PETA mistakenly targets church's nativity scene

[MrCoffee]

The pastor at Anchorage First Free Methodist Church was mystified. Why was the activist group People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals chastising him? No animals are harmed in the church's holiday nativity display. In fact, animals aren't used at all.

People, however, do dress the parts — Mary, Joseph, the wise men, etc. The volunteers stand shivering at a manger on the church lawn in a silent tribute to Christmas.

"We've never had live animals, so I just figured this was some spam thing," Armstrong said. "It's rough enough on us people standing out there in the cold. So we're definitely not using animals."

"We have some puppet camel things we put out," Armstrong said. "We have a cow hood thing that a person will wear that actually just looks spooky."

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/15892404/

I'd kill to get a picture of the cow hood thing.

[rug]

1. It's a shame to squander umbrage like this.

[PVnRT]

2. Rebels without a clue

n/t

[Mike Daniels]

3. What a bunch of idiots

Who would ever stop to think that "living" could refer strictly to people?

[flvegan]

4. "Target" maybe not so much.

"This morning, PETA sent an urgent letter to Jason Armstrong, pastor of the Anchorage First Free Methodist Church in Anchorage, urging him to set a policy prohibiting church-sponsored activities that can harm animals and asking him to use statues or models instead. PETA sent the plea because the church has sponsored "living Nativity scenes"—featuring live animals—in the past and is planning to host one this year. Every year, PETA’s office receives calls from church and community members across the country who are concerned about animals’ welfare and safety—and for good reason."

It's good publicity for the church, though.

[MrCoffee]

5. i just went with the headline from the article...

and i'm utterly fascinated by the camel puppet things and the cow hood thing. i'm this close to driving to Alaska.

[redqueen]

6. hahahahahahahah

if you do go, please take pics :)

[MrCoffee]

9. i'm thinking of writing to msn and demanding photos...

i mean, come on, the preacher man came out and said "We have a cow hood thing that a person will wear that actually just looks spooky."

i demand proof, dammit!

[redqueen]

12. that sounds like a good idea

how could they include those descriptions and not include pics? that's just cruel

[flvegan]

7. It's a good word. It has charisma.

Let's be honest...if the headline was "Animal Advocates send letter to church about nativity" then nobody would read it.

You must bring back pics. I'd like to see that as well.

[MrCoffee]

10. should i take pics, or just steal the spooky cow hood thing?

soooo tempting.

[flvegan]

11. "Borrow" my friend, borrow. 'Tis a church.

[flvegan]

15. Pssst...camel puppet

[MrCoffee]

17. and it's the cow hood thing that's supposed to be spooky?

the guy in the article is a complete freak.

[noonwitch]

8. People concerned about live animals in displays should call the ASPCA

Not PETA, who have no authority to do anything about it. Either the Humane Society or the ASPCA do work with police in such things.

I don't see where there is a problem with live animals if it's for a one-time event. I don't think anyone just leaves the animals in front of the creche for extended periods of time, but if the church is having a children's program and rents some animals for a couple of hours, I don't see where the animals are being mistreated from that alone.

PETA annoys the hell out of me. I eat meat, I have no problem with hunters, and someday, I hope I have enough money to buy a sable coat.

[LeftyMom]

13. 65 dead animals is a hell of a fashion statement

You may find you don't like the message it sends about your nature, though.

[flvegan]

14. Kind of like driving a Hummer

Except I think even MORE folks think "pretentious asshole" when they see a fur as opposed to an H2.

[LeftyMom]

16. For real.

The SUV people might live on the end of a dirt road or have horses or something. There's really no potential justification for fur unless you live off the land in the arctic circle or something.

[Gormy Cuss]

18. That quote isn't from the article, so I went looking for the source

It appears to be from the boilerplate news release from PETA. I say boilerplate because the exact language is used in other news releases.

Example from PETA site:
"Group Cites Spate of Animal Injuries and Deaths Nationwide

For Immediate Release:
November 20, 2006

Contact:
Jackie Vergerio 757-622-7382

Fresno, Calif. — This morning, PETA sent an urgent letter to Chris Erdman, pastor of University Presbyterian Church in Fresno, urging him to set a policy prohibiting church-sponsored activities that can harm animals and asking him to use statues or models instead. PETA sent the plea because the church has sponsored "living Nativity scenes"—featuring live animals—in the past. Every year, PETA’s office receives calls from church and community members across the country who are concerned about animals’ welfare and safety—and for good reason."

Is there a place on the PETA site with details about when in the past this specific church used live animals, or is it possible that as the article states PETA assumed live animals were used because other churches with "living nativities" include them?

FWIW, I applaud PETA's effort to urge churches to establish a policy against using live animals in the nativity scenes and it seems like a prudent step to send it to all churches advertising a live nativity. The only issue I would have is if there is a presumption that the churches are using animals without any calls or complaints specific to that church.