PART THREE: Blatant hypocrisy
While the organization continues to attract supporters and funds from celebrities and ordinary people, there are still a lot of those who are inclined to believe that the organization is an irony in itself. PETA claims to abhor animal killings and maltreatment when it has been known to have killed more than its fair share of animals through what they claim as euthanasia. More than the radical movements toward promoting animal welfare, this is perhaps the most appalling aspect of being a part of PETA.
Better dead than stressed-out PETA is against a no-kill movement and euthanizes most of the animals that are surrendered to their care. Their main point is that most of the animals in facilities already suffer from deadly and incurable ailments. The most humane thing to do is to remove them from their suffering and permanently put them to sleep. The animal rights group maintains that their stand to kill unwanted animals that are stuck in shelters is more humane than letting them loose because animal shelters simply could not accommodate them anymore. Instead of addressing the issue on the shortage of proper shelters for stray animals, PETA has chosen the easiest way and that is by obliterating those that are considered “surplus” or unwanted. All of a sudden, the choice for these animals is either to die in the most humane way possible or suffer from the stress of overcrowded shelters. Is it then proper to say that it’s better to kill all those homeless people instead of having them suffer on the streets? Their stand on animal euthanasia is a blatant contradiction of the advocacy that PETA seeks to uphold. How is it that they can righteously preach about animal suffering when they are one of those people who are first to choose death over another option for animals? It is disappointing to learn that these statements are supported by actual facts of just how many animals PETA has killed all in the name of relieving them from their sufferings.
More killed than saved Based on the recent data provided by the Virginia Department of Agriculture and Consumer Services, it appears that PETA has killed more animals than it has actually saved by actively looking for homes for the strays that are placed in their care. According to Wally Swelt, president of Primarily Primates, from 1998-2003, the animal rights organization has killed over 10,000 animals. In 2005, it has put some 1,946 pets to sleep and has managed to transfer about 215 or get them adopted by suitable homeowners. And here we all thought that it is an animal’s basic right to live; a right that is supposed to be upheld by its staunch champions. In 1991, the San Francisco Chronicle reported that after rescuing eighteen rabbits and fourteen roosters from a research facility, PETA has chosen to euthanize them. The reason? The organization didn’t have enough funds to care for the animals that it rescued. PETA’s budget for that year amounted to $6 million. Animal rights advocate turned animal oppressors In June of 2005, two PETA employees were arrested in North Carolina after police pulled dead bodies of eighty dogs and cats that were crammed in a rubbish container for three weeks. They arrested Adria Hinkle and Andrew Cook as they arrived in a truck that was said to contain 13 more dead animals. Both employees were charged with 22 counts of animal cruelty and three counts of obtaining property by false pretense after it was found out that they allegedly assured a veterinarian that they would find suitable homes for three cats but killed them instead. According to reports the two have been putting animals to sleep after picking them up from shelters in Northampton and Bertie counties. But the charges against the two employees were dropped in October of the same year and in January of 2007, both workers were acquitted of all charges except for a misdemeanor count for improper disposing of animals. Since this discovery, both shelters have refused to work with PETA on the issue of relocating stray pets. Conclusion This case is just one of the many blows against PETA’s credibility in upholding animal right and welfare. The organization is largely dependent on its members’ donations and the only way to attract financial revenue is to create as big a noise as ever. But it seemed that the massive ad campaigns and movements that the organization is notorious for are not only aimed at attracting public interest. They also serve to mask out and hopefully completely silence that small voice which says that PETA is not what everybody thought it is.
(contributed by BC Caylao)
| 