« The Priorities of the New York Times | Main | Cut-and-Run Fun »

Standing headline: another PETA publicity stunt

The People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals have discovered a new way to garner attention from the public at large. They've taken a break from killing 10,000 dogs and cats to go after yet another innocent group: the publisher of a dictionary.

It's a classic tactic, winning the argument by redifining words to suit your purpose. But the notion of bullying the Merriam-Webster to accept PETA's twisted definition of "circus" as the new standard... that's a new low.

Perhaps some kind circus will send some of its monkeys over to PETA to fling feces at them?


Comments (50)

I'm not a PETA supporter, b... (Below threshold)

I'm not a PETA supporter, but I am not a fan of some zoos or circuses either.

The line between domesticated animals and "wild" animals is blurred in the entertainment industry in the sense that many of the "wild" animals used have never known their natural habitat. Why, they have even been known to mistake gaudy gay performers for acceptable prey...

I do support ethical "Wild" animal zoos, where the emphasis is on preservation of species, research and education.

This is an interesting publicity stunt that neither threatens a human or animal, offers a financial threat to anyone in particular directly, or involves breaking the law. Very un-PETA.

The only reason PETA will p... (Below threshold)
Lee:

The only reason PETA will pull a stunt like this is to get publicity and further their cause. I'm sure they pick up new members everytime there philosophy gets publicized. If you think their cause is unjust, don't give them the ink.

PETA? I always enjoy pulle... (Below threshold)
moseby:

PETA? I always enjoy pulled pork stuffed into a peta.

I live near PETA HQ in Norf... (Below threshold)
Faith+1:

I live near PETA HQ in Norfolk. Their cause? hehe, it isn't to save animals. Their only cause is to pull publicity stunts in order to get donations to pay salaries and do more publicity stunts...oh yeah, and to be Virginia's second largest killer of animals.

They've run their "adoption" scam this is where they go around to various vets claiming they will find homes for the various abandoned pets and then just kill them. Made famous a couple of years back when two of them got caught dumping the bodies in a dumpster.

It's a completely phony organization. The SPCA is a much better run organization that actually runs rescue centers and adoption programs and is far more deserving of money for those supporting animal rights than the scammers at PETA.

>>PETA? I always enjoy pull... (Below threshold)
Lint:

>>PETA? I always enjoy pulled pork stuffed into a peta.

I bet you do...especially when watching a Queery Eye for the Straight Guy marathon.

"I live near PETA HQ in Nor... (Below threshold)
Lint:

"I live near PETA HQ in Norfolk. Their cause? hehe, it isn't to save animals. Their only cause is to pull publicity stunts in order to get donations to pay salaries and do more publicity stunts...oh yeah, and to be Virginia's second largest killer of animals."

I think you got it exactly right, Kathy. But I am curious though: wouldn't it be a whole lot easier to just wave brightly colored objects in front of Republicans and take their money?

I mean, sure, right-wingers and castrated turkeys are about on an equivalent level on the evolutionary ladder. But Right-wingers have more disposable income and would make a much better monetary target, don't you think?

The PETA extremists have ob... (Below threshold)
P. Bunyan:

The PETA extremists have obviously never owned an animal (of course they think having a pet is the most horrible thing in the world, while killing an unborn child is just fine-- but I digress.)

The reality is that the wips and chains are part of the show and mostly for the benefit of the audience. Anyone who's ever owned a pet knows that you train them with positive reinforcement, not punishment- and the circuses do too.

I really wouldn't expect a terrorist supporting, animal killing agency like PETA to really think about things before they say such stupid things though. Typical lefties.

Since you all are so upset ... (Below threshold)
Lint:

Since you all are so upset about all the animal killing that PETA is doing, I trust you will henceforth stop patronizing McDonalds?

I'm having grilled seal and... (Below threshold)
Tim:

I'm having grilled seal and sea turtle tonight. MMMMMMM

Feel free to skin and roast... (Below threshold)
Lint:

Feel free to skin and roast a republican along with your seal and turtle.

