In article

,
Telamon wrote:

In article
,
Leonard Martin wrote:

In article ,
"Daniel" wrote:

"slimsilver" wrote in message
om...

"Hatfield" wrote in message

I notice on this website that he's very big on PETA, and
preaches that we must show great respect towards the animal
kingdom.

He must not know much about PETA and their real agenda.

7 Things You Didn't Know About PETA 1.. PETA has stated
repeatedly that their goal is "total animal liberation." This
means no pets, no meat, no milk, no zoos, no circuses, no
fishing, no leather, and no animal testing for lifesaving
medicines.

And someday, when humans have advanced enough morally, these
changes may come to be. I bet those bearded old guys of the 19th
Century were equally shocked at the idea of women voting.

2.. PETA has given tens of thousands of dollars to convicted
arsonists and other violent criminals.

If they have, that's bad.

3.. PETA funds the misnamed Physicians Committee for
Responsible Medicine

I don't have enough knowledge of the group to have an opinion. I
bet you don't either.

3, an animal-rights organization that presents itself as an
unbiased source for nutritional information and has links to a
violent animal-rights group called SHAC.

Ditto.

4.. PETA has used their contributors' tax-exempt donations to
fund the
North American Earth Liberation front, an FBI-certified
"domestic terrorist" group responsible for fire bombs and death
threats.

The Earth Liberation Front has only harmed stuff, not people. We
have too much stuff already. Also see my answer re "total animal
liberation". These days that pre-Civil War fanantic John Brown is a
hero to many.

5.. PETA regularly targets kids as early as elementary school
with anti-meat and anti-milk propaganda.

Oh NO..not anti-MEAT and anti-MILK propoganda!!!!!

6.. PETA spends less than one percent of its $13 million
budget actually caring for animals.

That's more than you or I do.

7.. PETA has repeatedly attacked groups like the March of
Dimes, the
Pediatric AIDS Foundation, and the American Cancer Society, for
conducting animal testing to find cures for birth defects and
life-threatening diseases.

Most everyone would agree that we have to keep using animal testing
to find cures for diseases. But let's not kid ourselves that this
is a moral stance. It's simply a cold-blooded decision to advance
the interests of humans at the expense of other species' suffering.
If anything, PETA's is the true, absolutist moral stance...unless
you're in favor of intentionally causing suffering to creatures
that can feel pain.

To quote your response; "If anything, PETA's is the true, absolutist
moral stance..."

"If anything" I think the point of the post you are responding to was
that PETA has no moral standing.

"If anything" how in God's good name could you possibly entertain a
position of an animals supposed rights over a human beings? Only a
whack job would think this way.

I'm glad you are not a whack job but a I did read what you said and I
quoted what you said in my post. We agree that the PETA position is
wrong and according to the previous post we disagree on whether the
PETA position is an "absolutist moral stance." They are your words I'm
quoting so don't be insulting about my not reading your posts with any
care.

--
Telamon
Ventura, California