If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#81
|
|||
|
|||
http://www.curlio.com/new_showarticl...536&page=last#
2003-11-19 22:08:18 Yahoo News PETA Blackmails Clay Aiken PETA (People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals), who have long ago lost sight of "the line," have dropped to a new low. Now they are blackmailing American Idols runner-up Clay Aiken. "People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals has delayed a new ad campaign with the slogan "Get Neutered, It Didn't Hurt Clay Aiken," while it waits to see if Aiken will apologize for negative comments he made about cats," PETA officials said Tuesday. PETA vice president Dan Mathews said that Clay needs to learn to take a joke if he wants to be famous. So what are the oh-so-offensive comments that Clay made about cats? "There's nothing worse to me than a house cat. When I was about sixteen, I had a kitten and ran over it. Seeing that cat die, I actually think that its spirit has haunted me. I wasn't afraid of cats before. But now they scare me to death," Aiken told Rolling Stone. PETA has also said that they will call off the advertisement if Clays posts a message on his website urging owners to spay or neuter and give an interview to PETA. So basically, because Clay had a bad experience with a cat, and now doesn't like them, he's suddenly a bad person? He's not allowed to voice his personal preference? What, will Calvin Klein start to run derogatory advertisements against Ricky Martin if he suddenly announces that he prefers Hanes instead? What's next? You can't announce that you like a certain shampoo? That's just fricking nonsense. Personally, I'm not a big Clay Aiken fan, but I'll darn well stand up and support him should he choose to stand against PETA for this stupid and moronic choice of theirs. Clay, and all of his fans, should go support a worthy animal cause, such as the ASPCA, the Humane Society, or the World Wildlife Fund. I'm sure any one of those organizations would do wonderful things with your donations, not take time out to bash celebrities for their personal choice. ================================================== =========== http://www.triumphtheinsultcomicdog.com/ TRIUMPH ON THE PETA AD "Recently I agreed to do an ad for PETA. Why? I'm not into animal rights. The only animal right I want is the right to hump Ashanti's leg. Look at your average animal lovers, like Moby and Bill Maher. Sure, Bill Maher love animals... that's because humans hate him! Moby? Nice guy, but not the best looking man. I hear Moby had sex with a poodle once, and the poodle was arrested for bestiality. Vegetarianism? Count me out. I ain't giving up cow, or bird, or pig. So why the hell should you? Hell, we'd eat you if someone dropped a slice on the floor. Oh, yes. We'll have the deep fried Moby with a side of glazed Mary Tyler Moore, please. Dessert? I'm torn between the Pam Anderson flambe and the flourless Alec Baldwin cake. Bottom line: animals are assholes. Delicious assholes. Which brings me back to this PETA ad. Why would I endorse neutering? After all, I rip into another animal-hugging nut job, Bob Barker, on the CD. The guy can't stop telling people to cut their pets' nuts off. So Jack Black and I have at him: "Bob Barker got a bone to pick/gonna make a chew toy outta your dick/these teeth are sharp and the price is right/gonna neuter your ass with one nut crackin' bite." There can be only one reason I would then turn around and advocate ball chopping: free publicity. Timed right with the release of the CD. Did I mention animals are assholes? That should be the end of the story. But hold the phone - we're dealing with PETA. Bong - cuckoo! As you see, I made a typically poopy quip in the ad: "Get Neutered - It Didn't Hurt Clay Aiken." It actually wasn't my first choice. I really wanted "Chop 'Em Off - They Didn't Taste That Great Anyway." But PETA was jonesing for the Clay joke. Whatever. Just give me my pub and go back to your spray painting. Turns out PETA had an ax to grind with Clay. They released the ad and a press release, quoting Clay talking trash about cats, like "Cats are Satan." Never mind that Clay keeds. They quoted Clay saying "I ran over a kitten when I was 16." Never mind that they left out the part where Clay said it was an accident that haunts him to this day. (click here to read his quote) Well played, PETA. And I thought I was the pub whore. So here I am -- caught in the middle of crappy tunes and looney tunes... when all I wanted was to whore myself. Of course, I have to stand with Clay, even if they hadn't twisted his quotes. This is about a basic human and animal right that must be preserved... the right to poop, to joke, to keed. Look, I sing "Cats Are C***s" on the CD, but I keed. I don't hate cats. I've even banged a few in my day. Just never let a cat give you a hand job." |
#82
|
|||
|
|||
http://www.curlio.com/new_showarticl...536&page=last#
2003-11-19 22:08:18 Yahoo News PETA Blackmails Clay Aiken PETA (People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals), who have long ago lost sight of "the line," have dropped to a new low. Now they are blackmailing American Idols runner-up Clay Aiken. "People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals has delayed a new ad campaign with the slogan "Get Neutered, It Didn't Hurt Clay Aiken," while it waits to see if Aiken will apologize for negative comments he made about cats," PETA officials said Tuesday. PETA vice president Dan Mathews said that Clay needs to learn to take a joke if he wants to be famous. So what are the oh-so-offensive comments that Clay made about cats? "There's nothing worse to me than a house cat. When I was about sixteen, I had a kitten and ran over it. Seeing that cat die, I actually think that its spirit has haunted me. I wasn't afraid of cats before. But now they scare me to death," Aiken told Rolling Stone. PETA has also said that they will call off the advertisement if Clays posts a message on his website urging owners to spay or neuter and give an