection thread:
You obviously don't know much about PETA, then. I'm a supporter, and they have many things. Animal liberation- It's their first priority. And they put those videos up so that they can inform people of whats actually happening. It's not as believable when it's just in writing, but when you see the videos, then it's believable.
Actually, I know quite a bit about PETA. Animal liberation is not their first priority, it's far from it. They lie and distort facts to prove their point's which are often entirely differnt from what they advertise, and advertising is exactly what they do. They don't inform, they misinform and advertise themselves in hope of publicity.
The extremes they take their videos to is insane. I'll give them the benifit of the doubt and I won't say that those videos are staged, but for example, if you have seen their slaughter house series, its fucking crazy. They show animals being beaten and treated so cruely, do you honestly think major meat processing companies have time for that crap? Of course not, you can be against eating animals, thats 100% ok, but they lie and mislead people into believeing things aside from the truth and thats wrong. What really makes me sick is that theor "PETA insiders" are sick enbough to record those videos, they don't report the place they are filming at until they get the video they want, and they can loop it on the internet and have a bunch of air head celebrities give them a ton of money.... for nothing. They are way too concered witht the amount of press coverage they recieve. They have press releases on a weekly, if not daily basis. Instead of wasting money on things like that, why isnt it going to helping the animals like they claim they want to do? Pretty shady. PETA does have an animal shelter, and PETA recieves more than 29 million dollars a year in donations.... yet that animal shelter doesnt have a No Kill policy...... just wow.
Another factor that makes me dislike PETA even more are the their activists, and Im not refering to all of them, but a large number. if you've been to those protests you'll see what Im talking about. People get hurt, its insane. I rememeber I was at a Mall in St.Louis and they were having some protest at Wet Seal I think it was, and anyone who walked out of that store wearing or carrying anything that had fur on it ended up covered in paint. The organizers of the event did nothing, not even attempt to calm the riot they started, it turned into a gigantic mess. it's Violent measuers like such as those that are intolerable. Any organization that handles issues in a way such as that is nothing to be admired, thats immature and childish. Their Ties to ALF and ELF arent helping out their 'we're not violent' cover up story at all either..
PETA is also against life saving medical research, whats funny is each person in PETA has benifited from it. Shots that are mandatory by law have been tested on animals. Human lives have been saved from medical research, yet they are against it. You know, not only human drugs have been tested on animals, medicine for animals has as well. The drugs administered to animals that save their lives wouldnt exist without medical research. Any PETA activist that can walk through a childrens hospital and see kids dying of diseases we could find cures to through medical research, and still say they are against medical research is heartless, and obviously has no clue what having an illness such as that is like.PETA has r attacked groups like the March of Dimes, the Pediatric AIDS Foundation, and the American Cancer Society more than once for conducting animal testing to find cures for birth defects and life-threatening diseases.
Hence, why I refer to peta as not the " People for the Ethical treatment of animals" but "Poorly Educated teen acitivists." There are so many better animals rights groups, why anyone would want to support PETA is beyond me. Other groups might not have all the publicity, or celebrity acceptance, but honestly none of that matters, what matters is helping animals, and PETA doesnt do that. PETA wants "total liberation of animals" This means alot more than stopping animal cruelty, it means no meat or dairy, of course; as well as no aquariums, no circuses, no hunting or fishing, no fur or leather, and no medical research using animals, and seeing eyes dogs are included in the "medical" aspect as PETA. THAT is the definition of extreme.
steady riot. King For A Couple Of Days Age: 32 Gender: Female Posts: 2907
October 19th, 2006 at 08:13pm
PETA doesn't have No-Kill shelters because in some cases, the animals have to be euthanized. It puts the animals out of their pain. They don't want to be keeping animals that are suffering, do they? No, thats going against everything they stand for. And they need the room for any animals they can help.
And what exactly do you mean "Have time for all that crap" referring to slaughterhouses? They don't care how they're treated. Their not going to invest money on treating them well! The animals are going to die anyway, right? They don't give them pain killers when they slice their throats, or slice their beaks off. They don't give them enough room. Chickens cannot even open their wings.
Not to mention some animals are actually sexually assaulted...
