Not in any way shape or form.

No. I believe animals should be treated humanely, but my wife works with animals in research, and these animals have a good life. also doesnt PETA believe that we shouldnt even keep animals as pets? Like most groups founded on a single idea, they have taken it TOO FAR

I support their desire to see an end to animal cruelty and their efforts to educate the public. I can't support their tactics, though. Extremism even in the name of good usually ends up doing more harm than good.

PETA is too extreme. There is a happy useful median but they don't want to work towards that. If yu really get intot heir research and into their organization (I had a friend who was very into it) you will find that they will not be happy until all animals are free and there are no pets or zoo animals in the world. They don't think people should have pets as it is animals under a persons' control. They believe that all animals should be free and on equal footing with people. And then there is this strange website which I don't know if it is true or not but well, it's interesting. http://www.petakillsanimals.com/index.cfm

no,but i would like to be.

No. I am all for the proper treatment and care of animals but PETA is radical organization that has gone way overboard.

NO, I am all for the fair and non-abusive treatment of animals but I am not for the complete abandonment of all pets and all animals from captivity and use. And I am against terrorist methods to get a point or vision of the future across to others. If you think animals have rights and should have fair treatment and no abuse, you should at least feel the same towards people, too, and they don't.

No, they offer no alternative options and support people who fire bomb animal testing laboratories. What are we just supposed to give up on developing medicines that save our lives? Peta could spend their $ $ towards spaying and neutering pets if they really wanted to help. The main thing that irritates me is that they see the Holocaust on the same level.. Anyone involved in any way with PETA is mentally ill. Yes animal cruelty is bad..! not as horrific as the Holocaust though, WTF! what the fuck

I'm probably among the most politically left-wing people on AB and I'm a big animal lover (growing up, my family tended to adopt all the neighborhood strays). That being said, I *can't stand* PETA. Leaving the question of quasi-terroristic tactics aside (I don't know enough details to comment), they are the absolute worst at knowing how to pick their battles. For example, I heard on a radio news show that PETA had 'liberated' a few dozen guinea pigs that had been used for research. Meanwhile, in Central/South America, guinea pigs are raised by the millions and consumed as food. Which is greater? 50 or several million? If you're going to fight for animal rights, address the *biggest* problems first, then worry about the small stuff.

No, I'm more of an Animal Welfare supporter and not an Animal Rights supporter, even though their name sounds A.W. They're just too extremists in my views.

Peta bread maybe, but I don't know what the hell else peta means.

No, because though I believe they do have a point about factory farming and such, I don't approve of many of their tactics and they also appear to be putting animals on a higher status that they deserve in the grand scheme of the universe.

Nah. I'm more of a humane society kinda gal. I love animals, but I love people too.

they kill more than they save

ABSOLUTELY 100%!!! apparently noone on here know ANYTHING about PETA...i have been a member of PETA for 6 years now, i have been a vegetarian for 4 and i have even met Ingrid Newkirk and she is a wonderful person with amazing ideas the new movie that was released called "I am an animal" details her life, and what she wants to do...they are not "extremists" they dont sneak into labs and steal animals, or break into homes and "release" any animals...they are completely political, and are based on donations, they dont believe that "no animals should be pets" they want everyone to keep there pets inside and away from danger, they have a thing right now to build dog houses for dogs that are kept outside on chains, for people who cant afford getting a dog house for there pet, they work with the Humane Society and ASPCA, and with combined efforts they try to eradicate animal cruelty and animal suffering, Although this end could never be reached they strive to get the word out about animal cruelty and what everyone can do to help. They try to find what companies are cruelty free, and even what charities test there theories and solutions on animals. if you would go to http://www.peta2.org you can see the street team and what activites they are involved in, Everyone thinks PETA is "extremist" when they have been named one of the best charitable foundations in 2005-2007, im not saying they WERE the number one charity but they rated in the top 5! if PETA was so "extreme" i dont think their foundation would have lasted this long...do you?

Yes, I do.

Yes, I am a member of PETA!

I like PETA as much as I like the Catholic Church and I hate the Catholic Church.

No, PETA is loony. anyone ever watch the episode of "Bullshit!" Where they described just how loony it is?

'K Hempy.

