quote:

Fake chicken could now be worth $1 million. In the last few days, People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals announced that it will present a $1 million prize to anyone who can demonstrate a major breakthrough in the technology of lab-grown meat: Contestants have until 2012 to produce a commercially viable, in vitro chicken substitute that tastes just like the real thing.

The X-Poultry Prize has already generated high expectations. In its press release, PETA suggests that in vitro farms will spare the "more than 40 billion chickens, fish, pigs, and cows" that are killed every year in the United States. My colleague William Saletan promised Slate readers that "animals were only the first incarnation of meat. Get ready for the second." I'm not so bullish. We might be eating test-tube McNuggets at some point in the next 10 or 20 years, but it's hard to see how PETA's $1 million will help to get us there.

quote:

ORIGINAL: DomKen

PETA is run by a true nut. She opposes the keeping of pets. She actually supports banning breeding of the so called pitbull dog breeds. Anything she supports is almost certainly wrong.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Owner59

...dozens of birds that died on route from south and central America, for the few that make it north.

quote:

Ingrid Newkirk

quote:

ORIGINAL: Owner59

quote:

ORIGINAL: DomKen

PETA is run by a true nut. She opposes the keeping of pets. She actually supports banning breeding of the so called pitbull dog breeds. Anything she supports is almost certainly wrong.

"She opposes the keeping of pets".

Not exactly true.She apposes the cruelty and exploitation associated with the "pet industry".

When people think of pets,they think of purring cats, fun loving dog and chirping birds.There`s another,darker side to it.

They don`t think of puppy mills,animal shelters bursting at the seams with un-wanted dogs and cats or the dozens of birds that died on route from south and central America, for the few that make it north.

If people had a balanced,informed over-view of the situation,she wouldn`t seem so nutty.

Personally,I would ban puppy mills and most "breeders",until the animal shelters were empty.

After that,I`d make it a law that you had to adopt a shelter dog or cat,for ever pure breed you bought,one for one.

There`s no excuse why millions of dogs are put down(killed) every year,just because they`re un-wanted.

There`s no excuse for producing/selling hundreds of thousands of pure breed dogs and cats,when there are millions of dogs and cats available for free at the shelter.

If anyone could come up with a way to avoid the seemingly inherent cruelty ,I`d love to hear it.

Now ,I might seem nutty to suggest a law like this.It may seem a little extreme.I couldn`t care less.Come spend ten or fifteen weekends at your local shelter,then tell I`m nutty.

quote:

Animal Rights (AR) is based on moral and ethical philosophies. While Animals Rights Advocates and Groups talk about humane care, the bottom line is to work for humane care and legislation ONLY until all animals can be removed from human use. The reason for this is the Animal Rights belief that no species on this planet is better than another; therefore, humans have no right to dominate over, use, breed, or eat non-human species.
Basic principles of animal rights philosophy are:

[image]http://www.ncraoa.com/image2/bulletblack.gif[/image] The ability of animals to feel pain and pleasure puts them on a plane of moral equivalence with humans. This moral significance of animals necessitates that we reject the use and treatment of animals as resources or as property. Use of animals for food, research, and entertainment must be abolished and not merely regulated. (Peter Singer) (1) [image]http://www.ncraoa.com/image2/bulletblack.gif[/image] Animals have a life of their own that is of importance to them apart from their utility to us; therefore, logic implies that animals have the same right as humans to pursue their life without human interference. [image]http://www.ncraoa.com/image2/bulletblack.gif[/image] The line between human and non-human animals is an artificial construct designed to facilitate and justify the exploitation of non-human animals. (

quote:

"In a perfect world, animals would be free to live their lives to the fullest: raising their young, enjoying their native environments, and following their natural instincts. However, domesticated dogs and cats cannot survive "free" in our concrete jungles, so we must take as good care of them as possible. People with the time, money, love, and patience to make a lifetime commitment to an animal can make an enormous difference by adopting from shelters or rescuing animals from a perilous life on the street. But it is also important to stop manufacturing "pets," thereby perpetuating a class of animals forced to rely on humans to survive.

quote:

"We at PETA very much love the animal companions who share our homes, but we believe that it would have been in the animals' best interests if the institution of "pet keeping"—i.e., breeding animals to be kept and regarded as "pets"—never existed. The international pastime of domesticating animals has created an overpopulation crisis; as a result, millions of unwanted animals are destroyed every year as "surplus." This selfish desire to possess animals and receive love from them causes immeasurable suffering, which results from manipulating their breeding, selling or giving them away casually, and depriving them of the opportunity to engage in their natural behavior. Their lives are restricted to human homes where they must obey commands and can only eat, drink, and even urinate when humans allow them to."

quote:

"I don't use the word "pet." I think it's speciesist language. I prefer "companion animal." For one thing, we would no longer allow breeding. People could not create different breeds. There would be no pet shops. If people had companion animals in their homes, those animals would have to be refugees from the animal shelters and the streets. You would have a protective relationship with them just as you would with an orphaned child. But as the surplus of cats and dogs (artificially engineered by centuries of forced breeding) declined, eventually companion animals would be phased out, and we would return to a more symbiotic relationship ­ enjoyment at a distance." Ingrid Newkirk, PETA vice-president, quoted in The Harper's Forum Book, Jack Hitt, ed., 1989, p.223.

"Pet ownership is an absolutely abysmal situation brought about by human manipulation." Ingrid Newkirk, national director, People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals (PeTA), Just Like Us? Harper's, August 1988, p. 50.

"You don't have to own squirrels and starlings to get enjoyment from them ... One day, we would like an end to pet shops and the breeding of animals. [Dogs] would pursue their natural lives in the wild ... they would have full lives, not wasting at home for someone to come home in the evening and pet them and then sit there and watch TV," Ingrid Newkirk, national director, People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals (PeTA), Chicago Daily Herald, March 1, 1990.
"The bottom line is that people don't have the right to manipulate or to breed dogs and cats ... If people want toys, they should buy inanimate objects. If they want companionship, they should seek it with their own kind," Ingrid Newkirk, founder, president and former national director, People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals (PeTA), Animals, May/June 1993

quote:

"A rat is a pig is a dog is a boy." Ingrid Newkirk, PeTA's founder and president, Washingtonian Magazine, August 1986

quote:

ORIGINAL: dollparts85

I don't know where you guys are getting your info...but peta OWNS an animal shelter...and encourages people to adopt animals. They even sell products for companion animals.

And to the comment about rats...yes, peta wants to protect rats...and all animals. Rats are great animals and probably the most tortured.

quote:

"I don't use the word "pet." I think it's speciesist language. I prefer "companion animal." For one thing, we would no longer allow breeding. People could not create different breeds. There would be no pet shops. If people had companion animals in their homes, those animals would have to be refugees from the animal shelters and the streets. You would have a protective relationship with them just as you would with an orphaned child. But as the surplus of cats and dogs (artificially engineered by centuries of forced breeding) declined, eventually companion animals would be phased out, and we would return to a more symbiotic relationship ­ enjoyment at a distance." Ingrid Newkirk, PETA vice-president, quoted in The Harper's Forum Book, Jack Hitt, ed., 1989, p.223.

quote:

"You don't have to own squirrels and starlings to get enjoyment from them ... One day, we would like an end to pet shops and the breeding of animals. [Dogs] would pursue their natural lives in the wild ... they would have full lives, not wasting at home for someone to come home in the evening and pet them and then sit there and watch TV," Ingrid Newkirk, national director, People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals (PeTA), Chicago Daily Herald, March 1, 1990.