Well, I guess I will put in my two cents. In as much as PETA wants
animals under human care treated well, that is a no-brainer. But
PETA does not want to stop there as is indicated in this comment
from the linked article in the OP, “We’re taught that other animals’
flesh is “food,” that animals’ hair and skin is “clothing”

This author is USING lab animals as a smoke screen to promote the
real agenda. That agenda is complex, but part of the agenda is the
author’s belief that everyone should be a vegetarian. Clearly that
is the meaning of “animals flesh is food!”

There in we find the reason many dislike PETA. It is one thing to
say your goal is to make sure lab animals are treated well. It is
another to use that position to give legitimacy to another agenda.
Maybe it is not PETA that is so much guilty of this in this case.
Maybe it is the poster of the OP who linked to this particular
article to support questioning dissection of animals in the classroom.

***

Many in the thread write about balance and that is the answer to the
PETA condemnation that “animal flesh is food.” It is okay to cut
down a tree, if you make sure you do not damage the health of the
forest. It is okay to kill a deer for food, if you make sure that
you do not destroy the species.

In PETA’s case, they would object to the deer part, but not the tree
part. Strange, both are living creatures. I have news for PETA,
things die so that we can live. Maybe some day all humans can get
an injection of chlorophyll. It will spread and we will all turn
green (no more racism). Then we can all stand in the sun and eat dirt.

But wait, will PETA object to the death of all of the soil microbes
in the dirt we are eating?

PS: There are still humans who work so hard that they burn five or
six thousand calories per day. In this case, being a vegetarian is
very difficult.

Share This Post | Report This Post

Next Post >>

Posts on this thread, including this one