I will support the R.S.P.C.A. 24/7 but PETA I wouldn't piss on if they were on fire....they said they were going to open an office here in Australia ...lol it won't last long ...the fools should bone up on the facts before they dribble there shit and have to do back flips or make lame excuses

I absolutely, 100%, hate PETA to my very core, and feel that it is the logical extension of the dark, twisted, miserable soul of its founder and president, Ingrid Newkirk. But saying that, I should explain further. I want to make clear that I am vegan and strongly in support of animal rights. To me, when a human suffers the same pain that an nonhuman animal does, both pains are equally bad. I also support PETA's goal of ultimate "total liberation" - the complete abolition of the use or ownership of nonhuman animals in anyway, except maybe for seeing-eye dogs (but advances in robotics, artificial intelligence, and even artificial eye transplants will probably eliminate the need for them in the next decade or two). I also am unashamed to admit that I don't hold it against PETA that it most likely financially and philosophically supports terrorist groups like the Animal Liberation Front, thus supporting the use of terror, violence, and violation of the law to achieve its goals. Frankly, there is not ONE movement in the history of the human race that has ever succeeded based purely on non-violent protests and resistance. In India, Gandhi wasn't really the cause of liberation - Great Britain was devastated at the end of a world war, and in an age where "national self-determination" was in and "imperialism" was out, it couldn't turn to its allies for support, and so realized that it was incapable of holding on to the huge subcontinent through military force, or beating down the existing violent, terrorist freedom fighters that also existed in India. Violence liberated India. I would argue that organizations like the Black Panthers, and other violent grassroots African American groups, were also far more responsible for the success of the civil rights movement than Martin Luther King's admirable, but ineffective, non-violent resistance movement. I'm sorry if that sounds cynical, but the fact is, if peace and non-violence was convincing to humans, we'd all be saints, and if we were all saints, there would be no need for non-violent resistance movements. My "beefs" (pun intended) with PETA are many, and all motivated by concern for the rights of animals. Firstly, they're deeply hypocritical - they claim to see human life as equally valuable as nonhuman life, or at least comparable, and, as an example, compare the Nazi Holocaust to what happens yearly in factory farms. Now, although on moral grounds I think the comparison is fair, and shouldn't be seen as demeaning the Holocaust but rather elevating the serious evil of factory farming, it was bound to cause a HUGE backlash of anti-animal-rights public opinion. But my main point with this is that they are hypocritical - they KILL almost all the animals they rescue. Check out this site (which is not an animal rights site, but has good anti-PETA info): http://www.petakillsanimals.com/ Since 1998 they've killed over 17,000 of the animals they've "rescued", often almost immediately after "rescuing" them (often illegally, and, since they'll kill them anyway, unnecessarily). Each year, they kill over a thousand, and sometimes over two thousand "rescued" animals, anywhere from 72 - 97% of them. MANY of these animals are fully adoptable and healthy. They are actively AGAINST "no kill shelters", see here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/PETA#Policy_on_euthanasia Their president and founder, Newkirk, has personally killed thousands of animals with her own hands in her lifetime, many when she worked in an animal shelter before founding the organization. She felt it was her moral obligation to make sure she killed them herself, to make sure they were killed painlessly. PETA and Newkirk's stance seems to be that painless killing is morally acceptable. That "rescuing" an animal is consistent morally with ending its life shortly afterwards, even though it could just as easily live, often without veterinary intervention. If I was being tortured in a cage, and someone came to rescue me, I would certainly hope it was just to rescue me from torture and confinement, and not from the "horror" of being alive. And that is the main source of my deep disgust with PETA and Newkirk - their philosophy is one of being against LIFE. Now, Buddhists say that "life is suffering", but they try to do constructive things about that, not "mercy kill" themselves and everyone around them so that that suffering can end. What PETA doesn't get is that suffering is not the ultimate evil - death IS, and suffering only is a useful measure of how likely one IS to die, without intervention. But if you've ever seen or read anything from Newkirk, you'll find she sounds like a miserable person that hates being alive, and assumes that life is fundamentally horrible. PETA spends MILLIONS of dollars each year on cheap, tawdry, offensive ad campaigns that make the animal rights movement look sexist, stupid, gross, intellectually dishonest, racist, and anti-religion. All those millions would be better spent on not killing the animals they "rescue", but making sure they all go to good homes, or receive the appropriate veterinary care, instead of plastering Pamela Anderson with a message against fur on a billboard on Times Square. That brings me to the second, and, I guess, last thing I have against PETA. If I didn't know better, I would say that their REAL goal is to make bloody sure that the WHOLE WORLD knows that the old expression "all publicity is good publicity, even the bad" is completely untrue. To me, they've accomplished that goal, and should stop trying so hard to beat this dead horse (the one they "rescued") and either close shop or stop killing animals and start to actually make animal rights seem like a serious, compassionate movement, instead of a circus. That's my take on PETA. Spread the word that PETA kills animals, by the way. A lot of people don't know.

i really like animals and consider humans the bane of existence.

sure and ALF and WWF and The Physicians Committee for Responsible Medicine .local animal rights groups. Just yesterday we picketed the Local Turkey store as we do evey year. The owner snivels like she's being picked on...idiot.