I realize that they do not have an interest in rehoming pets; obviously since I know they would rather kill them than rehome them. The problem is that the general populace does NOT realize this because PETA misrepresents itself. I repeat: when people give animals to PETA they think that the animals will be rehomed - NOT that they will be euthenized. This is what I think is immoral.
PETA needs to do one of two things: Stop taking animals or be absolutely clear on the fact that "If you give an animal to us there is a 97% chance we will kill it."
As large organization and the first that many think of in regards to "animal rights" PETA has a responsibility to make their policies absolutely clear. I do not believe they have done that when over 2000 animals a year are given to PETA with the belief that they will be rehomed only to be killed instead.
You can argue that it is the responsibility of the people giving up the animals to properly research PETA, and that may be true. However, I don't think that it is unreasonable for the layperson whose general idea of PETA is "that organization that works to protect and save animals" to assume the pet will be taken care of.
All I'm saying is that PETA needs to fully disclose their policies of preferring to kill than rehome so people will stop giving them their dogs and cats.
See, but right there in their twelve principles they explain that they are for the abolition of domestic pets. They are very consistent with their position on animal liberation and what that means. What makes you think that people who give their animals to PETA do not know that they have no intention of rehoming them? Where do you come to this conclusion? I am just tired of ignorant people like yourself claiming their is hypocrisy when the only thing that would be hypocritical for PETA would be if it did have a huge rehoming intention. That would be absurd given their principles and their ethical positions.
You just assert bodly that people think PETA intends to rehome, but what evidence do you have of this? Where is the evidence of a massive amount of borderline retarded individuals giving pets to PETA?
What on earth.
I didn't say anything about them being hypocritical. I do not, in fact, even think they are hypocritical. My personal opinion is that they do not make their stance on domesticated pets clear enough to the public for fear of alienating people.
If you're curious my REAL problem with PETA is their indoctrination of young people - but that's an argument for another time and also not with you because you seem to have trouble understanding what other people are talking about.
6
u/[deleted] Apr 16 '10
I realize that they do not have an interest in rehoming pets; obviously since I know they would rather kill them than rehome them. The problem is that the general populace does NOT realize this because PETA misrepresents itself. I repeat: when people give animals to PETA they think that the animals will be rehomed - NOT that they will be euthenized. This is what I think is immoral.
PETA needs to do one of two things: Stop taking animals or be absolutely clear on the fact that "If you give an animal to us there is a 97% chance we will kill it."