How PETA twists religion to push animal "rights."

ME: It's current... but about an hour too old for LBN.
--------------------------

http://www.canadafreepress.com/2005/tgr101805.htm

ConsumerFreedom.com
Tuesday, October 18, 2005

People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals (PETA) has been widely criticized for its campaign comparing Nazi Holocaust victims to farm animals, its blind insistence that Jesus was a vegetarian, and it callous attempts to cheapen the symbols and rituals of Roman Catholicism. But a new report from the Center for Consumer Freedom indicates that these offensive gestures are just the tip of a larger iceberg.

This eye-opening report includes an inventory of scripture contradicting PETA's claim that only vegetarians can be observant Christians, Jews, Mormons, and Muslims.

....

"owever sympathetically you interpret the Judeo-Christian religious tradition, it puts animals in a fundamentally different category from human beings ... I think in the end we have, reluctantly, to recognize that the Judeo-Christian religious tradition is our foe." - Peter Singer, author of Animal Liberation and PETA's philosophical godfather


At the "Animal Rights 2002" national convention, Animal Liberation author and avowed atheist Peter Singer lamented that "mainstream Christianity has been a problem for the animal movement." Two days later at the same event, a program director with the Fund for Animals issued a warning: "If we are not able to bring the churches, the synagogues, and the mosques around to the animal rights view," he cautioned, "we will never make large-scale progress for animal rights in the United States."

PETA generally avoids alienating Hindus, whose "bad karma" prohibitions against killing most animals have endeared them to animal rightists. But Hindu law expressly permits eating meat. Similarly, the Buddhist world has (so far) been spared PETA's impious tantrums, although many Buddhists eat meat -- including the Dalai Lama.

....

http://www.canadafreepress.com/2005/tgr101805.htm

...why did he miraculously feed all those people with fish?

... with all their exaggerated pride & over-confidence, one might thing that they had taken a page out of the GW Bush book of hubris.

"PETA holds protests at houses of worship, even suing one church that tried to protect its members from Sunday-morning harassment. Its billboards and advertisements taunt Christians with the message that livestock (not Jesus) died for their sins."

and raise with 1 Tim 4:1-4.

:)

their intentions are always good.

PETA is a collective; many people belong and they do not all promote the same issues. Kind of like here at DU. Some PETA folk are more concerned with animal "rights" - the legal aspect - and some are more concerned about animal "welfare" - how society treats or values animals. Some pursue the vegetarian agenda, others really don't care if you eat meat, they just don't want the animals to suffer hellish lives and painful, gruesome deaths first (i.e., they oppose factory farming). But collectively PETA has done great things to advance the various causes of non-human animals, IMHO.

Those heading for Heaven should divest themselves of good intentions immediately!

... Bush having yet another Jim Beam with a Michelob chaser tonight.

ANOTHER thread bashing PETA begins at DU. It's been a week or two since the last one, so I guess we're all overdue for one now. We wil now taking submissions for the betting pool on just HOW large this thread will grow. I've got 168 posts. Anyone want to go higher?

Have at it, Species Bigots. Your hypocrisy for selected matters progressive does us all so very proud.

Oh, that's rich. Just because most of us aren't as devoted to your pet cause, we're bigots. This site gets stupider every day.

This site gets stupider every day.

I swear to god! It's like people are wholescale going off their meds or some shit.

Yes it does, but not because of posts like "species bigots."

I'm a member of PeTA and I've been called far worse.

:rofl:

That's laughable. I support animal rights fully and am actually in the process of going vegetarian but I don't support PETA because of their extremism and questionable tactics. That certainly doesn't make me a "species bigot".

"Species bigot?"

Please tell me you're practicing for a Mad TV skit.

If a lion attacks and eats a gazelle, is he a species bigot? Or is he just a hungry lion that's higher up on the food chain?

Are the worst. :grr:

(I can't believe someone actually said that without a hint of irony.)

And btw, the last PETA-bashing thread wasn't a week ago, it was on Sunday night...it was locked :)

Species bigots and "hypocrisy for selected matters progressive does us all so very proud"...I love it!

Kudos to you my friend! :toast:!!

"Bigot" by post #4, "crackpot" by post #20....

I'll go with 86 posts before it gets locked, because the knives got drawn so early.

lmao

Thats for the chuckle. Thats a great new term.

