Peta

[poodlefan]

KKDD:

I see a lot of stuff on DOL slamming PETA, but Im yet to see any real evidence to support that veiw. The information presented as evidence of PETA being evil is almost always from sources explicitly compiled to discredit PETA or just hearsay. It may be that some members of PETA are evil nutters, but then many organisations have those, and its not really fair to present their veiws as indicative of the organisations philosophy or activities. It may also be that PETA has some extremely disgruntled enemies who go to a lot of effort (such as setting up domains entitled petakillsanimals) to grind their axe.

I don't think Peta are evil. I think, like most fanatics, they've ramped up their activist agenda while losing sight of their original cause. I know they are strongly against dogs being "exploited" by being kept as pets or, as Ingrid prefers to call them, "slaves". As I said, that's where they lost me.

When you go to the official PETA website and read a dog campaign called "Lets's make America a no-birth nation" I fail to see how you can conclude anything other than that they want to eliminate pet dogs from society.

Seems the only way to save dogs from exploitation is to deliberately engineer their extinction. Interesting philosophy. And as it's wrapped up in terms of mandatory spay/neuter programs and AKC breeder bashing, no doubt it will be plenty of support from those who can't see the forest for the trees.

How the welfare of dogs is to be promoted by advocating the elimination of responsible breeding and homing sure beats the hell out of me. But there's no place for purebred dogs in PETA's world. And one generation on, there's no place for dogs at all.

And now they're campaiging to stop airlines flying dogs - only in the dogs interests of course. Think good and hard about what kinds of dogs will be hardest hit by that.

Edited March 13, 2010 by poodlefan

[Are You Serious Jo]

You make it hard enough and people just give up, they are chipping away and people just can't see it.

[sandgrubber]

I breed dogs.

Doesn't bother me that many Muslims feel dogs are unclean and think we'll go to hell for associating with them. Guess I worry about a different sort of hell.

Talk is fine.

When it is coupled with killing dogs in the name of 'ethical treatment' I get upset. Partly cause it's bad to kill dogs to make an ideological point. Partly because hypocrits rub me the wrong way.

I see a lot of stuff on DOL slamming PETA, but Im yet to see any real evidence to support that veiw. The information presented as evidence of PETA being evil is almost always from sources explicitly compiled to discredit PETA or just hearsay. It may be that some members of PETA are evil nutters, but then many organisations have those, and its not really fair to present their veiws as indicative of the organisations philosophy or activities. It may also be that PETA has some extremely disgruntled enemies who go to a lot of effort (such as setting up domains entitled petakillsanimals) to grind their axe.

Its hard to tell whats going on with the sort of information that makes its way onto DOL.

In reply to you, I quote jdavis' well-put post:

I especially don't get that people come onto a purebred dog forum and show support for an organisation that wants to rid the world of dogs. I can't imagine either what is going through people's minds when they are reading the posts where it is shown PETA want to eliminate pets, then they go on to say this isn't what PETA wants.

On one hand some people say PETA is important because people listen to them, but on the other hand they want us to believe that when it comes to their pet ownership campaigns people won't listen to them. So to the people that think they aren't capable of having any impact on pet ownership, do they have any influence or not?

KKDD -If you are goin to support PETA, perhaps you should re-think your membership of a puerbred dog forum. I know many members here are people who merely own & love dogs, be they purebred or "mutts", but many of us are people who breed and/or show dogs, PAY to belong to DOL and find comments such as yours extremely offensive.

Speaking of extremists who go off half-cocked...

Out of interest, what has anyone done here that is extremist? Are you saying that people who don't like PETA based on what they themselves have said are going off half cocked? What more evidence can you need about an organisations ideology than their stated beliefs? If they say they want dog breeding to stop, and dog breeders don't support them because of this it makes us extremists?

Dog breeders go then pet dogs go as well. Don't you like dogs?

Edited March 13, 2010 by sandgrubber

[whippets]

Or to form a more balanced perspective try the PETA website. You'll find quotes such as "There's no such thing as a responsible breeder." Meaning, rescue, don't buy from a breeder.

Yeah I can imagine the PETA rescue page with all cute dogs on there. When you go the PETA society and ask about a particular dog they'd say "oh we put all those down last week"

Edited March 13, 2010 by whippets

[poodlemum]

I see a lot of stuff on DOL slamming PETA, but Im yet to see any real evidence to support that veiw. The information presented as evidence of PETA being evil is almost always from sources explicitly compiled to discredit PETA or just hearsay. It may be that some members of PETA are evil nutters, but then many organisations have those, and its not really fair to present their veiws as indicative of the organisations philosophy or activities. It may also be that PETA has some extremely disgruntled enemies who go to a lot of effort (such as setting up domains entitled petakillsanimals) to grind their axe.

Its hard to tell whats going on with the sort of information that makes its way onto DOL.

In reply to you, I quote jdavis' well-put post:

I especially don't get that people come onto a purebred dog forum and show support for an organisation that wants to rid the world of dogs. I can't imagine either what is going through people's minds when they are reading the posts where it is shown PETA want to eliminate pets, then they go on to say this isn't what PETA wants.

On one hand some people say PETA is important because people listen to them, but on the other hand they want us to believe that when it comes to their pet ownership campaigns people won't listen to them. So to the people that think they aren't capable of having any impact on pet ownership, do they have any influence or not?

KKDD -If you are goin to support PETA, perhaps you should re-think your membership of a puerbred dog forum. I know many members here are people who merely own & love dogs, be they purebred or "mutts", but many of us are people who breed and/or show dogs, PAY to belong to DOL and find comments such as yours extremely offensive.

Speaking of extremists who go off half-cocked...

Im not sure where I have stated support for PETA, I smply commented that Iv not seen any evidence to support the extreme anti-PETA position of many DOLers which is quite often expressed in (ironically) violent terms. The thread started with a post about PETA poisoning dog's water, with no factual material to back it up. Other claims Iv read on DOL about what PETA does or wants to do, appear to be long and apocalyptic assumptions drawn selectively from published material, although I agree there is some stuff they appear to advocate that most of us would disagree with. But the material that has been posted in reponse to my post doesnt justify the extremeness of veiws and statements I see expressed on DOL.

And now its being suggested that I should leave DOL? You crack me up.

Glad to provide some amusement, but I stand by my assertion that THIS IS A PUREBREEED DOGS FORUM, people like me PAY for our DOL membership and don't take kindly to people supporting organisations who actively campaign against breeders!

[Shmurps]

They are more nuttier and more cruel than I thought How do they get away with the things that they do?

I must admit though a few years ago when thet exposed a certain food company, I thought they were alright

[Jed]

Adding anti freeze to show dogs water is being discussed on various lists in the US. It seems to have happened, as there were plenty of witnesses, and apparently the organisers of the show were putting announcements over the pa all day.

The most relevant and succinct comment is this one, from an exhibitor. So it seems it was not an isolated incident.

When I still showing xxxxxx as a class dog, some PeTa folks (either sympathizers or true members) did some damage at a dog show. They let several dogs out of crates citing "better dead than bred". At least one of the dogs ran off and got hit by a car on the road. From then on, my friends and I would make sure someone was watching crates if we had to step away.

When I was showing xxxx as a class bitch, I remember a show where anti-freeze did turn up in several dog bowls. So yes, it does happen.

Sandgrubber, it is not the random horrible acts by PETA, or promoting themselves as a shelter, and then euthanasing all the dogs, it is the long term propaganda campaign they mounted which is the biggest worry. The success they have achieved to date shows that they are likely to achieve all their stated aims.

They have stated and well publicised aims, yet people do not believe them.

Ingrid Newkirk said that changing the language was important, "companion animal" had different connotations from "pet". She said that in 1998/9, when all pets were named as dogs or cats, or pets, even in scientific papers

Now pets are referred to as companion animals everywhere, scientific papers, on this forum, in the newspapers, everywhere.

[sandgrubber]

In my book it's fair to lodge verbal campaigns. If the PETA mob manages to convince the world to forsake the old three litter word 'pet' -- which is often used for beloved people as well as non-human animals in favour of the clap-trap 'companion animal' we have ourselves to blame. If there is real evidence that a bunch of animal lib loonies are killing show dogs, and 'rescued' dogs that could easily be rehomed are being PTS, it's sad that the dog world's PR is so poor that this isn't effectively used to discredit PETA and get a few people locked up or fined big-time.

Adding anti freeze to show dogs water is being discussed on various lists in the US. It seems to have happened, as there were plenty of witnesses, and apparently the organisers of the show were putting announcements over the pa all day.

The most relevant and succinct comment is this one, from an exhibitor. So it seems it was not an isolated incident.

When I still showing xxxxxx as a class dog, some PeTa folks (either sympathizers or true members) did some damage at a dog show. They let several dogs out of crates citing "better dead than bred". At least one of the dogs ran off and got hit by a car on the road. From then on, my friends and I would make sure someone was watching crates if we had to step away.

When I was showing xxxx as a class bitch, I remember a show where anti-freeze did turn up in several dog bowls. So yes, it does happen.

Sandgrubber, it is not the random horrible acts by PETA, or promoting themselves as a shelter, and then euthanasing all the dogs, it is the long term propaganda campaign they mounted which is the biggest worry. The success they have achieved to date shows that they are likely to achieve all their stated aims.

They have stated and well publicised aims, yet people do not believe them.

Ingrid Newkirk said that changing the language was important, "companion animal" had different connotations from "pet". She said that in 1998/9, when all pets were named as dogs or cats, or pets, even in scientific papers

Now pets are referred to as companion animals everywhere, scientific papers, on this forum, in the newspapers, everywhere.

Edited March 14, 2010 by sandgrubber

[Are You Serious Jo]

In my book it's fair to lodge verbal campaigns. If the PETA mob manages to convince the world to forsake the old three litter word 'pet' -- which is often used for beloved people as well as non-human animals in favour of the clap-trap 'companion animal' we have ourselves to blame. If there is real evidence that a bunch of animal lib loonies are killing show dogs, and 'rescued' dogs that could easily be rehomed are being PTS, it's sad that the dog world's PR is so poor that this isn't effectively used to discredit PETA and get a few people locked up or fined big-time.

There is real evidence that they have a 97% PTS rate, but this isn't illegal. They were taken court for dumping the bodies though, but just got a fine. The problem is they use shock tactics and rely on incorrect evidence and some people believe them. Hard to compete with their big money campaigns, do you know any dog org that has the money to do a multi million dollar counter-campaign?

The real damage is done when they manage to get people into positions of power and they are able to make changes that are not in the best interests of dogs or breeders. Complacency is how they have gotten as far as they have so far.

[Sharna3]

I think PETA could do great things if they focussed their considerable resources on some really major animal issues, ie the near extinction of so many magnificent animals like tigers. Why aren't they all up in our faces about that?

Yes, they do good work for stopping baby seal clubbing and I agree with that BUT I have to also say i agree that the end does not justify the means.

As for their stance on "pets" and owning / breeding dogs, I do acknowledge that there are a lot of problems out there (ie puppy farms and 'accidental BY breeders'), but PETA seems bent on attacking the members of the dog world who DO care about dogs and DO do the right thing. If they want to stop the endless stream of puppies into pounds and shelters - shut down the pet shops that sell puppies and target puppy farms.

Responsible, registered breeders are not the issue. For one thing, they dont generally produce that many pups per year and two, frankly people will usually not dump a dog they've paid hundreds of dollars for. I don't think many (and yes there are some, but not many) pedigree dogs end up in shelters...

In the end, PETA will become known more as an extremist organisation. I am not sure if I believe the anti-freeze job was PETA work though, simply because of the cruelty involved in the animals if affected. But the letting dogs out, though still with the potential to be cruel, isn't as obviously murderous, if that makes sense.

Ok I think I've rambled enough now!!

[Are You Serious Jo]

They don't care how well dogs are treated, they don't think people should ever own them. Their goal is end all forms of pet ownership. They don't actually care about the animals though, they just want to achieve their goal, which is why they are happy to let lab animals out to suffer horrible deaths. Emotion over welfare is the order of the day, so I would have no trouble believing that some PETA nutters would poison dogs to "free" them for their slavery.

[Jaxx'sBuddy]

I see a lot of stuff on DOL slamming PETA, but Im yet to see any real evidence to support that veiw. The information presented as evidence of PETA being evil is almost always from sources explicitly compiled to discredit PETA or just hearsay. It may be that some members of PETA are evil nutters, but then many organisations have those, and its not really fair to present their veiws as indicative of the organisations philosophy or activities. It may also be that PETA has some extremely disgruntled enemies who go to a lot of effort (such as setting up domains entitled petakillsanimals) to grind their axe.

Its hard to tell whats going on with the sort of information that makes its way onto DOL.

In reply to you, I quote jdavis' well-put post:

I especially don't get that people come onto a purebred dog forum and show support for an organisation that wants to rid the world of dogs. I can't imagine either what is going through people's minds when they are reading the posts where it is shown PETA want to eliminate pets, then they go on to say this isn't what PETA wants.

On one hand some people say PETA is important because people listen to them, but on the other hand they want us to believe that when it comes to their pet ownership campaigns people won't listen to them. So to the people that think they aren't capable of having any impact on pet ownership, do they have any influence or not?

KKDD -If you are goin to support PETA, perhaps you should re-think your membership of a puerbred dog forum. I know many members here are people who merely own & love dogs, be they purebred or "mutts", but many of us are people who breed and/or show dogs, PAY to belong to DOL and find comments such as yours extremely offensive.

Speaking of extremists who go off half-cocked...

Im not sure where I have stated support for PETA, I smply commented that Iv not seen any evidence to support the extreme anti-PETA position of many DOLers which is quite often expressed in (ironically) violent terms. The thread started with a post about PETA poisoning dog's water, with no factual material to back it up. Other claims Iv read on DOL about what PETA does or wants to do, appear to be long and apocalyptic assumptions drawn selectively from published material, although I agree there is some stuff they appear to advocate that most of us would disagree with. But the material that has been posted in reponse to my post doesnt justify the extremeness of veiws and statements I see expressed on DOL.

And now its being suggested that I should leave DOL? You crack me up.

Glad to provide some amusement, but I stand by my assertion that THIS IS A PUREBREEED DOGS FORUM, people like me PAY for our DOL membership and don't take kindly to people supporting organisations who actively campaign against breeders!

i agree. if we are on this forum then there is a fundemental acceptance that we agree with dog breeding and therefore dog breeders.

I for one want and need you al...otherwise how where would i get my pedigreed/pure bred dogs?