Tag Archives: People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals

Priorities, People

Posted on by

Yesterday Breitbart posted an article about a New York City Council meeting this afternoon to discuss the possible banning of fur.

The article reports:

City council Speaker Corey Johnson sponsored the fur ban that will be the centerpiece of a hearing at City Hall Wednesday afternoon. The bill bans the sale of all fur, except for sales of used fur apparel and fur garments worn for religious reasons.

The bill is fervently supported by radical animal rights activists and leftwing celebrities. People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals claim that the industry is cruel to animals. Actress Angelic Huston wrote an op-ed in the Daily News in April calling for the ban, arguing that it would protect consumers whom she claimed may unknowingly be buying dog and cat fur. Project Runway’s Tim Gunn also wrote an op-ed supporting the ban.

Business owners said the ban will cost New Yorkers jobs and hurt family businesses. Fur businesses in New York employ 1,100 people, according to the Fur Council of America, an industry group.

The bill is also opposed by a coalition of African American leaders who say the bill is an attack on black culture. On Monday, more than 100 black pastors signed a letter decrying the ban.

“Fur has given black people standing, fortitude and strength in the face of bigotry, injustice, and intolerance throughout history,” the letter argued.

The letter pointed out that while city residents would be denied the opportunity to buy fur, it would remain available in surburbs around the city.

“No urban city should be treated less fairly than its wealthier suburban neighbors on any issue,” the letter said.

New York City’s subways are rapidly deteriorating, and the homeless problem in the city is increasing, the cost of living in New York City has skyrocketed, and the City Council is worried about people buying fur??!!

This Story Really Belongs On A Satire Site

Posted on by

The U.K. Daily Mail posted an article yesterday about a recent truck accident in Maine.

The article reports:

An animal rights advocate wants to place a roadside memorial in Maine to remember thousands of lobsters killed in a highway wreck.

A member of People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals filed an application for the memorial earlier on Wednesday to build a large grave to mark the site of a truck crash that resulted in thousands of lobsters spilling out onto a highway. 

PETA hopes to memorialize the ‘countless sensitive crustaceans’ who were killed during the August 22 crash in Brunswick, the animal rights group said. 

The grave would ‘remind everyone that the best way to prevent such tragedies is to go vegan,’ the animal rights group said. 

7,000 pounds of live lobsters were destroyed and it’s believed at least 4,500 lobsters died.  It’s believed the truck’s driver lost control because of rain.

Some of the lobsters died from being crushed, police say. Detective William Moir told The Bangor Daily News that the scene of lobster carnage ‘was something I’ve never seen before. Some lobsters were loose on the ground from being spilled over so we went to work to save the ones we could.’

I don’t mean to be difficult, but I suspect there are many other places the money involved could be put to better use. I am sorry about the lobsters, but they were not purposely harmed, and I do truly believe this article belongs on a satire site.

A California Judge Who Ruled Correctly Based On The Facts

Posted on by

On Thursday, CNS News reported on a lawsuit brought by People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals (PETA) against California dairy farmers. PETA sued to get the daily farmers to stop running ads showing happy, well cared for dairy cows. PETA claimed that the cows were neither happy nor well cared for.

The article reports:

PETA, which filed the lawsuit in 2011, had argued that the California Milk Advisory Board and the California Department of Food and Agriculture had violated state rules that bar misleading or inaccurate marketing with the “Happy Cows” ads.

I am not totally sure how PETA knew whether or not the cows were happy, but I will continue with the story.

The article reports:

According to court documents, PETA had specifically complained that “most California dairy cows are subjected to physical and psychological pain and stress caused by intense and uncomfortable dairying practices, have a high risk of suffering from a number of diseases, and die prematurely” and that “dairy producers take into account the animals’ wellbeing only to the extent that it is economically advantageous to do so.”

The judge ruled that PETA had failed to produce any specific evidence that the cows were being mistreated. The judge also pointed out that state veterinarians and agriculture officials routinely visit and inspect California dairy farms to observe the conditions at the farms.

I am not sure what PETA would like to do to change the conditions of cows on dairy farms. I am also not sure what causes stress in cows. I think most people want to see animals treated well, but I do wonder what changes PETA would make to the average dairy farm.

The article concludes:

PETA, meanwhile, said it is “continuing a review of the judge’s decision in order to determine its next step.”

My question is simple, “How much did this lawsuit cost the dairy farmers of California, and how much of that cost will be passed along to consumers in California when they buy milk or milk products?”

Enhanced by Zemanta

As Our Rights As Americans Are Being Taken Away The Rights Of Whales Are Increasing

Posted on by

Breitbart.com reported yesterday that a California court will decide if amusement park animals are protected by the same constitutional rights as humans. Good grief–haven’t they got more important issues to look at?

The article reports:

The issue arises from a lawsuit filed by rights group People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals (PETA) in a San Diegocourt on behalf of five orcas named Tilikum, Katina, Corky, Kasatka and Ulises.

The whales perform water acrobatics at the SeaWorld amusement parks in San Diego and in Orlando, Florida.

 PETA argues that continuing the whales’ “employment” at SeaWorldviolates the 13th Amendment to the US Constitution, which prohibits slavery.

District Judge Jeffrey Miller heard arguments in the complaint Monday and reviewed the response from SeaWorld, which asked that the lawsuit be dismissed. His ruling is expected to come later.

Why are we taking up the Judge’s and the Court’s time with this nonsense?

The article further reports:

The complaint demands that the court “appoint a legal guardian to effectuate plaintiffs’ transfer from defendants’ facilities to a suitable habitat in accordance with each plaintiff’s individual needs and best interests.”

Why was this case not immediately thrown out of court?

 

Enhanced by Zemanta