PETA is evil. Is Morrissey oblivious or careless?

[nothappynotsad]

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/nathan-j-winograd/peta-kills-puppies-kittens_b_2979220.html

http://www.petakillsanimals.com

Is it wrong to kill animals for food but perfectly fine to kill them and throw them in a dumpster somewhere? It's not like these are conspiracies about the organization. These are facts. Why do you think Morrissey continues to associate himself with a group that murders innocent animals every day?

 

[Deleted member 1074]

Is it wrong to kill animals for food but perfectly fine to kill them and throw them in a dumpster somewhere? It's not like these are conspiracies about the organization. These are facts. Why do you think Morrissey continues to associate himself with a group that murders innocent animals every day?

Because he's a moron.

 

[Deleted member 1074]

Why do you think Morrissey continues to associate himself with a group that murders innocent animals every day?

On a side note, why do you think Morrissey continues to associate himself with a group that murders innocent solo & Smiths songs every tour and album?

 

[Anonymous]

"It's not like these are conspiracies against the organization. These are facts."

What does this mean? Can't you get someone to look over your homework before you turn it in?

 

[oliver]

Is it wrong to kill animals for food but perfectly fine to kill them and throw them in a dumpster somewhere? It's not like these are conspiracies about the organization. These are facts.

1000s of animals are euthanized every week in county shelters. Some of these shelters employ vets to administer lethal injections which is considered the most humane method. Some use gas chambers and a few really poor shelters shoot the animals with rifles.

PETA goes to the county shelters that don't use lethal injection and pay for vets to administer the lethal injection so of course they're tax returns are going to show that they euthanized animals.

Also, who do you think funds the petakillsanimals site?
Here's who you believe to be telling you the whole picture:
http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php/Center_for_Consumer_Freedom
The Center for Consumer Freedom (CCF) (formerly called the "Guest Choice Network (GCN)") is a front group run by Rick Berman's PR firm Berman & Co. for the restaurant, alcohol, tobacco and other industries. It runs media campaigns which oppose the efforts of scientists, doctors, health advocates, animal advocates, environmentalists and groups like Mothers Against Drunk Driving, calling them "the Nanny Culture -- the growing fraternity of food cops, health care enforcers, anti-meat activists, and meddling bureaucrats who 'know what's best for you.'"

CCF is registered as a tax-exempt, non-profit organization under the IRS code 501(c)(3). Its advisory board is comprised mainly of representatives from the restaurant, meat and alcoholic beverage industries.

Of course this doesn't excuse anyone at PETA for not treating the animals (dead or alive) with the dignity they deserve.

 

[Rowntree]

1000s of animals are euthanized every week in county shelters. Some of these shelters employ vets to administer lethal injections which is considered the most humane method. Some use gas chambers and a few really poor shelters shoot the animals with rifles.

PETA goes to the county shelters that don't use lethal injection and pay for vets to administer the lethal injection so of course they're tax returns are going to show that they euthanized animals.

Also, who do you think funds the petakillsanimals site?
Here's who you believe to be telling you the whole picture:
http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php/Center_for_Consumer_Freedom
The Center for Consumer Freedom (CCF) (formerly called the "Guest Choice Network (GCN)") is a front group run by Rick Berman's PR firm Berman & Co. for the restaurant, alcohol, tobacco and other industries. It runs media campaigns which oppose the efforts of scientists, doctors, health advocates, animal advocates, environmentalists and groups like Mothers Against Drunk Driving, calling them "the Nanny Culture -- the growing fraternity of food cops, health care enforcers, anti-meat activists, and meddling bureaucrats who 'know what's best for you.'"

CCF is registered as a tax-exempt, non-profit organization under the IRS code 501(c)(3). Its advisory board is comprised mainly of representatives from the restaurant, meat and alcoholic beverage industries.

Of course this doesn't excuse anyone at PETA for not treating the animals (dead or alive) with the dignity they deserve.

Yes! In these days of pressure groups always look at where the information is coming from before jumping on the bandwagon.

 

[Deleted member 1074]

1000s of animals are euthanized every week in county shelters. Some of these shelters employ vets to administer lethal injections which is considered the most humane method. Some use gas chambers and a few really poor shelters shoot the animals with rifles.

PETA goes to the county shelters that don't use lethal injection and pay for vets to administer the lethal injection so of course they're tax returns are going to show that they euthanized animals.

Also, who do you think funds the petakillsanimals site?
Here's who you believe to be telling you the whole picture:
http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php/Center_for_Consumer_Freedom
The Center for Consumer Freedom (CCF) (formerly called the "Guest Choice Network (GCN)") is a front group run by Rick Berman's PR firm Berman & Co. for the restaurant, alcohol, tobacco and other industries. It runs media campaigns which oppose the efforts of scientists, doctors, health advocates, animal advocates, environmentalists and groups like Mothers Against Drunk Driving, calling them "the Nanny Culture -- the growing fraternity of food cops, health care enforcers, anti-meat activists, and meddling bureaucrats who 'know what's best for you.'"

CCF is registered as a tax-exempt, non-profit organization under the IRS code 501(c)(3). Its advisory board is comprised mainly of representatives from the restaurant, meat and alcoholic beverage industries.

Of course this doesn't excuse anyone at PETA for not treating the animals (dead or alive) with the dignity they deserve.

Yes! In these days of pressure groups always look at where the information is coming from before jumping on the bandwagon.

Clearly you missed the point of the article. Maybe you should read it again and soak up what it is actually saying instead of just reading the headline...which seems to be a very hard thing to do for some of you around here.

 

[CrystalGeezer]

Rush Limbaugh Logic.

