Eight. Keep that number in mind.
I get it. Vick killed animals. Or rather, let them die. No, I'll go as far as to say he killed them, and I'm sure there are legal terms for criminally-neglegent homocide, except homocide is for killing people - is it "canuside"? "Canucide"? "Dogicide"?
Anyway, the point is that the ones who are pointing fingers and calling him out are the members of PETA. If there were ever a case of pots calling kettles black, these pots in particular would be black holes - so dark that no amount of light could ever escape the darkness that dwells in these pots. Because PETA certainly kills animals. "How many? More than eight?" - I hear you cry.
Try 14,400 since 1998.
It's a number that the Center for Consumer Freedom is trying to get out to the public, going to the point of taking out a full-page ad in the New York Times to illustrate the hypocrisy of this "humane" organization. The text of the ad reads as such:
Who’s killed more animals? Vick (8) or PETA (14,400):
People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals (PETA) loves to point the finger at others, when they should be looking at their own record of killing more than 90% of the animals left in their care. According to government records PETA has killed more than 14,400 animals since 1998.
In fact, PETA has been using the Michael Vick incident to sell shirts, gain subscribers, and otherwise profit from someone who's killed a mere fraction of the animals they've killed in the past year alone.
"PETA has shamelessly used the horrific Michael Vick case to pad their group’s coffers, even though their track record of slaughtering thousands of helpless, adoptable animals is far more damning," said CCF Director of Research David Martosko. "Americans need to be aware of how PETA treats animals in their care and reject the group’s overt hypocrisy."
I mean for crying out loud - two employees of PETA in North Carolina admitted personally killing dozens of dogs and cats in what was literally a "death van" and then tossing the lifeless bodies of the critters into a nearby trash dumpster.
Again, dogfighting and those who torture the dogs to prepare them for the fights are fine examples of cruelty to animals. I'm not saying that isn't the case. My point is that you can't take it seriously when the screams of cruelty are coming from those responsible for puppy-killing deathmoblies. You wouldn't listen to a serial killer speaking out against a man who committed second-degree manslaughter, so why would you listen to an organization responsible for killing over 14,000 animals speaking out against a man who killed 8? The math doesn't add up. The logic doesn't add up.
Yes, Michael Vick killed animals.
But PETA killed thousands more this year alone.
And they're still out there, killing more dogs and cats every day, all the while yelling how killing animals is wrong and cruel.
At least they locked up Vick. When are we finally going to arrest every member of PETA?
And don't even get me started on the other animal-rights terrorist groups...
(www.PETAkillsanimals.com)
(Their press release about the PETA versus Vick advertisement)
3 comments:
Vick killed far more than 8 dogs. If you took the time to read the indictment you would see he killed 8 dogs in a single day back in April. It doesn't say those were the only dogs he killed in 8 years.
Also, I'd much rather see an animal die by a painless injection than by electrocution or hanging. The issue isn't killing, it's cruelty, and Vick is GUILTY!
And those numbers will NEVER be anywhere as close as to how many animals PETA has killed. I think that was the entire point of this post.
PETA is a group of hypocritical elitist assholes who think they can play God on deciding what animals have the right to live, and if they deem that they don't they kill them. It doesn't matter if it's lethal injection...Innocent, ADOPTABLE (despite what PETA claims, seeing how PUPPIES AND KITTENS are also claimed unadoptable) animals were killed.
If you want to talk on the accounts of cruelty, then look up PETA's Aspen Hill Sanctuary. Not a very happy ending for that place, eh?
What Vick did was wrong, but PETA is no better than he is.
Exactly.
And you know what? Not to even attempt to defend dogfighting or the cruelty that the dogs go through before even getting into a dogfighting ring, but still I have this idea in my head: Which is the better way to go?
- Tortured and beaten, then dying in a pointless battle, but at least with dignity, then buried with a little decency
- Lost, as a child, being found and held in a cage, and just when you think you'll find another owner to love you, you're taken into a van, injected with a lethal drug and killed while still young, and then thrown into a dumpster like trash
You know, even though it's torturous and cruel, and many dogs died horrible deaths before having a chance to die in the ring - I think I might still prefer it over the second choice.
Any time someone tries to tell me that what Michael Vick did was worse than anything PETA would ever do - I just have to say "puppy-killing deathmobiles and throwing the carcasses away in a dumpster" and Michael Vick's torture of animals doesn't seem quite as cruel.
Post a Comment