interview to PETA. So basically, because Clay had a bad experience with a cat, and now doesn't like them, he's suddenly a bad person? He's not allowed to voice his personal preference? What, will Calvin Klein start to run derogatory advertisements against Ricky Martin if he suddenly announces that he prefers Hanes instead? What's next? You can't announce that you like a certain shampoo? That's just fricking nonsense. Personally, I'm not a big Clay Aiken fan, but I'll darn well stand up and support him should he choose to stand against PETA for this stupid and moronic choice of theirs. Clay, and all of his fans, should go support a worthy animal cause, such as the ASPCA, the Humane Society, or the World Wildlife Fund. I'm sure any one of those organizations would do wonderful things with your donations, not take time out to bash celebrities for their personal choice. ================================================== =========== http://www.triumphtheinsultcomicdog.com/ TRIUMPH ON THE PETA AD "Recently I agreed to do an ad for PETA. Why? I'm not into animal rights. The only animal right I want is the right to hump Ashanti's leg. Look at your average animal lovers, like Moby and Bill Maher. Sure, Bill Maher love animals... that's because humans hate him! Moby? Nice guy, but not the best looking man. I hear Moby had sex with a poodle once, and the poodle was arrested for bestiality. Vegetarianism? Count me out. I ain't giving up cow, or bird, or pig. So why the hell should you? Hell, we'd eat you if someone dropped a slice on the floor. Oh, yes. We'll have the deep fried Moby with a side of glazed Mary Tyler Moore, please. Dessert? I'm torn between the Pam Anderson flambe and the flourless Alec Baldwin cake. Bottom line: animals are assholes. Delicious assholes. Which brings me back to this PETA ad. Why would I endorse neutering? After all, I rip into another animal-hugging nut job, Bob Barker, on the CD. The guy can't stop telling people to cut their pets' nuts off. So Jack Black and I have at him: "Bob Barker got a bone to pick/gonna make a chew toy outta your dick/these teeth are sharp and the price is right/gonna neuter your ass with one nut crackin' bite." There can be only one reason I would then turn around and advocate ball chopping: free publicity. Timed right with the release of the CD. Did I mention animals are assholes? That should be the end of the story. But hold the phone - we're dealing with PETA. Bong - cuckoo! As you see, I made a typically poopy quip in the ad: "Get Neutered - It Didn't Hurt Clay Aiken." It actually wasn't my first choice. I really wanted "Chop 'Em Off - They Didn't Taste That Great Anyway." But PETA was jonesing for the Clay joke. Whatever. Just give me my pub and go back to your spray painting. Turns out PETA had an ax to grind with Clay. They released the ad and a press release, quoting Clay talking trash about cats, like "Cats are Satan." Never mind that Clay keeds. They quoted Clay saying "I ran over a kitten when I was 16." Never mind that they left out the part where Clay said it was an accident that haunts him to this day. (click here to read his quote) Well played, PETA. And I thought I was the pub whore. So here I am -- caught in the middle of crappy tunes and looney tunes... when all I wanted was to whore myself. Of course, I have to stand with Clay, even if they hadn't twisted his quotes. This is about a basic human and animal right that must be preserved... the right to poop, to joke, to keed. Look, I sing "Cats Are C***s" on the CD, but I keed. I don't hate cats. I've even banged a few in my day. Just never let a cat give you a hand job." |
#83
|
|||
|
|||
PREPOSTEROUS PETA
http://www.dailyemerald.com/vnews/di...c?in_archive=1 Travis Willse Rivalless wit November 14, 2003 I still remember that cool summer day in July 1988. I was just a few weeks shy of my sixth birthday. My mom carted my younger brother, Tyler, and me to the Humane Society outlet at the south end of Hillsboro. There, I picked out and adopted a kitten I named "Friskie," a tabby American shorthair that still lives at my parents' house. Travis Willse Rivalless wit I like Friskie, and I've grown attached to her over the last 15 years, but I would give her up if it meant finding a cure for malaria or AIDS. I'd let her go, too, if it meant finding a cure for cystinosis (which affects only 600 people nationwide) or fibrodysplasia ossificans progressiva (125 people) or even a disease that afflicts only one person. Why? Because a human life, by virtue of human consciousness, is more valuable than the life of a lower animal. But not everyone sees it that way. "Even if animal tests produced a cure for AIDS, we'd be against it (sic)," Ingrid Newkirk hysterically explained in the Sept. 1, 1989, issue of Vogue. Newkirk co-founded and is currently the president of People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals. And the absurdity of her comment is lamentably representative of the group's largely fanatical philosophy and reflects the irrational agenda of many extreme animal rights activists. This column will explore less PETA's core values, though, and delve more into its history of grossly irresponsible, offensive rhetoric and opportunistic, radical methods they use that often (somewhat ironically) violate both human decency and intellectual integrity. (A brief aside is necessary he I accept a so-called "animal welfare theory," wherein the use of animals for food, clothing or experimentation is acceptable as long as that use has a functional motive and is reasonable. Experimenting on rhesus monkeys to find an AIDS vaccine is wholly acceptable; senseless torture of backyard dogs is not. Furthermore, I condemn PETA's methods and those of many radical animal rights activists, as well as many of their philosophies, but I do not denounce vegetarianism, veganism or any of many other rational practices and ideologies sometimes associated with the animal welfare movement.) Animal testing of medical procedures that benefit humans is often, simply put, essential. "Most, if