PETA to Al Gore: Go Veggie
You have to hand it to PETA: It doesn't miss any chance to promote the animal rights agenda. It is now warning Al Gore that he will be considered a hypocrite if he doesn't stop eating meat because of the purported contribution cow flatulence and other animal wastes purportedly make to the purported problem of human-induced global warming.
Of course, if vegetarianism somehow caused global warming, PETA wouldn't care. It doesn't want anyone eating meat because of its "rat is a pig is a dog is a boy" ideology, not due to genuine environmental concerns. PETA's commitment to the fight against global warming is just so much grandstanding--which, it must be admitted, PETA is better at than any other advocacy group in the world
Labels: PETA
posted by Wesley J. Smith @ 8:34 PM
7 Comments
7 Comments:
I agree with you in part, but concede PETA's kernel of a point.
I agree PETA is grandstanding and don't care about global warming so much as the animals. If they could work a way into saying that eating rats is contributing to global warming, they would.
But it is true that the huge, mechanized cow farms ARE contributing to GCC (global climate change) as they are an unnaturally very dense source of methane, a worse chemical than CO2 for GCC.
But - here PETA loses me - the solution to this to avoid hypocrisy isn't necessarily to go veggie, but as well to stop eating meat from the huge mechanized farms, perhaps go hunting or eating organic.
If you continue to follow PETAs logic from an environmental standpoint then it would make sense to kill a massive amount of cows, or even possibly cause them to go extinct.
Matthew: PETA does want domestic cows to go extinct. Animal liberationists want there to be no domestic animals of any kind, including dogs and cats.
They have no problem with killing domestic animals. When Florida outlawed gestation crates for pigs in its constitution, an animal rights move about which I wrote in the Weekly Standard, the only 2 hog farms in the state killed their herds because they could no longer stay in business. An animal rights spokesperson (not from PETA) applauded the move because it cut short their suffering lives. PETA has also urged that African elephants that were about to be culled be euthanized rather than spared to live in animal parks.
Primarily, they would neuter all domestic animals, allow them to live out their lives in open areas, and not replace them eventually making domestic animals extinct.
If people knew what PETA was really about, they would conclude this outfit was nothing but an insane cult which cares NOTHING for animals.
Susan:
I'm with you - PETA doesn't seem to rely on science, morality, ethics, or facts, only on some weird emotion that says all animals must be free, and then goes to the most insane extreme possible. It almost looks like a group of people with OCD - we *must* release all animals or else "something bad will happen." And most folks who get suckered into it don't want to go to extremes, they just want it to be harder for people to abuse animals.
There's something to this mentality that bugs me. It's not just PETA, it's most every activist group out there - there's a core of insane peopel wanting to ultimately force everyone on earth to follow their lead in this one issue, and they surround themselves by a thin layer of extremists who might not really be into their ideology and a thick layer of normal folks they trick into thinking that they stand for Truth, Justice, and all that jazz, against the evil Empire (i.e. America as it stands).
Regardless of PETA's intentions, there are other reasons to be a vegetarian even if you don't oppose killing animals (which I do). We use a gargantuan amount of grain and food to overfeed animals, who if left to their own devices would be perfectly content to eat the grass growing in the field. With that grain -- by "eliminating the middle-man" -- we could feed thousands if not millions of people.
bmmg39: I have no objection to people arguing for vegetarianism. However, I do object to animal rights. As you point out, one is not necessary to embrace the other.
Post a Comment
Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]
<< Home