PETA' Stance on Aquariums

The friendliest place on the web for anyone with an interest in aquariums or fish keeping!
If you have answers, please help by responding to the unanswered posts.
See posts with no answers
Status
Not open for further replies.
The fact that the organization made their position very clear to Macman and the fact that he posted the response speaks volumes for where Macman stands on the issue. I say that deserves a tremendous amount of thanks to him.

In the words of a great philosopher: "A word to the wise is sufficient".
 
Her letter did have a holier than thou attitude.....if you want to make her mad write her back and ask her if she thinks humans should live in houses because after all housing developments are affecting animals as well.
Click to expand...

Or if their VP should stop taking insulin, etc. etc. Bah, I'm all done talking about PETA (although I will say most of the "7 things" that you took issue with macman are verifiable facts, and most through their own website).

If you want to care about animals without going overboard, consider WWF or the Audubon Society. They have their faults as well, but they don't expect you to be vegan or risk your safety by handing out sick leaflets to children (which is what a person would be doing handing my kid a leaflet like "Your daddy kills cows" or whatever).
 
:D Great response talloulou. :lol: :lol:

What I find interesting about Karin Roberstsons position is the understatement that people just don't realize how unfair, and how it is we mistreat animals. Most caring people don't want to see a living thing suffer, or be put to death needlessly. Although I don't agree with how far she takes things, I respect her feelings. I have wants, needs, and a way of life that make her position almost irrelevant to me.

Mans relationship with the animals on this planet predate human history. The domestication of animals, and how we utilize them is a key component of the success of our species. If Karin feels we're too successful she is fighting a losing battle. It would be unnatural for us to give up the relationships that we've spent thousands of years cultivating with our animals. It would also be a much sadder and lonelier world. For us and our animals.
 
BrianNY said:
Mans relationship with the animals on this planet predate human history. The domestication of animals, and how we utilize them is a key component of the success of our species. If Karin feels we're too successful she is fighting a losing battle. It would be unnatural for us to give up the relationships that we've spent thousands of years cultivating with our animals. It would also be a much sadder and lonelier world. For us and our animals.
Click to expand...

My feelings precisely, Brian.

IMO, you can't have a black and white approach to these things. We can't simply take a 180 turn on centuries of history and progress and abandon all of our animal husbandry and dependency on living resources. Nor can we simply neglect our animal resources and use them with wanten disregard for their sustained existance.

We have to take a balanced approach, not just for the aquarium hobby (trying to stay on topic!!), but for ALL of our natural resources, of which, animals play a large part. Animal resources always have, and always will play a large part in sustaining the human society. If we expect ourselves to survive, we have to ensure the survival of other living things. Without their presence and the resources they provide (wether its food, labor, companionship, etc) we to will cease to exist.

This is why I support and obey conservation laws and organizations. Efforts that recognize both the want and need to use animal resources while also recognizing the importance of ensuring they are not over used and their existance threatened.
 
To shawmutt,

I am actually an avid member of both the WWF and Audubon Society.
____________________________________________________________________

Brain I really think your response says it best, and you are right human interaction and domestication of animals has taken place for nearly as long as humans have walked on planet Earth. Even intellegent primates can be taught to domesticate and care for lower animals; as can be seen with the work surronding Koko the gorilla.

Anyhow I think as I have stated before Peta, like any group that has taken a radicalist stance has good and bad members. I was dis-satisfied overall with Karin's stance on the issues and I honestly believe it is literally a waste of time to write any more letters to her or any other of Peta's admin.

The quote I have under each post in my opinoin says it best and who better to make a valid point about society than Ghandi. That is one reason I am against the things that have taken place at KFC. I dont have a problem harvesting chickens as food even for a large restaraunt chain, although I do have a problem alloying employees to torture those animals for fun and literally hold contests seeing how many times it takes a chicken to hit a cement (and finally die) wall when being thrown by a person. If you dont believe KFC employees took part in such actions a quick search via google will turn over actual video of it taking place at one of thier plants - and trust me it turns most anyone's stomach.

When Peta asked KFC to put a stop to this treatment they declined, and have since said they will not change thier chicken processing procedures at all. The main reason I wont eat at KFC however comes not from thier treatment of chickens so much as the fact that thier birds are given hormones and other growth acceleration that has been linked to cancer and a variety of other illnesses in the animals that consume them. In addition to that KFC plants keep thier chickens in such inhumane and dirty surrondings that they often feed off the carcasses of other chickens and thier own waste and I personally dont want that degree of meat going into my stomach.
 
again... lets try and stay on topic. KFC has nothing to do with PETAs stance on aquariums.
 
One thing I really wonder about when thinking of peta and aquariums - I wonder if a any of peta's members has released captive fish to the wild thinking they were setting them free?
 
That is a very good point. What would they do with all of the Aquarium Fish they rescued if they could?? I doubt very highly they would pay the expenses of shipping them back to their "natural habitats"; and thereby subjecting them to the same shipping issues they are so wont to prevent. And, since many are bred in tanks and not from the wild, that would undoubtedly place a strain the the eco-balance of that region.
 
Not only that - I highly doubt a marine fish from captivity, taken at a young age will have the same resistance to parasites and natural occuring conditions than a fish that has been living in the natural enviroment its entire life. I would assume Peta would end up euthanizing many of the fish they are planning on saving if thier wants and desires were to see fruitation.

In any instance I dont think Peta really has a clue about this hobby. The part of thier article that suggests people with an interest in fish use one of the many screensavers avaliable really shows thier level of knowladge on the hobby. My hope was to increase that level of knowladge by coming to them as a Peta member and hobbysit - sad to say it didnt work. Unfourtantly I wont be a Peta member much longer.....
 
PBirdsong said:
You should email them a link to this thread . . . :lol:
Click to expand...

Very much not....you have no idea just how much trouble for AA that could cause....PETA has many less than ethical persons on their side....we hardly need to be hacked.
 
Exactly you don't want hand us over as one of the groups to target for their whole "anti-aquarium" crusade! 8O I can't believe they have an anti-aquarium campaign dept. 8O
 
Little bit of a joke, dude. Don't take it seriously. :roll:
It's true though. That could very possibly be their response. And would PETA (as an organization) condemn the action? No . . . even though hacking could be considered "cyber terror".
Since they have a whole deparment on this; they probably have already seen this website . . . maybe not this thread, but certainly our site.
 
talloulou said:
Exactly you don't want hand us over as one of the groups to target for their whole "anti-aquarium" crusade!
Click to expand...
You have to figure there are just as many who would love to hack PETA. A simple redirect could be hillarious in an infantile way. Imagine the following...

http://peta.org/index.html

Yes. It's childish and I would never do such a thing ;), but I'm sure somebody out there would consider it. Remember when Madonna spoke out against sharing mp3's and then somebody hacked her website and put her new album available for free download on her site? Yeah.

Anyways, I'm going to continue to ignore PETA. If they want to be heard, they need to stop yelling and start talking.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

S
UV Safety
Replies
7
Views
772
Colin_T
C
R
First aquarium setup - but worried!
Replies
5
Views
465
Rev G
R
M
"Inherited" an Aquarium
Replies
2
Views
414
Autumnsky
Autumnsky
A
Aquarium light scaring the fish
Replies
2
Views
496
Aron90
A
R
Algae on bogwood
Replies
1
Views
206
Aiken Drum
Aiken Drum

Latest posts

Back
Top Bottom