Link,A you saying ... (Below threshold)
P. Bunyan:

Link,

A you saying that there's no difference in killing for convenience and killing for food?

Also it's the hypocracy of PETA not the actual killing that is the problems.

sorry, I meant "Lint" not L... (Below threshold)
P. Bunyan:

sorry, I meant "Lint" not Link

Hey Tim...sounds delicious!... (Below threshold)
moseby:

Hey Tim...sounds delicious!! May I join you? I'll bring the spotted owl wings and the baby seal steaks. We can roast them over a burning tire to piss off the global warming nazi's too.

how do you know they're kil... (Below threshold)
Lint:

how do you know they're killing for convenience? Clairvoyance?

What do they gain by killing your pets? Like Kathy said, this must be some elaborate ploy to take money from people so that they can indulge in their sick fantasies of raping your chiuahua and killing your kitty.

This is beyond retarded. LAter.

Hey P. Bunyan...you had it ... (Below threshold)
moseby:

Hey P. Bunyan...you had it right. You just forgot to put the word "missing" in front of it.

Lint,I don't remem... (Below threshold)
P. Bunyan:

Lint,

I don't remember the exact percentage but suffice it say the PETA was killing most of the Animals they were "rescuing".

They could've used only a small fraction of the money they spend defending terrorists to keep all those animals alive and happy until they were adopted or died of old age. They killed them because it was more convenient than doing the right thing.

LOL Moseby, but no Lint is ... (Below threshold)
P. Bunyan:

LOL Moseby, but no Lint is not an imaginary creature so he couldn't be "the missing link".

oh you made a funny. Good ... (Below threshold)
Lint:

oh you made a funny. Good for you.

And you have access to PETA's finances? this is how you're able to know what they do, why they do it, and how cost effective it is?

Please. share.

I'm not the media Lint. If... (Below threshold)
P. Bunyan:

I'm not the media Lint. If the MSM wasn't just a left-wing propaganda outfit everyone would know these things. But the information is out there-- you seem to have internet access; try doing a search.

P. Bunyan"They ... (Below threshold)
914:

P. Bunyan

"They killed them because it was the convenient thing to do."

They kill for convenience. all to true..

Has anyone else noticed tha... (Below threshold)
jaymaster:

Has anyone else noticed that the intellectual capacity of the liberal trolls has dropped lately?

What's up with that?

I agree with Faith+1, The S... (Below threshold)
Tony:

I agree with Faith+1, The SPCA is by far the superior organization. I was in New Orleans after the hurricane, and SPCA had people vigilantly filling up big bowls of water and big containers of dog food all around the devastated areas. Also, they saved many many animals, which hopefully-because of their sob story-will be adopted once brought around the country. PETA...those dudes are the Home Depot of tools.

Wow! What a looser bunch of... (Below threshold)
Allen:

Wow! What a looser bunch of comments. How the Hell is PETA bullying Webster's dictionary? By writing a letter to them. Oooh! Scary. What next, a polite phone call? Jay, are you a drooling retard?

As for PETA euthanizing, "killing," animals. How is that any different than the SPCA, the Humane Society and every other animal shelter and protection group that is forced to humanely put to sleep dogs and cats that nobody cares for? Something like 4 million dogs and cats are euthanized every year in the US, of which PETA has only euthanized about 10,000 in the last several years according to articles I've read. The reason these animals are euthanized is because there is not enough room for them in the shelters because millions more puppies and kittens are bred each year for pet stores and private buyers. Instead of blaming those who have the dirty job of euthanizing these animals, blame the "tools" who buy dogs and cats from pet stores and breeders rather than rescuing them from shelters.

The only reason PETA is getting slack for euthanizing animals and the SPCA and Humane Society aren't is because PETA also advocates vegetarianism and is opposed to wearing fur or beating up on elephants in the circus. This angers those idiots out there who don't want people kicking puppies but are okay with cows getting their throats slit so that they can eat a hamburger. At least PETA is consistent.

