PETA Defends Pro-Life

Before you get all upset or worried, this isn't quite what some of you may think.

Yes, PETA is on the side of a pro-life activist in this instance, but it's in a very specific court case. Does anyone recall the series of undercover sting videos where Planned Parenthood higher-ups were caught under embarrassing circumstances making crass statements about the sales of fetal body parts for money? I'm sure people do because they caused quite the splash here and in other places.

PPP was very upset about them and ended up suing the journalist David Daleiden for making the videos. The district court awarded PPP $15.8 million in damages. Daleiden has appealed to the 9th Circuit, and this is where PETA and other animals' rights groups have piled on.

You see, undercover sting videos like the ones Daleiden used are also very important to the animal rights cause.

PETA’s involvement may seem surprising, but the animal-rights groups rightly warn that the district court’s $15.8 million ruling against Daleiden endangers the freedom of speech. Animal-rights groups have long opposed agricultural-gag (or “ag-gag”) laws protecting the agriculture industry from investigative reporting aimed at exposing animal mistreatment. If Planned Parenthood can silence Daleiden, agriculture companies can silence PETA, or so the argument goes.

I'm sure we're all familiar with these videos. Vegans love to post them as do those opposed to factory farming. They're the ones showing practices and slaughterhouses at their very worst.

For those of you wanting to condemn Daleiden, ask yourself how what he did was any different.

If you think animal rights activists are valuable for exposing cruelty and the things they do are important, a ruling against Daleiden that stands jeopardizes their ability to continue to covertly film and expose those practices. What Daleiden did was no different. He only did it to another industry, one you might approve of politically.

“The use of deception for undercover investigative reporting on matters of public concern is constitutionally protected speech. The U.S. Supreme Court has rejected the view that there is an exception to the First Amendment for ‘false statements.’ But the district court in this case ignored free speech principles and approved a near categorical common law right to punish persons who engage in deception-based investigations,” PETA and the other organizations warned in their amicus brief.

“If such a view stands, civil claimants leveraging misapplied generally applicable laws through litigation will accomplish exactly what this Court has said cannot be done through industry-specific legislation like agricultural-gag (ag-gag) statutes: namely, to quash investigative reporting speaking on matters of the highest public concern,” the organizations argued.

And as you can see, this is exactly what the amicus brief from PETA and the other animal rights groups argues. Squash free speech here, and it is in danger of being squashed for all whatever you think of the use of it in this one case. Consider this one hard whatever your personal feelings on abortions and PPP are because if PETA and other generally far left groups can figure out the ramifications of this one, you ought to be able to as well.

a reply to: ketsuko

And as you can see, this is exactly what the amicus brief from PETA and the other animal rights groups argues. Squash free speech here, and it is in danger of being squashed for all whatever you think of the use of it in this one case. Consider this one hard whatever your personal feelings on abortions and PPP are because if PETA and other generally far left groups can figure out the ramifications of this one, you ought to be able to as well.

Repeated for TRUTH and because it cannot be said enough or too much.

While in general, yes, peta is useful in instances of animal abuse.

But I know, sometimes, they take things too far. They wanted a local farmer shut down here, after someone videoed one of the "worker" kicking calves.
The farmer and other workers did not condone this behavior. The guy was fired immediately. But they damn near ruined the farmer over it.

But I can understand why they would join the cause. You would think the media would as well, for back when they actually did investigative journalism.

a reply to: chiefsmom

Don't get me started on ruining honest folks in the name of animal rights.

The rabbit growers and breeders have a thing or two to say. Plenty of them have been ruined by people who want to see rabbits treated only as pets and not as legitimate stock animals. There was a scene in Colorado, I think, where kids' 4-H projects were being confiscated because not treating rabbits as house pets was "cruel", but how many 4-H kids are raising rabbits to show and abusing them?

a reply to: ketsuko

The use of social media video to vilify someone or misrepresent facts is not a good thing.

The concept that one may lie with a social media post or video seems to elude some people.

But a video or other social media post can also be evidential. The difference is in the fact-checking and a skeptical attitude to whatever is being presented.

a reply to: chr0naut

In this particular case, Planned Parenthood admitted there was nothing untrue about the videos in question. They admitted it under oath in court.

originally posted by: ketsuko
a reply to: chiefsmom

Don't get me started on ruining honest folks in the name of animal rights.

The rabbit growers and breeders have a thing or two to say. Plenty of them have been ruined by people who want to see rabbits treated only as pets and not as legitimate stock animals. There was a scene in Colorado, I think, where kids' 4-H projects were being confiscated because not treating rabbits as house pets was "cruel", but how many 4-H kids are raising rabbits to show and abusing them?

Yup. I'm a rabbit breeder and was a 4H rabbit leader. We learn to work around them for the most part but it sure hampers the industry. Even putting a business card out at a show became a no no when the phone number/email is used to out the breeders within the animal rights groups and harass them. If these people think we put our heart. soul, every spare penny and minute into these animals to then abuse them, they are nuts. We had to teach the 4H kids how to respond to the animal rights people's bullying questions and comments with respect and education but I know some were gutted at times.