While this isn’t a new campaign, it’s still worth a mention. Last year Peta did a number of “demonstrations” using “human meat” with the slogan “meat is murder.” It’s definitely attention-getting. I’ve seen a couple of films about the truth behind processed meat and it’s not pretty. It’s one of those questionable things that we know about but don’t want to acknowledge (think smoking). There was a fur store downtown a number of years ago and it was often the target of demonstrators. I understand how people justify these positions, but do they ever make a difference? I’m sure Peta has its audience, but if its message doesn’t sway any opinions isn’t it just rhetoric? If this campaign were political, Peta would be representing fringe fanatics. (Give me rhetoric or give me death!)

Off the top, I can’t think of any one entity that opposes Peta outright (or Truth for smoking). I’m not saying that no such organization exists because maybe it does. However, opposition gives validation. People will say one thing and do another. So while one may agree with the facts, facts alone may not be enough for one to change his or her way of life. My personal stance on “human meat” is that I don’t liken myself to an animal so I won’t even entertain the thought of it. Peta should compare “apples to apples.” I have to quote another ad cliche (and there are many). At the very least Peta “breaks through the clutter.”