Allen,First, they ar... (Below threshold)
scsiwuzzy:

Allen,
First, they are getting flack, not slack. When somebody cuts you a break, it is called slack.
Second, PETA told the public that they were going to try to find the animals new homes. So does the SPCA. The difference is, the SPCA tries to find those home before killing the ones that cannot be placed where PETA just killed them. That's right, they picked them up and killed them right away. Then disposed of the bodies illegally.


Try mastering some facts and the English language before joining the fray, or calling someone else a drooling retard.

Lint,My name isn't... (Below threshold)
Faith+1:

Lint,

My name isn't Kathy.

I'm not a female.

Allen, PETA gets in trouble because they make little to no effort to actually place animals or rescue them. The reality is PETA could care less about the animals themselves, they are only in it for publicity stunts and fund raisers. They don't actually DO anything for animals. The only consistent thing about PETA is what they say in front of a TV camera. Their actual actions are completly the opposite.

About 4 years ago PETA ran ads offerring free spade/neutering services. On the surface, sounds like a good plan. They just killed the animals. They would tell people the animals "died in surgery" only there was no surgery just killing. These weren't strays but people's pets. They did it to about 30 before word got out and they were busted.

Last year 2 PETA employees were busted for collecting various animals from shelters under the lie they had found good homes for the pets. They killed them in the infamous "death van" and were caught dumping the dead animals in a dumpster behind a restaurant. It wasn't a case of overcrowding. It was a case of their outright lying that they had homes for them. PETA has zero interest in actually doing anything for animals. They only care about mustering donation checks.

The SPCA actually makes an effort to find animals a good home (all three of my pets are rescued animals from the SPCA).

I don't have a problem with animal rights supporters. I DO have a problem with an organization claiming to be such an entity when they aren't for the sole purpose of funding their organization. They end siphoning away money to legitimate organizations that actually do try and do something for the animals.

They are just a bunch of con-artists. Just because they claim to have a good cause doesn't make it so.

Hey AllenI attende... (Below threshold)
914:

Hey Allen

I attended one of those Elephant anger management classes before and believe Me, its not what its cracked up to be? if You look at them funny they accuse You of a hate crime and fart all over the place..trust Me, put this on Your not to do list.

And you have access to P... (Below threshold)
MikeSC:

And you have access to PETA's finances? this is how you're able to know what they do, why they do it, and how cost effective it is?

Seeing as how their tax returns are public as is a TON of other information (again, being a non-profit means A LOT of info is public), it is common knowledge. They kill about 70% of the animals they "save". They admit that there are times where the "most humane" thing you can do is kill the animal.

I found THIS line hilarious:

At least PETA is consistent.

One of their Executive VP's is alive solely due to medication produced by animal testing and sees NOTHING wrong with protesting animal testing and living due to what it provides.

As for PETA euthanizing, "killing," animals. How is that any different than the SPCA, the Humane Society and every other animal shelter and protection group that is forced to humanely put to sleep dogs and cats that nobody cares for?

Do they kill over 2/3 of the animals they bring in?

PETA does. They buy massive freezer lockers for it. Since 1998, the LARGEST percentage of animals they had adopted was a whopping 26.2% in 2001.

They ALSO financially support domestic terrorism and terrorists and has done so for years.

Something like 4 million dogs and cats are euthanized every year in the US, of which PETA has only euthanized about 10,000 in the last several years according to articles I've read.

We'll go for percentages of animals taken in that PETA has killed.

2000: 75.6%
2001: 72.4
2002: 85.7
2003: 85.9
2004: 86.3
2005: 90.7

http://www.petakillsanimals.com/downloads/PetaKillsAnimals.pdf
And, note the name --- what this actually posts is information supplied...BY PETA. None of it is invented.

Again, defend an organization that virulently opposes animal testing and financially supports groups that fire bomb animal research facilities --- while one of their executives openly uses medication derived from animal testing. A group that condemns such "evil" groups as the March of Dimes, the Pediatric AIDS Foundation, and the American Cancer Society because *gasp* they support animal testing (which, again, one of their Executive VP'S would be quite dead without).

Feel free.

