PETA are ethical

I see a confusion in your line of thought. You are under the delusion that humans are superior to animals and that if anyone seeks to compare us to them we are being unethical and disrespectul to human kind. Comparing the pain suffered in Auschwitz to that of animals who are equally helpless and tortured to an equal, if not greater, extent is not disrespectful to humans it's merely showing how disrespectful and negligible we are to animals.The second point you raise is that of PETA supporting the ALF. The issue is they are supporting ALF's ideals, they are not directly supporting their methods. They are fudning these terrorists for their cause blame the other party for their mishaps, don't look at the middle man. Does one blame a pharmaceutical institution for funding a crazed scientist? Mistakes happen. P.E.T.A. love animals they do not love terrorism. If you have two friends and one is violent, a drunkard and a rapist does that automatically make the other friend one too? By any means of logical reasoning, no it does not. PETA and ALF have an ideal in common, do not for one second think that PETA are in support of the methods ALF use unless you can explicitly quote a direct support of the violent methods, you have no such evidence to prove their support of the violence.Thirdly, I would like to point out to you that your point about killing animals being an aesthetic issue and not a moral one comes from the point of view of a meat-eater. From the point of view of PETA the issue is a very moral one. They are absolutely ethically entitled to hold this moral and opinion on animal slaughter, this has nothing to do with your view on it not being moral nor PETA being ethical or unethical.On another note, this debate is whether or not PETA are ethical you are beigning up the point about them being against pets and guide dogs. I would like to explain that jst because you see humans as more important than the dogs, PETA see the dogs as rightful to freedom as a human and despite this ethic not matching your ethic it has absoutely nothing to do with PETA being unethical, it merealy is a conflict between your perosnal choice of ethics and PETA's choice of ethics. Both of you are ethical but your ethics themself differ.I do not mean to be rude nor obnoxious when I say this: Please educate yourself on an issue before making a point about it. The assisted killing of their animals being at almost 60% is because most of the animals PETA take in are abused and therefore often end up in a situation where they are better off dead. In fact I find the preservation and sentimental respect for the dead animals is very ethical, only further supporting the idea that PETA are ethical.As a final point, the support in July 1995 of Rodney Coronado was a sponsorship made without the knowledge of what he would do with the money. They have not paid him or discussed him since. It was a mistake because they trusted that, having the same ideal as PETA, he would go about it in a similar fashion. They were fooled by him and his father to believe he was ethical until they realised the harm he caused. The quote you give was stated before his arnoist attacks.In conclusion, none of the points you raise are valid to suggest why PETA are unethical, only as to why some people who share their ideal go about it in an unethical way or why your ethics conflict with PETAs ethics wince you believe humans to be superior to animals and PETA do not.