TL;DR: Domesticated animals deserve death. More specifically, because they letting them live is “inhumane” because they won’t thrive without human influence—which they’re strictly against.
IMO: These people are fucking psychopaths.
Edit: Yes, that specific site is sponsored by the meat industry. I didn’t think it needed to be said, but don’t take sensational topics at face value and read any receipts provided (which they did). Or, use Google and find other sources (that are also probably backed by corporate or political interests). In either case, PETA has made it pretty clear that they’re hypocrites who are euthanizing healthy animals.
If you had not plugged your metaphorical ears and doubled down on an ad hominem, you would have seen that some of those receipts are self-reported filings from PETA themselves to the government.
I would link the definition of “ad hominem” for you, but let’s be real: you’re not going to read that either.
I think you’re just being obtuse and pedantic for your own sake, if you’re really curious you could very easily look this information up. Please stop being like this, you don’t have to be this way. Touch grass for fucks sake, good luck out there, must be tough being an insufferable git.
This comment chain is you defending PETA having high euthanasia statistics due to euthanizing animals they had taken from families yards and from homeless individuals. You had suggested that these euthanasias were mercy killings, and when another commenter pointed out that pets can’t be considered suffering even under the loosest definition of the word, you posed a rhetorical question in bad faith. If you actually wanted to argue that PETA’s euthanasias are only done in situations of suffering animals, you would have just said that and perhaps included a source for that claim like the initial commenter did for theirs.
What’s the story on PETA killing animals?
https://petakillsanimals.com/
TL;DR: Domesticated animals deserve death. More specifically, because they letting them live is “inhumane” because they won’t thrive without human influence—which they’re strictly against.
IMO: These people are fucking psychopaths.
Edit: Yes, that specific site is sponsored by the meat industry. I didn’t think it needed to be said, but don’t take sensational topics at face value and read any receipts provided (which they did). Or, use Google and find other sources (that are also probably backed by corporate or political interests). In either case, PETA has made it pretty clear that they’re hypocrites who are euthanizing healthy animals.
Have you stopped eating cows, chickens and pigs? If not, you, like PETA, believes they deserve death.
But do you have a non biased source not funded by the meat industry?
The website has receipts. Feel free to actually read them.
So… No, you don’t.
And like PETA, you also believe certain animals are deserving of death.
I don’t know, man, I think you might be a future member.
If you had not plugged your metaphorical ears and doubled down on an ad hominem, you would have seen that some of those receipts are self-reported filings from PETA themselves to the government.
I would link the definition of “ad hominem” for you, but let’s be real: you’re not going to read that either.
deleted by creator
They have shelters that euthanized a high number of animals. They have also stolen animals from owners including homeless people and children.
https://www.theatlantic.com/health/archive/2012/03/petas-terrible-horrible-no-good-very-bad-history-of-killing-animals/254130/
Euthanasia as in mercy killing?
Your beef with PETA is that they euthanize sick animals when shelters can’t afford to?
It’s not mercy killing when the animals weren’t suffering and weren’t voluntarily given up. It’s murder for the sake of their agenda.
So PETA doesn’t euthanize sick animals?
>you think euthanizing sick animals is bad?
>PETA euthanizes more than sick animals
>you think PETA doesn’t euthanize sick animals?
There isn’t a single thing I can say to convince someone who isn’t arguing in good faith.
Am I arguing or using the Socratic method?
Have you always felt the Socratic method is bad faith, or just when you already have a strong opinion?
I think you’re just being obtuse and pedantic for your own sake, if you’re really curious you could very easily look this information up. Please stop being like this, you don’t have to be this way. Touch grass for fucks sake, good luck out there, must be tough being an insufferable git.
Maybe it is pedantic. But people should have examined beliefs. I’m sorry you are against that.
You are arguing in bad faith
Asking for clarification is bad faith?
This comment chain is you defending PETA having high euthanasia statistics due to euthanizing animals they had taken from families yards and from homeless individuals. You had suggested that these euthanasias were mercy killings, and when another commenter pointed out that pets can’t be considered suffering even under the loosest definition of the word, you posed a rhetorical question in bad faith. If you actually wanted to argue that PETA’s euthanasias are only done in situations of suffering animals, you would have just said that and perhaps included a source for that claim like the initial commenter did for theirs.