The REALLY dark side of animal rights

I have always looked upon the animal rights movement (as distinct from animal welfare) as a bit of a nutty proposition. It seems to be one those movements in which its proponents seem to naturally move more and more to radical positions. For many it seems to have become a religion that needs its missionaries to spread the word to the unwashed. Sometimes “the word” is pretty scary.

The University of Southern Indiana’s student newspaper, “The Shield” printed a “Special Editorial” entitled “Animal Rights and Ethical Veganism by a Gary Yourofsky.

Mr. Yourofsky starts out slowly.

Ever since Pythagoras promulgated peace to our planetary companions some 2,600 years ago, the animal rights community has utilized pacifism in its attempts to facilitate substantive change.

As a proponent of education, my activism is no different.

Then he takes a u-turn.

After all, consuming the cut-up corpses of murdered animals – and the things that ooze out of their bodies – is hardly an enlightened way of living. However, author Sam Harris explained a major flaw with pacifism activism:

“When your enemy has no scruples, your own scruples become another weapon in his hand.”

So, while my lifestyle and lectures are based on compassion, those who refuse to stop harming animals force me to support ‘eye for an eye’ and ‘by any means necessary’ philosophies.

And finally he explains that the following two paragraphs, which he says were posted on his website, was the reason why the University cancelled a lecture of his last year.

“Sometimes I think the only effective method of destroying speciesism would be for each uncaring human to be forced to live the life of a cow on a feedlot, or a monkey in a laboratory, or an elephant in the circus, or a bull in a rodeo, or a mink on a fur farm. Then people would be awakened from their soporific states and finally understand the horror that are inflicted on the animal kingdom by the vilest species to ever roam this planet: the human animal! Deep down, I truly hope that oppression, torture and murder return to each uncaring human tenfold! I hope that fathers accidentally shoot their sons on hunting excursions, while carnivores suffer heart attacks that kill them slowly.

Every woman ensconced in fur should endure a rape so vicious that it scars them forever. While every man entrenched in fur should suffer an anal raping so horrific that they become disemboweled. Every rodeo cowboy and matador should be gored to death, while circus abusers are trampled by elephants and mauled by tigers. And, lastly, may irony shine its esoteric head in the form of animal researchers catching debilitating diseases and painfully withering away because research dollars that could have been used to treat them was wasted on the barbaric, unscientific practice vivisection.”

Well, so much for pacifism. My first reaction is the man should be kept away from carrying pointy sticks and the like.

I wonder if that bit about carnivores suffering heart attacks applies to wolves, coyotes and cougars as well. If they have rights they should be no different than the rest of us carnivores.

2 Responses to “The REALLY dark side of animal rights”

  1. conny Says:

    I don’t know what’s so difficult to understand about people who don’t want animals to be harmed. Maybe if you knew how they were treated in factory farms you’d feel differently. Take a look at this video
    http://meat.org

  2. Elaine Vigneault Says:

    a) I take some offense to his words, but they are just words. He is not actually doing any of the things he described. (The offense I take is in the description of rape as two separate types of events for men and women. Anal rape is rape, plain and simple. Rape of a woman shouldn’t be assumed to be vaginal and rape of a man shouldn’t need to be qualified as anal rape.)

    b) The descriptions of violence are actually happening, just not to human animals. They’re happening to nonhuman animals in factory farms, fur farms, science labs, backyard breeders, and various other places.

    c) Our moral impetus to treat nonhuman animals ethically arises from our morality, not their lack of morality. (In your example, you’d have no duty to treat children, mentally disabled, or incapacitated people morally. But you do, so…?)

    d) All social justice movements encounter resistance of your kind – ignorance, refusal to think, lack of empathy, hasty generalizations, mocking, unfounded accusations of violence, censorship, and more. You can change and join us or you can remain deluded and think morality doesn’t apply to human interactions with nonhumans.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s


Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

%d bloggers like this: