You are either not logged in or not registered with our community. Click here to register.
 
December 10, 2016, 08:58:28 AM

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?

Login with username, password and session length

Click here if you are having problems.
Default Wide Screen Beige Lilac Rainbow Black & Blue October Send us your theme!

Hark!  The Herald!
Holiday Issue 2016

Wiki Blogs Dicebot

Author Topic: People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals Kill Rate  (Read 3265 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline chaoslord29

Re: People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals Kill Rate
« Reply #75 on: December 26, 2013, 11:23:30 AM »
Actually, 'guerrilla' means 'skirmisher' (lit. 'little war').

I did not know that, but I presumed it had an unrelated etymology to the eponymous Gorilla; hence the potential for a pun if I hadn't been talking about chimps  ;D

Offline ladia2287

Re: People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals Kill Rate
« Reply #76 on: December 26, 2013, 06:09:07 PM »
Personally, I believe in letting nature take its course. We should not go out of our way to be cruel or cause harm to other animals (for mankind is still an animal whether we like it or not), but sometimes intervening with the intent of 'protecting' certain animals from harm can make matters worse. If they have what it takes to survive whatever situation they're in, then they'll survive. If not, they won't. The last thing Mother Nature needs is for us to interfere when we can seldom see the big picture.

Offline DemonessOfDeathValley

  • For those who are gone.....but never forgotten....
  • Lady
  • Enchanter
  • *
  • Join Date: Nov 2013
  • Location: Somewhere between sleep and awake
  • Gender: Female
  • I remember......
  • My Role Play Preferences
  • View My Rolls
  • Referrals: 1
Re: People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals Kill Rate
« Reply #77 on: January 07, 2014, 03:58:14 PM »
To be quite honest, I had never really thought much about PETA. On first blush they seemed like radicals to me. The type of people that seem to do what my mother called gagging at a gnat and swallowing a camel.

After reading the provided articles, I don't feel so bad about being interested in hunting or Taxidermy. My grandfather loved to fish and (provided that I don't have to clean it) I found it fun too.

I love animals. I've had several parakeets (Since I always lived in a place where anything but a caged pet wasn't allowed). I give to the local PAWS shelter and my cousin's second dog was gotten from that very shelter. I have to agree that welfare over rights is the way to go.

Offline IStateYourName

Re: People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals Kill Rate
« Reply #78 on: January 08, 2014, 10:40:11 AM »
PETA is another in a long list of examples of people taking a good concept (animals should have some rights and be treated humanely inasmuch as is possible) to unworkable, even destructive extremes.  And probably lining their pockets a bit along the way...

Offline chaoslord29

Re: People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals Kill Rate
« Reply #79 on: January 08, 2014, 11:26:22 AM »
PETA is another in a long list of examples of people taking a good concept (animals should have some rights and be treated humanely inasmuch as is possible) to unworkable, even destructive extremes.  And probably lining their pockets a bit along the way...
Fortunately, PETA's more or less misguided nature extends into their finances. No one ever got rich defending animal rights (except the sponsors).

Offline Callie Del Noire

Re: People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals Kill Rate
« Reply #80 on: January 08, 2014, 12:08:50 PM »
Fortunately, PETA's more or less misguided nature extends into their finances. No one ever got rich defending animal rights (except the sponsors).

I'd rethink that.. there are DOZENS of ways they can make money off that.

Consider this.. ALL FUNDRAISING assets are centrally collected and disbursed. Every single donated cent goes through the central office. EVERY LAST one. When you have control of the flow of funds..that makes for impressive amounts money.

That doesn't even include what shorting stock on a protested company could do or other ways a PETA action can effect a company.

Offline chaoslord29

Re: People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals Kill Rate
« Reply #81 on: January 08, 2014, 12:25:25 PM »
I'd rethink that.. there are DOZENS of ways they can make money off that.

Consider this.. ALL FUNDRAISING assets are centrally collected and disbursed. Every single donated cent goes through the central office. EVERY LAST one. When you have control of the flow of funds..that makes for impressive amounts money.

That doesn't even include what shorting stock on a protested company could do or other ways a PETA action can effect a company.

I'm not saying that you couldn't, but PETA is a registered not-for-profit and they're revenue stream is several hundred million a year. That obviously sounds like a lot of money, but as an organization with hundreds of employees supporting a network of millions of supporters worldwide, they're pretty much exemplary as far as cost-effectiveness goes. The major players within the organization are by and large independently wealthy, and unlike many similarly sized not for profits, don't exactly enjoy the same 'company perks'.

PETA finances are monitored with unrivaled scrutiny by watchdog organizations, due largely to the fact that they have in the past given funds to the Animal Liberation Front and Earth Liberation front, both of which have claimed responsibility and been investigated for acts of domestic terrorism.

You want to see a not-for-profit that abuses their status? Investigate any evangelical minister syndicated television appearances, or hell, the church of scientology.

Offline Callie Del Noire

Re: People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals Kill Rate
« Reply #82 on: January 08, 2014, 04:39:09 PM »
I'm not saying that you couldn't, but PETA is a registered not-for-profit and they're revenue stream is several hundred million a year. That obviously sounds like a lot of money, but as an organization with hundreds of employees supporting a network of millions of supporters worldwide, they're pretty much exemplary as far as cost-effectiveness goes. The major players within the organization are by and large independently wealthy, and unlike many similarly sized not for profits, don't exactly enjoy the same 'company perks'.

PETA finances are monitored with unrivaled scrutiny by watchdog organizations, due largely to the fact that they have in the past given funds to the Animal Liberation Front and Earth Liberation front, both of which have claimed responsibility and been investigated for acts of domestic terrorism.

You want to see a not-for-profit that abuses their status? Investigate any evangelical minister syndicated television appearances, or hell, the church of scientology.

I know.. I've seen it happen.. I'm just saying.. someone said they couldn't see how a group like Peta could be 'rich enough'. I was pointing out options. I know that several incidents that would kill a less prosperous charity have come up (disposal of animal carcasses for example)