PETA is at it again. They are staging protests against McDonald’s over the treatment of chickens that go into the restaurant’s food. I am okay with PETA protesting (even if I am not in full agreement), but I am not okay with the way PETA is going about it.
Watch this video that discusses PETA’s methods:
http://cosmos.bcst.yahoo.com/up/player/popup/?rn=3906861&cl=15002947&ch=4226713&src=news
In the video, 11 year-old Elijah is given an “Unhappy Meal” by PETA that has a Ronald McDonald on the outside of the packaging wielding a knife and holding a bloody chicken. The packaging disturbed Elijah so much that he no longer eats chicken. His mother is upset because PETA gave the meal to her little boy without her permission.
When asked about this, the PETA spokesperson replies that they are “trying to get the word out to children so they can make informed decisions.”
What? Since when is it PETA’s job to raise your child? PETA has no right to try to play parent. If they have anything to protest, let them speak to parents and adults. They have no right to frighten and bully little children into adopting their radical views! Next time you see PETA be sure to keep your children away. Who knows what they may hand your child?
Theologically Speaking 
They’ve been showing the violence of poor treatment to animals to a lot of people lately. Last Christmas, they had many flash games obviously built towards children that had other violent things.
The fact is, PETA’s right. Everyone else is having a say in what your children get fed via TV and so forth. So why don’t *they* get the word out?
I remember last Saturday, Laura and I saw a public service announcement essentially saying to be nice to gay people. I agree that we should be nice to homosexuals (and others), but the undertones of the message was clearly: “Children, being gay is okay.” And that is a message that is not supported by most Americans (for better or for worse — I let the reader decide).
PETA’s just excericing their rights and I think they’re within them. It’s in our rights to protect our children from them, too. And I think I’ll do just that.
I don’t see what’s wrong with Peta doing this. It would have been wrong if they had handed it out to a vegetarian child who had no need to see this.
The parents are the ones to blame for the so called trauma: if you can’t show to your kid how a food is made without traumatising him, then you shouldn’t be feeding it to your child.
And I am pretty sure that Peta did not show the slaughter of chickens to children, just a picture of Ronald with a dead chicken? But that’s what the parent was feeding his child, a dead piece of chicken. You would have prefered a smiling chicken or happy smiling cows? Children love animals they would feel absolutely horrified and betrayed if they realised what we are feeding them. They are so many veggie options out there, often healthier, so well absolutely nothing bad to me.
Lydia:
Sorry, but I think you are absolutely wrong. According to the interview, PETA lured this boy over to them without his parents being aware and gave him their “meal”. They had no idea if the boy was a vegetarian or not. (As if that even matters in this situation.)
It is not up to PETA (or anyone else) to “educate” children without the consent of parents on any topic!
As has already been mentioned on this blog, PETA does not care about the impact of their propaganda on the lives of these children. All they care is that their methods cause a stir so that it gains them some extra publicity. It is all about shock value. The only problem is, the shock is also teaching people how radical PETA really is. PETA’s methods will be far more effective in pushing people away than bringing in supporters.