not all of the medical advances over the last 50 years have depended, either directly or indirectly, on research done on animals," psychology Professor Emerita Barbara Gordon-Lickey explained. "Certainly all new methods, regardless of how they're developed, have to be tested on animals." But some radical animal rights activists -- evidently unsatisfied with merely verbalizing their displeasure with animal testing -- voice their ill-reasoned grievances by resorting to indefensible violence. On Oct. 26, 1986, at least one activist broke into, ransacked and defaced Gordon-Lickey's lab ("Vandals ransack science labs, threaten to strike again soon;" ODE; Oct. 27, 1986), inflicting $36,000 in damages. (Ironically, the vandal destroyed $2,000 of audio tutorial materials used for training technicians and scientists to care for and handle lab animals properly.) In a statement the Animal Liberation Front delivered to the Associated Press about the incident, the group decried the lab's "torture chambers" and asserted: "This is just the beginning of our efforts to liberate those oppressed in research concentration camps in Oregon. We will not allow this slaughter to continue without resistance. You will hear again from us soon." Just to clarify, ALF is a criminal organization that FBI spokesman Ross Rice said is responsible for more than 600 acts of vandalism. Sharon Nettles, former coordinator of Eugene's PETA chapter, told the Emerald for the 1986 story that PETA does not condone illegal actions. However, about the break-in, Nettles gloated, "I'm glad someone did it." Activist Roger Troen, who was eventually convicted of the break-in, is a member of ALF. PETA came to Troen's undeserved rescue, paying from its tax-exempt war chest his $27,000 of legal fees and $34,900 fine. PETA's connections with ALF are numerous -- its major grantees include longtime ALF ringleader and former Earth First! Journal Editor Rodney Coronado, who was sentenced in 1995 to 57 months in federal prison for the 1992 arson of a Michigan State University laboratory. Since his release, Coronado has openly admitted to at least six other arsons. PETA's annals are filled not only with granting funds to terrorists but with rhetoric that ranges from offensive to nonsensical. On July 6, 2001, a shark attacked and chomped off the right arm of then-8-year-old Jessie Arbogast on the Florida coast. In what Time Magazine dubbed on its cover "Summer of the Shark," mass media tapped into the collective unconscious, talking sharks for months (lost in this brouhaha was the fact that shark attacks actually declined by 13 incidents from the year before). PETA followed suit, unveiling a promotional billboard that asked, "Would you give your right arm to know why sharks attack? Could it be revenge?" According to PETA, "The recent injuries suffered by shark attack victims offer us a glimpse into the terrifying experience these fish endure when they are hauled out of their environment only to be pitch-forked back into the water after their fins have been sliced off." Maybe so, by some particularly imaginative and macabre stretch of the mind. But offering a bizarrely non sequitur "revenge" theory only chillingly and opportunistically abuses a human tragedy and unfairly takes advantage of the gullible, further polluting dialogue about important issues with irrationality. Regrettably, this blatant opportunism and deviation from reason is more PETA's rule and less its exception. In summer 2000, a few months after doctors diagnosed New York City then-mayor Rudy Guiliani with prostate cancer, PETA ran a billboard campaign with ads showing Guiliani sporting a milk mustache. The message? The ad read, "Got Prostate Cancer? Drinking milk contributes to prostate cancer." The group dropped the campaign after Guiliani threatened to sue the group. But even worse than its disregard for a single person's suffering is its apparent disregard for and wholesale devaluation of human life. In its Nov. 13, 1983, issue, the Washington Post quoted Newkirk lamenting, "Six million people died in concentration camps, but six billion broiler chickens will die this year in slaughterhouses" (emphasis added). Twenty years later, PETA pushed the ideological pedal to the rhetorical metal, launching a "Holocaust on Your Plate" campaign to promote a "nonviolent, vegan diet." In the campaign, PETA paraded a massive graphic display wherein images of chickens, pigs and calves were juxtaposed with pictures of near-dead Holocaust victims and piles of human corpses. "Just as the Nazis tried to 'dehumanize' Jews by forcing them to live in filthy, crowded conditions," read PETA's press release detailing the campaign, "animals on today's factory farms are stripped of all that is enjoyable and natural to them and treated as nothing more than meat-, egg-, and milk-making 'machines.'" The Holocaust, one of the worst abominations in human history (numerically and morally), reflects humanity's capacity for cruelty. PETA seems to lack the appreciation for human life or decency to see that, out of respect for those who survived the concentration camps -- and moreover, for those who did not -- comparisons to the tragedy should be restricted to, well, legitimately comparable tragedies. Asserting that the death of a chicken is morally equivalent to the wholesale, grotesque slaughter of sentient, conscious beings is an appalling affront to every Jew, Gypsy, homosexual, person with a disability and other Nazi-labeled "misfit" who resisted de facto murder in the camps for months or years. On its frequently asked questions page, PETA's Web site quotes the celebrated humanitarian Albert Schweitzer: "Aware of the problems and responsibilities an expanded ethic brings with it, said we each must 'live daily from judgment to judgment, deciding each case as it arises, as wisely and mercifully as we can.'" But, as its conduct has illustrated time and time again, PETA lacks the wisdom to participate in a fair and rational discussion of its grievances, and eschews mercy by supporting terrorists and taking unfair advantage of human tragedies whenever it suits its bizarre, misguided agenda. According to nonprofit tax forms filed with the Internal Revenue Service, PETA spent only $6,100 of its $10.9 million budget on animal shelters in fiscal year 1996. It seems, then, that The Price Is Right host Bob Barker -- who founded the DJ&T Foundation, an organization that funds low-cost animal clinics to fight animal overpopulation -- has done more for Friskie and millions of other animals nationwide than PETA ever has. (Oh, and by the way, don't forget to spay or neuter your pets.) ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- ---- Contact the editorial editor at . His opinions do not necessarily represent those of the Emerald. |
