THE VIRGINIAN-PILOT
Copyright (c) 1996, Landmark Communications, Inc.
DATE: Thursday, February 29, 1996 TAG: 9602290007
SECTION: FRONT PAGE: A12 EDITION: FINAL
TYPE: Letter
LENGTH: Short : 47 lines
It's interesting.
There is an organization which believes that it is wrong for human beings to kill or mistreat our fellow intelligent, feeling creatures. All of the killing and mistreatment to which this organization objects is wholly unnecessary to support human survival, health or comfort. Rather the killing and mistreatment are only for pleasure, profit, vanity or convenience, or just because the killing and mistreatment are traditional.
This organization promotes its positions by means of peaceful and lawful educational activities. It relies on facts and logic as much as it does on compassion. It is an organization which any community should be proud to welcome.
This organization is the People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals, and it has been vilified by writers to your paper who use terms such as ``radical,'' ``extremist'' and ``divisive'' to describe it.
Go figure.
RANDOLPH D. STOWE
Norfolk, Feb. 19, 1996
Regarding ``PETA's radical agenda not wanted'' (letter, Feb. 16): Daniel J. Arris shouldn't presume to know how every Virginian feels about People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals moving to our area.
What is wrong with a different viewpoint and becoming educated about that viewpoint?
Not everyone agrees with CBN, the military, Hillcrest Clinic, drinking, gambling, Judaism, Buddhism, colors of skin not their own, ad infititum.
What is ``radical'' about less consumption of flesh? Every article I read these days suggests that most of our ills are directly and indirectly attributable to eating flesh.
If Mr. Arris is concerned about leaving a legacy for future generations, he should consider opening minds and realizing all life is precious.
That's just one more opinion.
GAIL C. KOHN
Virginia Beach, Feb. 16, 1996 by CNB