The only people who support PETA are people too uneducated to know what they've done.
-=Mike

That's just the tip of PETA... (Below threshold)
James Cloninger:

That's just the tip of PETA's shadiness (I use that term very loosely)

(Note, I also know the difference between "Loose" and "Lose"...wish some of you would too.)

http://www.activistcash.com/organization_overview.cfm/oid/21

Oh, and more on the Death V... (Below threshold)
James Cloninger:

Oh, and more on the Death Van:

http://www.petakillsanimals.com/petaTrial2.cfm

I am not a peta member but ... (Below threshold)
nick:

I am not a peta member but traveling circuses are abusive for wild animals. Elephants should not be beaten with bull-hooks and electricuted to be trained to do their "tricks" such as an elephant standing on her head. Not to mention the elephants are severely confined for 23 hours a day chained by 1 front leg and 1 back leg. Many times circus elephants will sway and bob their heads repeatedly back and forth which is a sign of stereotypical abnormal stress like a mental patient in a hospital.
Many caring people are simply unaware of the horrendous cruelty to wild animals in circuses and don't realize that when they patronize these circuses with animals they are un-knowingly supporting animal cruelty. I went to Cirque Du Soleil with no wild animals and it was wonderful. I hate animal cruelty. While I may not agree with some of what Peta believes in or some of their methods, unfortunetly it seems one of the only ways to get publicity to support an animal cause. Animals otherwise would not get the attention they deserve when they are suffering from severe cruelty. It's a shame Peta has to do these "stunts" to just get the animal cause out to the public. It is sick in this society that headline news will cover Celebrities and their break-ups but yet won't do a story on circuses caught on under-cover tape electricuting circus elephants as they scream in agony and cower to their knees. Animal cruelty unfortunetly is linked to human cruelty and the media should cover more stories, than I bet Peta wouldn't have to pull as many "stunts'. AS I said I'm not with Peta but animal cruelty is not right either. Thanks for reading.

Feel free to jump in and de... (Below threshold)
James Cloninger:

Feel free to jump in and defend the squeeky-clean PETA anytime here, Allen...

Many caring people are s... (Below threshold)
MikeSC:

Many caring people are simply unaware of the horrendous cruelty to wild animals in circuses and don't realize that when they patronize these circuses with animals they are un-knowingly supporting animal cruelty.

Which is different than giving money to PETA how? Hearing PETA bemoan animal cruelty is like hearing Arabia bemoan the hurtful rhetoric against Jews in the West.

I went to Cirque Du Soleil with no wild animals and it was wonderful.

Sadly, a lot of families can't afford tickets to Cirque du Soleil.

I hate animal cruelty. While I may not agree with some of what Peta believes in or some of their methods, unfortunetly it seems one of the only ways to get publicity to support an animal cause.

You can support legitimate groups that concern themselves with animal welfare.

PETA kills more animals than circuses do.

Animals otherwise would not get the attention they deserve when they are suffering from severe cruelty. It's a shame Peta has to do these "stunts" to just get the animal cause out to the public. It is sick in this society that headline news will cover Celebrities and their break-ups but yet won't do a story on circuses caught on under-cover tape electricuting circus elephants as they scream in agony and cower to their knees.

I hate animal cruelty --- but there is a line between cruelty and idiocy.

PETA has stated --- more than once --- that they'd oppose a cure for cancer or AIDS if it came due to animal testing.

I will, personally, slaughter every monkey on Earth if one human life can be saved due to it.

Animal cruelty unfortunetly is linked to human cruelty and the media should cover more stories, than I bet Peta wouldn't have to pull as many "stunts'. AS I said I'm not with Peta but animal cruelty is not right either. Thanks for reading.

PETA is a much more vigorous user of animal cruelty than circuses.
-=Mike

Nick,Thank YOU for... (Below threshold)
jaymaster:

Nick,

Thank YOU for posting.

I think you are sincere in your desire to prevent suffering in circus animals.

That's a good thing, and I think your heart is in the right place.

But I also think you validate my previous post.

