• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Documents: PETA kills more than 95 percent of pets in its care

Renae

Banned
Suspended
DP Veteran
Joined
Aug 26, 2007
Messages
50,241
Reaction score
19,243
Location
San Antonio Texas
Gender
Female
Political Leaning
Conservative
Documents published online this month show that People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals, an organization known for its uncompromising animal-rights positions, killed more than 95 percent of the pets in its care in 2011.The documents, obtained from the Virginia Department of Agriculture and Consumer Services, were published online by the Center for Consumer Freedom, a non-profit organization that runs online campaigns targeting groups that antagonize food producers.Fifteen years’ worth of similar records show that since 1998 PETA has killed more than 27,000 animals at its headquarters in Norfolk, VA.In a February 16 statement, the Center said PETA killed 1,911 cats and dogs last year, finding homes for only 24 pets.

Read more: PETA | Killing Animals | Animal Rights Campaign | The Daily Caller

Does this not just say it all folks?
 
From what I can tell, it says that we have more animals than society desires.
 
Does this not just say it all folks?

What a business for PETA to be in. There are no-kill shelters all over the United States. For PETA to run a shelter that euthanizes family pets is just plain hypocritical. Good God.
 
Does this not just say it all folks?

Friggin hypocrites. I hate PETA so bad. One of the most worthless organizations there is. They could be good. I have no issue with an organization that fights for the humane treatment of animals. But when you have a group that goes after the POTUS for slapping a fly? That's ridiculous. These guys have been a joke for LOOOOONG time.
 
Of course they do. PETA is a scam and are nothing but a bunch of damned hypocrites. The Penn and Teller show Bull**** did an episode on PETA and that's pretty much all anyone needs to know about that organization.
 
Friggin hypocrites. I hate PETA so bad. One of the most worthless organizations there is. They could be good. I have no issue with an organization that fights for the humane treatment of animals. But when you have a group that goes after the POTUS for slapping a fly? That's ridiculous. These guys have been a joke for LOOOOONG time.

You are apparently unaware of PETA's positions. They support it. That would mean that euthanizing animals is not hypocrisy. In fact they have solid reasons why euthanasia is necessary. Animal Rights Uncompromised: Euthanasia | PETA.org

PETA did not go after the president for swatting a fly. They joked around a bit and made some generic comments about being kind to all animals, and then only when asked by the media. Obama and the Fly, Part Deux | PETA.org

I am not a fan of PETA since they go too far in some things and their tactics are not what I consider appropriate. However, this thread is the ultimate fail since it requires people to be entirely ignorant of the actual topic. More reading on the topic: Euthanasia | PETA.org

Until dog and cat overpopulation is brought under control through spaying and neutering, we must prevent the suffering of unwanted animals in the most responsible and humane way possible. Euthanasia, performed properly, is often the most compassionate option.
The only way to stop the suffering of the innocent victims of companion animal overpopulation is to prevent their births through sterilization efforts. Every last one of the millions of animal deaths at animal shelters and in the streets, alleyways, fields, basements, and back yards that occur every year could be prevented through spaying and neutering. You can help. It's as easy as ABC—animal birth control.

That is something I can actually agree with. PETA uses the appropriate, noncruel methods approved by the US Humane Society and AMVA.
 
You are apparently unaware of PETA's positions. They support it. That would mean that euthanizing animals is not hypocrisy. In fact they have solid reasons why euthanasia is necessary. Animal Rights Uncompromised: Euthanasia | PETA.org

PETA did not go after the president for swatting a fly. They joked around a bit and made some generic comments about being kind to all animals, and then only when asked by the media. Obama and the Fly, Part Deux | PETA.org

I am not a fan of PETA since they go too far in some things and their tactics are not what I consider appropriate. However, this thread is the ultimate fail since it requires people to be entirely ignorant of the actual topic. More reading on the topic: Euthanasia | PETA.org



That is something I can actually agree with. PETA uses the appropriate, noncruel methods approved by the US Humane Society and AMVA.
We wouldn't expect you to find anything wrong here, this wasn't posted for the likes of you.
 
Cat rescue is what I do. So here is my IMHO about this....

PETA generally ends up with animals that have been abused. Not those that have lived in a loving environment. Those animals do not have social skills and can not be rehomed so euthanasia is an appropriate solution.

No-kill shelters are packed solid everywhere. My local government pound contractor kills 85% of the cats they take in INCLUDING highly socialized cats that would make someone a GREAT companion.

This is MY website - there are no ads - I do this because I give a damn. Advocacy for exceptional cats in imminent danger

Maybe this will give you a better idea of the horror of what's going on. I think PETA is nuts but I support some of what they do.
 
