Because it's true, possibly not in their beliefs but in their methods.
Their agenda drives the evidence they
wish to consider, any evidence to the contrary is forgotten or ignored.
The current argument is a wonderful
example. We must protect chimpanzees they should have rights. They have
much in common with humans, in
this case 97% of their genetic material. If they are that close
genetically they must be of genus homo therefore
they must have rights as humans...
No different than the Nazis taking every insignificant difference
between the Aryan ideal and their idea of "sub-humans"
to prove "non-Aryans" were not human.
There are times that the ends _may_ and I use the word _may_ justify the
means, but in general it's bad practice, leading
to unintended consequences that all concerned eventually regret.
Markus Maurer wrote:
Hi P.J.
Why are you comparing claims of PETA to anything from the Nazi's race theory
to make your point?
The background of PETA *should be* the protection of animals and their
(insufficient) rights.
It's sad enough that we need organizations like that at all.
You are free to believe what you want and it is always good not to trust
blindly anything
published but your going way to far with your comparison for me....
back to Pentax topics...
greetings
Markus
You don't have to tell me what the point of the article was, I knew that
when I saw who published it. I
don't buy it. It's not genetics alone that defines a genus. PETA has a
political agenda. Taking their article
as proof of anything is like taking the ravings of the Nazis as proof
that Jews Slavs and Gypsies are sub human.
--
A man's only as old as the woman he feels.
--Groucho Marx