#84
|
|||
|
|||
PREPOSTEROUS PETA
http://www.dailyemerald.com/vnews/di...c?in_archive=1 Travis Willse Rivalless wit November 14, 2003 I still remember that cool summer day in July 1988. I was just a few weeks shy of my sixth birthday. My mom carted my younger brother, Tyler, and me to the Humane Society outlet at the south end of Hillsboro. There, I picked out and adopted a kitten I named "Friskie," a tabby American shorthair that still lives at my parents' house. Travis Willse Rivalless wit I like Friskie, and I've grown attached to her over the last 15 years, but I would give her up if it meant finding a cure for malaria or AIDS. I'd let her go, too, if it meant finding a cure for cystinosis (which affects only 600 people nationwide) or fibrodysplasia ossificans progressiva (125 people) or even a disease that afflicts only one person. Why? Because a human life, by virtue of human consciousness, is more valuable than the life of a lower animal. But not everyone sees it that way. "Even if animal tests produced a cure for AIDS, we'd be against it (sic)," Ingrid Newkirk hysterically explained in the Sept. 1, 1989, issue of Vogue. Newkirk co-founded and is currently the president of People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals. And the absurdity of her comment is lamentably representative of the group's largely fanatical philosophy and reflects the irrational agenda of many extreme animal rights activists. This column will explore less PETA's core values, though, and delve more into its history of grossly irresponsible, offensive rhetoric and opportunistic, radical methods they use that often (somewhat ironically) violate both human decency and intellectual integrity. (A brief aside is necessary he I accept a so-called "animal welfare theory," wherein the use of animals for food, clothing or experimentation is acceptable as long as that use has a functional motive and is reasonable. Experimenting on rhesus monkeys to find an AIDS vaccine is wholly acceptable; senseless torture of backyard dogs is not. Furthermore, I condemn PETA's methods and those of many radical animal rights activists, as well as many of their philosophies, but I do not denounce vegetarianism, veganism or any of many other rational practices and ideologies sometimes associated with the animal welfare movement.) Animal testing of medical procedures that benefit humans is often, simply put, essential. "Most, if not all of the medical advances over the last 50 years have depended, either directly or indirectly, on research done on animals," psychology Professor Emerita Barbara Gordon-Lickey explained. "Certainly all new methods, regardless of how they're developed, have to be tested on animals." But some radical animal rights activists -- evidently unsatisfied with merely verbalizing their displeasure with animal testing -- voice their ill-reasoned grievances by resorting to indefensible violence. On Oct. 26, 1986, at least one activist broke into, ransacked and defaced Gordon-Lickey's lab ("Vandals ransack science labs, threaten to strike again soon;" ODE; Oct. 27, 1986), inflicting $36,000 in damages. (Ironically, the vandal destroyed $2,000 of audio tutorial materials used for training technicians and scientists to care for and handle lab animals properly.) In a statement the Animal Liberation Front delivered to the Associated Press about the incident, the group decried the lab's "torture chambers" and asserted: "This is just the beginning of our efforts to liberate those oppressed in research concentration camps in Oregon. We will not allow this slaughter to continue without resistance. You will hear again from us soon." Just to clarify, ALF is a criminal organization that FBI spokesman Ross Rice said is responsible for more than 600 acts of vandalism. Sharon Nettles, former coordinator of Eugene's PETA chapter, told the Emerald for the 1986 story that PETA does not condone illegal actions. However, about the break-in, Nettles gloated, "I'm glad someone did it." Activist Roger Troen, who was eventually convicted of the break-in, is a member of ALF. PETA came to Troen's undeserved rescue, paying from its tax-exempt war chest his $27,000 of legal fees and $34,900 fine. PETA's connections with ALF are numerous -- its major grantees include longtime ALF ringleader and former Earth First! Journal Editor Rodney Coronado, who was sentenced in 1995 to 57 months in federal prison for the 1992 arson of a Michigan State University laboratory. Since his release, Coronado has openly admitted to at least six other arsons. PETA's annals are filled not only with granting funds to terrorists but with rhetoric that ranges from offensive to nonsensical. On July 6, 2001, a shark attacked and chomped off the right arm of then-8-year-old Jessie Arbogast on the Florida coast. In what Time Magazine dubbed on its cover "Summer of the Shark," mass media tapped into the collective unconscious, talking sharks for months (lost in this brouhaha was the fact that shark attacks actually declined by 13 incidents from the year before). PETA followed suit, unveiling a promotional billboard that asked, "Would you give your right arm to know why sharks attack? Could it be revenge?" According to PETA, "The recent injuries suffered by shark attack victims offer us a glimpse