I find myself scrutinizing PETA, and Ingrid Newkirk in particular, for many reasons, most based around when the Michael Vick dogs were in the news. Why you may ask? Well just to name one, they plastered posters and held up banners of “Support” for those dogs, when Vick was on trial, mostly to whore themselves out to the media! Did you know that, when they were asked to help, their stance was; that they could do nothing for these dogs, and in the interest of public safety they believed the dogs should be put down. Now correct me if I’m wrong here but should they not have helped to have the dogs evaluated individually before jumping the gun on that one? should they not do more in general for those dogs as well as abandoned animals everywhere? Well here’s a statistic for you 95% of the animals PETA gets, are refered for euthanization. Does that sound like an animal rights/welfare group worth supporting? PETA has become big business you see, Ingrid Newkirk started this organization supposedly with the intent of saving animals, when in actuality they do only a fraction of what they could. A fraction of what they lead you to believe they do. The money you donate goes to lobbyists, and if history has shown us anything, that means there is a bigger agenda at work here, (What that truly is, is anyones guess at this point, only time will tell.) Does Ingrid wear very nice tailored clothing? Yes! Does Ingrid live in a very posh house? Yes! Does Ingrid have a nice fat bank account? I will wager a guess that the answer is YES! which would account for where you donations really go, at least in part! So the supporters of PETA will have to forgive me, but the next time they want to hold up a sign maybe it should be this one,Just so you are not left feeling as though all organized animal aid and or rights groups are all bad they aren’t, but before you do choose to Donate please do some research through the freedom of information act and anywhere else you can find and find out where the money goes, do they really do what they claim, and exactly how legitimate they are! The opinion expressed is solely mine, and should be taken as such, but the facts don’t lie, I sure didn’t see any PETA trucks lined up to help all those Vick pitbulls they felt “so sorry for” did you? For further information on their practices and tactics google PETA is bad, or PETA lies, also check out these sites http:/www.petakillsanimals.com/ and http:activistcash.com and also http:www.humanewatch.org There is alot of interesting info to digest. Judge for yourself, but I am a firm believer that this woman and all those like her, want celebrity and money more than they want to help! I think they enjoy this limelight they have cast themseves into. You can say that PETA has decreased the number of people that use and buy fur, but here’s a little tid bit for you, the carbon footprint left behind from synthetic furs rivals that of any other plastics, keep in mind “Faux Fur” is simply plastic and fabrics woven together. Personally I do not object to animals raised for food and or fur sales as long as the animals are treated correctly and not abused. I must admit that, in most cases, they are not. All is not dark though, not all farms mistreat their animals, in fact many are seeing the benefits of having “happy” animals raised for food and or fur sales, the meat tastes better, the eggs are larger and stronger the fur is more supple and has a greater sheen, due to the animals not being over stressed, So there are ethical options. Myself I do eat meat and I don’t object to fur, my theory is if you are willing to eat a mink steak, by all means buy a mink coat, if you are not, don’t! I am not willing to eat mink, so I do not buy the coat. I am willing to eat beef, chicken, pork and fish and would use any products made from them so there is less waste, if we have to raise them for food and clothing we should at the very least be responsible and respectful about the sacrifice. If an animal’s physical and mental well being has been seen to, than I see it as a circle of life moment, do you think a lion feels bad for the antelope? probably not. I feel like I am playing god a bit but, the fact is I have to eat, and I happen to eat meat, but I also do a lot of research on where my meats and dairy com from, I love the internet! Now it is up to you to decide.
Daily Archives: September 22, 2010
An article I wrote about the Michael Vick dogs appeared on the cover of the December 29th, 2008, issue of Sports Illustrated. In the weeks after, the magazine received almost 488 letters and emails about the story and the dog pictured on the cover, the most we got in response to any issue for that entire year. By an overwhelming majority the letters were supportive, but there were some detractors.