Personally, Im a yummy species bigot. I have no use for species that taste bad.

on animal sacrifice, fishing in the New Testament, turning water into wine. Just don't get me started. :grr:

group for the food, tobacco, and alcohol industry?

Lesse, a critique by some outfit funded by business interests is worse than propaganda by a bunch of crackpots.

Yeah. It sounds to me like they cancel each other out.

and I take offense to that comment.

The better question isn't "Why post a link to a business trade org?", it's "Why posts a link to a right-wing mouthpiece run by Richard Berman, the head of a right-wing PR firm closely associated with the RNC, Brent Bozell and Phyllis Schlafly, which actively campaigns against workers rights, the environment, consumer safety, government regulation, women's rights, drunk-driving laws, against food safety and labeling laws and wants to revoke the USDA's regulation of what pesticides can be used on food?" Oh...they also oppose PETA.

and am also offended that you would call me a crackpot.

Personal attacks are a violation of DU rules.

... or anyone one else specifically. It's an attack against a crackpot organization, and that's not a violation.

Because we belong to PeTA?

... this thread is about how Peta wants to use religion to push their animal "rights" agenda. I think that's pretty sleazy.

And I don't care what you think is the topic of this thread. You wanted a discussion and you got one.

Do you or do you not think I am a crackpot because I am a member of PETA? It's a simple question - please stop stonewalling and just answer it. Saying a generic "Peta are crackpots" isn't an answer.

... and I'm not going to do it. I stand by my earlier statement that Peta are crackpots. Own it, or ignore it. Your choice. I do not care which you do.

I've answered your question. If you don't like the answer... that's too bad. Cope.

You clearly are realizing that there is no acceptable way for you to say what you feel which is that you think I, and the other PeTA members here, are crackpots. DOn't put your intolerance and name-calling on me.

If you believe it, be a man and say it.

Unless you are a mind reader, you do not know what my personal feelings may be about you (or if I even have any feelings about you personally.) Maybe I do, maybe I don't.

But I wonder... why do you even CARE what I might think about you? What's the fascination you have over what my opinion of you is?

I think PETA are crackpots. Take it or leave it.



<< If you believe it, be a man and say it.>>

Oh brother! "Be-a-man"? You gotta be kidding me!

I'll take that at face value. Other than that arwalden, to continue to engage in a pointless discussion with you is beneath me and a waste of my beautiful mind. I am pooped from classes and have a big day tomorrow so must be getting to bed.

'Night, doll! :hi:

You just want to provoke someone into making a personal attack against you. I'm not taking your bait... and you call that "backing down"???

<< Other than that arwalden, to continue to engage in a pointless discussion with you is beneath me and a waste of my beautiful mind. >>

So did you learn anything? Can I expect you NOT to show up and dog me around the next time I have something negative to say about Peta?

is an organization made up of people, hence the name People for The Ethical Treatment of Animals. As I am one of those people, to claim that PeTA is a crackpot organization is, in fact, a broadbrush smear against me and others.

... I think you need to get thicker skin if you're going to spend time on public discussion forums.

So... other than that. Don't you think that Peta trying to use religion is pretty sleazy?

Are you confused politically arwalden? You're taking some good cues from the GOP with your intolerance and avoidance tactics here! :)

... just so you know. That's an attack on the messenger.

I don't verbally abuse people on message boards, so I think it's fair to expect others to treat me with civility. If I feel personally insulted by someone's broad brush smear, I can and will alert on the post, then I leave it to the mods/admins and consider their response or lack of same in my overall assessment of the quality of the board.

Like you, I have no use for religion, but I'm in favor of any tactic that may help to cause humans to consider treating non-human animals with more respect and consideration. So, no, I don't consider using religion to be sleazy. I think the Bible says something about humans being stewards of the earth. To me that menas being care takers of the planet, and all things on the planet. Not using and abusing it with neither consideration nor consicence nor respect.

<< "I'll pass on the thicker skin" >>

Thanks fine. It's just an expression.

<< I don't verbally abuse people on message boards, so I think it's fair to expect others to treat me with civility. >>

So you think your membership/association/affinity in/with/for Peta somehow makes them "off-limits"? Think again.