into the terrifying experience these fish endure when they are hauled out of their environment only to be pitch-forked back into the water after their fins have been sliced off." Maybe so, by some particularly imaginative and macabre stretch of the mind. But offering a bizarrely non sequitur "revenge" theory only chillingly and opportunistically abuses a human tragedy and unfairly takes advantage of the gullible, further polluting dialogue about important issues with irrationality. Regrettably, this blatant opportunism and deviation from reason is more PETA's rule and less its exception. In summer 2000, a few months after doctors diagnosed New York City then-mayor Rudy Guiliani with prostate cancer, PETA ran a billboard campaign with ads showing Guiliani sporting a milk mustache. The message? The ad read, "Got Prostate Cancer? Drinking milk contributes to prostate cancer." The group dropped the campaign after Guiliani threatened to sue the group. But even worse than its disregard for a single person's suffering is its apparent disregard for and wholesale devaluation of human life. In its Nov. 13, 1983, issue, the Washington Post quoted Newkirk lamenting, "Six million people died in concentration camps, but six billion broiler chickens will die this year in slaughterhouses" (emphasis added). Twenty years later, PETA pushed the ideological pedal to the rhetorical metal, launching a "Holocaust on Your Plate" campaign to promote a "nonviolent, vegan diet." In the campaign, PETA paraded a massive graphic display wherein images of chickens, pigs and calves were juxtaposed with pictures of near-dead Holocaust victims and piles of human corpses. "Just as the Nazis tried to 'dehumanize' Jews by forcing them to live in filthy, crowded conditions," read PETA's press release detailing the campaign, "animals on today's factory farms are stripped of all that is enjoyable and natural to them and treated as nothing more than meat-, egg-, and milk-making 'machines.'" The Holocaust, one of the worst abominations in human history (numerically and morally), reflects humanity's capacity for cruelty. PETA seems to lack the appreciation for human life or decency to see that, out of respect for those who survived the concentration camps -- and moreover, for those who did not -- comparisons to the tragedy should be restricted to, well, legitimately comparable tragedies. Asserting that the death of a chicken is morally equivalent to the wholesale, grotesque slaughter of sentient, conscious beings is an appalling affront to every Jew, Gypsy, homosexual, person with a disability and other Nazi-labeled "misfit" who resisted de facto murder in the camps for months or years. On its frequently asked questions page, PETA's Web site quotes the celebrated humanitarian Albert Schweitzer: "Aware of the problems and responsibilities an expanded ethic brings with it, said we each must 'live daily from judgment to judgment, deciding each case as it arises, as wisely and mercifully as we can.'" But, as its conduct has illustrated time and time again, PETA lacks the wisdom to participate in a fair and rational discussion of its grievances, and eschews mercy by supporting terrorists and taking unfair advantage of human tragedies whenever it suits its bizarre, misguided agenda. According to nonprofit tax forms filed with the Internal Revenue Service, PETA spent only $6,100 of its $10.9 million budget on animal shelters in fiscal year 1996. It seems, then, that The Price Is Right host Bob Barker -- who founded the DJ&T Foundation, an organization that funds low-cost animal clinics to fight animal overpopulation -- has done more for Friskie and millions of other animals nationwide than PETA ever has. (Oh, and by the way, don't forget to spay or neuter your pets.) ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- ---- Contact the editorial editor at . His opinions do not necessarily represent those of the Emerald. |
#85
|
|||
|
|||
PREPOSTEROUS PETA
http://www.dailyemerald.com/vnews/di...c?in_archive=1 Travis Willse Rivalless wit November 14, 2003 I still remember that cool summer day in July 1988. I was just a few weeks shy of my sixth birthday. My mom carted my younger brother, Tyler, and me to the Humane Society outlet at the south end of Hillsboro. There, I picked out and adopted a kitten I named "Friskie," a tabby American shorthair that still lives at my parents' house. Travis Willse Rivalless wit I like Friskie, and I've grown attached to her over the last 15 years, but I would give her up if it meant finding a cure for malaria or AIDS. I'd let her go, too, if it meant finding a cure for cystinosis (which affects only 600 people nationwide) or fibrodysplasia ossificans progressiva (125 people) or even a disease that afflicts only one person. Why? Because a human life, by virtue of human consciousness, is more valuable than the life of a lower animal. But not everyone sees it that way. "Even if animal tests produced a cure for AIDS, we'd be against it (sic)," Ingrid Newkirk hysterically explained in the Sept. 1, 1989, issue of Vogue. Newkirk co-founded and is currently the president of People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals. And the absurdity of her comment is lamentably representative of the group's largely fanatical philosophy and reflects the irrational agenda of many extreme animal rights activists. This column will explore less PETA's core values, though, and delve more into its history of grossly irresponsible, offensive rhetoric and opportunistic, radical methods they use that often (somewhat ironically) violate both human decency and intellectual integrity. (A brief aside is necessary he I accept a so-called "animal welfare theory," wherein the use of animals for food, clothing or experimentation is acceptable as long as that use has a functional motive and is reasonable. Experimenting on rhesus monkeys to find an AIDS vaccine is wholly acceptable; senseless torture of backyard dogs is not. Furthermore, I condemn PETA's methods and those of many radical animal rights