Look, every organization has it's bad seed. Look at solo for example?

 

[Deleted member 1074]

Rush Limbaugh Logic.

Look, every organization has it's bad seed. Look at solo for example?

Solo has a Rush Limbaugh too...only it's female and housesits.

 

[oliver]

Clearly you missed the point of the article. Maybe you should read it again and soak up what it is actually saying instead of just reading the headline...which seems to be a very hard thing to do for some of you around here.

Really... whats the point? There are two links:

The first is riddled with inaccuracies - there's nothing 'secret' about what PETA is doing. They declare it on their taxes (when they could easily hide it as "program costs") they have pages on their website explaining why they do it and they have mobile low cost spay/neuter vans that accompany them when they take over the euthanasia programme for a shelter

The second is funded by people with a vested interest in turning people against PETA.

Euthanizing animals is a horrible thing to have to do but if you make it less traumatic for the animals isn't that a *better* thing than doing nothing?

 

[Deleted member 1074]

Really... whats the point? There are two links:

The first is riddled with inaccuracies - there's nothing 'secret' about what PETA is doing. They declare it on their taxes (when they could easily hide it as "program costs") they have pages on their website explaining why they do it and they have mobile low cost spay/neuter vans that accompany them when they take over the euthanasia programme for a shelter

The second is funded by people with a vested interest in turning people against PETA.

Euthanizing animals is a horrible thing to have to do but if you make it less traumatic for the animals isn't that a *better* thing than doing nothing?

The better thing for PETA to do, as was the point of the article, would be at least (being listed as an animal shelter) bother to take the time to see if they could find a home for the animals they adopted as opposed to just adopting them to kill them less "traumatically".

 

[oliver]

The better thing for PETA to do, as was the point of the article, would be at least (being listed as an animal shelter) bother to take the time to see if they could find a home for the animals they adopted as opposed to just adopting them to kill them less "traumatically".

According to the article, they're listed as a shelter *or* humane society. The rules for each are very different depending on county by-laws. Where I live, anyone can incorporate as a society but you need 10 acres of land to be a shelter (or be in a property taxed as commercial.)

The fuzzy description is just for tax purposes (501(c)3 versus any other tax free status) so it's quite clear to me that PETA does not operate a 'shelter' in the traditional sense. Of course if the journo had done real research instead of finding something shocking he would have realised this.

 

[Anonymous]

Euthanizing animals is a horrible thing to have to do but if you make it less traumatic for the animals isn't that a *better* thing than doing nothing?

Then perhaps they should rethink holding up this protest sign

 

[Deleted member 1074]

According to the article, they're listed as a shelter *or* humane society. The rules for each are very different depending on county by-laws. Where I live, anyone can incorporate as a society but you need 10 acres of land to be a shelter (or be in a property taxed as commercial.)

The fuzzy description is just for tax purposes (501(c)3 versus any other tax free status) so it's quite clear to me that PETA does not operate a 'shelter' in the traditional sense. Of course if the journo had done real research instead of finding something shocking he would have realised this.

So, do you find a problem with PETA being listed as an 'animal shelter or humane society' on paper for tax purposes even though they do not attempt to provide the function of either with the exception of spaying/neutering?

 

[oliver]

So, do you find a problem with PETA being listed as an 'animal shelter or humane society' on paper for tax purposes even though they do not attempt to provide the function of either with the exception of spaying/neutering?

They do provide humane society services. To qualify as a humane society you can do nothing but run a mailbox and offer advice to people.

 

[Rowntree]

Clearly you missed the point of the article. Maybe you should read it again and soak up what it is actually saying instead of just reading the headline...which seems to be a very hard thing to do for some of you around here.

Clearly I did see the point of the article(s) but you have an agenda so couldn't really give a f*** what anyone else says either way. This is a bit like the RSPCA and other animal charities killing animals. They only have so many resources, if you don't like animals being killed then throw more money their way, that way less animals will die as the charities' resources will be greater.

If your only intention is to show anyone up that does something for animals as a hypocrite that's fine, there's obviously a lot to be achieved by that.

 

[Deleted member 1074]

They do provide humane society services. To qualify as a humane society you can do nothing but run a mailbox and offer advice to people.

I'm not privy to the laws & qualifications for forming your own humane society, so I'll secede from discussing that.

National humane societies primarily focus on essentially what you pointed out. Local humane societies, however, primarily focus on adoption, sheltering & euthanasia. I find it questionable that PETA picks and chooses which aspects of a humane society they want to participate in...essentially choosing every action other than the ones that would prolong the animals life.

 

[Deleted member 1074]

Clearly I did see the point of the article(s) but you have an agenda so couldn't really give a f*** what anyone else says either way. This is a bit like the RSPCA and other animal charities killing animals. They only have so many resources, if you don't like animals being killed then throw more money their way, that way less animals will die as the charities' resources will be greater.

If your only intention is to show anyone up that does something for animals as a hypocrite that's fine, there's obviously a lot to be achieved by that.

Yeah, because that is what this is about, isn't it?

 

[123xyz]

1000s of animals are euthanized every week in county shelters. Some of these shelters employ vets to administer lethal injections which is considered the most humane method. Some use gas chambers and a few really poor shelters shoot the animals with rifles.

PETA goes to the county shelters that don't use lethal injection and pay for vets to administer the lethal injection so of course they're tax returns are going to show that they euthanized animals.

.

Really liked the details and homework in your post , Oliver.

 

[Deleted member 1074]

Really liked the details and homework in your post , Oliver.

Only beside doing that, they have animals sent to them in Virginia to be put down.