From the New York Times, and not, sadly, “The Onion”:
PETA Asks a Village Named Wool to Change Its Name to Vegan Wool
How is this unethical, as opposed to stupid and the epitome of self-parody? Well..
It is disrespectful to the town to presume it would agree to be exploited as a billboard for a fanatic advocacy organization.
It is demeaning to assume that residents of a municipality would allow non-residents from a deranged organization to change their town’s name in exchange for “a cozy, cruelty-free blanket.”
It unfairly implies that there is anything unethical about the name “Wool.”
It undermines the important cause of the ethical treatment of animals by associating the cause with wacko extremists who cannot distinguish between real issues and ridiculous ones.
It wastes the contributions of serious donors on self-defeating nonsense.
For a refresher course on just how embarrassing PETA is to the legitimate cause of preventing animal cruelty, go here.
Ethics Alarms 
And what the hell is “vegan wool”? Who eats wool? Is it yummy?
And how is harvesting wool in any way cruel or harmful to sheep. Plus, it’s renewable and therefore sustainable. Gawd.
PETA wants sheep to roam free! FREE! And, of course, since they have no utility and are dumb as rocks, that eventually means no sheep.
Unless the rams that chase the ewe-sheep are determined there’ll be new sheep.
Seriously though, aren’t sheep more comfortable when they’re sheared regularly?
That was my understanding, but PETA doesn’t really care about the well-being of sheep.
Why pick on wool? Does PETA think it’s cruel to shear sheep?
Now if it was “lamb’s wool,” and people do eat lamb,not mutton, I could see the crazies going there. Wouldn’t make them less crazy or more rational, but it would at least have a tiny iota of lunatic logic there.
I hope the good townspeople told PETA to bugger off.
It’s non-consensual haircutting, which we all know is barber-ic.
HA!
And the Navajo’s eat a LOT of mutton. Their tacos, for instance, are mutton. One of my joys growing up in the hill country of Texas was barbecued mutton (with the German settlers).
I assume it must be made clear that sheep are herbivores, and thus their wool is PETA-approved… Could that really be possible?
PETA does a bad job of explaining the link between wool production and meat production. Sheep farmers produce both products to maximize profits. Only about 1 in 50 males are left intact to breed the females, the rest are neutered to become meat lambs. Depending on market conditions, all females may be kept as breeding / wool producing stock or some may be culled as meet lambs.
The “here” link just links back to this webpage.
Ha! Scroll down. It links to the PETA tag, so naturally that’s the first post to come up. Many more are below….
Ah, the egg is on my face then.
Thanks.
The yolk’s on you!
Eggs are not vegan. Report to the nearest PETA re-education center within 48 hours.
I knew about the animal cracker boxes but what really gets me is the pictures of them holding signs saying that “Disney hurt Porgs”. I have zero faith in an organization that thinks CGI fictional creatures, that were only added to cover up the actual Puffins that scattered the area the scenes were shot it and they couldn’t get rid of, were actually hurt! So were Ewoks in the first trilogy of movies. It’s very sad, and scary, that people are really this stupid.
I should have looked into the picture closer… That whole thing came from a sight called fakingstarwars so was satire. My fault for not looking closer. But it really wouldn’t surprise me if they had actually done this given all the other things they have done. This whole trying to get a town to changer their name still holds with my original opinion of people being stupid however.
Jack, I guess you wanted to write,
“It undermines the important cause of the ethical treatment of animals by associating the cause with wacko extremists who canNOT distinguish between real issues and ridiculous ones.”
Ya think?
#@!!@@*&%!
I fixed it.
So now they’re the People for the Editing of Township Appellations…?
Who knew?
–Dwayne
Then they’re really not going to like Mediumraresirloin, Texas…
A few tidbits from the bottom of the article:
I think I would have enjoyed that article
Ironic that kills actually save fish….
I doubt they take issue with Dutch Kills on Long Island, however
Max might have to change his last name (or his first name to “Min”)
The Sheriff don’t like it!
I volunteer in local government; unless they filed a paid eponym transfer application, the consideration given will be quite limited….
They wanted Slaughterville to change its name as well, calling the name disgusting. Of course, the relatives of John Slaughter, for whom the town is named, were not amused.
Not to belittle their efforts, but the naming problems with which PETA must contend are as nothing compared to the challenges facing their sister organization, SAPP, (the Society Against the Persecution of Plants …“Wheat is Murder!”). From Appleton, WI, to Orange County, CA, to Hickory, NC, the sheer volume of flora-inspired place names in the USA alone would seem to make the task of correcting the problem nigh insurmountable. Think of all the Elm Streets, Maple Avenues, and such; in Atlanta alone, it could take years of work just to address the rampant Peachtree issue. Still, the SAPPers hope to gradually persuade people that placing prefixes such as “native”, “endemic”, “indigenous”or “wild” (there’s some internal debate about whether the implied violence in that one makes it unsuitable) is the only right thing to do.
Additionally, the hope is that success in correcting the typical Town/street/location based problems will ultimately provide some insights into how to deal with major crimes against plantkind, such as South Dakota’s unique and horrible Corn Palace.
This is being appropriately lampooned.