I mildly agree with you when it comes to PETA's activists. They sometimes do seem to cross the line, but, in some cases it's almost necessary.
When it comes to the paint throwing on fur, I don't think thats too far at all. It gets peoples attention, does it not? And thats what protesters are trying to get- attention for their cause. Sometimes you have to get extreme to get people to pay attention. Handing out fliers doesn't always work.
I understand dumping red paint on fur is vandalism, and it may seem a little crazy, but, fur is murder, and that to me, and a lot of others, is crazy too.
PETA has also done some remarkable protests. Running of the nudes is probably their best.
I frequently go on the PETA2 boards, and I recall multiple times the people who work at PETA [Ex. Noah] assuring everyone that they have no ties with ALF. The only thing in common with eachother is that they believe in animal rights.
It's gotten to the point where the F.B.I are supposably is watching the boards on PETA, to see if any of us are involved with ALF.
PETA is an amazing organization. They get a lot more bad press than good press. Most likely due to some of their protests.
They've saved so many animals, and made many companies stop testing on animals. That to me, is respectable, and that is why I support them. They're making a difference. Whether people agree with it or not, they do expose the truth.
Now, ALF on the other hand... I can see why some people think they've taken it too far.
But to some, not far enough. I like the idea of what they're doing, in a sence. I can agree with when they free the lab animals. But, some of their other things they've done is way too far.
PETA doesn't have No-Kill shelters because in some cases, the animals have to be euthanized. It puts the animals out of their pain. They don't want to be keeping animals that are suffering, do they? No, thats going against everything they stand for. And they need the room for any animals they can help.
And what exactly do you mean "Have time for all that crap" referring to slaughterhouses? They don't care how they're treated. Their not going to invest money on treating them well! The animals are going to die anyway, right? They don't give them pain killers when they slice their throats, or slice their beaks off. They don't give them enough room. Chickens cannot even open their wings.
Not to mention some animals are actually sexually assaulted...
I mildly agree with you when it comes to PETA's activists. They sometimes do seem to cross the line, but, in some cases it's almost necessary.
When it comes to the paint throwing on fur, I don't think thats too far at all. It gets peoples attention, does it not? And thats what protesters are trying to get- attention for their cause. Sometimes you have to get extreme to get people to pay attention. Handing out fliers doesn't always work.
I understand dumping red paint on fur is vandalism, and it may seem a little crazy, but, fur is murder, and that to me, and a lot of others, is crazy too.
PETA has also done some remarkable protests. Running of the nudes is probably their best.
I frequently go on the PETA2 boards, and I recall multiple times the people who work at PETA [Ex. Noah] assuring everyone that they have no ties with ALF. The only thing in common with eachother is that they believe in animal rights.
It's gotten to the point where the F.B.I are supposably is watching the boards on PETA, to see if any of us are involved with ALF.
PETA is an amazing organization. They get a lot more bad press than good press. Most likely due to some of their protests.
They've saved so many animals, and made many companies stop testing on animals. That to me, is respectable, and that is why I support them. They're making a difference. Whether people agree with it or not, they do expose the truth.
Now, ALF on the other hand... I can see why some people think they've taken it too far.
But to some, not far enough. I like the idea of what they're doing, in a sence. I can agree with when they free the lab animals. But, some of their other things they've done is way too far.
No, the reason animals have to be euthinized is because the animal shelter can not afford to accomodate and care for the animals they have. PETA makes enough money to care for all those animals, and if they wanted to they could open up other shelters, but they don't. Why? Because actually using money to help animals would cut into the advertising budget.
As for the slaughterhouses, in PETA videos animals are shown being beaten with bats and all sorts of things Thats much too time consuming, no major company is going to do that. The videos that PETA uses are from rural communities that are most likely ignorant to the laws because no one is informing them (and sadly people don't have the common sense to know that its wrong to bash a cows brains in with a bat) but then PETA likes to use those videos against major corparations, they lie. I don't see why they feel the need to lie about that, evidently they think going after bigger companies will get them more press, and they do nothing to inform the rural communities so they can stop their unethical treatment of animals.
