Kfc Case

1. It may be because I am an animal lover myself, but I support PETA the most in this case, however I am not totally against KFC Corporation. PETA demonstrated their place by publicizing the acts of KFC to the world so that we are informed of the process which is taken on the chickens we eat from there. I agree that PETA or anyone has the right to exploit what happens in the slaughterhouses for the sake of the animals. Doing such things mentioned are unethical and should be subject to animal cruelty regardless of whether they die anyway. Then reason I am in slight support for KFC is because they do not control the measures to which the chickens are handled, and have never been to begin with. Plus, KFC is just one out of all the other corporations that serve chicken. Many other corporations have not gotten such a knocking on them yet, so why such a beating on KFC? What about

2. There are many basic criticisms that PETA makes of KFC. PETA claimed that the practices of KFC‘s suppliers were not using humane tactics on the chickens. The chickens were stunned with electrical shock, placed in scalding, boiling water to loosen feathers, and then their throats were split. The birds were handled horrible when being caught. The broiler breeders used were meant to age longer and were given chemicals to enhance rapid weight gain. The weight gain caused their joints and bones to be very painful because it was too much weight for the chicken. Also, the chickens were packed very tightly in and had little room to move around in. The critcisms are convincing enough for me because I never thought that these kinds of acts happened to something I ate. The criticisms are similar to the timeless criticisms of the past because after the stock market crash of 1929 everyone looked at big business and started attacking it.

3. KFC has to defend itself somehow. The most truthful tactic is that it does not directly cause harm to the chickens, it only purchases chicken ready to be cooked