My greatest fear was a flood of complaints from people with friends or loved ones that had been injured or lost to pit bull attacks, but there were remarkably few of those. Most of the complainers fell into two groups. The first: What does this have to do with sports? A fair question, if you take the narrowest view of the subject-if all you want from your subscription is games and players and straight up analysis-then that’s a legitimate gripe. I would argue, however, that what defines Sports Illustrated and has set it apart for more than 50 years are well-told stories that attempt to put sports into a larger perspective, to offer a deeper and broader view of how the people and events in question reflect and contribute to the larger social and moral make-up of our society. To each is own, I suppose.
The second complaint was more troubling. In its simplest incarnation it usually went something like this: Why does it matter, they’re just dogs? The more verbose in this camp might elaborate: People are dying and starving every day and we’ve got bigger problems. No one cares if you kill cows or chickens or hunt deer. What’s different about dogs?
What is different about dogs? I had not directly addressed the question in the article. On some level it seemed obvious to me, but at the same time I couldn’t put a satisfying answer to words. As I started work on this book, the question hung over my head. As I was interviewing experts, reading books on canine history and behavior, touring shelters and talking to dog lovers, I processed a lot of the information through the prism of that question.
The answer, cobbled together from all those readings and conversations, took me back to the beginning. Men first domesticated dogs more than 10,000 years ago, when our ancestors were hunting for their meals and sleeping next to open fires at night. Dogs were instant helpers in our struggle for survival. They guarded us in the dark and helped us find food by day. We offered them something too, scraps of food, some measure of protection, the heat of the flames. In an article about the origin of dogs that ran in the New York Times in early 2010, one expert on dog genetics theorized that, “dogs could have been the sentries that let hunter gatherers settle without fear of surprise attack. They may also have been the first major item of inherited wealth, preceding cattle, and so could have laid the foundations for the gradations of wealth and social hierarchy that differentiated settled groups from their hunter-gatherer predecessors.”
Certainly, as man rose in the world, dogs came with us, perhaps even aiding the advance. They continued to guard us and help with hunting, but they did more. They marched with armies into war, they worked by our sides, hauling, pulling, herding, retrieving. We manipulated their genetic makeup to suit our purposes, cross breeding types to create animals that could kill the rats infecting our cities or search for those lost in the snow or the woods.
In return we brought them into our homes, made them part of our families. We offered them love and companionship and they returned the gesture. From the start it was a compact: You do this for us and we’ll do that for you.
Our relationship with dogs has always been different than it has been with livestock or wildlife. The only other animal that comes close is the horse, which has undoubtedly been a partner in our evolution and a companion. But a horse can’t curl up at the bottom of your bed at night, and it can’t come up and lick your face when you’re feeling down. Dogs have that ability to sense what we’re feeling and commiserate. There’s a reason they’re called man’s best friend.
As for why our bond with them matters, there are reasons for that, too. If you hang around animal activists for a while you’ll inevitably hear repeated a famous Gandhi quote: “THE GREATNESS OF A NATION AND ITS MORAL PROGRESS CAN BE JUDGED BY THE WAY ITS ANIMALS ARE TREATED.” The idea being that in order to lift the whole of society, you must first prop up the lowest among its many parts. If you show good will and kindness toward those who cannot stand up for themselves, you set a tone of compassion and good will that permeates all.
To this day, I believe Donna Reynolds, one of the founders of Bad Rap, a rescue organization at the center of the Vick case, said it best. “Vick showed the worst of us, our bloodlust, but this showed the best. I don’t think any of us thought it was possible-the government, the rescuers, the people involved. We like to think we have life figured out, and it’s nice that it can still surprise us, that sometimes we can accomplish things we had only dreamed of. We’ve moved our evolution forward. Just a little bit, but we have, and I’m happy to have been a part of that.”
I’m happy to have witnessed the effort and told the story.
Reprinted from The Lost Dogs by Jim Gorant by arrangement with Gotham Books, a member of Penguin Group (USA) Inc., Copyright © 2010 by Jim Gorant.
The video speaks for its self!
A couple friends and I were having fun with xtranormal.com makin videos this one is not mine.
Thanks Chris! you are an inspiration to all those that can’t understand dogsbite or the haters that support that garbage!