PETA’s Death Wish: When fried chicken becomes Auschwitz
By Rachel K. Ayerst | July 29, 2004
According to the organization, humans eating animals is the moral equivalent of Nazis murdering Jews in concentration camps.
If People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals is correct, then millions of American families are sitting down for dinner each night to a “Holocaust” on their plates. According to the organization, humans eating animals is the moral equivalent of Nazis murdering Jews in concentration camps. This advertising campaign, which is just one of many tasteless stunts staged by PETA in the last few years, proves that the animal rights group can no longer be taken seriously by reasonable Americans.
Founded in 1980, PETA has as its operating principle “that animals are not ours to eat, wear, experiment on, or use for entertainment.” But they have moved far beyond educating responsible citizens about animal cruelty. By adopting a policy of fear mongering in order to gain some easy attention, PETA has finally succeeded in discrediting itself.
The “Holocaust on Your Plate” campaign, which began in February 2003, brought large-scale posters to cities and college campuses across the nation. The posters compare the slaughter of animals to the slaughter of Jews by Hitler’s Nazi thugs. The disturbing billboards juxtapose graphic images of the lifeless bodies of concentration camp victims with the corpses of various farm animals. According to PETA, the United States’ invention of the slaughterhouse has provoked as much, if not more, horror in the world as the gas chamber did under the Nazis. By equating human life with the lives of animals, PETA has not only trivialized the suffering of Holocaust victims, but offended the moral sensibilities of millions of Americans who realize that the life of a rat is not equal to the life of a human being.
If PETA’s perverse moral equivalence isn’t enough to completely marginalize it, decent Americans should be outraged at its deliberate attempts to indoctrinate children with frightening propaganda. In recent months, PETA has begun targeting KFC restaurants for cruelty to chickens. In order to raise awareness for their cause, members of PETA have begun distributing “buckets of blood” to children outside KFC restaurants. By specifically targeting children with these buckets, which include fake bones, bloodied feathers and a rubber chicken, PETA has sunk to an all-time low. In a special section of a PETA-sponsored Web site aimed at elementary school-aged children, the most basic fears of children are exploited with propaganda like “chickens on Colonel Sanders’ farms never get to be loved by their moms. These birds’ lives are awful and scary even before they are killed and cut up for food.”
Contrary to popular belief, PETA does not use the bulk of its operating budget to fight animal cruelty. Rather, it puts the money toward offensive ideological campaigns designed to remake American society. According to the Center for Consumer Freedom, a Washington-based coalition of consumers, food companies and restaurants, less than one percent of PETA’s total budget is dedicated to actually “helping animals.” They report that in 1999 alone PETA “euthanized more than 1,300 cats and dogs?preferring to spend its money on cheap publicity stunts and criminal defense rather than finding the animals suitable homes.”
Unfortunately, indecent advertising campaigns and misspent funds are not the only serious problems facing PETA. In 2001, PETA made donations to the Earth Liberation Front. ELF has been responsible for a number of arsons and other incidents of eco-terrorism around the country, provoking the FBI to add it to its list of domestic terrorist organizations. As a charitable organization that receives millions of dollars in annual donations from Americans, PETA’s tax-exempt status depends on its ability to abide by the law.
The Center for Consumer Freedom has undertaken a massive campaign to expose PETA’s radicalism. It has begun a petition against PETA that highlights the group’s involvement with criminal organizations and calls on the government to revoke PETA’s tax-exempt status immediately. With more than 35,000 signatures, it appears that the Center for Consumer Freedom is having a noticeable impact on Americans.
In addition to the petition, the Center for Consumer Freedom has also begun an awareness campaign designed to educate Americans about PETA’s twisted morality. PETA opposes any organization that uses animals for medical testing, and has recently directed its membership to boycott such organizations as the Pediatric AIDS Foundation and the Susan G. Komen Breast Cancer Foundation. Some of the Center for Consumer Freedom’s advertisements, which have been strategically placed in the Capital District’s Metro system for maximum exposure, quote PETA’s President Ingrid Newkirk as saying “even if animal research resulted in a cure for AIDS we’d be against it.” This type of statement reveals just how out of touch PETA has become.
PETA’s radicalism, however, appears to be catching up with it. With groups like the Center for Consumer Freedom mounting a sweeping counter-offensive, it seems only a matter of time before Americans become fully aware of PETA’s activities, and as a result, cease making donations to the organization. In the most ironic of endings, perhaps it’s now PETA’s goose that may be cooked.
Guest columns do not necessarily reflect the views of Accuracy in Media or its staff.
