Animal Rights Movement Gone Wrong: Peta Oversteps Its Bounds

Fancy yourself sitting in the confines of a fast-food restaurant. You are about to tuck yourself in on a nice plate of fried chicken: Before you have barely lay your hands on that succulent piece of chicken drumstick, police officers descend upon you, handcuffing you and charging you with a charge of animal manslaughter. Seizing the plate of chicken as evidence, they read out your rights, and as any good natured citizen will do, you ask, what have you done wrong?

Sounds a tat too far-fetched? Well, if Ingrid Newkirk and her fellow animal activists from PETA had their way, they would do just that: enforcing a strict code of vegan morals onto a largely meat-eating population of homo-sapiens.

PETA'S DISTORTED SENSE OF COMPASSION: COMPARING CHICKENS IN SLAUGHTERHOUSES TO JEWS IN GULAG CAMPS

PETA's campaigns against alleged animal abuses have often been notorious for shocking the senses of the general public. From mock displays of fake blood to naked country runs, PETA has made strenuous, innovative efforts to portray animals as the human equivalent.

In 2003, PETA's mad-capped actions reached a new zenith, when it held an exhibition, titled : "Holocaust on A Plate". By juxtaposing images of concentration victims of the Nazi holocaust with batteries of chickens in chicken farms and pig carcasses strewn around carelessly with those of dead concentration prisoners, PETA attempted to thug the heart-strings of the mainstream meat eater. By insinuating that the consumer is somehow culpable and responsible for the slaughters in chicken farms, the consumer becomes an accomplice in the perceived "holocaust".

As callous as these pictures may be, Ingrid Newkirk, chief honcho of PETA, best sums up PETA's position with this remark: "Six million Jews died in concentration camps, but six billion broiler chickens will die this year in slaughterhouses."