PETA is a pretty messed up bunch. They support criminals like the ALF, who bomb medical laboratories.
 
We wouldn't expect you to find anything wrong here, this wasn't posted for the likes of you.

I did not figure you would be able to counter anything I posted.
 
You are apparently unaware of PETA's positions. They support it. That would mean that euthanizing animals is not hypocrisy. In fact they have solid reasons why euthanasia is necessary. Animal Rights Uncompromised: Euthanasia | PETA.org

PETA did not go after the president for swatting a fly. They joked around a bit and made some generic comments about being kind to all animals, and then only when asked by the media. Obama and the Fly, Part Deux | PETA.org

I am not a fan of PETA since they go too far in some things and their tactics are not what I consider appropriate. However, this thread is the ultimate fail since it requires people to be entirely ignorant of the actual topic. More reading on the topic: Euthanasia | PETA.org



That is something I can actually agree with. PETA uses the appropriate, noncruel methods approved by the US Humane Society and AMVA.

Redress, I think we all understand that euthanasia is, very unfortunately, necessary due to pet over-population. My issue with PETA, is that they seem to think euthanasia to be preferable to, at least, attempting to find new homes. I'd much rather support an organization like the ASPCA.
 
Cat rescue is what I do. So here is my IMHO about this....

PETA generally ends up with animals that have been abused. Not those that have lived in a loving environment. Those animals do not have social skills and can not be rehomed so euthanasia is an appropriate solution.

No-kill shelters are packed solid everywhere. My local government pound contractor kills 85% of the cats they take in INCLUDING highly socialized cats that would make someone a GREAT companion.

This is MY website - there are no ads - I do this because I give a damn. Advocacy for exceptional cats in imminent danger

Maybe this will give you a better idea of the horror of what's going on. I think PETA is nuts but I support some of what they do.

I respect your recue efforts, Specklebang, but you're just flat out wrong to say that abused animals can't be socialized or rehabilitated. Both my dogs are shelter dogs and one of them had suffered a broken jaw and leg in her past. She's the sweetest (and now a very spoiled) dog. Looks just like a living teddy bear.

I remember a NatGeo special about some of Michael Vick's pitbulls taken to Dog Town. The wisdom was that they were just too abused to ever be good family pets and the expectation was that they would just live out their lives at Dog Town. After months of care and rehab, thought, some of those dogs were able to be adopted out, even surprising several of the volunteers there.
 
Last edited:
I did not figure you would be able to counter anything I posted.

Refute what? Taht PETA supports "ethical" euthanasia, but at the same time throws paint on people wearing fur, compares KFC to the Nazi's and other such stupidity? That they are "good" about killing "unwanted" animals, but damn you if you use animals to advance medical sciences to save lives and treat diseases?

Well boffo for them. Your stance isn't that PETA is doing something right, you're trying to deflect negatives from an organization with the proper political ideology to yours. That's all your post was. Defending political brothers, nothing more.
PETA is a horrible organization that says "Do as we say, not as we do".

**** them, and **** anyone defending those ****heads.
 
Remember this guy?

2.jpg

Saved.

How about this little fella? He was dumped, on the side of the road. Had we taken him to PETA, he'd have a 5% chance to not be fertilizer. Instead he's living the good life with a caring family. (no kill shelter for the win)
beagle.jpg

How about this guy?

labby.jpg

He went to a large dog no kill group, he's now living the good life as ranch dog.

And of course, Wyatt (he's the blonde one)
wyatt.jpg

Dumped on a county road near Abilene, now living with us (Knox is my pom).

Everyone of these dogs
(and the poor skunk) would stand a good chance of being "ethically" killed by PETA. But what do you care? They do it "humanly" so it's OK.

Oh, there is another, I don't have his pic at the moment, a huskie my wife rescued, he was in such bad shape when we found him he pissed blood all over the back of the car. He's alive, and well today with a loving family.

**** PETA.
 
Refute what? Taht PETA supports "ethical" euthanasia, but at the same time throws paint on people wearing fur, compares KFC to the Nazi's and other such stupidity? That they are "good" about killing "unwanted" animals, but damn you if you use animals to advance medical sciences to save lives and treat diseases?

Well boffo for them. Your stance isn't that PETA is doing something right, you're trying to deflect negatives from an organization with the proper political ideology to yours. That's all your post was. Defending political brothers, nothing more.
PETA is a horrible organization that says "Do as we say, not as we do".

**** them, and **** anyone defending those ****heads.

You're a sad individual.
 
Oh, how so? Care to elaborate? Didn't think so.

I love how you responded to yourself in a poor attempt to make yourself seem higher up on the ladder. How cute.

I am no fan of PETA. I find them incredibly annoying and idiotic.

Strange. They share so much in common with you, yet you denounce them.