activists, as well as many of their philosophies, but I do not denounce vegetarianism, veganism or any of many other rational practices and ideologies sometimes associated with the animal welfare movement.) Animal testing of medical procedures that benefit humans is often, simply put, essential. "Most, if not all of the medical advances over the last 50 years have depended, either directly or indirectly, on research done on animals," psychology Professor Emerita Barbara Gordon-Lickey explained. "Certainly all new methods, regardless of how they're developed, have to be tested on animals." But some radical animal rights activists -- evidently unsatisfied with merely verbalizing their displeasure with animal testing -- voice their ill-reasoned grievances by resorting to indefensible violence. On Oct. 26, 1986, at least one activist broke into, ransacked and defaced Gordon-Lickey's lab ("Vandals ransack science labs, threaten to strike again soon;" ODE; Oct. 27, 1986), inflicting $36,000 in damages. (Ironically, the vandal destroyed $2,000 of audio tutorial materials used for training technicians and scientists to care for and handle lab animals properly.) In a statement the Animal Liberation Front delivered to the Associated Press about the incident, the group decried the lab's "torture chambers" and asserted: "This is just the beginning of our efforts to liberate those oppressed in research concentration camps in Oregon. We will not allow this slaughter to continue without resistance. You will hear again from us soon." Just to clarify, ALF is a criminal organization that FBI spokesman Ross Rice said is responsible for more than 600 acts of vandalism. Sharon Nettles, former coordinator of Eugene's PETA chapter, told the Emerald for the 1986 story that PETA does not condone illegal actions. However, about the break-in, Nettles gloated, "I'm glad someone did it." Activist Roger Troen, who was eventually convicted of the break-in, is a member of ALF. PETA came to Troen's undeserved rescue, paying from its tax-exempt war chest his $27,000 of legal fees and $34,900 fine. PETA's connections with ALF are numerous -- its major grantees include longtime ALF ringleader and former Earth First! Journal Editor Rodney Coronado, who was sentenced in 1995 to 57 months in federal prison for the 1992 arson of a Michigan State University laboratory. Since his release, Coronado has openly admitted to at least six other arsons. PETA's annals are filled not only with granting funds to terrorists but with rhetoric that ranges from offensive to nonsensical. On July 6, 2001, a shark attacked and chomped off the right arm of then-8-year-old Jessie Arbogast on the Florida coast. In what Time Magazine dubbed on its cover "Summer of the Shark," mass media tapped into the collective unconscious, talking sharks for months (lost in this brouhaha was the fact that shark attacks actually declined by 13 incidents from the year before). PETA followed suit, unveiling a promotional billboard that asked, "Would you give your right arm to know why sharks attack? Could it be revenge?" According to PETA, "The recent injuries suffered by shark attack victims offer us a glimpse into the terrifying experience these fish endure when they are hauled out of their environment only to be pitch-forked back into the water after their fins have been sliced off." Maybe so, by some particularly imaginative and macabre stretch of the mind. But offering a bizarrely non sequitur "revenge" theory only chillingly and opportunistically abuses a human tragedy and unfairly takes advantage of the gullible, further polluting dialogue about important issues with irrationality. Regrettably, this blatant opportunism and deviation from reason is more PETA's rule and less its exception. In summer 2000, a few months after doctors diagnosed New York City then-mayor Rudy Guiliani with prostate cancer, PETA ran a billboard campaign with ads showing Guiliani sporting a milk mustache. The message? The ad read, "Got Prostate Cancer? Drinking milk contributes to prostate cancer." The group dropped the campaign after Guiliani threatened to sue the group. But even worse than its disregard for a single person's suffering is its apparent disregard for and wholesale devaluation of human life. In its Nov. 13, 1983, issue, the Washington Post quoted Newkirk lamenting, "Six million people died in concentration camps, but six billion broiler chickens will die this year in slaughterhouses" (emphasis added). Twenty years later, PETA pushed the ideological pedal to the rhetorical metal, launching a "Holocaust on Your Plate" campaign to promote a "nonviolent, vegan diet." In the campaign, PETA paraded a massive graphic display wherein images of chickens, pigs and calves were juxtaposed with pictures of near-dead Holocaust victims and piles of human corpses. "Just as the Nazis tried to 'dehumanize' Jews by forcing them to live in filthy, crowded conditions," read PETA's press release detailing the campaign, "animals on today's factory farms are stripped of all that is enjoyable and natural to them and treated as nothing more than meat-, egg-, and milk-making 'machines.'" The Holocaust, one of the worst abominations in human history (numerically and morally), reflects humanity's capacity for cruelty. PETA seems to lack the appreciation for human life or decency to see that, out of respect for those who survived the concentration camps -- and moreover, for those who did not -- comparisons to the tragedy should be restricted to, well, legitimately comparable tragedies. Asserting that the death of a chicken is morally equivalent to the wholesale, grotesque slaughter of sentient, conscious beings is an appalling affront to every Jew, Gypsy, homosexual, person with a disability and other Nazi-labeled "misfit" who resisted de facto murder in the camps for months or years. On its frequently asked questions page, PETA's Web site quotes the celebrated humanitarian Albert Schweitzer: "Aware of the problems and responsibilities an expanded ethic brings with it, said we each must 'live daily from judgment to judgment, deciding each case as it arises, as wisely and mercifully as we can.'" But, as its conduct has illustrated time and time again, PETA lacks the wisdom to participate in a fair and rational discussion of its grievances, and eschews mercy by supporting terrorists and taking unfair advantage of human tragedies whenever it suits its bizarre, misguided agenda. According to nonprofit tax forms filed with the Internal Revenue Service, PETA spent only $6,100 of its $10.9 million budget on animal shelters in fiscal year 1996. It seems, then, that The Price Is Right host Bob Barker -- who founded the DJ&T Foundation, an organization that funds low-cost animal clinics to fight animal overpopulation -- has done more for Friskie and millions of other animals nationwide than PETA ever has. (Oh, and by the way, don't forget to spay or neuter your pets.) ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- ---- Contact the editorial editor at . His opinions do not necessarily represent those of the Emerald. |
#86
|
|||
|
|||
http://people.aol.com/people/news/no...545260,00.html
November 18, 2003 PETA May Curb Catty Anti-Clay Campaign STEPHEN M. SILVERMAN The zealous animal-rights group People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals had a brand new ad campaign planned to promote the spaying and neutering of cats and dogs -- only it wasn't very nice. "Get Neutered -- It Didn't Hurt Clay Aiken," says Triumph the Insult Comic Dog, who is featured in the ad. According to the PETA Web site, Aiken, 24, was targeted for such treatment because the "American Idol" runner-up recently said in a Rolling stone profile: "I think cats are Satan. There's nothing worse to me than a house cat. When I was about 16, I had a kitten and ran over it." (In fact, Aiken went on to say, though the rest of his comments were overlooked by PETA: "Seeing that cat die, I actually think that its spirit has haunted me. I wasn't afraid of cats before. But now they scare me to death.") Triumph, of course, is best known as a regular guest on "Late Night with Conan O'Brien," and the trash-talking puppet (created by comic writer Robert Smigel) has released his first album, "Come Poop with Me." "Triumph's big mouth may rub some people the wrong way, but his message in our new spay/neuter ad is right on the money," PETA director Daphna Nachminovitch declares on the Web site. "It's a case where a 'stitch in time saves nine' -- or 90 -- unwanted animals from a life of misery." But now that PETA's attack on popular Clay has surfaced, the group now appears to be backtracking. A spokeswoman for the group, Ingrid Newkirk, tells New York's Daily News that her organization is delaying and possibly killing the ad, which was to begin running this week. Newkirk cited a flood of protests from rabid Aiken fans, to say nothing of a call from his attorney. "We're in a slight holding pattern," she tells the Daily News. "We're always flexible. We got a lawyer calling, and our lawyers said maybe we can work something out, make the ad evaporate, and put a leash on the insult dog." Aiken has yet to comment on the ad. On Saturday, he's due to go home to Raleigh, N.C., to serve as grand marshal of the 59th Annual Raleigh Christmas Parade. No word on whether he also fears reindeer. |
#87
|
|||
|
|||
http://people.aol.com/people/news/no...545260,00.html
November 18, 2003 PETA May Curb Catty Anti-Clay Campaign STEPHEN M. SILVERMAN The zealous animal-rights group People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals had a brand new ad campaign planned to promote the spaying and neutering of cats and dogs -- only it wasn't very nice. "Get Neutered -- It Didn't Hurt Clay Aiken," says Triumph the Insult Comic Dog, who is featured in the ad. According to the PETA Web site, Aiken, 24, was targeted for such treatment because the "American Idol" runner-up recently said in a Rolling stone profile: "I think cats are Satan. There's nothing worse to me than a house cat. When I was about 16, I had a kitten and ran over it." (In fact, Aiken went on to say, though the rest of his comments were overlooked by PETA: "Seeing that cat die, I actually think that its spirit has haunted me. I wasn't afraid of cats before. But now they scare me to death.") Triumph, of course, is best known as a regular guest on "Late Night with Conan O'Brien," and the trash-talking puppet (created by comic writer Robert Smigel) has released his first album, "Come Poop with Me." "Triumph's big mouth may rub some people the wrong way, but his message in our new spay/neuter ad is right on the money," PETA director Daphna Nachminovitch declares on the Web site. "It's a case where a 'stitch in time saves nine' -- or 90 -- unwanted animals from a life of misery." But now that PETA's attack on popular Clay has surfaced, the group now appears to be backtracking. A spokeswoman for the group, Ingrid Newkirk, tells New York's Daily News that her organization is delaying and possibly killing the ad, which was to begin running this week. Newkirk cited a flood of protests from rabid Aiken fans, to say nothing of a call from his attorney. "We're in a slight holding pattern," she tells the Daily News. "We're always flexible. We got a lawyer calling, and our lawyers said maybe we can work something out, make the ad evaporate, and put a leash on the insult dog." Aiken has yet to comment on the ad. On Saturday, he's due to go home to Raleigh, N.C., to serve as grand marshal of the 59th Annual Raleigh Christmas Parade. No word on whether he also fears reindeer. |
#88
|
|||
|
|||
http://people.aol.com/people/news/no...545260,00.html
