A Response to Penn & Teller
regarding PETA

This article is a response I sent to an email that was forwarded to me with a copy of an article that covered Penn & Teller's anti-PETA comedy special that aired on Showtime in March 2004. My responses follow the article (in italics).

The article:

Taking the bull by the ... horns?
by Tom Jicha
Copyright (c) 2004, South Florida Sun-Sentinel

> March 28, 2004 >

> America has a reputation for cynicism that is undeserved: It's
> amazing how much nonsense we accept unquestioningly. The wildly
> inventive Penn & Teller prefer a more vulgar term for nonsense.
> They call it Bull----! They've made it the title of their
> Showtime series, which on Thursday launches its second season of
> debunking ... nonsense.

Penn and Teller are comedians, that means they make a living through humorous and ridiculous exaggeration. Hardly the source for objective information, but I'm sure the program is funny and entertaining.

> PETA's mission statement is that it doesn't want animals to be
> killed, hurt, exploited or embarrassed. These are laudable goals
> within reason, which PETA rarely is. If PETA had its way, Penn
> notes, everyone would have to become vegans; shoes would be made
> of something other than leather; rodeos and circuses would be
> eliminated, as would horse and dog racing. Fishing wouldn't be
> allowed, zoos would be closed and harvesting honey would end,
> because this is an exploitation of bees.

PETA is a consciousness raising group, not an imperialistic regime. They offer education about the reality of animal cruelty in all its forms and deal directly with animal cruelty cases. Everything listed above are instances of animal exploitation. Certainly it is the hope of all those who care about the welfare of animals that such abuse ceases.

> Any medical research involving animals, even if it meant cures
> for AIDS and cancer, would cease. PETA would not even approve of
> guide dogs for the blind, again an exploitation of animals in its
> warped thinking. Despite the first three letters of its name,
> there would be no pets, because this amounts to slavery,
> according to Ingrid Newkirk, PETA's founder and president.

In order to know "PETA's perspective," one would have to read their official documentation and literature. No one person's opinion or side comment taken out of context amounts to "PETA's perspective." Nowhere in PETA's literature does it state that pet ownership is slavery. Instead, PETA encourages pet owners to be loving in all their literature.

The PETA staff I know of own and love pets. Ingrid Newkirk also takes care of cats who live with her at her office and wrote a book for cat owners about cat care...so it can hardly be said that all pet ownership amounts to slavery from "PETA's" perspective.

> The latter contention is one of the reasons for the program, Penn
> explains. Many pet owners are donors to PETA, unaware of its
> extremist agenda.

Maybe someone should tell that to all the PETA staff who have pets.

> They are also oblivious to the fact that the money they think
> they are donating toward the welfare of animals goes to support
> arson and bombing of buildings and other terrorist acts,
> according to Penn. These allegations are documented through tax
> returns and admissions from PETA officials and a confessed felon
> whose activities have been underwritten by the group.

What is documented in PETA's tax returns, to be exact, is that one time they gave a rather small donation ($1500) to an E.L.F. member for a very specific purpose of assisting him with his legal defense over "free speech matters." This is not donating money that "goes" to "arson, bombing, or terrorist acts."

As Newkirk writes: "When we gave $1,500 to the Earth Liberation Front press office, it was for help with legal bills for one good animal protectionist who we felt was being harassed and has never been charged with anything at all."

To spin such a donation as "supporting arson" is simply false, if not slanderous.

> Penn displays PETA ads that show emaciated Holocaust victims and
> mass graves next to similar images of animals. PETA officials
> vehemently argue there is no difference.

Abuse is abuse. In our society we acknowledge this when we prosecute people for "animal abuse" and establish laws against it. What's wrong is wrong. The same mentality that encourages violence and exploitation of animals encourages it in humans...that's just one reason why statistically those who abuse animals will not stop there but will go on to abuse humans. Pointing out this fact is extremely important if we ever hope to end abuse and violence against people and animals alike.

> Rocker Ted Nugent, an outspoken advocate of hunting and an avowed
> opponent of PETA, says his children's lives have been threatened
> by people who say they are affiliated with PETA.

PETA has over 750,000 people who are affiliated with it in some way. Blaming PETA as an organization for something one or two people did would be like claiming that Canada is a terrorist country because a few of its citizens are terrorists.

> The head of the Los Angeles animal shelter, which boasts of
> rescuing 63,000 animals a year, has also been targeted. Jerry
> Greenwalt says his house and car have been vandalized by people
> representing themselves as being from PETA;

Ditto to what I said above.

>his wife had a heart
> attack after one of these incidents, he adds.

Hmmm...but perhaps the heart attack had something to do with all the meat she eats? Human health is a primary concern to animal rights activists including PETA and is one of the primary reasons listed for eating a vegan diet. Heart disease is killing us and ingesting animal products is the primary culprit.

> Penn derides PETA's aspiration to unconditionally liberate these
> animals. With freedom comes responsibilities, he says. The
> purpose of liberation would be defeated because there would have
> to be animal jails for creatures that kill other creatures, as
> they inevitably would, as well as lesser offenses, such as
> defecating in the street.

Yep, that's right, PETA is going to create animals jails and give fines to animals for defecating in the street. Really. Seriously. (It's called comedy for a reason folks.)

> Rodney Coronado, who has received at least $42,500 in support
> from PETA, according to tax returns, is seen showing college
> students how to make a Molotov cocktail. Coronado has admitted to
> bombing a Michigan State research laboratory and pleaded guilty
> to six other acts of arson, Penn says.

Yes, according to reports, PETA gave money, again, for legal fees to someone who had been charged with a crime for his involvement in animal rights. Since when did people in this country not deserve a fair trial? Everyone has that right last I checked. People charged with crimes deserve a fair trial and the right to an attorney...unless we are no longer a democratic nation.

Hmmm...apparently PETA does care about people and human rights.

"I was deeply shocked by the degree of violence that's linked to
> PETA. I knew that they cared more about anthropomorphizing rats
> than they did about the welfare of humanity, but I didn't know
> the degree to which they bombed buildings."

Again, a false statement. No one who is employed by PETA has ever claimed to bomb a building or been convicted of such.

> In all likelihood, neither do many Americans who write checks to
> PETA, thinking they are supporting a group like more mainstream
> and responsible animal welfare organizations such as the ASPCA
> and the Humane Society. .

Yes, and the ASPCA and Humane Society are worthy organizations. However, they don't do as much as PETA does to help animals in our nation.

People and organizations only get ridiculed when they are successful. No one ridicules those doing little or nothing to make a real difference. PETA is a target because they are not afraid to go after big billion dollar industries and corporations. While these corporations constantly sue PETA, PETA has successfully defended itself legally every time.

Apparently PETA is more concerned about helping animals than in ensuring they make money and maintaining a rosy reputation.

PETA certainly has my vote of confidence.

Home