Thursday, September 23, 2010
PETA - Practicing Extremist Tactics in America
I love my dogs. I think what Michael Vick did was wrong and that he deserved the punishment he got. I worked as a Veterinary Technician for over 7 years, and a Veterinary Receptionist for 2 years. I consider myself an animal lover, and have even used humane catch and release traps for mice in the past. I catch spiders and put them outside, I stop my car or swerve to miss squirrels when they run across the road. I think there is definitely a need for legislation that provides for more humane treatment of animals within the food industry, the scientific research arena, and for domestic animals. I think some of what PETA is doing is commendable, but they are like all the other public pressure, extremist groups (NRA, Focus on The Family, the Christian Coalition, etc), they take it WAY too far.
Let's look at animal research - I don't like it... wouldn't want to work in a research lab - but I know that humane animal research is important if we are ever going to cure cancer, AIDS, hepatitis C, etc. In the 1920s, research on Insulin therapy in dogs led to the use of Insulin for humans - prior to this, Diabetics usually suffered a great deal and died at a young age. It was animal research studies that helped scientists develop the anti-viral drugs we now have for treating HIV. Because of these drugs, AIDS isn't thought of as a death sentence like it was in the 1980s. It's thought of as a manageable disease now, and people with AIDS are living full lives. It's not pretty but it's vitally important. I mean, if not animals - would PETA rather we use human testing as an alternative? PETA's co-founder Ingrid Newkirk has been quoted as saying that "even if animal research led to a cure for AIDS, we still wouldn't want it."
I do, however, agree that the animals used for research aren't always treated as humanely as they should be. I still believe that they should be provided clean, adequately sized, humane cages and be fed, watered and cared for while living in the laboratory setting. I believe laboratory testing involving animals should only be done when absolutely necessary, and that it's use be closely monitored and regulated. I do think animal testing in areas like cosmetics & health and beauty supplies is unnecessary. Animals kept in laboratories and put through uncomfortable and/or painful testing for human vanity doesn't compute with me.
As for the food industry - I do agree that some serious overhauling is needed where the care and treatment of animals is concerned. Factory farming is the number one culprit where cruelty is concerned, and I know that there needs to be some major legislative changes. I get that companies use factory farming rather than traditional agricultural methods to be able offer massive amounts of their product at a cheaper price point - but that doesn't make it right or humane, and I think it needs to be looked at. But unlike PETA, I don't think that non-Vegetarians are cruel, heartless people who don't care about the humane treatment of animals.
I think it's ridiculous that PETA states that insects have feelings and a right to live their lives free of suffering - and that instead of using pesticides to kill roaches in your home, you should use a product that renders them sterile so that they can live out their life without the ability to reproduce, and not suffer at the hands of humans. I think it's ridiculous that PETA is urging the Boy Scouts to cease awarding kids a fishing badge because they feel it is encouraging kids to mistreat animals. I think it's ridiculous that PETA is trying to get laws passed to stop large honey producers from artificially inseminating queen bees because it's "rape".
As with most all extremist groups, PETA has taken things WAY too far, and has endangered the lives of human beings in their quest to further their cause. For example, PETA gave a woman by the name of Fran Stephanie Truitt over $7,000 for her defense. Ms. Truitt was being tried for the attempted murder of the president of a medical research laboratory. PETA also donated over $5,000 to a man by the name of Joshua Harper, an extremist who admits that his ultimate goal is to see the complete collapse of industrial civilization. In 2000, Mr. Harper and his cohorts attacked a group of Native Americans out hunting, by throwing tear gas grenades at them, and spraying them in the face with chemical fire extinguishers. So think about this for a moment... it's cruel to artificially inseminate a bee, but it's perfectly acceptable to maim and/or kill another human being if it furthers your agenda. Yeah, that makes sense.
Let's look at animal research - I don't like it... wouldn't want to work in a research lab - but I know that humane animal research is important if we are ever going to cure cancer, AIDS, hepatitis C, etc. In the 1920s, research on Insulin therapy in dogs led to the use of Insulin for humans - prior to this, Diabetics usually suffered a great deal and died at a young age. It was animal research studies that helped scientists develop the anti-viral drugs we now have for treating HIV. Because of these drugs, AIDS isn't thought of as a death sentence like it was in the 1980s. It's thought of as a manageable disease now, and people with AIDS are living full lives. It's not pretty but it's vitally important. I mean, if not animals - would PETA rather we use human testing as an alternative? PETA's co-founder Ingrid Newkirk has been quoted as saying that "even if animal research led to a cure for AIDS, we still wouldn't want it."