Okay, here's why:

Your first reply to Redress is extremely ignorant.

"We wouldn't expect you to find anything wrong here, this wasn't posted for the likes of you."
You automatically make the assumption Redress supports PETA, which Redress points out that he/she does not. You go on further to assume that Redress shares the same political ideology to PETA. Redress pointed out that PETA's euthanasia policy is clear and is backed by the US Humane Society. You ignored this, responding with insults. Redress pointed out the logical fallacies in your post and argument, and you respond by bitching like a angsty-teenager.
 
I love how you responded to yourself in a poor attempt to make yourself seem higher up on the ladder. How cute.

I am no fan of PETA. I find them incredibly annoying and idiotic.

Strange. They share so much in common with you, yet you denounce them.

Okay, here's why:

Your first reply to Redress is extremely ignorant.

"We wouldn't expect you to find anything wrong here, this wasn't posted for the likes of you."
You automatically make the assumption Redress supports PETA, which Redress points out that he/she does not. You go on further to assume that Redress shares the same political ideology to PETA. Redress pointed out that PETA's euthanasia policy is clear and is backed by the US Humane Society. You ignored this, responding with insults. Redress pointed out the logical fallacies in your post and argument, and you respond by bitching like a angsty-teenager.
I see. You're a pretentious one aren't you? Redress and PETA are politically aligned, first off. Secondly, who cares HOW they kill the animals? It's the fact they take in and KILL 95% of the animals brought to them, yet have the audacity to protest "cruelty" to animals. What? Would KFC get a pass if they "humanely" slaughtered their chickens? Would a fur brand get daps from PETA if they killed "nicely"?
 
I see. You're a pretentious one aren't you?

Whatever helps you sleep at night bitch.

Redress and PETA are politically aligned, first off. Secondly, who cares HOW they kill the animals? It's the fact they take in and KILL 95% of the animals brought to them, yet have the audacity to protest "cruelty" to animals. What? Would KFC get a pass if they "humanely" slaughtered their chickens? Would a fur brand get daps from PETA if they killed "nicely"?

Do you honestly think I'm trying to defend PETA? I couldn't give a flying **** what they do.
But the way you responded to Redress obviously indicated you have a serious problem with people disagreeing with you.
 
Redress, I think we all understand that euthanasia is, very unfortunately, necessary due to pet over-population. My issue with PETA, is that they seem to think euthanasia to be preferable to, at least, attempting to find new homes. I'd much rather support an organization like the ASPCA.

I prefer the ASPCA and Humane Society myself. PETA does not as best I can tell run shelters, but they also do not as I can best tell think euthanasia is preferable to finding homes for pets. Further, PETA runs low and no cost spay/neuter programs which help work on the overpopulation issue.

Why We Euthanize | PETA.org (warning: disturbing images)

Every day, PETA's fieldworkers help abused and neglected dogs—many of them pit bulls nowadays and many of them forced to live their lives on chains heavy enough to tow an 18-wheeler—by providing them with food; clean water; lightweight tie-outs; deworming medicine; flea, tick, and fly-strike prevention; free veterinary care; sturdy wooden doghouses stuffed with straw bedding; and love.
 
I respect your recue efforts, Specklebang, but you're just flat out wrong to say that abused animals can't be socialized or rehabilitated. Both my dogs are shelter dogs and one of them had suffered a broken jaw and leg in her past. She's the sweetest (and now a very spoiled) dog. Looks just like a living teddy bear.

I remember a NatGeo special about some of Michael Vick's pitbulls taken to Dog Town. The wisdom was that they were just too abused to ever be good family pets and the expectation was that they would just live out their lives at Dog Town. After months of care and rehab, thought, some of those dogs were able to be adopted out, even surprising several of the volunteers there.

Some abused animals can be socialized, but it is a painfully long, expensive process.
 
Refute what? Taht PETA supports "ethical" euthanasia, but at the same time throws paint on people wearing fur, compares KFC to the Nazi's and other such stupidity? That they are "good" about killing "unwanted" animals, but damn you if you use animals to advance medical sciences to save lives and treat diseases?

Well boffo for them. Your stance isn't that PETA is doing something right, you're trying to deflect negatives from an organization with the proper political ideology to yours. That's all your post was. Defending political brothers, nothing more.
PETA is a horrible organization that says "Do as we say, not as we do".

**** them, and **** anyone defending those ****heads.

So different reactions to different things are different. The fact you have yet to show where PETA is wrong or inconsistant in euthenizing animals shows that one of us is using this for politics, and it ain't me.
 
If PETA didn't euthanize animals, there'd be too many to take care of.

What I think people should do is take responsibility and spay/neuter their pets.
 
Back
Top Bottom