Your Thoughts On PETA?

  • Thread starter savethebulliedbreeds
  • Start date
Joined
Feb 5, 2005
Messages
10,119
Likes
0
Points
36
Location
wasilla alaska
#61
Hitler used humans for medical experiments, as bad and worse than what we use animals for experiments now. But you knew that, or at least I hope you know.
 
S

savethebulliedbreeds

Guest
#62
Pitbulliest:
Sorry to get off topic but I whole heartedly believe there is a cure for cancer and they are just not releasing it. I do strongly believe it is a money issue too. You're right that many many people would lose jobs. I just think it is a little funny how they can come up with cures or ways to fight other diseases that are not as deadly, but they can't figure out how to cure cancer! There are way too many genious people working on a cure to not find one. I do not support cancer foundations or heart and stroke foundations any more since I worked for a foundation. Yes, I said it, I WORKED for them. I went around and did canvasing for a foundation and at the end of the day I got 30% of whatever I brought in. The head guy that hired all the canvasers got 30% of what each of us brought in and then there was the person that headed up all of the people to "hire" the "volunteers" and he took 30%. So that leaves 10% to go to the foundation and I wonder how many of that actually goes into research? I also had another bad experience with a foundation that sent stuff out all the time. They called me and asked me if I would like to donate and I told them no I didn't. She asked me why so I politely explained to her that I would not support a foundation that spends so much money on sending crap out in the mail. The money they spent on that stuff should have gone to research.

Anyways, now I am done ranting about charities and foundations and such.

Sorry to change the subject. Now back to the original subject.
 

pitbulliest

Active Member
Joined
Jun 24, 2004
Messages
1,112
Likes
0
Points
36
Age
39
Location
Toronto, Canada
#63
Hey did you guys hear the story today on the news? The freak polygamist Warren Jeffs was captured. Test on him damnit..test on him..!!!!!!
 

pitbulliest

Active Member
Joined
Jun 24, 2004
Messages
1,112
Likes
0
Points
36
Age
39
Location
Toronto, Canada
#64
Pitbulliest:
Sorry to get off topic but I whole heartedly believe there is a cure for cancer and they are just not releasing it. I do strongly believe it is a money issue too. You're right that many many people would lose jobs. I just think it is a little funny how they can come up with cures or ways to fight other diseases that are not as deadly, but they can't figure out how to cure cancer! There are way too many genious people working on a cure to not find one. I do not support cancer foundations or heart and stroke foundations any more since I worked for a foundation. Yes, I said it, I WORKED for them. I went around and did canvasing for a foundation and at the end of the day I got 30% of whatever I brought in. The head guy that hired all the canvasers got 30% of what each of us brought in and then there was the person that headed up all of the people to "hire" the "volunteers" and he took 30%. So that leaves 10% to go to the foundation and I wonder how many of that actually goes into research? I also had another bad experience with a foundation that sent stuff out all the time. They called me and asked me if I would like to donate and I told them no I didn't. She asked me why so I politely explained to her that I would not support a foundation that spends so much money on sending crap out in the mail. The money they spent on that stuff should have gone to research.

Anyways, now I am done ranting about charities and foundations and such.

Sorry to change the subject. Now back to the original subject.

Wow..I'm sorry to hear you've had that experience...but glad you shared it with us. I always had suspicions about how much money is actually even being put out for the research if a cure doesn't already exist...I guess its now more obvious!

But back to my previos post....TEST ON WARREN JEFFS!!! lol
 

.Alice.

New Member
Joined
Aug 18, 2006
Messages
83
Likes
0
Points
0
#65
I'm certainly against using animals for testing chemical produce, and my opinion on medical purposes is that we are completly different species. We wouldn't take pills that are prescribed by our vet, so I don't understand how testing something on animals proves in any way it will be safe for human use.

