PETA is Off
Track
Sun, Aug 20, 2000
PETA
(People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals) used to get my support. I would
either mail them a donation or stop by their headquarters on the Norfolk
waterfront with a donation. That was several years ago and, unless they change
their philosophy, will not happen again. I refuse to support an organization
that places their quest for power ahead of their stated goal, that of helping
animals.
Now don’t get me wrong, even as I supported PETA, I did not fully support
their militant stances against the fur and the meat industries, but I did feel
their assistance of animals to be worthy of support. After all, there is no
group, business or charitable, whose functions and purposes I fully approve of.
PETA’s “Got Beer” campaign was funny, off-base, but still imaginative.
Many felt they had gone too far with that. What did bother me was the apparent
waste of money that could have gone toward bettering the lives of animals, or
investigating true animal abuse. Milking cows is not, in my opinion, abuse.
The most recent PETA fiasco is the recent lawsuit PETA filed against the
Executive Director of the Portsmouth Animal Shelter, Keith Jeter. As a result of
a PETA investigation, Jeter was charged with various counts of animal cruelty
and failure to provide adequate treatment to animals in his care. There were 32
counts in all. Disturbing to me is that neither the Portsmouth police nor the
Commonwealth Attorney’s office saw fit to investigate, even minimally, the
charges on their own before taking the matter to court. They just took PETA’s
word. Fortunately, a Portsmouth judge found Jeter not guilty of any of the
charges.
Let’s look at the logic of this move by PETA, supposedly an organization that
has the goal of helping animals. The case cost them money in investigation,
legal fees and administrative costs; the case cost the Portsmouth Animal Shelter
in legal fees to defend itself and Executive Director Jeter. According to one
newspaper account, the shelter’s annual budget is only $162,000, hardly enough
to do their jobs, and now their funds have been further cut by a substantial
legal fee.
Wouldn’t it have been better for PETA to recognize that the shelter’s
problem was not acting neglectful towards animals, but not having enough funding
to adequately care for animals? PETA could have accomplished so much more had
they provided their supposed expertise in helping the shelter improve itself;
they could have donated funds to help bring the shelter up to acceptable
standards of care for its charges. Cooperation between PETA and Jeter’s staff
could have benefited all, the shelter, PETA, the community and the animals which
PETA purports to love and assist. My recommendation to PETA is to find more
cooperative ways to work with people and other animal support organizations.
Until PETA becomes more cooperative and less aggressively obstinate in their
perceived wars against perceived abusers, I will not support them. I also urge
the rest of you Hampton Roads citizens to take a closer look at PETA before
providing them with funds that may well go to harm rather than help animals.
|
