Makes sense, Iâll buy into this. Thanks for the information.
With regards,
aspacia 
I donât care for their hypocricy but, their prime ideals are moral and correct. I canât stand the PETA people I have had to meet during charitable functions. And I do not support the group, I do support their beginning ideals though. I had to look up ALF I had forgotten about them, Their website is uh, well, it is um informative to say the least. I must agree with some of their philosphy. But, in saving animals the way they do, they are harming more,plus humans. A bit odd for such obviously intelligent humans. Someone did not think such idiotic strategy through.
I got a chuckle out of their guidlines:
The ALF guidelines are:
-
TO liberate animals from places of abuse, i.e. laboratories, factory farms, fur farms, etc, and place them in good homes where they may live out their natural lives, free from suffering.
-
TO inflict economic damage to those who profit from the misery and exploitation of animals.
-
TO reveal the horror and atrocities committed against animals behind locked doors, by performing non-violent direct actions and liberations.
-
TO take all necessary precautions against harming any animal, human and non-human.
-
To analyze the ramifications of all proposed actions, and never apply generalizations when specific information is available.
Then they have militant strategies in their Alf Primer. Ceeehrist give me a break. Goofy and scary all at once.
Ok Mas I give up I googled and searched what the heck is the PEHHA foundation?
Why, lady Kriswest, it is an acronym ⊠you shant have thought otherwise, would you?
âPeople for the Extermination of Honorless Human Assholesâ ⊠itâs a very powerful organization with a limited membership, serving the greater needs of People, worldwide. Often without their involvement or knowledge.
Kind of the ⊠âIlluminati for anti-stupidityâ.
We have an ⊠errrrrr ⊠they have an agenda, I mean. I wouldnât know anything about it personally, just heard about it, in passing.
Does the PEHHA accept donations?
So theyâre ninjas?
Black Men and Dogs: Donât Believe Vick
by Kevin Blackistone
All Things Considered, September 25, 2007 Ă·
He was a Dandy Dinmont, we were told. Long with a short tight gray coat.
A bushy white Fu Manchu on his snout and a white Afro on his head. He went by the name Harry and was a favorite to win the Westminster dog show back in February.
He was co-owned by Americaâs favorite black father figure, Bill Cosby.
In the wake of the disgusting Michael Vick dog fighting case, it was easy to think that black people, black men in particular, donât care much for manâs best friend. The 53 pit bulls bred for fighting found on the NFL quarterbackâs Virginia property are facing euthanasia.
But at least 17 others werenât that lucky. Their remains have already been found. Some were electrocuted or drowned with Vickâs help because they didnât fight ferociously enough.
Then sheriffâs deputies found three dog carcasses and several malnourished pit bulls on rapper DMXâs Arizona property. Ving Rhames had to defend himself, his English bulldog and three bull mastiffs against charges the dogs killed a housekeeper while Rhames was out of town.
And then, Whoopi Goldberg, decided to publicize her arrival on The View by offering a cultural explanation for all of this.
There is none.
There are historical relationships between black men and big vicious dogs. During the Civil Rights struggle black men often found themselves in the jaws of police dogs sicced on them by racist Southern white cops. In colonial Africa, police used German Shepherds to suppress the majority, which is why George Foreman was the villain in Zaire in his fight against Muhammad Ali.
Heâd paraded with his pet German Shepherd.
That certainly hasnât made us somehow predisposed to mistreating our mutts. We shouldnât be the new ugly face of animal cruelty. The two biggest recent busts on the dog fighting front were of white men. One was described as the Al Capone of Dog fighting and lived in suburban N.Y. Earlier this month in Dublin, Ireland, the star of the Gaelic football league was exposed as a director of an illegal dog fighting ring.
He was not black Irish.
And how can we forget the most-heartwarming stories from the tragedy of Katrina? They were of dog owners, mostly the working-class poor in heavily black neighborhoods like the now famous Ninth Ward, who refused to evacuate without their four-legged loved ones - cats too.
Yes, we love our dogs. Most of us arenât like the fellow who called into a sports talk show I was on recently and dismissed Vickâs creatures as, âjust dogs.â Most black folks are like me - Iâll do anything for my adopted Nova Scotia Duck Tolling Retriever, Mocha, and think the world of the SPCA and other animal welfare do-gooders.
Iâm not necessarily a religious man, but I do believe in much of the wisdom from the good book, like Proverbs 12:10. It says: âA righteous man regardeth the life of his beast: but the tender mercies of the wicked are cruel.â
Cruelty to animals is bound by no color;kindness isnât either.
Kevin B. Blackistone is a regular panelist on ESPNâs Around the Horn, an XM Satellite Radio host and a frequent sports opinionist on other TV and radio shows. A former sports columnist for The Dallas Morning News, he currently lives in Hyattsville, Md.
Peta is a terrorist organzation.
Thatâs an unsupported assertion. What terrorist acts has PETA committed?
