Peta barbecue dog stunt sickens public

Caption: Sure, the public are really going to get on side with people who think this is perfectly reasonable.

Virtue-signalling may be a recent term, but the act is nothing new. The Gospels relate Jesus? condemnatory observations of the hypocritical actions of those who make a public performance of their assumed virtue. Jesus would be excoriating about groups like Peta. This is, after all, the ‘animal rights group’ which operated an industrial-scale pet-killing facility at its headquarters.

Modern activism is more about attention-seeking exhibitionism than action. Feminists expose their sagging flesh to anyone who can bear to look. Snowflake leftists gather to scream helplessly at the sky.

Peta says, ?hold my beer?. Quote:

Animal activist group Peta has caused outrage after barbecuing a fake dog in the street – leaving kids “visibly upset”.

Shoppers and their children were traumatised by the realistic bloody prop being grilled whole at a shopping centre in Sydney.

Peta activists set up the sick stunt with a banner that read: ?If You Wouldn?t Eat a Dog, Why Eat a Lamb? Go Vegan!?

The group’s aim was to raise awareness for the idea that dogs are ?no different to lamb, cows or chicken?. End of quote.

But they are. Peta?s stunt was not only sickening, but philosophically nonsensical. Quote:

Some outraged onlookers took to Twitter to express their disgust in PETA’s shocking stunt?[one] wrote: “That supposed protest in Sydney is more inhumane than any slaughtering of animals. Keep them out of public places. It should be classed as public nuisance!

“Kids around? That is further reason to stop this! Exposing them to this??? Cruel.”?While another added: “If you care about people stop showing them a very life like dog being barbecued. No one needs to see that.

“And before you say “a dog is no different from a lamb” maybe to you guys they aren’t different but to kids walking by they are very different.”

However, Peta?s Emily Rice told the demonstration was ?thought-provoking?. End of quote.

Well, it certainly provokes thought about whether Peta really believe their own bullshit, or if they?re just freaks after attention. Quote:

The organisation said in a statement: “The idea of barbecuing dogs rightly causes outrage amongst Australians.

“Meanwhile, millions of other equally sensitive and intelligent animals are forced to endure horrific suffering when they’re bred, raised and killed for the meat industry. End of quote.


This is the false equivalency that?s at the core of Peta?s stupid argument.

Dogs, sheep, cows and chickens are not ?equally sensitive and intelligent?. Not only is there a mountain of scientific evidence, anyone who?s ever paid much attention will realise that dogs are uniquely psychologically and emotionally akin to humans. There?s a reason dogs and humans have formed such an effortless symbiotic bond: we deeply understand each other, in a way that cows and sheep just cannot. As for chickens: any animal that can survive perfectly well without its head is clearly not that high on the evolutionary ladder.

Nor do food animals necessarily ?endure horrific suffering?. Livestock in places like Australia actually live a pretty good life: free-range for almost the entirety of their lives. The holding pens and slaughterhouses that animal activists like to try and shock people with are something they only experience, briefly, at the very end of their lives.

Certainly there is every reason to try and minimise any suffering in food production. Sensible animal rights activists like Temple Grandin actually work with industry, who are often quite responsive to practical suggestions for change.

To argue that all animals are the same is just stupid. As one Twitter user responded to Peta?s stunt: ?You wouldn?t eat a pine cone, so why eat a lamb??