Does PeTA...have...a point here?!

[Kinguendo]

Yeah, sure... go ahead and release these animals that were born into captivity... see how that works out for them.

Fact of the matter is people kill whales, people kill dolphins, people kill animals in the wild... people have hunted animals to the brink of extinction and sometimes over it... the animals that are born into captivity arent being screwed over, they are being fed with no risk to them, they have their illness treated and they have space... they are being exploited as much as an actor.

And sometimes, these animals in captivity are used to give their breed a fighting chance at continuing to exist.

The simple truth is PETA have it ass backwards... if we didnt take an interest in these animals then they would have been extinct a long time ago... hell, even us taking an interest in some animals being dead keeps a species thriving... have you heard of the cow ever brinking on extinction? The sheep? Pig? Chicken? Yeah, thats what I thought... Next time a PETA person or a particularily mouthy Vegan take the perceived moral high ground smack them down with that slice of fact, animals that we want to eat are not endagered and animals that we keep at Zoos and Aquariums live safe and easy lives.

EDIT: Oh and this whale didnt murder anyone... its killed 3 people... but its a freaking animal thats what a lot of them do, yes its a shame it has killed people but it didnt know it was killing them, as far as the evidence goes it points to the whale being excited and not realising that humans arent whales and cant survive under water for as long as a whale. Shockingly enough whales arent that smart but also certainly dont kill people just for funzies.

 

[SmartIdiot]

I can see where you're coming from here. It brings to mind the whole animals raised in captivity vs wild animals placed in captivity and how they behave arguement. However that's not the issue here, the issue is PETA and whether they have a point. No they do not. They never will. Even if what they're saying makes sense (haha I know) never allow them that credibility. Why? They are a bunch of insane celery sucker morons who, at the end of the day, could not argue their way out of a wet paper bag but will still try and at first it's funny, but the more they try the sadder it gets.

 

[CincoDeMayo]

I think it's disgusting that they keep the whales, and other animals as well, in such small spaces. I can understand if the animals are on the verge of extinction, but it just feels bad to watch animals living in such small areas. Not many zoos I have seen really let the animals walk around on great amounts of space, I once saw around 8 monkeys (I can't remember what race) who's outside space was about the size of a livingroom. Sure, they could climb around and play but it would feel better if they had large amounts of space where they could feel something resembling freedom. Same goes with all animals in captivity, of course.

 

[SensibleCrout]

Of course it's not ok to put wild animals in an environment they're not made for, expecially if there is no good reason to do it.

As for Peta, I think they are right, and this time even for the right reasons. But usually the way Peta argues makes me doubt they do animal rights much good.

 

[Dys]

It's a killer whale, while I can at least see the logic behind claiming we shouldn't make animals perform tricks (I'm not convinced they are necessarily unhappy or living a worse life than they would in the wild) I don't think it comes into play here.

Orca whales (and dolphins for that matter) are not cuddly little house cats, they earned the nickname killer whales for a reason. They are probably the most intelligent hunter on the planet, they actually teach their young specific tricks for catching different prey (making waves to knock seals off ice or how to dive onshore and roll back out to sea with food). They also eat everything (it's not uncommon for them to eat great white sharks). I certainly think you'd have to be either very brave or very stupid to willingly approach one.

Yeah, sure... go ahead and release these animals that were born into captivity... see how that works out for them.

Fact of the matter is people kill whales, people kill dolphins, people kill animals in the wild... people have hunted animals to the brink of extinction and sometimes over it... the animals that are born into captivity arent being screwed over, they are being fed with no risk to them, they have their illness treated and they have space... they are being exploited as much as an actor.

And sometimes, these animals in captivity are used to give their breed a fighting chance at continuing to exist.

The simple truth is PETA have it ass backwards... if we didnt take an interest in these animals then they would have been extinct a long time ago... hell, even us taking an interest in some animals being dead keeps a species thriving... have you heard of the cow ever brinking on extinction? The sheep? Pig? Chicken? Yeah, thats what I thought... Next time a PETA person or a particularily mouthy Vegan take the perceived moral high ground smack them down with that slice of fact, animals that we want to eat are not endangered and animals that we keep at Zoos and Aquariums live safe and easy lives.

I don't think killer whales are at a particularly big risk (at least deliberate risk) from humans, we don't really hunt them.

Rather than aggressively slapping a vegan a vegan with your subjective views on what's likely to increase an animals chance of survival, perhaps you could politely point out the absurdity of preventing animal deaths by 'saving' one domesticated animal when you eat only vegetables that are massed farmed and responsible for billions of insect, small mammal and bird deaths. Regardless of how right or wrong they may be as to whether domesticate (effectively change) an animal so it better suits our purpose (I'm flat out neutral to it, animals evolved naturally, I'm quite happy to help them along the way), it is most certainly conceivable that some people would object to the idea of huge mammals weighing several tonnes being removed from their natural habitats and encouraged to perform tricks in front of humans, for our amusement, in spaces that are inconceivably small compared to their natural habitat. Maybe if this orca is untameable and seems to enjoy killing people, we should, I dunno...not force it to constantly be around us?

 

[dante brevity]

PETA are a bunch of narrow-minded, short-sighted fuckheads. i will damn well enjoy eating my meat if the animals are humanely cared for and slaughtered, and wear my leather/fur if it does not involve inhumane slaughter/endangered species/unsustainable hunting.