<< If I feel personally insulted by someone's broad brush smear, I can and will alert on the post, then I leave it to the mods/admins and consider their response or lack of same in my overall assessment of the quality of the board.>>

Or you could just read the rules and you'll see that it's not prohibited.

<< Like you, I have no use for religion, but I'm in favor of any tactic that may help to cause humans to consider treating non-human animals with more respect and consideration.>>

Rights are for people. Not animals.


<< So, no, I don't consider using religion to be sleazy. >>

I do... it's very GOP... it's so Fred Phelps... ick!

<< I think the Bible says something about humans being stewards of the earth. To me that menas being care takers of the planet, and all things on the planet. Not using and abusing it with neither consideration nor consicence nor respect. >>

That's not what Peta is about.

And therefore, if you insult their members, you are also insulting me. By calling PeTA members crackpots, you are also calling me a crackpot, which is totally unfair and un-progressive of you. Name-calling is so Free Republic! :)

So...are you calling me and the other DU/PeTA members on here crackpots? Hmm? Why do I think you won't answer this...

Got awfully quiet in here didn't it?

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

Because I am a member of PeTA? Don't skirt the issue. Either you think I'm a crackpot because I'm a member of PeTA or you don't.

If you choose to own it and wear that... then that's your problem. Not mine. I have not singled you out for personal scorn or ridicule.

Now...are you or are you not calling me a crackpot because I am a member of PeTA? Will you answer that or will you continue to avoid answering the question? It's a simple question arwalden.

<< Now...are you or are you not calling me a crackpot because I am a member of PeTA? >>

I have made no comments about you one way or the other.

<< Will you answer that or will you continue to avoid answering the question? >>

I have already answered you. It's just not the answer you want to hear. So you keep trying to think of clever ways to ask it.


<< It's a simple question arwalden. >>

No... it's bait. I'm not taking your bait.

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

and I now believe it is entirely reasonable to assume that all of the PETA members here are nutty as a fruitcake.

OK PETA people-- I now believe you're NUTS! Crazy, insane, maybe too stupid to breathe. Got that?

That's how it works, right? Or did you have something else in mind?

Oh, and since the source, these "Consumer Freedom" people, are well known to be lying shills for the processed food industry and rightwing Republicans, maybe you haven't convinced me PETA are such crackpots after all.

<< "So, you have convinced me that PETA is a bunch of crackpots..." >>

Really?! That was an easy sell!


<< OK PETA people-- I now believe you're NUTS! Crazy, insane, maybe too stupid to breathe. Got that? >>

:shrug:


<< That's how it works, right? Or did you have something else in mind?>>

I don't have any idea what you're going on about.

<< Oh, and since the source, these "Consumer Freedom" people, are well known to be lying shills for the processed food industry and rightwing Republicans, maybe you haven't convinced me PETA are such crackpots after all. >>

I don't know this to be factual. That sounds like a Peta press-release to me.

I believe I speak for most of DU in thanking you for providing the evening's entertainment.

Carry on, and I sincerely hope there's not enough "Fuck you, asshole" posts in here from any quarter to make us lock this thing.

<< "Yes you do. We all do, and..." Posted by TreasonousBastard >>

Are you a mind-reader? How would you know what I do?

<< I believe I speak for most of DU in thanking you for providing the evening's entertainment. >>

That sounds like a personal crack to me. :shrug:

<< Carry on, and I sincerely hope there's not enough "Fuck you, asshole" posts in here from any quarter to make us lock this thing. >>

I don't understand what you mean by that.

you don't like PeTA and you don't like religion.

So I guess you just wanted to throw out some flame bait?

If this topic does not interest you, then you know what your options are.

<< you don't like PeTA and you don't like religion. >>

What does that have to do with anything? This thread is not about me.

I'm not sure why you're posting it either.

The jury is still out on dolphins and whales. Should animals have rights?
Especially those with first-class brains?
Did Jesus kill cows and other mammals? (I don't think so)
The fish bit? I never really believed that story though I do believe that Jesus was an advanced soul and I seriously doubt he'd take the life force of any mammals. (fish? maybe, but just for the benefit of the crowds)
But, in light of Fiztmas, I wonder about a lot of the subjects I've been seeing here lately. I know I am not alone in my observations.

I do hope you enjoy it here.

:hi:

;-) :toast:

That's a pretty nasty article, with a clear bias. JMO

On all accounts. Bravo!