I don't agree with forcing prisoners to be tested upon. Animals arn't given a choice, they can't stick up for themselves and I am totally against that so saying I want the same treatment for prisoners would be seriously hypocritical. Somebody said that prisoners would volunteer in return for better living conditions, etc.. and I think that would be an excellent way to go.
 
Joined
May 13, 2005
Messages
1,736
Likes
0
Points
0
Location
Pidjun Haller, with ma uncle Palmer
#66
I didn't put words in your mouth, I was referring to PETA's pit bull policy that you said you agreed with.
I can see how you became confused, but I didn't say I agreed with PETA's general pit bull policy. When I said I thought they had a point about pit bulls, I was refering to the comment (in the OP's post, attributed to PETA) that more people should bypass them in the shelter in favor of other breeds.
 

Amstaffer

Active Member
Joined
May 13, 2005
Messages
3,276
Likes
0
Points
36
Location
Milwaukee WI
#67
Hitler used humans for medical experiments, as bad and worse than what we use animals for experiments now. But you knew that, or at least I hope you know.
I am sorry to say that humans have been testing "medically" on other humans since the time of the Pharaohs. I just didn't understand why you brought up Hitler. His people (like Joseph Mengala) tested on innocent people against their wil, where I was saying help murders and rapist to repay their debt to society by volunteering to be tested.

They share our DNA and can talk about how they feel which would make the test much more accurate and you wouldn't have to do as much.
 

Kase

New Member
Joined
Mar 1, 2006
Messages
15,703
Likes
0
Points
0
Age
36
Location
Britain
#68
I don't support PETA in any shape or form. I haven't researched them in particular but from what I've seen its a no go area. Especially the bit about setting free all dogs/cats ect? I think it was that anyway.


However what I don't like at all is when any other group or people try to defend animal right they get labelled as PETA. Just because they belive in animal right it doesn't mean they are part of PETA.

As far as my own beliefs go I believe all living things to be equal, I'm a vegetarian and in a lot of cases I would value an animals life over a human, there are just too many horrible people in this world :(. I've been labelled as a 'crazy' veggie, tree hugging hippie and have had my beliefs picked on countless times. I try not to let it bother me but when people label me into the same group as PETA that bothers me because I am no such thing.



Lastly as for the testing on animals, no I don't agree with it and like Amstaffer said there are plenty of people in prison who could be tested on. I've always thought it, does it make me cold and heartless? maybe in some peoples opinions but murderers, rapist, child/animal abuses don't deserve anything more in my opinion. It costs a lot of money to keep people like that in prison and if many of them are willing why not let them.
 

bubbatd

Moderator
Joined
Nov 28, 2004
Messages
64,812
Likes
1
Points
0
Age
90
#69
Folks ....prisoners don't reproduce as quickly as rats and mice do ! Most of the tests involve future generations. They are close to working with the genes that cause Alzheimer's ..... which also may help children with DS.
 

Amstaffer

Active Member
Joined
May 13, 2005
Messages
3,276
Likes
0
Points
36
Location
Milwaukee WI
#70
Folks ....prisoners don't reproduce as quickly as rats and mice do ! Most of the tests involve future generations. They are close to working with the genes that cause Alzheimer's ..... which also may help children with DS.
Actually a lot of of testing doesn't need generational study. Most of the tests involve toxicity levels and drug effectiviness on certain conditions.
 
S

savethebulliedbreeds

Guest
#71
Yup, thats true, that most of the drugs are tested for toxicity. And even still with all the testing they do there are still so many drugs that make it out of the lab and into peoples bodys that are found out down the line to be not that safe at all. If testing on animals really works, then why is it we have so many drugs that are used to treat us that really aren't that safe. Researchers should have known that they weren't safe if animal testing really worked.

I am not saying that all research has been bad, there have been some life saving drugs invented due to animal testing. So its not all bad.

But I do say.....TEST ON WARREN JEFFS!!!!!!!
 