I can not believe that you are justifying assaulting another person, thats insane actually. Regardless of how you feel about the issue, buying and wearing fur isnt illegal and they have the right to do that. It's violent and ignorant. There is never a reason to use violence to solve problems, what is that accomplishing. They are basically saying "We want humans and animals to be treated equally, but it's ok for us to use brutality against humans... but not animals." Thats hypocritical to top it all off. If you have to resort to barbaric means such as that to get across your point, it only shows your ignorance to the subject at hands. Maybe instead of handeling the situation like a bunch of 8 year olds in art class they should educate the public of why Fur is murder and whats wrong with it, instead of acting like a bunch of radical extremeists.
You actually think PETA made those organizations stop producing fur? I hate to break it to you, but PETA is not the only organization that promotes animals rights. PETA has it's little online petitions and what not, other organizations get involved and actually handle the situation respectfully and address the corparation itself. PETA does the exact opposite of expose the truth. Back in march or april of last year I recieved one of their newsletters about the St.Louis Zoo (which I happen to live in St.Louis so it caught my eye) and I read it and they claimed that the animals died of poor care and neglect. The St.Louis zoo is one of the top ranked Zoo's in the United States. They are actively involved in conservation programs and take excellent care of their animals. One of the Polar bears who died had complications from her pregnancy and it wasnt preventable. The other died of old age. Yet this was used in an anti-zoo campaign saying that zoo's are crueal and inhumane. Zoo's to amazing things for animals, PETA is just to power and media hungry to even see that.
PETA has handled press for the AFL before, Ingrid Newkirk has been associated with the multi-million-dollar arson at Michigan State University involving the AFL. Its insane. They had some leaflet published once that had the AFL title in it. That seems like involvment to me.What the AFL does is sick, and it produces stereotypes and ignorant views of what an animal activist should do. ALF, ELF, and SHAC have some alliance, and are all considered Domestic Terrorist Groups by the F.B.I because they are. They have went as far as to insult medical researchers in the privacy of their own homes in front of their families. Yes you said that "I like the idea of what they're doing, in a sence." How on earth could you like and support violent measuers such as that? SHAC might as well be the reformation of the AFL, seeing as how 3 out of 4 of the Directors have relation to AFL crimes. And can you tell me what illegally setting lab animals free does? So they can all die anyways because they werent raised in their natual habitat and will have no idea where they are, or what they are doing. Honestly, the amount of confussion and trama they would go through after being released is just as bad as using them in labs. Maybe they should actually use the thing located between their ears and try and PREVENT animals from being breeded for lab purposes and lose the radicalist actions. OHHH wait, that wouldnt get them publicity now would it.
oh yes and I forgot my other reason why PETA bugs me beyond all reason. Have you by chance heard their theroy on Judaism? They oppose Kosher slaughter, thats a sacred religious tradition. They have gone as far as to say that Jewish people havent read their scriptues right, and are misreading it. That is crossing the line. They don't have any inforamtion to support that fact, but I guess thats not a problem for PETA. Lying and distorting the truth is acceptable.I'll give them credit though.. they didnt just pick on the Jewish kids like some judgemental people woudl have, they went all out of a religious bashing spree.
They must enjoy tampering in religion, remember those stupid billboards they put up with the Pig on them that said something about dying for sins, go vegan or something around Easter. Honestly, that doesnt even make any sense at all. The bible doesnt condem eating meat as a sin... so what going vegan has to do with that is beyond me. It's almost mocking the religion(or vegetarian, I don't remember what they said) Then they had the protests at the St. Stephen's Cathedral on Good Friday in Germany. They protested in front of a church with signs that read "Do sollst nicht toten" which translates to "you should not kill" This is degrading to peoples religious beliefes because they staged a crusifiction, so someone by mocking christianity... animals lives are going to be saved. It didnt accomplish any goals I care about... but PETA got the press coverage so they were happy with it.
Lucifers Angel King For A Couple Of Days Age: - Gender: Female Posts: 4751
October 20th, 2006 at 09:12am
i am in an activist group to ban the national ID card in Uk. i think they are interfering in our freedom and i will never ever carry one and there is no one who can make me.
The Doctor Falling In Love With The Board Age: 34 Gender: Female Posts: 8786
October 20th, 2006 at 09:16am
I work with a activist group called the Glasgow Palestine Human Rights Campaign. You can check it out here
Lucifers Angel King For A Couple Of Days Age: - Gender: Female Posts: 4751
October 20th, 2006 at 09:19am
what do you guys think about banning the veil its a big thing here in Uk at the minute?
