13 of 15

Write now Article Tools

Sorting through the mail, most people will find a staggering amount of advertising in regards to animal rights groups. Each organization has its own plight, its own programs, and its own creedo towards the proper treatment of animals. With ridiculous amounts of advertising from each one, which can potential donors trust? The question here isn't which can be trusted, but which can't be trusted. One organization stands alone in its sheer misconduct in its plight for animal rights. People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals, or PETA, should be boycotted against due to its questionable treatment of received animals, its contributions and support given to eco-terrorist groups, and its warped marketing campaigns.

The purpose of an animal rights group is to lobby for and protect the rights and lives of animals. Among the many ways that animals can be liberated by these organizations is the actual intake of the animals into their headquarters and offshoots of the main building. Promises of new or better homes are offered to unwanted and stray dogs and cats. According to an article the news section of MSNBC.com, "Two employees of [PETA] were charged with animal cruelty for allegedly picking up dogs and cats from shelters and dumping their dead bodies in the garbage" (MSNBC.com). This incident occurred in July of 2005 as animals had been euthanized at these shelters rather than given new homes as PETA had promised. PETA did not follow through on the promise, instead killing the animals under the guise of there being more unwanted animals than there are good homes. The fact remains that those animals could have lived in homes. One can reasonably conclude that horror stories like this can only be classified as animal cruelty. PETA should be boycotted due to contradicting philosophies in regards to animal rights.
Some animals rights groups resort to drastic measures in order to make their point clear. Organiations such as the Animal Liberation Front (ALF) and the Earth Liberation Front (ELF) use "eco-terrorism" to promote their causes. Activities can range from settting animals free that are being held captive to assassination attempts on executives who have been known to support companies a group is adamantly against. Acts like this are just as immoral as the acts of terrorism happening in the Middle East. These groups are given steam not by their own donors, but by PETA. Wikipedia's entry on PETA lists seven instances where PETA has contributed significant

• 1
• 2
• 3
• next page >>

Add your voice

Know something about PETA: A disgrace to charity in the name of animal rights?
We want to hear your view. Write now!