PETA Principles
By Dr. Mike S. Adams

A Note from Ellie…

For those not familiar with P.E.T.A. (People For the Ethical Treatment Of Animals), PETA is one of those silly, off-the-wall (but large, powerful and dangerous) animal rights organizations that believes animals, i.e. rabbits and rats (yum-yum), should have the same rights as humans. In their own words, “People who support animal rights believe that animals are not ours to use for food, clothing, entertainment, experimentation, or any other purpose and that animals deserve consideration of their best interests….”

Just a few of PETA’s many objectives are; to make hunting and fishing illegal, abolish circuses, eliminate the use of animal fur, and outlaw the use of animals in medical research. They’re also rabid vegetarians. (Yuck! Give me a good steak anytime over a bowl full of peas.)

Interestingly though, their web site doesn’t say anything is wrong with killing an innocent human baby in its mother’s womb. They just simply state that there are two sides to the issue. Such a statement leads me to believe that as far as PETA is concerned, it’s OK to murder a baby human but don’t go fishing because you’ll kill a fish.

There’s no question that humans, as instructed in Scripture, must be good stewards of God’s creatures. The Bible tells them so. God provided the plants and animals of the earth for their nourishment, medical benefit and companionship. Putting animals above or on the same level as man however is not only unscriptural, but outright crazy.

After reading Dr. Adam’s Dear PETA letter, I had to chuckle and share it. Enjoy!

Dear PETA:

A buddy of mine named John has been trying to do a study on animal rights organizations. He wants to ask you a few questions but fears that you will try to cause him (or his family) physical harm if any of the questions should offend you.  Since he thinks that my recent article (“How to collect guns and irritate PETA”) has already put me on your organization’s hit list, he asked me to submit the questions on his behalf.

Please respond to the following questions via e-mail (to avoid using paper that may have been taken from the carcasses of innocent trees murdered for the advance of human interests):

1)  When we hear the word “animal” rights activist, can we assume you are not plant rights activists?  Does that mean that you give one life form preferential treatment over another? I just noticed that you have a “veggie dogs” ad on your website.

2) Do you believe in evolution as described by Darwin? If yes, do you find it at all hypocritical to prefer one life form over another (e. g., mice over alfalfa sprouts), considering that Darwin’s theory states that we evolved from a common life form? Doesn’t that mean we are all related and deserving of equal treatment?

3)  Do you believe what modern genetics has to say about our relationship to plants and other non-mammalian organisms?  For example, it is believed that we have only a few genes that are different, while 98% are identical. Would this in any way conflict with the view that animals (read: not fungi) deserve special treatment over plants?

4) Has your group ever organized a protest against the lions’ treatment of antelopes?

5)  What animals are considered worthy to protect?  Is it only those that pass what your critics have dubbed the “cuteness test?” I’ve noticed, for example, that Greenpeace says little about sharks, which are much more endangered and vital to the ocean ecosystem than whales. Does the shark’s ferociousness play a role in this decision?  Does a “cuteness test” exist or are there other parameters?

6)  Regarding a vegetarian diet, do you believe that humans are naturally vegetarians even though many human biological traits point toward a varied diet?  For example, our teeth structure, enzyme make-up, enlarged brain (which is not really needed for grazing), and muscle ratio.

7)  What would you say to an individual who fights against animal abuse in laboratories, yet wishes to eat meat, as long the animal is treated humanely and killed without pain?

8)  I noticed that fish fall under your protective mandate, but how about mollusks, such as clams and mussels?

9)  If fishing is considered cruel, do you consider the cutting down of trees to be cruel? I like to fish but I don’t use a chainsaw on them. Is there a moral difference? What do you think?

10) Do you plan to undertake a campaign to stop the cutting down of trees?  If so, will you extend the campaign to include all forms of plants?  Giving trees and animals preferential treatment is species-ism, isn’t it?  Or is it kingdom-ism? It’s all so confusing. (This question was inspired by the “ink, not mink” ad on your website).

11) If PETA does launch a “plant rights” campaign, will it include weeds? If so, does that mean that your members will have to quit smoking weed?

12) Do you know, roughly, what percentage of the women in your organization have had abortions?

13) I heard one of your fellow animal rights activists claim that “veggie dogs” taste “just like chicken.” Is that really true? If so, how does he know?

14) If you see an endangered animal eating an endangered plant, what do you do?

15) Would you be offended if I mowed my lawn?

16) Do PETA members eat animal crackers?

I appreciate your time and hope that I receive a prompt response to my queries.  I am planning to help John publish his report in the coming months. We look forward to your valuable feedback.

See you later. I’m almost late for lunch.

Dr. Mike S. Adams is a criminology professor at the University of North Carolina at Wilmington and is a regular columnist for Townhall.com. His first book, Welcome to the Ivory Tower of Babel, is a brilliant but disturbing expose´ of life in postmodern academia today which reveals the pervasive fraud found on America’s college campuses under the seductive euphemisms of political correctness, multiculturalism, and diversity -- a book well worth reading for any parent sending their child off to college. For more information and articles by Dr. Adams visit his web site at www.DrAdams.org.