The Doctor Falling In Love With The Board Age: 34 Gender: Female Posts: 8786
October 20th, 2006 at 09:22am
Lucifers Angel:
what do you guys think about banning the veil its a big thing here in Uk at the minute?
As a spokesperson?
Well, we are against 'Islamaphobia' and we think that if the person wants to wear it, the authorites should allow the veil to be worn. If they get used to it at a young age then it could combat racism when they grow older. I believe that the comments made by Jack Straw were offensive to a high degree. They would probably try and sue or whatever if someone tried to ban crosses being worn or whatever.
NeoSteph Basket Case Age: 36 Gender: Female Posts: 16494
October 20th, 2006 at 02:21pm
isn't that veil talk a little off topic, or did i wander into the wrong thread 0_0.
NeoSteph Basket Case Age: 36 Gender: Female Posts: 16494
October 20th, 2006 at 02:22pm
oh right my mistake, wrong thread
*goes back to cave*
worn-out astronaut. Had A Life Before GSB Age: 31 Gender: Female Posts: 28177
October 20th, 2006 at 03:47pm
Im an e-mail member of Greenpeace.
spill_no_sick Falling In Love With The Board Age: 30 Gender: - Posts: 8588
October 20th, 2006 at 04:48pm
well Courtney, I do believe you pwned them for now
what do you guys think about banning the veil its a big thing here in Uk at the minute?
As a spokesperson?
Well, we are against 'Islamaphobia' and we think that if the person wants to wear it, the authorites should allow the veil to be worn. If they get used to it at a young age then it could combat racism when they grow older. I believe that the comments made by Jack Straw were offensive to a high degree. They would probably try and sue or whatever if someone tried to ban crosses being worn or whatever.
I personally find it disgraceful what happened. And they say they suspended for because the veil dispruted her teaching...I mean what? I'm not sure what teaching system they have in England but I always learned from textbooks and examples on the board, not my teachers face. So as long as the kids can hear her when she speaks there shouldn't be a problem.
They're just trying to deflect the real reason she got suspended; her veil makes people uncomfortable. And by banning a teacher for wearing the veil they're sending out the message to kids that there's something wrong with it, so they're bound to start finding it uncomfortable as well, where as if the got use to it they might be more open minded about cultural deversity.
spill_no_sick Falling In Love With The Board Age: 30 Gender: - Posts: 8588
October 20th, 2006 at 06:09pm
Incubus:
Lil' Fetus.:
Lucifers Angel:
what do you guys think about banning the veil its a big thing here in Uk at the minute?
As a spokesperson?
Well, we are against 'Islamaphobia' and we think that if the person wants to wear it, the authorites should allow the veil to be worn. If they get used to it at a young age then it could combat racism when they grow older. I believe that the comments made by Jack Straw were offensive to a high degree. They would probably try and sue or whatever if someone tried to ban crosses being worn or whatever.
I personally find it disgraceful what happened. And they say they suspended for because the veil dispruted her teaching...I mean what? I'm not sure what teaching system they have in England but I always learned from textbooks and examples on the board, not my teachers face. So as long as the kids can hear her when she speaks there shouldn't be a problem.
They're just trying to deflect the real reason she got suspended; her veil makes people uncomfortable. And by banning a teacher for wearing the veil they're sending out the message to kids that there's something wrong with it, so they're bound to start finding it uncomfortable as well, where as if the got use to it they might be more open minded about cultural deversity.
I just did a report on that in class, but it's a different topic, you should make one
. And by banning a teacher for wearing the veil they're sending out the message to kids that there's something wrong with it, so they're bound to start finding it uncomfortable as well, where as if the got use to it they might be more open minded about cultural deversity.
Yes, thats a really big problem in some schools. The lack of cultural diversity leaves kids with prejudice views and stereotypes as to what is normal and what is not. Not every school has a diverse group of kids, so actually I would love it if I had a teacher who did have a different culture. I am lucky in a way because my school actually does have cultural programs. We have the culture club that our forgein language teachers started a couple years ago. When it started they had like 15 kids.... then kids started figuring out that club did all the cool stuff and it was really interesting.. now like 200 kids are in it and they had to divide it up by grade level for club meetings. I think clubs like that can almost be considered an activist group because they dislike cultural stereotypes and do try to do away with them, and it's an important thing attemp to promote, especially in schools.