Unless you've much, much more careful about where your meat has come from in the past 50 years than nearly all Americans have (including me) throughout your life, the meat you've eaten HAS been inhumanely kept and slaughtered. The factory farm system is one that has cruelty and a lack of regard for the animal's well-being built into the system. Read for more info:
http://www.farmforward.com/farming-forward/food-choices
Regarding zoos, on a species by species basis, their moral acceptability can range from tolerable to cruelly irrational. Yes, there are animals that do well in captivity and enjoy the protection and companionship of humans. Those same animals can also have reduced life spans, health problems unobserved outside captivity and stress levels that would result in raving lunacy in humans. These animals aren't "domesticated" the way dogs and cats are, over thousands of generations. The whales in the story above had wild parents or grandparents whose instincts told them to range and hunt over vast areas of territory. They have the same instincts, are kept in a glass box, and it drives them slowly mad, regardless of how much they enjoy being fed fish by a trainer.

EDIT: You want to see and learn about wild animals? Go to a National Park.

 

[Uszi]

So discuss---are animal shows morally objectionable or do you think they're OK?

To be honest, people only want to save the cute/fuzzy animals that do tricks. So the more Animals Seaworld can train to do flippies, the better off conservation will be.

That said, I don't think anyone should direct any anger towards the Killer Whale that was basically doing what God built it to do.

 

[Macgyvercas]

NO!

THEY DON'T HAVE A POINT!

I will never admit to them ever having a point, otherwise they would get all smug about it and start on bigger and more terrifying schemes to stop my carnivorous rampage!

This.

There are three types of people who are never to be taken seriously: Religious Fundimentalists, PETA, and Anti-video game activists.

 

[Hamster at Dawn]

Is it really necessary for animals to be imprisoned for entertainment nowadays? I mean, there are plenty of nature documentaries on TV if you're interested. I don't agree with PETA but I also don't really see the justification for forcing a whale to perform tricks several times a day. I suppose the whale might enjoy it and to be fair, I'm sure it is well taken care of. I guess it's a bit of a grey area.

 

[Denamic]

If PETA makes a point, it's wrong by default.

 

[cuddly_tomato]

I don't agree with PETA, although sometimes our viewpoints math each-other's. I don't agree with keeping dolphins in tiny tanks, but knowing PETA they'd want that poor orca killed instead of being slowly rehabitized (is that word? If it isn't I mean that the orca should be slowly re-introduced into its environment).

EDIT: I don't have a problem with zoos and aquariums where the animals are well cared for, but I don't really like the shows they put these dolphins on.

I was going to type up something extremely similar to this, but thanks to Mr Umberphoenix it isn't necessary.

PETA are a bunch of idiots, but that doesn't mean that animal welfare isn't an important issue to many of us. I don't think it is right to keep such a large animal in captivity if you can't provide enough space for it to have some kind of freedom.

 

[CouchCommando]

Hey I'm one of those gawking idiots!!! as much as I hate to agree with anything peta actually say or do, yeah they've got the nail on the head on this one (must have been accidental), seriously keeping a five ton marine predator in an enclosure for entertainment is kinda retarded.
But then you have to look at the work they put back into the community ,helping with beached pods, Bird/marine life maimed by nets and lines, a lot of it is funded by donations and then again a lot of it isn't. Having a well funded private organisation capable of helping from time to time isn't all bad. And at the same time allowing families to see the animals interact, even if it is just staged, can be a life changing experience for children.
How is someone going to give a damn about something in this day and age of a plethora of information and items been bombarded at an individual on a daily basis.
Peta to me are like that cow germain greer, just crying out for their own publicity with out actually doing anything of substance, either educational or practical. And decrying anyone who actually does try something different to actually try to address a problem.

 

[Drakstern]

PETA never has good points.

Even when they do, it's marred by the fact that it's PETA.

 

[Regiment]

In the wild there are very few cases of orcas injuring people. In captivity, there are many.

In the wild, people and orcas rarely come into close contact. That's like arguing that more people die in car crashes in Detroit than in the Brazilian rainforest. I'd like to know the ratio of safe/ violent human- orca interactions in the wild and in captivity.

On topic: PETA's full of loonies, so I can't side with them. I'l side with the whale, though. It's a carnivore. It subsists on creatures that look an awful lot like people. (Why do they keep doing shows with an animal that's already attacked two people? Is it a three- strikes thing?)

 

[SimuLord]

PETA never has good points.

Even when they do, it's marred by the fact that it's PETA.

The cognitive dissonance involved when they say something that makes sense is astounding. Hence the overall tone in my original post.

 

[soilent]

Reading this article [http://www.cnn.com/2010/US/02/25/florida.seaworld.death/index.html] about a woman at Sea World who got killed by an orca (or "killer whale", if you prefer), I have to agree with the PeTA spokesman. No matter how much Sea World tries to spin it as educating people about these majestic creatures, the fact still remains they're putting wild animals into spaces that are about the size of a bathtub relatively speaking and making them do silly tricks for gawking idiot tourists for profit. There's something...well, unnecessary about it.

I'm not usually one for agreeing with PeTA (I'm normally suggesting we feed Ingrid Newkirk to lions the way Romans disposed of Christians), but on this one they're spot on. My sympathies are with the whale on this one.

So discuss---are animal shows morally objectionable or do you think they're OK?

My Opinion:

We control this planet, not the bloody whales. We will do what we want with them for our own amusement and they can cry and moan at the fact that thier world, the ocean; is so far and there is nothing they can do to stop us from having absolute control.

also, PETA are a bunch of terrorists.

 

[AvsJoe]

are animal shows morally objectionable or do you think they're OK?

Both. Hate to sit on the fence on this issue but I choose both. On one hand, yes, it's pretty cruel to do this to an animal. On the other, many people, especially children, find this incredibly enjoyable and who would want to take away the happiness of a young child? I for one have very fond memories of going to Marine Land when I was 4 years old (for those who care, Marine Land is Canada's version of Sea World.

 

[Valksy]

I know that I do not trust any insight offered by PETA on what is or is not best for the orca -I would much rather here from recognised experts.

I also know that I still don't want them to hurt the orca because of what happened.