Lowercase sigmabot III (talk | contribs) m Archiving 2 discussion(s) to Talk:People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals/Archive 15) (bot |
Mr. Meseeks (talk | contribs) →Semi-protected edit request on 27 December 2017: new section |
||
Line 75: | Line 75: | ||
[[User:Bob Speth|Bob Speth]] ([[User talk:Bob Speth|talk]]) 03:19, 17 December 2017 (UTC) |
[[User:Bob Speth|Bob Speth]] ([[User talk:Bob Speth|talk]]) 03:19, 17 December 2017 (UTC) |
||
== Semi-protected edit request on 27 December 2017 == |
|||
{{edit semi-protected|People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals|answered=no}} |
|||
I request that PETA be described as a domestic terrorist organization as it was classified by the federal government. Nowhere in this entire article does it give this Information. People should be able to know the full info for this Article. [[User:Mr. Meseeks|Mr. Meseeks]] ([[User talk:Mr. Meseeks|talk]]) 17:42, 27 December 2017 (UTC) |
Revision as of 17:42, 27 December 2017
|
This article is of interest to multiple WikiProjects. | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Index 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16 |
Insulin, POV tag |
This page has archives. Sections older than 60 days may be automatically archived by Lowercase sigmabot III when more than 4 sections are present. |
Can someone fix the spelling of Bill Maher's name?
It is in the list of members under Bill Mahar. I was going to change it but cannot due to the protected status of the article.
This article needs more criticism before it can become a good article or a featured article. Perhaps a criticism section or a separate article for criticism?
As the title to this section states, this article is in need of well-written, legitimate criticism of the group and of certain of its unethical aspects, which is largely absent or hard to find. Could you fellow editors reach a new consensus on including criticism in a separate section? We do not want PETA sockpuppets to whitewash the article of criticism. Also, if a criticism section cannot be made, how about a separate article about criticism in the "See also" section? What do you think, ladies and gentlemen? Zakawer (talk) 20:49, 12 December 2016 (UTC)
- Agreed. At the moment all criticism is squashed into the intro. --31.49.114.250 (talk) 19:49, 24 February 2017 (UTC)
- Agreed. For such a controversial group, it seems odd that the criticism is watered down throughout the article instead of standing on it's own. I agree a separate article may be better suited, how would that fit in with the protected status of the PETA article? ourweakness (talk) 15:32, 5 August 2017 (UTC)
I completely agree. I actually came to this page because I wanted to know more about the controversy of PETA and wikipedia often has a section about that.
Deep.fried.bacon (talk) 15:33, 10 January 2017 (UTC)
(Also I couldn't figure out how to add a separate post nested under this original one so I just added this here. I wasn't sure if that was the proper way to do it, so if not if someone could let me know what is the proper way, I'd be grateful.)
If a criticism and controversy section and/or a separate article for criticism doesn't work, we're gonna have to incorporate a buttload of criticism into the article's lead and especially into the body of the article. Still, the article needs a lot of work before reaching GA or FA status. Zakawer (talk) 18:15, 30 April 2017 (UTC)
- Agree. I was disappointed to not find anything about the case where PETA sued photographer David Slater because a monkey took a selfie with his camera and he published it in a book. Apparently he is now bankrupt from the ongoing court case where PETA demands the monkey should own the copyrights and be reimbursed. There is a wikipedia article on the case but I couldn't find a link in the PETA article. Monkey selfie 2001:14BA:2F8:F700:9153:6A96:43A2:2556 (talk) 14:03, 6 August 2017 (UTC)
- Agree, too. Why it's there a link to the controversy of the Monkey selfie copyright dispute? 212.59.44.4 (talk) 13:45, 13 September 2017 (UTC)
Why don't you use the SVG Version?
Hi, I'm from the Hebrew Wikipedia. I just updated the logo of PETA. Take a look here טוסטר אובן (talk) 14:18, 28 September 2017 (UTC)
PeTAs and Bill Maher's hypocrisy and psychopathy
Despite his successes as a comedian, Bill Maher is an abject failure as a human being. By vilifying researchers who seek the truth by conspiring with the extremist animal rights movement, who are some of the greatest masters of modern-day fake news, he lacks all measure of credibility or respect.
Mr. Maher’s latest antihuman (and anti-animal) crusade is directed at Texas A & M researchers who are attempting to cure Duchenne Muscular Dystrophy <1>. As the parent of a child whose short life was burdened with this disease, I know how much suffering it brings, not just to the victim, but to their loved ones as well. Ironically, in Maher’s attack on the use of a dog model of Muscular Dystrophy to develop a cure for this disease, he forgets that any cure developed through this research could also benefit the dogs that have this disease. It reminds me of a Law and Order episode in which an antiabortionist kills a women seeking an abortion, and thereby dons the mantle of an abortionist.
At a time when the United States is facing an unprecedented health-care crisis from the specter of Alzheimer’s Disease, Parkinson’s Disease, Chronic Traumatic Encephalopathy and many more neurodegenerative diseases, Mr. Maher is supporting a group that wants to cripple the research that scientists such as Joe Kornegay are pursuing in their efforts to cure debilitating diseases. This is on par with the deniers of global warming, whose efforts will likely make the Earth uninhabitable for most of its human and animal inhabitants.
Mr, Maher is a board member of the radical animal rights group PeTA <2>, which is opposing Dr. Kornegay’s groundbreaking research to cure Duchenne Muscular Dystrophy. If you don’t know how malignant they are; their founder once infamously said: “Even if animal research led to a cure for AIDS, we’d be against it.” <3> Fortunately, we were undeterred by this vicious mindset and today an infection with HIV is no longer a death sentence. In another irony, PeTA personnel were charged with animal cruelty and illegal disposal of the carcasses of the dogs and cats they killed after they collected them from veterinarians and animal shelters with the false promise that they would be taken to PeTA's animal shelter for adoption <4>. Sadly, the animals likely would have been killed even if they made it back to PeTA's shelter in Virginia <5>. It would appear that to Mr. Maher and PeTA; humans, and dogs and cats not involved in research, are not included in their version of humane. More anti-human comments from the founder of PeTA have also been archived <6> as they seem to be unavailable from the PeTA website.
So, I applaud Texas A & M in their steadfast heroic struggle against the deplorable attacks of animal rights zealots who seek to sabotage Texas A & M’s noble mission to promote the health and well-being of humans and animals alike. https://today.tamu.edu/2017/12/15/research-in-veterinary-medicine-offering-hope-for-youths-with-debilitating-disease/ References (1) https://www.peta.org/features/bill-maher-takes-on-tamu/ (2) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bill_Maher (3) Vogue September 1989 (4) http://www.roanoke-chowannewsherald.com/2005/06/18/peta-duo-charged-with-62-felonies/ http://www.suffolknewsherald.com/2005/11/15/peta-case-goes-to-superior-court/ (5) http://www.nytimes.com/2013/07/07/us/peta-finds-itself-on-receiving-end-of-others-anger.html (6) http://www.naiaonline.org/articles/article/animal-welfare-is-not-animal-rights#sthash.1i1af2Ml.dpbs
Bob Speth (talk) 03:19, 17 December 2017 (UTC)
Semi-protected edit request on 27 December 2017
I request that PETA be described as a domestic terrorist organization as it was classified by the federal government. Nowhere in this entire article does it give this Information. People should be able to know the full info for this Article. Mr. Meseeks (talk) 17:42, 27 December 2017 (UTC)