Matt Smith Admin Age: 32 Gender: Female Posts: 31134
October 20th, 2006 at 07:18pm
Incubus:
I personally find it disgraceful what happened. And they say they suspended for because the veil dispruted her teaching...I mean what? I'm not sure what teaching system they have in England but I always learned from textbooks and examples on the board, not my teachers face. So as long as the kids can hear her when she speaks there shouldn't be a problem.
They're just trying to deflect the real reason she got suspended; her veil makes people uncomfortable. And by banning a teacher for wearing the veil they're sending out the message to kids that there's something wrong with it, so they're bound to start finding it uncomfortable as well, where as if the got use to it they might be more open minded about cultural deversity.
And if children feel uncomfortable with it how are they going to learn anything?.
To be honest, when I was a kid, a person coming up to me in a black veil with eyeslits would have scared me shitless. It has nothing to do with racism, but children have fears.
Mrs. Azmi was suspended not because she is Muslim but because she is unable to perform her job to the standard that parents have a right to expect for their children. If she believes that it is her religious duty to wear the full-face veil - as she does - then clearly she cannot be asked to remove it, but neither can she expect to teach in a mixed-gender environment.
Teaching is based on complex interaction between student and teacher. This interaction requires the student to make eye contact, to see the lips move as they speak, to register facial expressions and to build a relationship of sorts, all of which is severely impeded if the teacher’s face is covered, even if there are slits for the eyes. Now, you might learn from staring at a blackboard but you aren't every child in the world. Especially with young children, facial expressions are so important.
By the way: the 'teaching system they have in england' isn't anything special. Its not some secret service.
NeoSteph Basket Case Age: 36 Gender: Female Posts: 16494
October 20th, 2006 at 07:19pm
Well let me just point out to you all a few facts of this case, cause seeing as most of you making your point heard are not from the united kingdom.
What Jack Straw said, to me and for the large part of the British Public was not an offensive comment, he did not ask for parliament to pass legislature on the ban of muslims wearing veils, neither did he in this particular case ask the women to remove hers. It was the actions of the school who wished her to teach without the veil and for the most part i agree with them.
Fristly to the person who think they wouldn't ask the cross to be banned, well yes they do. ALL religious artifacts are banned from schools. Unless you happen to go to a religious school then more than likely they bend the rules.
Furthermore The veil worn my muslim women is actually not a religious symbol, before this turns into one of those debates. It is a piece of clothing brought into that culture to segregate and de-moralise women as lesser equals and if you speak to elder muslim women who choose not to wear they veil they find it hurtful that younger generations of their creed choose to wear because to them it will always be a symbol of oprression.
The reason the school wishes her not to wear the veil is firstly the message it sends to young girls, that you must hide your face from males. Secondly these are PRIMARY school children where the majority of lesson on vocational. If your a 5 year old who has only begun to read you learn how to pronounce letters and words from looking at the speaking motions on the teachers face. Thirdly if the only part of the face you can see is the eyes. Facial features will be emotionless, one of the pivital ideas of teaching is that you must be able express learning in more than what you say. How can the children be excited about what there learning if they can't tell how their teacher is reacting.
This is not a religious matter or a culture matter, it is abotu what is right for the pupils.
Tp Incubus: Yes apart of the reason is because it made people uncomfortable what reports don't tell you is that it is the children it made uncomfortable, why should they have to be subjected to that in a place they should feel secure.
In the area where this women taught has a high population of muslims, there was already cultural diversity in the school her choosing to wear the veil when there is no apparent need to, because according tot he teachings of Islam veils should only be worn in the company of men. school boys do not count as they havn't come of age.
I'm going to say this once and you can call em a racist a biggit or prejudice i don;t care because I know the majority of the British public support this idea.
ENGLAND and the reast of the united kingdom is not a multi-cultural society we are a christian country with christian understanding and christian morals. That doesn't mean we are religious it means we have our own culture. Why should our country have to abide by new legislature new completely idioitic religious hatred laws which allows christians to be sluaghtered in the press but not muslims. To mean we must change the way we teach the future of this country.
