Rather than addressing the problem of overcrowding or the reason behind euthanizing animals without any attempt to find a home, some animal rights organizations would rather argue over who is more hypocritical.
Marlton, NJ (PRWEB) May 16, 2013
The organization People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals (PETA) is in the news, but not for any publicity stunt this time. The controversy began when The Huffington Post* ran an exposé entitled “Shocking Photos: PETA’s Secret Slaughter of Kittens, Puppies” on April 2, 2013. The author alleges that the organization euthanized 96 percent of the animals it took in during 2011, including those that veterinarians considered fit for adoption, within hours or minutes of receiving those animals. Mudslinging has happened on both sides. The accusations have attorney Richard P. Console, Jr., questioning whether some organizations are doing more harm than good to the animal welfare cause. With twenty years of experience representing injured victims, Console has long been a safety advocate who believes that any form of animal cruelty abuse can have an impact on public health and safety for humans, as well.
“Rather than addressing the problem of overcrowding or the reason behind euthanizing animals without any attempt to find a home, some animal rights organizations would rather argue over who is more hypocritical,” Console said. “When animal welfare groups are so divided that they seem to spend more time smearing each others' reputations than actually helping animals, they let down humans and animals everywhere.”
Console explores the accusations and the difficulty knowing which sources of information to trust that animal lovers may experience in his latest article, “‘Humane’ Goals: Are Animal Rights and Welfare Groups Hurting or Helping?” Console urges readers to beware of misleading charities, know what they are contributing to before they donate, and support local shelters rather than massive organizations.