And to follow up on Mr. Clo... (Below threshold)
MikeSC:

And to follow up on Mr. Cloninger's post (this is from the leak he put up here; some REALLY damning stuff) --- PETA uses less than 1% of its funding to actually take care of animals.

People need to stop applauding press sluts (their own words) and support ACTUAL animal rights groups.
-=Mike

A friend of mine also think... (Below threshold)

A friend of mine also thinks that it's okay for PETA to try to manipulate people's emotions with lies because it's for a good cause.

She's wrong.

Lies and stupid stunts, even *without* the animal cruelty that people have linked to here, doesn't promote a cause, it undermines it.

Too many people are going to see through the hype and it will color their perception of *all* animal advocacy organizations.

As for circuses... I've also read that circus animals tend to be much happier (however they measure that) than animals in zoos because they are *engaged*. Elephants, as an example, are *highly* intelligent. A circus might not be as good as roaming wild in India or working as a beast of burden there, but it's much better than being confined in a zoo with nothing to think about. Even big displays with inventive "toys" aren't as good as actually having something to *do*.

Which brings up more of the complete garbage... pet ownership as slavery, *forcing* sled dogs to pull sleds, etc. PETA doesn't believe in having pets, ultimately. Yes, it's silly to insist on calling pets "companion animals" but at least those people understand that the first cats or dogs took up with humans of their own free will because they liked the food. Domesticated animals of all sorts are the most genetically successful creatures, biologically speaking, of any on earth (bigger than a bug.)

The lies and manipulative stunts, like the "definition of circus", alienate a whole lot of people and those people *probably* think other groups are just as bad.

I think you do make a prett... (Below threshold)
Tom Feral:

I think you do make a pretty good case against PETA. I actually was a member some years ago, but decided that they were much more into themselves than into animals, so hasta lavesta.

One poster said the fault for so many cats/kittens and dogs/puppies being killed is that of the people who don't get their pets "fixed". People who, in my opinion, are either too lazy, cheap, or soulless to care enough to do it. HOWEVER, a 90% kill rate does seem VERY high.

You hurt your case against PETA however, when you say "Not counting the dogs and cats PETA spayed and neutered, the group put to death over 90 percent of the animals it took in during 2005 alone."

What does that mean? That spaying and neutering dogs and cats is bad? The opposite is in fact true. Or does it mean that they killed 90% of the cats and dogs that they did not spay or neuter? If that is the case, then the 90% kill rate would be a disingenuous claim.

The 90% is based on documen... (Below threshold)
MikeSC:

The 90% is based on documents they are required to turn into the state of Virginia (the state of their HQ) where they have to reveal the number of animals they take in and the number of animals they kill.

The 90% figure is simply doing the math. Spaying and neutering has nothing to do with it which is why I (the guy who provided the 90% number) didn't mention spaying or neutering.
-=Mike

Hi-I am not talking just ab... (Below threshold)
Nick:

Hi-I am not talking just about Peta here, I am simply talking about the abuse wild circus animals endure, That is all. And like I mentioned I don't belong to Peta but I belong to the humane society. Peta and the humane society may both care about circus animal cruelty "to a certain extent" and although Peta may get the circus abuse attention that doesn't mean that people shoudn't be educated about it. I googled and there are other circuses that don't use wild animals such as the Bg Apple circus, Circus Chimera, Circus Smirkus, and more. I'm not saying I condone and agree with all Peta, I just do not like animal cruelty and circuses with wild animals are horrific, thats all. Thanks

"Not counting the dogs and ... (Below threshold)
Tom Feral:

"Not counting the dogs and cats PETA spayed and neutered, the group put to death over 90 percent of the animals it took in during 2005 alone."

What then do you or they mean by "Not counting the dogs and cats PETA spayed and neutered" in this context then? It sounds like you or they are saying this this is a bad thing, equivelent to killing them.
Sorry, but it makes no sense and detracts from the otherwise reasonably good case against PETA.

OK, I think that I "get it"... (Below threshold)
Tom Feral:

OK, I think that I "get it". You did not mention the spaying and neutering part, as you presumably thought that it made no sense either.

