Big Think

Amber Ford on July 4, 2008, 9:20 PM

I agree in theory with what Ingrid is saying, I simply do not believe that PETA practices what Ingrid is preaching. The PETA "victory" against KFC Canada proves this. Here we have a campaign where the "victory" was instead of slitting chickens' throats to kill them, they are gassed to death. Is this taking animal interests seriously PETA?

PETA should be advocating veganism, and stop worrying about how to make animal industries more efficient. Effectively that is what controlled atmospheric killing of chickens does. The CAK method of killing chickens was sold to the chicken killing industry on the premise that it would save the industry money and produce a better product.

I ask, can you serve the interest of animals and animal exploiting industries at the same time? I don't think so. The only effective way to serve animal interests and to be true to the idea that animals deserve the right not to be used as a means to an end by us, is to go vegan. Let the animal exploitation industries try and figure out how to make their own model more efficient.

Amber Ford on July 5, 2008, 1:20 AM

I agree in theory with what Ingrid is saying, I simply do not believe that PETA practices what Ingrid is preaching. The PETA “victory” against KFC Canada proves this. Here we have a campaign where the “victory” was instead of slitting chickens’ throats to kill them, they are gassed to death. Is this taking animal interests seriously PETA?

PETA should be advocating veganism, and stop worrying about how to make animal industries more efficient. Effectively that is what controlled atmospheric killing of chickens does. The CAK method of killing chickens was sold to the chicken killing industry on the premise that it would save the industry money and produce a better product.

I ask, can you serve the interest of animals and animal exploiting industries at the same time? I don’t think so. The only effective way to serve animal interests and to be true to the idea that animals deserve the right not to be used as a means to an end by us, is to go vegan. Let the animal exploitation industries try and figure out how to make their own model more efficient.

Jonathan Frank on August 26, 2008, 8:23 PM

I agree, Ingrid.

To the commenter above me:

PeTA thinks that CAK is better for animals because it minimizes the pain and suffering that the animals have to endure. The fact that it's more efficient and less costly to the industry is just something that helps to switch over to it.

I hate that the animals have to die, however, preaching vegetarianism for all, and ignoring the fact that chickens are have their throats slit and are scalded to death and have to die such a horrible death, but not looking into more compassionate ways of killing them, isn't a very intelligent thing to do.

PeTA is doing everything in their power to reduce the amount of suffering that animals go through and are helping to phase in an era of compassion where NO animals have to suffer, NO animals have to die, NO animals are exploited, etc…

-Rocko

Jonathan Frank on August 27, 2008, 12:23 AM

I agree, Ingrid.

To the commenter above me:

PeTA thinks that CAK is better for animals because it minimizes the pain and suffering that the animals have to endure. The fact that it’s more efficient and less costly to the industry is just something that helps to switch over to it.

I hate that the animals have to die, however, preaching vegetarianism for all, and ignoring the fact that chickens are have their throats slit and are scalded to death and have to die such a horrible death, but not looking into more compassionate ways of killing them, isn’t a very intelligent thing to do.

PeTA is doing everything in their power to reduce the amount of suffering that animals go through and are helping to phase in an era of compassion where NO animals have to suffer, NO animals have to die, NO animals are exploited, etc…


-Rocko