News: PETA Files Suit Against SeaWorld

[accelerate]

I'm confused... Is PETA trying to sue on behalf of whales?

 

This can't be legal, can it? Maybe slander, even!

[chadster]

^Thats the publicity stunt they are trying to pull, yes.

[DallasAlvey]

I'm no history buff but I'm pretty sure the the Bill of Rights doesn't say "all men/whales are created equal." On a side note I find it kind've weird that PETA likes Seaworld on Facebook.

[coastersrule85]

I'm not sure why everyone is so upset. I love whales and dolphins as much as the next guy, especially with a little drawn butter and French fries. But, I'm sure they'd taste just as good in a PETA or would even make a heck of a hogie for that matter.

[BeemerBoy]

PETA thanks you all for continuing to give them a voice in the world.

[Jojo19799]

I mentioned this at work yesterday, and a co-worker says "Well, I'll be expecting them to knock on my door and file a lawsuit on behalf of the porterhouse steak I had for dinner last night which BTW was mighty delicious".

 

I know that cruelty towards animals is no laughing matter, but PETA takes it too far. I bet half of their members like a good porterhouse steak now and then.

[crazywolf88]

If this is about giving constitutional rights to animals, would it be a crime to kill them for food?

[jjune4991]

I'm not sure why everyone is so upset. I love whales and dolphins as much as the next guy, especially with a little drawn butter and French fries. But, I'm sure they'd taste just as good in a PETA or would even make a heck of a hogie for that matter.

 

Yes.

[coasterbill]

Everyone is having a field day with this.

The Colbert Report

 

"How many slaves get to hang out all day at a waterpark?"

[deathbydinn]

 

Seems like an accurate representation of the situation.

[TJ27]

^

Words can not describe how stupid this case is.

[Schotcher]

What about those poor animatronic hippos? :o They have rights too!

[Sir Clinksalot]

At it's core, I think an organization like PETA could do a hell of a lot of good for the world in protecting animals.

 

At it's execution, they end up doing more harm than good because of things like this.

[AllenA07]

At it's core, I think an organization like PETA could do a hell of a lot of good for the world in protecting animals.

 

At it's execution, they end up doing more harm than good because of things like this.

 

Frankly I think PETA, in their own minds, have done a good achieving their own personal ends. Despite how we all feel about it they have people talking which in their minds is the first step. I can promise you that their lawyers are aware that this suit is going nowhere. The lawyers don't have standing to bring the suit, if I was the attorney for Sea World I could have the paperwork done to dismiss this case done in an hour. PETA's point here was never to win the suit, their point was to file a frivolous suit that would grab as much attention in the media as possible. They've done just that. They have people talking about this suit and among all of the "PETA is stupid" talk, there has been a small amount of discussion about whether there is any actual merit to this.

 

Frankly I hate all suits like this because in the end it always ends up being the lawyers fault that crap like this sees the light of day.

[osm]

I think this thread merits Robb pulling out his "Jesus facepalm" photo.

[CoasterBeagle]

Animals are considered property (sad but true). If they win it would open a can of worms. PETA always thinks short term.

[gisco]

People Eating Tasty Animals is what I think about every time I see PETA!

 

BUt really, 5 pages of posts about this topic and I think they have achieved their goal of publicity.

[dragonskeep]

I know we say that all publicity is good, but it isn't. It would be easy to ignore something so stupid but judges have let known child molesters off. All it takes is one whacked out judge and Seaworld has a very large problem. Ignoring stuff like this is why we have such a mess in the legal system. I think average Americans can't be reminded enough about folks like PETA.

[sam25va]

Seriously? PETA kills more animals then anyone!

[CoasterBeagle]

Another thing is that I think that African Americans should be offended by what amendment PETA is using. If anybody remembers the time period, African Americans were considered animals/property back then. I feel offended PETA thinks they even can use this.

 

As a refresher to the 13th amendment:

 

 

Amendment XIII in the National Archives

The Thirteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution officially abolished and continues to prohibit slavery and involuntary servitude, except as punishment for a crime. It was passed by the Senate on April 8, 1864, passed by the House on January 31, 1865, and adopted on December 6, 1865. On December 18, Secretary of State William H. Seward, in a proclamation, declared it to have been adopted. It was the first of the Reconstruction Amendments.

President Lincoln was concerned that the Emancipation Proclamation, which outlawed slavery in the ten Confederate states still in rebellion in 1863, would be seen as a temporary war measure, since it was based on his war powers and did not abolish slavery in the border states or any other areas where slavery was still technically legal.

[crazywolf88]

As a refresher to the 13th amendment:

 

 

Amendment XIII in the National Archives

The Thirteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution officially abolished and continues to prohibit slavery and involuntary servitude, except as punishment for a crime. It was passed by the Senate on April 8, 1864, passed by the House on January 31, 1865, and adopted on December 6, 1865. On December 18, Secretary of State William H. Seward, in a proclamation, declared it to have been adopted. It was the first of the Reconstruction Amendments.

