Topless Beauties Ask Selfridges to ‘Have a Heart’ and Drop Foie Gras

by Conor Thu Feb 12, 2009 21:49

no matter how many times you see this type of footage you never get used to it.

by Jim Fri Feb 13, 2009 11:09

Most farmers treat their animals with dignity and their welfare is a top priority.
Slaughter of animals should always be as human as possible to ensure the animals have a swift death and their suffering is not prolonged.
When I hunt deer I always use one shot to kill, usually to the head, and a soft-nose bullet to ensure that an injured animal dies instantluy and does not escape to die a long lingering death. Any animal that I kill I butcher for venison as well as mounting the head on my wall.
To kill vermin I use a shotgun rather than poison because a poisoned carcass of a crow or rat will poison any animal that will consume it.

The raise animals in appalling conditions purely to maximise profit is an unforgivable moral crime To prolong the suffering of any creature is evil. Pure and simple.

by rogY Fri Feb 13, 2009 22:02

PeTA's lack of imagination is truly staggering: http://www.kfoxtv.com/news/18704797/detail.html#-

This is such an embarrassment for genuine rights-based animal advocates.

by John Carmody Mon Feb 16, 2009 22:37 arancampaigns at eircom dot net

Hi Everyone!

Thank you for responding to this posting and thank you for sending in your comments good and bad about PETA's work for animals.

For me personally, i am very grateful for most of the work that PETA does for animals worldwide, i don't think there are any groups, individual's or campaigners that will get everything right or indeed perfect, but i agree that PETA's voice has changed many hearts and minds, people who otherwise may not have heard the animal’s plight.

After i saw Canada's barbaric seal hunt on the front cover of the Irish Daily Mirror back in 1999 with horrific pictures of baby seals head's smashed in and their bodies skinned and their skins shipped around the world for people to wear, i immediately wrote to PETA for an information pack and the contents of which helped to change my life for the better and today i am a staunch animal rights campaigner who is now volunteering to help animals and trying hard to educate other people too, a snowball effect.

I am delighted for PETA and i wish them every success in their work to raise awareness of cruelty to animals, after-all, the animals need all the help and support they can get.

Thank you,

Caption: Video Id: 7QKGg01OHXY Type: Youtube Video
Embedded video Youtube Video

by Catlady Tue Feb 17, 2009 00:21

I looked at the first link RogY posted and was appalled that this sort of stunt was pulled in the name of animal rights. Would the same ever be tolerated in the name of children's rights? I think bloody not.

My personal disdain for media-whoring stunts aside, I found one comment from this site very interesting. For once I agree with someone who is doubtless anti-AR when they say:

"Even if PETA was trying to make a point about vegetarians beig healthier and "better lovers," why would they have TWO WOMEN KISSING IN TEXAS? One of the few states left in the country where being homophobic is a pastime. If you want people to treat animals better, why not just just say that?"

The important sentence in the above is the last one - why not "just say it"? Why the need to hide the real message of AR behind stunts which simply make certain men (ok, perhaps some women too!) want to run home and have a good old w**k? I mean what is the point of this?????

OK it may be very pleasant to watch 2 healthy young girls have a snog, but it hardly puts one in mind of veal calves deprived of light and movement, dogs skinned alive for their fur or the thousands of healthy dogs killed in pounds each year now does it?

Personally I prefer to keep my sexuality and enjoyment of it entirely seperate from my AR activities. The 2 do not mix well. It is difficult to get turned on whilst thinking of the pain and torture of innocents (unless there is something seriously wrong with you). And vice versa may I say!

by James Wed Feb 18, 2009 20:48

The question we should ask ourselves is this: Is PeTA part of the solution to the problem of animal exploitation? Or is PeTA part of the problem – defined as the social mechanism that reinforces the dominant (speciesist) paradigm? Consider the following: (1) PeTA kills healthy, adoptable animals. (2) PeTA gives awards to institutional exploiters. (3) PETA promotes welfarist regulation which benefits industry. Thus, since PeTA employs speciesist tactics, it inescapably follows that PeTA is not an anti-speciesist, animal rights group: just as an “anti-racism” group which employs racist tactics is not an anti-racist group.

Furthermore, if PeTA had spent all of its institutional resources on clear and unequivocal vegan education, instead of on cheap stunts and welfarist regulation which benefits industry, then, it is eminently plausible to assume, it would have “converted” even MORE vegans. Thus, the claim that we should support PeTA because PeTA “does some good”, or because it has “converted” some vegans, is really nothing but a veiled justification for a less than maximally effective strategy. Indeed, the point can (and should) be put more strongly: how many people has PeTA's sexist campaigns and its “happy” meat message PREVENTED from going vegan?

Contra PeTA, I suggest that we pursue a maximally effective strategy for animals consisting of clear and unequivocal vegan education, in all its manifestations: one on one talks with nonvegans, group lectures, internet blogs, nonviolent protests and demos, all of which should be designed to educate the public about the moral, social, and environmental disaster that is institutionalized animal exploitation.