I only disagree with some of what PETA does, I support a whole lot of their initiatives. Unfortunately, if you read PETA's victory pages - there really isn't another group that has done or is doing all that they do. Who put vivisection on the map? PETA. Who stopped our dogs from being in automobile crash-tests? PETA. Who filmed those dogs in China who had the fur ripped from their live bodies? PETA. Who basically motivated complete reform in animal medical testing and cosmetic testing? PETA. Who exposed what was happening in chimp labs? PETA. Who filmed those guys sitting on turkeys? PETA. Who filmed those men shoving prods up those pigs' vaginas? PETA.

To me, those ARE "real issues" and legitimate animal abuse. I support those initiatives above and so many others that have resulted in less cruelty to animals. I'm sorry, but those issues are not "warped" to me. :)

To address the level of my support to animal welfare charities, I'll just lay it out. I give about $1000 a year to animal charities. Of that, about $50 goes to PETA. The rest goes mostly to direct care agencies like Best Friends Society, Humane Ass'n of AZ, Noah's Wish etcetera and/or ASPCA, HSUS etcetera. My biggest donation this year was $400 to the Cochise Human Ass'n here in AZ - they provide vet services for animals whose owners cannot afford them.

There is no organization that I agree with 100% and I'm okay with it. However, I give to these organizations anyway because I've SEEN results and I support enough of what they do to make it very worthwhile for me. :)

Ann, I know you are not the type I was referring to, and I hope you took no offense at my comment. It's good to know if we ever meet, we can still eat at the same table - me with my steak, and you with your salad :D

LOL :D :D :D!!! You got it baby, and dinner is on me! :)

[I didn't take any offense, my friend! :)]

why do you get so defensive about it?. I never said that i want everybody to stop eating meat, did I?
I was just giving an opinion. If you thought it was insulting you had the choice(just like you have the choice to eat meat) to not reply to it. :mad::mad::mad:

No, you didn't say those words, but you did say"I promise you would be a vegetarian if you'd really care" that implies those of us that do eat meat don't care and nothing could be further than the truth.

And btw, I do recognize the good things PETA has brought about. Although, I can't support them due to them being responsible for euthanizing many (if not most) of the dogs in their possession and their position on pet ownership (wanting the practice abolished) along with several other animal issues. I show my support of dogs, other animals and their plight in different ways than PETA would expect me to do.

you are awesome!!!!:)

Oh lord. I appreciate the some of the work PETA does, because all in all they defend the rights of animals but my oh my. They have some of the most outrageous ways of trying to get their point across and some of the most bizzarre perspectives.
I didn't know the veternarian whatever is against ear cropping and tail docking. I thought that because they do it at such a young age it doesn't affect them that badly when they do it, for the tails at least. I've never had a dog with cropped ears.

I curious to know how you PETA supporters feel about their letter to USA network. (The subject of this thread) I noticed not one of you mentioned it. Are you against all breeders, period? Are you against the Westminster Dog Show or dog shows in general? If you support PETA, but not this particular action, how do you feel about them using you to get their point across? They did after all, make a point of mentioning their "2 million members and supporters."

I guess I wouldn't be considered part of their 2 million supporters because I haven't actually donated to PETA. But I do support their organization. From reading the original post, to me, it sounds like they are basing their reasoning for wanting the show cancelled off of what some breeders may practice. From what I recall they were saying that breeders who breed purebred dogs typically inbreed their animals, which causes more health concerns.
I don't agree with that because it's like punishing an entire group for what some people may do, and they didn't provide any proof that all those dogs are actually inbred. I know that my two Yorkies (each from a different breeder) were not inbred, in fact one of the breeders talked with me about how they were against doing that.
And a lot of groups that campaign for certain viewpoints tend to stretch the truth some, there are probably several of their 2 million supporters who don't agree with this, but when thinking about that in relation to say the population, or people who are a part of dog shows, it's probably not as big of a number as it sounds. And I don't think it's their strongest point in their arguement anyway.

I'm defensive about it because I found it insulting, not to mention completely inaccurate. Like you, I too have a right to voice my opinion rather than sit back and say nothing. And in my opinion, I didn't agree with your statment and found it to be insulting. I think that jencar98 summed it up nicely in her reply, not that it really needed explaining...it seemed pretty clear cut.

The producer of the film that caused the BBC to not air Crufts wrote a letter rebuffing PETA for riding their coattails and 'marginalizing their efforts'. Seems like their bad reputation extends beyond our shores. I think it's laudable that the KC is attempting to revise standards that help ensure the health of dogs but I guess they aren't moving fast enough for the film's producers and the BBC. In general though, it seems like the EU is years ahead of us regarding better treatment of animals, both pets and farm stock. They've done this without all the sensationalism often associated with PETA so maybe there is a better way. While PETA may have been useful in the past in bringing about awareness, IMO their reputation as an extreme and fanatical group now only serves as a hindrance to any cause they associate themselves with. Perhaps we should look to the European model if we truly are concerned with making things better for animals. In any case, we certainly don't need PETA carrying the banner for animal rights. Through their extremism, they have become poison to a worthy cause.

:thumbup:Well stated!!

Way to go - I couldn't have said it better. I haven't read this whole thread -cause I haven't been online in days - but I too think they are a bit warped.... When I see the many good things they do for animals as Wylies mom said - then who cares about the crazy stuff they do ?

Sometimes I feel they get outrageous just for the publicity. If they didn't do or say nutso things - who would ever bother paying attention to them ?

I'd rather see 1000 people with bugged out eyes :eek: jumping onto the PETA Site to see what they're about when they pull stunts like this & actually seeing/reading about the atrocities inflicted on animals - then no one paying any attention

We have massive problems with animal cruelity ....they take it on and at least draw attention to it.

Even YouTube is helping animals without even trying - - there are so many videos of animal abuse/puppy mills/dog fighting and especially animal slaughter ....that even teens are paying attention. Many are not eating meat because these videos get ATTENTION ...many are PETA undercover videos.


who knows what the future holds.... but the world is cruel to animals and PETA goes after it

WE are the predators

(ps...didn't mean to sound like a nutcase)