I'm characterizing the movement based on their actions and words by their leadership. not a "Few small sound bites." PETA has repeatedly demonstrated their fanaticism time and time again. Their leaders are supposed to be the mouthpiece of PETA, well, they've been doing a great job of spreading their twisted message. Encouraging violence and donating money time and time again to people associated with even more extremist groups such as the ELF. Are we ignoring the point that PETA has donated money to the defense funds of people convicted of attempted murder? Are we ignoring the fact that they've donated money to groups exhorting violence and carbombings?
Geez, if the leadership of PETA doesn't accurately reflect the views of the organization, then please tell me who is supposed to?
So tell me this, does George W. Bush accurately reflect your views?
And before you say "well that's different", tell me, have you ever been involved in a fairly large, volunteer run, non-profit organization? It really isn't much different, there isn't the strict chain of command, and many of the volunteers will have slightly opposing viewpoints. Further, there is a board, there are several different administrators, the voice of an individual does not accurately represent the voice of the organization.
You can also get a pretty good picture of what they stand for, and what they do, by looking at their budget. The whole budget mind you, not just the few figures you have of money that might have been used for "terrorist" activities.
Mind you that I'm not denying that some money has gone to these activities, what I'm contending is that the vast majority of the resources of PETA go to legal activities and actions. You have every right to be opposed to PETA on what they stand for, you can even call them all fucktards. What you really should try to avoid doing is judging the many by the actions of the few, that's not helpful to anybody.
I am sure there are plenty of really nice people in PETA that would be horified by the use of violence for the animal rights movement. However there are a good many that aren't... the responsibility of the leadership of these kinds of organizations is to ensure that the members do not go overboard or otherwise "hurt the cause", and if they do they MUST speak out against it. Think of good old Arafat and his speaches for peace in english and his speaches for violence in Ahrabic. ELF are terrorists, PETA is fringe extremists... maybe not all but they allow enough in there ranks to be lumped with them. If you want a good place to send your money or volunteer time try the Humane Society, they are prety much spotless.
![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
![[identity profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/openid.png){kind=small}
no subject
Date: 2002-09-18 03:52 am (UTC)Geez, if the leadership of PETA doesn't accurately reflect the views of the organization, then please tell me who is supposed to?
no subject
Date: 2002-09-18 04:32 am (UTC)And before you say "well that's different", tell me, have you ever been involved in a fairly large, volunteer run, non-profit organization? It really isn't much different, there isn't the strict chain of command, and many of the volunteers will have slightly opposing viewpoints. Further, there is a board, there are several different administrators, the voice of an individual does not accurately represent the voice of the organization.
You can also get a pretty good picture of what they stand for, and what they do, by looking at their budget. The whole budget mind you, not just the few figures you have of money that might have been used for "terrorist" activities.
Mind you that I'm not denying that some money has gone to these activities, what I'm contending is that the vast majority of the resources of PETA go to legal activities and actions. You have every right to be opposed to PETA on what they stand for, you can even call them all fucktards. What you really should try to avoid doing is judging the many by the actions of the few, that's not helpful to anybody.
no subject
Date: 2002-09-18 04:54 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2002-09-18 01:01 pm (UTC)That's a stupid question; being a PETA supporter is voluntary. Having a government isn't. And for the record, I didn't vote for him.