Zoom

Twin 2.0
Joined
Jul 11, 2005
Messages
40,739
Likes
3
Points
38
Age
41
Location
Denver, CO
#72
Was Jeffs one of those sick polygamists that had 7 15 year old girls as wives, or just the fact that he was a polygamist at all? I know this is totally off topic, and I have to admit that I know nothing about this case, but I'm not sure why polygamy in and of itself is grounds for "test on him!"
 

pitbulliest

Active Member
Joined
Jun 24, 2004
Messages
1,112
Likes
0
Points
36
Age
39
Location
Toronto, Canada
#73
well considering the fact that some of his wives had to escape from the community or they would be killed...or the fact that the women are expected to be submissive and completely at the will of their husbands...or the fact that the men in the community literally force 15 year old girls to marry them and have tons of children like a breeding machine...or the fact that Jeffs and his other colleagues in the community have raped and molested children younger than 15....

would you like me to go on about why I think polygamy is disturbingly disgusting and why Warren Jeffs should be tested on?..

He seems quite healthy enough for accurate results *sneers*
lol
 

Dani

Ninja Dog
Joined
Nov 6, 2005
Messages
1,514
Likes
0
Points
0
Age
34
Location
Vancouver
#74
Not a PETA fan at all. While I agree with a select few of their causes, they're generally a bunch of nutjobs.

As far as animal testing goes...sometimes it has to be done. I don't mean animal testing for cosmetic or other completely unnecessary reasons, but medical. If the testing is done in as humane a way as possible, if the doctors make use of what they discover, if it's what it takes to make medical advances, I don't condemn it. Sometimes the good outways the bad, in the way that hundreds if not thousands of lives could be greatly improved, if not saved, by the results from the tests.

And if murderers etc. in prison choose to volunteers themselves, why not?
 

bubbatd

Moderator
Joined
Nov 28, 2004
Messages
64,812
Likes
1
Points
0
Age
90
#75
I've always believed that murderers on death row should give back to society some way . Save some lives .... a kidney , part of a liver etc etc . I know it would never pass, but I personally would like to see ALL their organs available for transplant before that final needle.
 
S

savethebulliedbreeds

Guest
#76
I've always believed that murderers on death row should give back to society some way . Save some lives .... a kidney , part of a liver etc etc . I know it would never pass, but I personally would like to see ALL their organs available for transplant before that final needle.
Completely agreed!
 
Joined
Feb 5, 2005
Messages
10,119
Likes
0
Points
36
Location
wasilla alaska
#77
I will greatly agree with grammy.

A voluntary program to where inmates submit to medical programs is a grey line where groups will sue as cruel and unusual punishment even though it is voluntary.

Involuntary testing, in my mind, does fall under the cruel and unusual clause and cannot be done even to death row inmates.

Groups like PETA use their programs to gather as much money as possible in donations, not to actually do anything productive.
 
S

savethebulliedbreeds

Guest
#78
I kind of look at inmates being used for testing as an eye for an eye. If they took someones life (or many), or raped people I don't find it to be cruel and unusual punishment. If you hurt someone you as well should be hurt. Maybe if rapists and murderers knew that if they killed or raped they would be used as lab rats instead of just being stuffed in a cell they would think twice, then again maybe not but thats just my views.
 
Joined
Feb 5, 2005
Messages
10,119
Likes
0
Points
36
Location
wasilla alaska
#79
I kind of look at inmates being used for testing as an eye for an eye. If they took someones life (or many), or raped people I don't find it to be cruel and unusual punishment. If you hurt someone you as well should be hurt. Maybe if rapists and murderers knew that if they killed or raped they would be used as lab rats instead of just being stuffed in a cell they would think twice, then again maybe not but thats just my views.
While I agree with you, anything short of a quick painless death, the way I understand the constitution, would make us the same type of monster as Hitler made the German people.


*edit* Justice is blind.
 

bubbatd

Moderator
Joined
Nov 28, 2004
Messages
64,812
Likes
1
Points
0
Age
90
#80
There's a blood shortage here ............... I know where they could find many pints !
 

Members online

No members online now.
Top