The veil acts as segregation. Jewish, hindu's, protestants, catholics. for the last century have coincided peacefully abiding by the culture of this country. But and i expect i will be called a racist for this even though the majority of you do not live in england so do not know what i'm talking about. Muslims segregate themselves in colonies away from the public and EXTREMIST get away with sheer bloody murder, and if we try and stand up for ourselves call them out on their segregating behavious. We are labelled as Racist, bigits.
If you come to this country, the country shouldn't have to change to your views you should peacefully join the community.
I'm not scapegoating all muslims here, but it's a large percentage of that community who feels this way towards the rest of us.
(oh and sorry for any grammar mistakes. This talk has annoyed me and i don't pick up on spelling mistakes when i'm annoyed)
I didn't see anything wrong with Jack Straw's comments as it was a request not a demand.
"Aishah Azmi, 24, a Muslim teaching assistant who has been suspended by her school in Dewsbury, northern England, denied on Saturday that she had refused to take off her veil while in class.
Azmi told BBC radio she had only insisted on wearing it in the company of male colleagues but had accepted to remove it while before her pupils at Headfield Church of England junior school.
"I have no problem with the children," she said."
She took it off while she was teaching so her teaching skills weren't being compromised in anyway.
Also her eleven-year-old pupils never complained that they had trouble understanding on the times that she was wearing her veil.
Muslims segregate themselves in Ireland as well - though not to the extent they do in Britian - so I do know what you're talking about. However by taking actions such as banning the veil in schools isn't helping the suituation. It's only going to make the Muslim commumtiy feel more and more resentful, when they feel they're being victimized enough as it is.
Wow. So what actually happened? Did she refuse to remove the veil or not. O__o conflicting stories.
I get that England is a chrstian society, thats fine. But that doesnt mean they have to discriminate against other societies. I think this discussion would be good in the social groups and discrimination thread more than here.
The Doctor Falling In Love With The Board Age: 34 Gender: Female Posts: 8786
October 21st, 2006 at 10:39am
I_worship_tre_Cool:
Wow. So what actually happened? Did she refuse to remove the veil or not. O__o conflicting stories.
I get that England is a chrstian society, thats fine. But that doesnt mean they have to discriminate against other societies. I think this discussion would be good in the social groups and discrimination thread more than here.
It's going to court. But it's acting like a nice little scapegoat just like scapegoat bird flu.
I was also asked to consider joining this pressure group CND.
But I refused to buy into it. So, yeah.
Any comments?
NeoSteph Basket Case Age: 36 Gender: Female Posts: 16494
October 21st, 2006 at 11:38am
I_worship_tre_Cool:
Wow. So what actually happened? Did she refuse to remove the veil or not. O__o conflicting stories.
I get that England is a chrstian society, thats fine. But that doesnt mean they have to discriminate against other societies. I think this discussion would be good in the social groups and discrimination thread more than here.
we're not discriminating against other societies we're being to leniant to the point where British Citizens rights have been seconded after immigrants.
You can't come to a different society and expect every part of your culture to be abided to, it's no right and it's not fair. We our giving you the right to free education, free hostpitals and a bugger load of support on the welfare all which is payed by from the tax payer. In return muslim communities parade down the street flying death to england banners. And celebrating the July bombings. Yet it is the christian, jewish, hindu's who are arrested for speaking their mind.
Whats going to happen soon is people will start taken action into their own hands and causing violence because the government doesn't give a shit anymore. The only people in this crountry who our being discriminated against is the british.
Oh and sorry Incubus i thought you were american not Ireland. So i was writing as if you were on the otherside of the globe....if that makes sense.
Thats much too time consuming, no major company is going to do that. The videos that PETA uses are from rural communities that are most likely ignorant to the laws because no one is informing them (and sadly people don't have the common sense to know that its wrong to bash a cows brains in with a bat) but then PETA likes to use those videos against major corparations, they lie. I don't see why they feel the need to lie about that, evidently they think going after bigger companies will get them more press, and they do nothing to inform the rural communities so they can stop their unethical treatment of animals.