November 18, 2003 PETA May Curb Catty Anti-Clay Campaign STEPHEN M. SILVERMAN The zealous animal-rights group People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals had a brand new ad campaign planned to promote the spaying and neutering of cats and dogs -- only it wasn't very nice. "Get Neutered -- It Didn't Hurt Clay Aiken," says Triumph the Insult Comic Dog, who is featured in the ad. According to the PETA Web site, Aiken, 24, was targeted for such treatment because the "American Idol" runner-up recently said in a Rolling stone profile: "I think cats are Satan. There's nothing worse to me than a house cat. When I was about 16, I had a kitten and ran over it." (In fact, Aiken went on to say, though the rest of his comments were overlooked by PETA: "Seeing that cat die, I actually think that its spirit has haunted me. I wasn't afraid of cats before. But now they scare me to death.") Triumph, of course, is best known as a regular guest on "Late Night with Conan O'Brien," and the trash-talking puppet (created by comic writer Robert Smigel) has released his first album, "Come Poop with Me." "Triumph's big mouth may rub some people the wrong way, but his message in our new spay/neuter ad is right on the money," PETA director Daphna Nachminovitch declares on the Web site. "It's a case where a 'stitch in time saves nine' -- or 90 -- unwanted animals from a life of misery." But now that PETA's attack on popular Clay has surfaced, the group now appears to be backtracking. A spokeswoman for the group, Ingrid Newkirk, tells New York's Daily News that her organization is delaying and possibly killing the ad, which was to begin running this week. Newkirk cited a flood of protests from rabid Aiken fans, to say nothing of a call from his attorney. "We're in a slight holding pattern," she tells the Daily News. "We're always flexible. We got a lawyer calling, and our lawyers said maybe we can work something out, make the ad evaporate, and put a leash on the insult dog." Aiken has yet to comment on the ad. On Saturday, he's due to go home to Raleigh, N.C., to serve as grand marshal of the 59th Annual Raleigh Christmas Parade. No word on whether he also fears reindeer. |
#89
|
|||
|
|||
Clay Aiken Targeted In Ridiculous Ad Campaign
Wednesday November 19, 2003 @ 03:30 PM By: ChartAttack.com Staff Animal rights group People For The Ethical Treatment Of Animals (PETA) have taken some shots at celebrities in the past with their sensational ad campaigns before, but this time they may have gone too far. PETA have just delayed an ad campaign that attacks the measure of American Idol runner-up Clay Aiken's manhood, but they're warning Aiken that if he doesn't change his alleged anti-house cat stance, they'll push the ad ahead. The ad in question features cult hero Triumph The Insult Comic Dog (a rubber puppet known for his delightful vulgarity) and the slogan "Get Neutered. It Didn't Hurt Clay Aiken." According to the Associated Press, the puppet ad-libbed the quote, but PETA decided to keep it in once they found out that Aiken is a cat hater. The anti-cat allegations come from a Rolling Stone interview that Aiken did earlier this year in which he admits to having cat phobia. He told the magazine that he had accidentally run over a kitten when he was a teenager and since witnessing the animal's death, he's felt that the cat's spirit has "haunted" him, thus spurring on his phobia. So, Clay's a dog person. Does that give PETA the right to attack his masculinity? PETA are giving Aiken a chance to redeem himself if the singer agrees to support the organization. According to AP, the organization will change their slogan to the equally asinine, but less slanderous, "Cut ‘em off. The don't taste that great anyway," if Aiken agrees to do an interview for the PETA website and post a message on his own website encouraging his fans to spay/neuter their pets. PETA may not support cat-hating, but it looks like there's no rule against blackmail in their moral handbook. Aiken has not publicly commented on the matter, but his lawyer has reportedly been in contact with PETA. The organization claims that they will run the Aiken ads next week if the singer doesn't bow to their demands. |
#90
|
|||
|
|||
Clay Aiken Targeted In Ridiculous Ad Campaign
Wednesday November 19, 2003 @ 03:30 PM By: ChartAttack.com Staff Animal rights group People For The Ethical Treatment Of Animals (PETA) have taken some shots at celebrities in the past with their sensational ad campaigns before, but this time they may have gone too far. PETA have just delayed an ad campaign that attacks the measure of American Idol runner-up Clay Aiken's manhood, but they're warning Aiken that if he doesn't change his alleged anti-house cat stance, they'll push the ad ahead. The ad in question features cult hero Triumph The Insult Comic Dog (a rubber puppet known for his delightful vulgarity) and the slogan "Get Neutered. It Didn't Hurt Clay Aiken." According to the Associated Press, the puppet ad-libbed the quote, but PETA decided to keep it in once they found out that Aiken is a cat hater. The anti-cat allegations come from a Rolling Stone interview that Aiken did earlier this year in which he admits to having cat phobia. He told the magazine that he had accidentally run over a kitten when he was a teenager and since witnessing the animal's death, he's felt that the cat's spirit has "haunted" him, thus spurring on his phobia. So, Clay's a dog person. Does that give PETA the right to attack his masculinity? PETA are giving Aiken a chance to redeem himself if the singer agrees to support the organization. According to AP, the organization will change their slogan to the equally asinine, but less slanderous, "Cut ‘em off. The don't taste that great anyway," if Aiken agrees to do an interview for the PETA website and post a message on his own website encouraging his fans to spay/neuter their pets. PETA may not support cat-hating, but it looks like there's no rule against blackmail in their moral handbook. Aiken has not publicly commented on the matter, but his lawyer has reportedly been in contact with PETA. The organization claims that they will run the Aiken ads next week if the singer doesn't bow to their demands. |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Question about a vax | Cheryl | Cat health & behaviour | 29 | March 4th 05 01:37 AM |
rec.pets.cats: Manx Breed-FAQ | Paul Osmond | Cat Information | 0 | November 28th 04 05:17 AM |