PETA Wants a Memorial to Dead Fish

An Irvine, California woman representing PETA wrote a letter to Irvine city officials asking them to erect a sign at an intersection that memorializes the death of about 1,600 pounds of saltwater bass who met their demise in a vehicle crash a couple weeks ago. A truck was transporting the live fish to a market while the bass were being kept alive by several tanks of oxygen. After the collision, which involved two other cars, the fish and oxygen tanks spilled out all over the intersection, and the fish quickly suffocated. The PETA representative wants the sign to read:  “In memory of hundreds of fish who suffered and died at this spot.”

In her letter, she argues that even though these memorial signs are usually reserved for humans, these fish deserve one because they’re people too:

“Research tells us that fish use tools, tell time, sing, and have impressive long-term memories and complex social structures, yet fish used for food are routinely crushed, impaled, cut open, and gutted, all while still conscious. Sparing them from being tossed from a speeding truck and slowly dying from injuries and suffocation seems the least that we can do.”

 These PETA people pretend like they are concerned for animals. They claim they want animals to receive “ethical treatment.” Then why does PETA “euthanize” 95 percent of the animals that they take in? Since 1998, PETA has slaughtered over 27,000 animals. Last year alone, PETA took in 1,911 cats and dogs but only found homes for 24 of them. They killed 84 percent of the animals they took in within the first 24 hours of receiving them.

Plush with a $36 million annual budget and the backing of celebrities and Hollywood types, PETA maintains that they have to euthanize these animals because of their age and aggressive natures. They claim they’re “unadoptable.” So, the vast majority of them are slaughtered.

PETA doesn’t even have a sufficient number of animal enclosures to house the number of animals they reportedly take in. They don’t even really try to take care of these “poor” and “abused” animals. They’re just a money-making venture that makes its money by playing on people’s emotions.

Their arguments for killing the majority of animals they take in are the same as those who support abortion. To those on the left, abortion is an “act of love” because it prevents that baby from growing up in this cold, harsh, and dangerous world. PETA is simply putting these poor animals out of their misery.

I love animals. That is, I love the way they taste. Especially grass-fed beef and the chickens we get from our farmer friend. Nothing like it in the grocery stores. But, at the same time, I think we should treat our animals ethically. The Proverbs tell us that the righteous man has regard for the life of his animal, and there is an Old Testament case law that required farmers not to muzzle an ox while it was threshing. Yes, we should eat them, but while they’re alive, we should take good care of them. Feeding cows corn and soy (supplemented with paper to help fatten them up), antibiotics, and growth hormones while they’re locked up in cages is mistreating the cows. Cows are supposed to graze on grass outside, free of antibiotics and hormones that make them grow faster. Their digestive systems weren’t designed to digest corn, and consequently, they get sick, and their guts get filled with e. coli. But PETA doesn’t really care about those things. They care about one thing in particular:  making money.