President Lincoln was concerned that the Emancipation Proclamation, which outlawed slavery in the ten Confederate states still in rebellion in 1863, would be seen as a temporary war measure, since it was based on his war powers and did not abolish slavery in the border states or any other areas where slavery was still technically legal.

Tilikum killed a trainer, good enough for me.

[OISU8P]

Another thing is that I think that African Americans should be offended by what amendment PETA is using. If anybody remembers the time period, African Americans were considered animals/property back then. I feel offended PETA thinks they even can use this.

 

 

I personally do not remember the time period. However, I am part Irish and had relatives that also had history of that time period. Wonder why this never gets mentioned or referenced in these discussions (in whole, not this site).

 

http://www.africaresource.com/rasta/sesostris-the-great-the-egyptian-hercules/the-irish-slave-trade-forgotten-white-slaves/

[CoasterBeagle]

As a refresher to the 13th amendment:

 

 

Amendment XIII in the National Archives

The Thirteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution officially abolished and continues to prohibit slavery and involuntary servitude, except as punishment for a crime. It was passed by the Senate on April 8, 1864, passed by the House on January 31, 1865, and adopted on December 6, 1865. On December 18, Secretary of State William H. Seward, in a proclamation, declared it to have been adopted. It was the first of the Reconstruction Amendments.

President Lincoln was concerned that the Emancipation Proclamation, which outlawed slavery in the ten Confederate states still in rebellion in 1863, would be seen as a temporary war measure, since it was based on his war powers and did not abolish slavery in the border states or any other areas where slavery was still technically legal.

Tilikum killed a trainer, good enough for me.

 

Ok..? But that has nothing to do with slavery. It is a wild animal but so is everything even dogs an us to an extent. They aren't in cages when they are not doing shows. They have super huge tanks that I forget specific dimensions to. They made it deep enough for it to replicate the open ocean.

What they should do is put that whale down because it's actually killed three trainers. It's what we would do to a dog.

[Commando]

 

PETA has to be one of the most annoying organiztions in the world. They are really just a bunch of attention whores.

[David H]

Am I the only one here who actually has given any thought to PETA's point here? Sure, PETA always takes their views to the extreme, and cases like this are obviously designed to get free publicity. And I don't agree with at least half, if not much more, of what they do and say. But are they automatically wrong, just because they're fanatics? And, as fanatics who take their issues to the extreme, they invite ridicule, as seen in this thread. But do they ever actually have a valid point, among all of their theatrics?

 

No, obviously, orcas aren't the same as human beings. But if they are actually as intelligent and aware as at least a young human child -- and evidence is pointing to that being the case -- do we actually have the right to capture them, keep them in small tanks and then force them to do tricks for our amusement and the parks' profit?

 

I'm hardly an animal rights activist. I eat meat and love steak. I work in a seafood restaurant and feed dozens of dead animals to people each day. I have a ton of fish as pets in my house. (Yes, those two last statements coexist in an interesting irony.) I enjoy zoos and aquariums and marine life parks. And yes, I watch the orca and dolphin shows and the rest. But I also sometimes ask myself if what we do and if what *I* do is actually right.

 

And despite my always enjoying Sea World parks (I visited the San Antonio park this year, and for many years had a season pass to the Orlando park, despite living in Boston), I do ask sometimes myself if everything they're doing is right. The regular fish exhibits are obviously fine. Trust me on this one. As a fish owner, I can tell you that fish are stupid as hell! But dolphins and orcas are not.

 

I mean it's one thing when parks like Sea World rescue injured manatees and house them and take care of them. That's obviously a good thing. And there's no questioning that zoos, aquariums and marine life parks bring attention to and respect for wildlife.

 

But did that intelligent dolphin who was captured from its home and taken away with dozens of its family and others, many of whom died from fright and their poor conditions in captivity, agree to be an ambassador for the animal kingdom? And while Sea World parks (unlike many marine parks in other countries, especially in Asia) don't torture the animals to make them do tricks, should intelligent animals actually have to literally jump through hoops to get fed? But at the same time, I admit that I enjoy watching those shows. And by doing so, I'm contributing (both financially and with my presence) to the treatment of those animals. And I try to assuage my mixed feelings of potential guilt by buying a few dead fish and feeding them to the dolphins and sea lions. It's probably a big part of why I overfeed my own fish, too, convincing myself that my fish (and the sea lions and dolphins) are better off and happier because of my presence.

 

Do people out here actually think that it's wrong to sometimes ask ourselves these questions?

 

Do we, as human beings, automatically have the right to do anything to any animal on the planet -- no matter how intelligent? Or should there be some limits? And if so, how do we define those limits, if not by asking these kinds of questions in public forums?

 

Or is this kind of discussion unwanted, in favor of funny, snarky comments?