Sunday, February 26, 2012

What defines "Ethical"?

Who couldn't adopt that face?
I'm a big fan of charities (clearly) and a big fan of animals, so it's easy to surmise that I'm a big fan of animal charities. There's one that usually gets me more angry than rallied and that's PETA (People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals). Maybe it's my Midwest sensibilities that say that prevent me from thinking it's more effective to create a big stink than effective, methodical work towards a goal by negotiating (when possible). But if you like PETA, you love PETA and I'm totally fine with that. I just don't like or love them. Frankly, I could just be ignorant. Other than advocating against cruelty, I am not aware of any major claims of success. When I think of the organisation I worked for, I could name bills locally and nationally, research that lead to great discoveries, etc. that lead to success. Again I could just not be aware enough and I accept that.

Our adopted buddy: Khubla
What does seem shocking to me, though, are current claims that 95 percent of the animals surrendered to the PETA headquarters were euthanized last year. I can accept that most animals that are turned into shelters are not in the best of shape to begin with. I was initially shocked at this number (as I think the article wanted me to be), and then Chef said "yeah, but how many pets are euthanized at all shelters each year?". Good question, and the answer is not easy to find, but rough estimates by the American Human Society are 64 percent. That's quite a difference. 

So, why is there a big difference? I have no idea. If you do know, let me know. I'd be curious to hear it. Until then, I'll continue supporting the ASPCA, despite the horrible Sarah McLachlan commercials.

No comments:


Related Posts Plugin for WordPress, Blogger...