Of course, if the source makes no sense on one thing , how could they be credible on another. But, oh well, I quess I'm sounding like a lawyer now. My bad!

Well, Tom, they do use publ... (Below threshold)
MikeSC:

Well, Tom, they do use public information provided by PETA to the state of Virginia. The VDACS Online Animal Reporting. PETA has no choice about making the information public or else they'd face MASSIVE penalties.

So, why do I believe them here? Because it's not just them saying it.
-=Mike

PETA members seem to revel ... (Below threshold)
Lee:

PETA members seem to revel in their unique approach to the question of animal rights. Their underground style wins young hearts, and their heroes appear to be those who are most daring. They're having a measurable influence on American culture. More and more people are moving towards a vegetarian /vegan lifestyle, for example.

Uh oh. They're a danger to the Texas beef industry. Let's frisk them for WMDs!

I can't believe anyone would feel threatened by these kids.

Ah, but Lee. It's *annoyi... (Below threshold)

Ah, but Lee. It's *annoying* to have to wage a full time battle to keep your own children eating red meat.

At least my vegetarian friends are honest about the fact that not eating meat doesn't mean they're into health food.

What is a vegetarian/vegan "lifestyle" anyhow?

Have you ever had to bring vegan snacks to a party when you aren't even a vegetarian? It's a hundred times easier to manage four food alergies and keep it kosher than figure out how to actually bring something other than dry crudettes... and boy do *those* get old fast.

At least food alergies are involuntary and the need for kosher is legitimate religion... vegan is a choice that is freely made that requires all your friends and aquaintances to jump through hoops not to "offend" you.

I *like* my vegan friends but the food issues get so old so fast. At least vegetarians will eat cheese and deviled eggs and you don't have to worry that you used butter in the stuffed mushrooms.

And have you ever *seen* a Tofu Pup? And I'm supposed to believe that vegan is *healthy?*

Give me a slab of beef with some moo left in it and stay the heck away from my kids.

Pets as slavery? My friends... (Below threshold)

Pets as slavery? My friends' dog is just about the happiest creature I've ever seen. She loves being taken new places, meeting new people, running around at the park, playing fetch, etc. Dogs aren't really wild animals any more anyway, it's not like we could just release her into the wild and let her run free. She'd probably starve to death or get run over. I don't see it as being cruel at all.

I bet if they spent the money they spend on PR and stupid stunts on taking care of and finding a home for the animals they take in, they could save almost all of them. If I was allowed to keep a pet here I would go to the local vet or animal shelter and adopt one. Hell, their message that having pets is wrong is probably contributing to the problem of finding them good homes :(

I just can't believe they would do something so horrible. Wait, yes I can. But I wish they wouldn't.

PETA members seem to rev... (Below threshold)
MikeSC:

PETA members seem to revel in their unique approach to the question of animal rights.

Hypocricy is hardly a "unique" approach.

Their underground style wins young hearts, and their heroes appear to be those who are most daring.

Their heroes include people imprisoned, repeatedly, for committing acts of domestic terrorism. They support the most active domestic terrorist groups in this country (ELF and ALF). They financially support terrorists convicted of assaulting police officers (see Harper, Josh).

Heck, ALSO see Wilson, David. Coronado, Rod. Heck, you want amusing? Rod Coronado received $45,200 from PETA in 1995. You know how much was spent on animal shelters by PETA that year? $3,955.

And they win "young hearts" through the most loathesome propaganda you're likely to see.

They're having a measurable influence on American culture. More and more people are moving towards a vegetarian /vegan lifestyle, for example.

Well, Clinton helped lead to Enron, so there's no telling what leads to other things. You can call it a good thing if you wish. PERSONALLY, I happen to like the idea of curing cancer and AIDS which PETA opposes.

Uh oh. They're a danger to the Texas beef industry. Let's frisk them for WMDs!

Nah. They just oppose animal research to cure cancer and AIDS.

Those wacky, wacky kids.

I can't believe anyone would feel threatened by these kids.