Knowing that people on this site seem to be pretty picky about sources. Did you notice who wrote that article?

"The Center for Consumer Freedom is a nonprofit coalition of restaurants, food companies, and consumers working together to promote personal responsibility and protect consumer choices. "

That article was literally nothing more than an advertisement. Very weak imho. Even as a vegetarian I am no big fan of PETA, but I still think it was unfair and slanted.

See my comment above on the CCF. Basically, they're also a RW mouthpiece with ties to the RNC, Phyllis Schlafly and Brent Bozell.

I am neither vegetarian OR a PETA member and I think that article is dreck.

I am rethinking my loyalties to PETA (and don't get excited arwalden, it's nothing your little and loud PETA-bashing campaign can take credit for), but I agree wholeheartedly with what you said...unfair and slanted pretty much sums it up.

BTW, welcome to DU! :hi:

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

:toast:

Sorry you have to see this trash as one of your first threads :eyes: Those of us who have been around for awhile get numb to these kinds of non-sensical, biased, and slanted sewage stories being posted every week.

Good to have you here! :hi:

No worries. I am an avid reader here but am feeling more hopeful than usual, hence the posts. The negative ones seem to be in direct proportion to the increasing cracks in the proverbial walls.:toast:

<< How did I know who was posting this before I even checked the name of the OP : eyes : >>

If this topic does not interest you, then you know what to do.

The topic is you posting your biased flamebait for the week, and trying to antagonize people so you can start arguments so you can use your two favorite words: PeTA kooks. I'm surprised you haven't whipped that old favorite out yet. :eyes:

And you don't own DU. Even if the subject doesn't interest me I can tell you 90% of us are really pretty sick of seeing your weekly ranting PETA-bashing threads. Just read the responses to your OP for heaven's sake. It's so played out and no one cares anymore. Really.

of how Peta wants to use religion to promote animal "rights"?

Hear that sound? That was my point whizzing past your head.

:eyes: Oy vey. I'm not going to engage in a puerile and fruitless discussion with you on PeTA - because you are incapable of having a reasonable discussion on this issue. I've tried before to have a reasonable discussion with you about it (as have many other DUers) and you only resort to wildly overblown rhetoric, broad-brushing, name-calling, and attacks.

You posted a piece of propaganda from the meat industry smearing PeTA, and people called you on it. Repeatedly. Why don't you go answer some of their questions?

Everyone is just really sick of you posting this crap every week arwalden - I don't know what else to tell you other than that. :shrug:

... anyone who is as disinterested you are in having a discussion with me repeatedly shows up and tries to engage me in discussion. Albeit off-topic and filled with personal attacks on the messenger rather than sticking to the subject. That behavior indicates some sort of fascination with me that I find to be puzzling.

I am not disinterested in the topic per se, perhaps I phrased it wrong.

I'm not attempting to engage you in a reasonable discussion (gave that feat us looong ago), just trying to enlighten you a bit.

And I wouldn't be condemning others for "personal attacks" if I were you arwalden. This isn't the first post by you I've read you know.

:hi:

... I think it's pretty clear who's following whom. If I displease you so much, then why bother with me? I do not understand.

<< I'm not attempting to engage you in a reasonable discussion (gave that feat us looong ago), just trying to enlighten you a bit. >>

I'm not so easily brainwashed.

you make it about you.

The largest part of critical thinking is discerning the bias of the source (In this case, as the OP, that's you.), that's one of the first things I was taught in J-school. You can't claim separation from your source and by writing (posting) it you become a subject party to it. That is...by posting it, you're open to criticism as to why you've posted it. You and you alone are responsible for your words.

In other words, saying it's not about you is both a lie and a cop-out.

This is a subject that I am interested in.

The person who wrote it is obnoxious enough to describe a relgiious difference as "impious tantrums" but not brave enough to sign his name.

Or else the p.r. company wouldn't let him sign his name.

:thumbsdown:

What do you want a cookie or something?

Mmmm.

nad lead to the extinction of itself and higher forms close to it. Bugs will do nicely.

We are bad news, out of control, and really stupid about what is happening. We're DOOMED!

We're one of the best

I don't agree with Peta on many issues but this topic only serves the "Divide and concure" methods of Rove and Co. Lets agree to disagree, we have work to do.

The dogs are now awake from all of the smoke and heat from this thread.