What are opinions on PETA?

Answer 1

Here are some opinions from various Answers.com Contributors:

• PETA is free to express their opinions peacefully, but when members of PETA throw blood on a woman who chooses to wear a fur coat, that is wrong. They become terrorists when they condone bad behavior like burning down a beef farm. PETA would get more respect if they let people wear what they want without harassing them or destroying property. Everyone has the right to choose.

• PETA chapters have been known to be rather hypocritical in their actions. One report from last year indicated that they would dump bodies of deceased animals in their care (sometimes killed cruelly in their own custody) in dumpsters.

• The charges of animal cruelty were investigated by the ASPCA legal counsel and proved unfounded. That being noted, the organization has harmed it's own cause by it's unacceptable actions and blatant disregard of the law and the rights of other citizens. There are more productive and positive methods for furthering a cause that one believes in than the destruction of property and the assaulting of persons regardless of the circumstances. In some cases such as the Civil Rights Movement, violating the law becomes a necessity for the obvious humanitarian reasons, however, PETA does not fall into such a category. I personally have my doubts of the genuine concern and the truth in their agenda statements. FYI, I am an animal lover and a vegan (a vegetarian who consumes no animal products).

• PETA has done nothing but help animals and fight the evil basic human society who are so egotistical that they refuse to believe that animals are being tortured to make their lives easier. They are some of the most respectable people in existence today.

• The People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals, is probably one of the most polarizing organizations in the world, meaning: 'either you love them, or hate them' and not much in between. Supporters of the non-profit, Tax deductable organization know its philosophies, and adgenda. Critics often cite PETA's opposition, CCF (Centre for Consumer Freedom) Which is a lobbying company created by the Phillip Morris Co. but now owned and operated by fast food restaurants and their suppliers IE; Tyson food, Cargaill, Mcdonalds, and KFC to name a few. The CCF condemns PETA for its high euthanasia to adoption rate, yet PETA has never claimed to be an adoption agency, and offer a free euthanasia program to sick, suffering, and dying animals. PETA, unlike any other animal rights organization in the world, also offers free spay and neuterings to animals with families that cannot afford it. The CCF is also widely known for attacking many other respectable organizations such as: Mothers Against Drunk Driving, Centre for Disease Control and Prevention, and anti-obesity advocates.

• This will depend on your perspective. PETA's critics will tell you that PETA gives a great deal of money to convicted arsonists, domestic terrorists and known criminals if the group feels those people will help advance their cause. PETA's stated goal is to eliminate human interference in animals' lives. This would mean no having pets or service animals, everyone would have to eat a vegan diet (no meat, dairy or egg product foods, probably also no seafood), leather would be outlawed and the animals would be released 'back into the wild'. The underlying theme is that human interference in the lives of animals is always detrimental and the highest ideal is for humans to stop monkeying around with the natural lives of fellow living beings. The practical result of this would be to bankrupt nations (in the US, agriculture including animal agriculture is one of only two industries with a positive trade balance; the other is aerospace technology), result in mass starvation across the globe (plant diets have low caloric density and animal products are the fastest and most readily available sources of protein), and billions of animals would starve to death because they can no longer live in the wild due to selective breeding by humans (think of a Chihuahua in northern Maine). PETA's advocates will tell you that PETA is working towards improving the lives of animals through increased awareness of how egregiously humans abuse animals routinely - horses that are left to starve in the pasture, dogs that fight one another to the death after being trained to kill by their owners, toxicity testing of substances on rabbits, etc. Also, a meat-based diet is widely considered to be a primary reason so many of the first world countries have a major obesity and cardiovascular disease epidemic - reducing or eliminating meat, dairy and egg products from the diet in the United States will overall make American citizens healthier. There are now synthetic versions of leather and other animal-based products that work as well or better than the original "real" version. Personally, I think PETA consists of a large group of well-meaning supporters but is run by a few very radical activists who are willing to push far beyond what their donors would like to see happen. I suspect, but cannot prove or even provide much support, that a large number of PETA's financial backers would cut off their donations if they looked into what PETA believes, their stated goals and the methods they are willing to use to promote their beliefs. I don't think the large group of supporters are bad, just not well-informed; I fully believe that the leading radical activists are bad (morally corrupt) and that they are dangerous both to humans and to the animal populations they purport to be advocating for.