If you don't, you're not paying attention.

Well, it is clear that y... (Below threshold)
Lee:

Well, it is clear that you are frightened by children, but that isn't surprising MikeSC. I was referring to the adult readers.

Well, Clinton helped lead to Enron, so there's no telling what leads to other things. You can call it a good thing if you wish. PERSONALLY, I happen to like the idea of curing cancer and AIDS which PETA opposes.

What I said....

An organization that happil... (Below threshold)

An organization that happily gives money to terrorists, which PETA has done for years, is a danger. I don't feel physically threatened by them as vegans are a notoriously pathetic bunch of D & D playing rejects.

But, hey, who NEEDS cures for cancer and AIDS, anyway? People with those afflictions probably asked for it, right?
-=Mike

Isn't it PETA's contention ... (Below threshold)
Lee:

Isn't it PETA's contention that if animal testing was to be phased out other, just as effective, means of performing this kind of testing and research would be found? That doesn't sound far-fetched.

Also - to have neo-cons, many of whom seem so set on derailing stem cell research, barking about PETA being anti-Cancer research is laughable.

Yeah, let's stick with nineteenth century methodology for research rather jumping into twenty-first century realms....

You can lead a liberal to <... (Below threshold)
914:

You can lead a liberal to water but they will not drink. this is a study in futility,.

Isn't it PETA's contenti... (Below threshold)
MikeSC:

Isn't it PETA's contention that if animal testing was to be phased out other, just as effective, means of performing this kind of testing and research would be found? That doesn't sound far-fetched.

Seeing as how doctors vehemently disagree that it is possible, I could care less what some animal rights group thinks. On the grand scale of things, I'll respect the opinion of the March of Dimes, American Cancer Society, and Pediatric AIDS Foundation over PETA (and, again, PETA opposes all of those groups and has tried to hamper their fund-raising).

How about this --- if you ever have a child, stand up for PETA and refuse any treatment that animals have helped produce.

Sure, your child's life will be short and painful --- but, darn it, until we stop using it, the animals will never be saved.

Also - to have neo-cons, many of whom seem so set on derailing stem cell research, barking about PETA being anti-Cancer research is laughable.

Hmm, Bush is the first President to ever legally allow federal support of stem cell research.

"Neocons" support using adult stem cells --- which have ACTUALLY produced results --- and not fetal ones, which have NOT produced results.

Yeah, let's stick with nineteenth century methodology for research rather jumping into twenty-first century realms....

You might want to stick with being wrong on politics. When you're this wrong on science, it's a little sad.

Defending the indefensible is a liberal tradition, though.
-=Mike




Advertisements









rightads.gif

beltwaybloggers.gif

insiderslogo.jpg

mba_blue.gif

Follow Wizbang

Follow Wizbang on FacebookFollow Wizbang on TwitterSubscribe to Wizbang feedWizbang Mobile

Contact

Send e-mail tips to us:

[email protected]

Fresh Links

Credits

Section Editor: Maggie Whitton

Editors: Jay Tea, Lorie Byrd, Kim Priestap, DJ Drummond, Michael Laprarie, Baron Von Ottomatic, Shawn Mallow, Rick, Dan Karipides, Michael Avitablile, Charlie Quidnunc, Steve Schippert

Emeritus: Paul, Mary Katherine Ham, Jim Addison, Alexander K. McClure, Cassy Fiano, Bill Jempty, John Stansbury, Rob Port

In Memorium: HughS

All original content copyright © 2003-2010 by Wizbang®, LLC. All rights reserved. Wizbang® is a registered service mark.

Powered by Movable Type Pro 4.361

Hosting by ServInt

Ratings on this site are powered by the Ajax Ratings Pro plugin for Movable Type.

Search on this site is powered by the FastSearch plugin for Movable Type.

Blogrolls on this site are powered by the MT-Blogroll.

Temporary site design is based on Cutline and Cutline for MT. Graphics by Apothegm Designs.

Author Login



Terms Of Service

DCMA Compliance Notice

Privacy Policy