People acting as PETA agents have destroyed the property of others in order to advance their political agenda. Theyâve done it in violation of the laws here, so theyâre terrorists. Just like the E.L.F. and the aspca!
It often gets the attention it seeks.
Here is a good alternative that is fighting for similar causes legally:
The largest problem I see is the blind hypocracy of such organizations. Kill, maim and cause pain to your fellow human save a dog, then kill the dog because you canât support it but, you saved it from the evil human. Then you have the Right to Lifers that kill doctors and nurses with bombs at health clinics oh and the occasional pregnant woman, but ,thats ok she was going to abort the baby anyway so she should die.
Insanity can always be justified by the insane.
What human has the Humane Society killed, maimed or pained?
Are all the ways animals killed the same?
I donât suppose the humane society has caused a human death, members that belong to it may have though especially, if they belong to PETA, or ELF.
But, the society, has been known to be ruthless to families that have lost pets. They will euthanize a pet if the family canât come up with the money to get the pet out on time. Instead of handing the beloved pet back they insist the family must pay for shots ,boarding, food and I think other misc charges, even if its a poor family or they euthanize it.
Now not all do this perhaps. But, it has happened to people I know and have heard about similar stories on the news. You donât think thats harmful or hypocritcal?
You are not allowed to make payments, you must pay up front or fido or fluffy dies. And its legal. Its is legalized blackmail.
So you are saying we shouldnât spport a group because its members might be members of another group we donât like? As for limits on helping, I suppose the AHS is balancing compassion with the competing values of budgeting and animal control. They are doing good things in terms of advocacy and lobbying. In my experience, hypocracy is present in every social group. If you care about social change in the direction of compassion toward animals, group action is the most way to go to get things done. The over-arching problem where pets are concerned is not advocacy groups but irresponsible pet owners.
Itâs not that complicated from a policy perspective: people without the financial resources to take proper care of animals shouldnât have any. (Of course, thatâs even less practical than saying they shouldnât have babies they canât afford.) As for paying for the shelterâs costs when their animals get lost, Iâm not in agreement that a healthy animal should be killed rather than returned to its ownerâŠbut if itâs there in the shelter with no ID in the first place, that indicates there may be a problem. Sure, pets sometimes get out despite their ownersâ efforts to be responsible, but those owners still have to be held accountable for the shelterâs cost. The animal is their property and thus their responsibility; we fine people according to this principle in all sort of circumstances. And if they have been irresponsible (or just stupid) then why should they be allowed to disregard the health and safety of their pets with impunity just because theyâre poor? However, you canât get blood from a rock and capital punishment for the pet isnât the right answer. Shelters always need help, maybe they should institute a program where people could work off the charges, volunteer their time in order to get back their animal. If the person loves and wants the animal, then they can demonstrate it and help out a good cause in the process.
Of course in real life, there arenât the resources to enforce such a policy and animals are way at the bottom of the priority list. But we should at least make available free spay/neuter services to anyone who canât afford it. I know that city or county animal shelters euthanize, but I once did volunteer work with ASPCA shelters, and the two I worked for had a no-kill policy for healthy animals. However, in many areas, this simply isnât practical. People can be irresponsible fools, either donât consider or donât care about the consequences of letting their animals roam and breed all over the place.
It does finally come down to personal responsibility by the pet owner, regardless their economic capabilities. If my piece of crap car quits and I leave it along the side of the road, Iâm still responsible for it, and if officialdom has to move it then Iâm liable for its disposition. Granted, the car doesnât have soft brown eyes or wag its tail, but it still is about ownership and the responsibility that comes with it.
Some areas can run strong adoption programs, but like anything in over-supply, the price of doing business guarantees that âinventoryâ has to be kept to a minimum. There are no easy solutions that are politically sellable and so the animals pay the price.
If the humane society only survived by the cost of people paying for fines and such I would agree in part that they are justified. But they survive mostly on subsidies and donations.
Is not an animal considered property by law? The destruction of private property is ilegal is it not? Animals that are euthanized are generally held for max only two weeks if that, in alot, its one week then they are destroyed. Now a family can afford to live week to week and still support a pet, its normal shots its food and such, but, a surprise 50 or 60 $ during the week is downright hard to cough up.
To try and dig up 50 bucks in time to keep your family pet from getting killed is cruel. At least vets will allow you to make payments on Doctor bills. You canât justify such treatment. The cost of putting the dog or cat down is not cheap unless they do group gassing or electrocute the animals, which does happen in the states. Then you get to hear them complain about lack of space⊠well ainât that a load of âŠ
Câmon Kris,
Youâre a personal responsibility advocate. Put the problem where it belongs. Yes, it is sad that the animal has to pay for the crimes or negligence of itâs owner, but that is the reality. You want monthly payments? And who cares for the animal until the bill is actually paid? The lack of a âpayment planâ reflects the harsh reality of people sort of forgetting⊠
A bench warrant for someone who owes 30.00 to the local pound? Yeah, thatâs cost efficient. It may be a sad commentary on human values, but it is what it is.