I do, however, agree that the animals used for research aren't always treated as humanely as they should be. I still believe that they should be provided clean, adequately sized, humane cages and be fed, watered and cared for while living in the laboratory setting. I believe laboratory testing involving animals should only be done when absolutely necessary, and that it's use be closely monitored and regulated. I do think animal testing in areas like cosmetics & health and beauty supplies is unnecessary. Animals kept in laboratories and put through uncomfortable and/or painful testing for human vanity doesn't compute with me.
As for the food industry - I do agree that some serious overhauling is needed where the care and treatment of animals is concerned. Factory farming is the number one culprit where cruelty is concerned, and I know that there needs to be some major legislative changes. I get that companies use factory farming rather than traditional agricultural methods to be able offer massive amounts of their product at a cheaper price point - but that doesn't make it right or humane, and I think it needs to be looked at. But unlike PETA, I don't think that non-Vegetarians are cruel, heartless people who don't care about the humane treatment of animals.
I think it's ridiculous that PETA states that insects have feelings and a right to live their lives free of suffering - and that instead of using pesticides to kill roaches in your home, you should use a product that renders them sterile so that they can live out their life without the ability to reproduce, and not suffer at the hands of humans. I think it's ridiculous that PETA is urging the Boy Scouts to cease awarding kids a fishing badge because they feel it is encouraging kids to mistreat animals. I think it's ridiculous that PETA is trying to get laws passed to stop large honey producers from artificially inseminating queen bees because it's "rape".
As with most all extremist groups, PETA has taken things WAY too far, and has endangered the lives of human beings in their quest to further their cause. For example, PETA gave a woman by the name of Fran Stephanie Truitt over $7,000 for her defense. Ms. Truitt was being tried for the attempted murder of the president of a medical research laboratory. PETA also donated over $5,000 to a man by the name of Joshua Harper, an extremist who admits that his ultimate goal is to see the complete collapse of industrial civilization. In 2000, Mr. Harper and his cohorts attacked a group of Native Americans out hunting, by throwing tear gas grenades at them, and spraying them in the face with chemical fire extinguishers. So think about this for a moment... it's cruel to artificially inseminate a bee, but it's perfectly acceptable to maim and/or kill another human being if it furthers your agenda. Yeah, that makes sense.
Tuesday, September 21, 2010
I Am Not For 'Gay Marriage'
I am for Marriage Equality! The term 'gay marriage' sounds like a special marriage just for gays - something aside from, less than, or otherwise removed from what we now consider marriage. I don't believe that the gay & lesbian community want anything special or different. What they want, and what should be afforded all Americans under our Constitution, is EQUALITY - not only marriage equality, but equal rights across the board. And lets not confuse civil marriage with religious marriage. For those churches who wish not to perform same sex marriages, then they should retain the right not to perform those marriages. You see, I also believe VERY strongly that religion has NO place in government. So even after the civil institution of marriage is made available to same sex couples, churches will be able to - and should be able to decide for themselves whether or not to perform these ceremonies. For those couples desiring religious affirmation of their marriage, there are already churches willing to perform same sex marriages. I hear time and time again from opponents to marriage equality, that gay and lesbian couples should just be happy with commitment ceremonies and other private, (non legally recognized) celebrations. This isn't just about a piece of paper - it's about the federal rights that come along with that piece of paper; the rights that protect a person financially in the event their spouse dies, i.e. social security, pensions, etc, the right to be involved and make decisions medically in the event their spouse cannot make those decisions, the right to file joint tax returns, obtain employer sponsored benefits such as maternity/paternity leave, insurance, etc. It's about two people co-habitating and sharing finances and civil responsibilities and having the same benefits provided to other married couples. As for the moral argument against marriage equality, live according to whatever rules you wish, but realize that your beliefs aren't universal and that you have no right to force your morality on others. And as for the marriage protection argument... according to the US Census Bureau, marriage is in trouble already - the median length of marriages in the US that ended in divorce was 8.1 years, and in a study done in 2007, for every 100 marriages in the US, 49 end in divorce. So this sacred heterosexual institution isn't doing so hot the way it is now. The fact is, marriage equality isn't going to harm the institution of marriage at all, and allowing the re-writing of the Constitution to deny rights to any group of Americans only stands to hurt us all eventually.
Welcome!
This blog is a place for me to think, rant, bitch, analyze, make fun of, applaud, celebrate, ramble, babble, and otherwise listen to myself think at any given moment. It may involve sensitive issues such as morality, christian intolerance, homosexuality, hot topics in the news, random issues that I feel strongly about, and at times (ok probably ALOT of the time) my views on life as a person who has finally been freed of the suffocating grip of religion. If any of this has the potential to offend you, then you may not want to bookmark me. I make no apologies for my opinons, I am not seeking validation, and depending on the day, may or may not be interested in debating what I believe to be true. That being said - if you do want to read me, then welcome to my thoughts!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)