Babies vs. Animal Rights

[4elise]

PETA is a terrorist organization. There’s no whitewashing that. There are MANY, many groups that wish to degrade mankind to the level of brute animals. There is no whitewashing that either.

I am not arguing for ‘animal abuse.’ I am arguing for the species made in the image of God.

I think you may be arguing with yourself then. No one on this thread has said anything about PETA, or elevating animals above humans - so… guess you find yourself in agreement with these posts.

 

[severus68]

Marfran;5654020:

PETA is a terrorist organization. There’s no whitewashing that. There are MANY, many groups that wish to degrade mankind to the level of brute animals. There is no whitewashing that either.

I am not arguing for ‘animal abuse.’ I am arguing for the species made in the image of God.

PETA is not a terrorist organisation. Humans know how to degrade themselves without any help. Animals cannot sin, they do not start wars etc etc, so what’s this about who bringing you down to the level of brute animals. The only brutes I know off are humans.

 

[Sailor_Kenshin]

I don’t see where you have posted an argument or a relevant connection to the topic.Nobody here is talking about the PETA organization. Try looking into ***Catholic Concern for Animals *** tiny.cc/F3AGP and the other Catholic groups, books, and organizations.

Animals are here for us to eat if we wish. God gave them to us for that purpose. Or for wearing fur, or using as livestock protection, or pets.

I wish people who call themselves Catholic were one-tenth as concerned with saving souls and the unborn as they were about saving animals.

And PETA is indeed a terrorist organization. But no amount of proof will be enough for animal ‘rights’ activists.

This president has called pro-lifers terrorists. What side are you on?

 

[severus68]

Animals are here for us to eat if we wish. God gave them to us for that purpose. Or for wearing fur, or using as livestock protection, or pets.

I wish people who call themselves Catholic were one-tenth as concerned with saving souls and the unborn as they were about saving animals.

And PETA is indeed a terrorist organization. But no amount of proof will be enough for animal ‘rights’ activists.

This president has called pro-lifers terrorists. What side are you on?

I said PETA is not a terrorist organisation , not Marfran. If it was, wouldn’t the US have detained all concerned in you know where. What is the relevance here anyway?

Really God did all that. Go back to the beginning of Genesis and read what God wanted in the first place. Cavenen may have needed to kill animals and to use fur and skins. Now we have man made material which protect from the cold better than fur could. Why then would you need to use fur? If you are concerned only about human beings do you know that the resources used for rearing animals for food could be used to feed many many more if used to grow grain, fruits and vegetables.

What is this again about animal rights supporters being pro abortion. I am pro all life.

Shouldn’t we save our own souls first before trying to “save” the souls of others?

The president of the US did??? Or was he talking about those who bomb abortion clinics and kill doctors who perform abortions? Do you think any moral person would think that right? Do you think the Church supports that?

 

[JaneGrey]

Animals are here for us to eat if we wish. God gave them to us for that purpose. Or for wearing fur, or using as livestock protection, or pets.

I wish people who call themselves Catholic were one-tenth as concerned with saving souls and the unborn as they were about saving animals.

And PETA is indeed a terrorist organization. But no amount of proof will be enough for animal ‘rights’ activists.

This president has called pro-lifers terrorists. What side are you on?

Id like to see if you can make a good argument for why we need to use fur in this day and age. Animals were given their fur for a reason - for their use only. It wont kill us if we dont use natural fur but it kills them if we do.

 

[Sailor_Kenshin]

We were given ALL of creation to USE by God as we see fit—fur included. ‘This day and age’ has nothing whatever to do with truth or lies.

Recently, GE declared lab rats to be more valuable than human embryos, which they will now be using in their research.

Where was the outrage from the animal ‘rights’ groups then?

I would rather see millions of animals destroyed than a single human baby. And that is the point the OP brought up. Some people refuse to see it.

 

[JaneGrey]

That’s acclimization and avoidance behavior of people they are not used to, which is an instict function, not an “emotion” as some people mistakenly think. Either way, I don’t particularly like snakes. It’s a rule in our clinic that we don’t see patients with less than 2 or greater than 4 legs. I refer sick snakes to a veterinarian in our area who sees lots of them.

A trade off that would mean a significant number of pets wouldn’t receive any or just minimal health care. Is that worthwhile?

Yep.

The way you set out your post makes it very difficult for me to reply to all of your points but ill try.

1.I was surprised to learn that you are a vet. because the tone of your previous posts to me seemed like those of someone who looked down on ‘‘animal rights folks’’. You said some things I felt were condescending, but whatever. Now that I know youre a vet I have more respect because I know you are not just someone with a personal dislike fo animals (theyre out there). What confuses me is that you dedicate your life to treating ill animals yet dont understand people who hold animal life in high regard.

1. Fine, but I still think something could be done on the doctors’s side as well. Why are doctors forced to practise ‘‘defensive medicine’’? Is it fear of the lawsuits? Maybe everyone needs a bit more common sense. I know Im not providing a solution here and there will be problems with suddenly charging vets the same as doctors for malpractice. However that doesnt the situation should remain the same. Your argument might make sense, but it seems more a matter of human folly, ego and practical issues.
2. Lying and thinking impure thoughts are sinful in Catholicism. A good Catholic would attempt to refrain from these things because of their being wrong and the bad that might result. However I know for a fact good Catholics slip up all the time though they aspire to better things and then they go to confession. I know my situation is different, but it relates to what i was saying that a person is not a hypocrite because they believe in something bigger than themsleves but have not yet managed to become the person they aspire to be. I think its safe to say most of us here are not the people we aspire to be. Thats why I do not condemn people who eat meat, not because i think it less wrong, but because I believe they believe they are doing the right thing, and aspiring to what **they ** think is right (obviously they have to be moral in other aspects e.g.not a cheat, serial killer). I m aware that since I believemyself that unnecessary consumption of meat is immoral, its somewhat worse for me to be still eating it than for someone of your views. However I consider myself on the right track. You might understand better if I told you the reasons why I have not become vegetarian overnight, but they involve personal family issues which Id like to keep private-this forum is not my place to rant about the people I live with. You mentioned something about logistics in another post-if it was as simple as logistics I wouldnt be consuming any animal product at all.

If a person did not have the intention to stop eating meat but was not arrogant about it, I can respect them. Id be thrilled enough if people just accepted the reality of meat eating and that it poses a true ethical problem.

1. About the trade off-what you described is a prediction which I admit would be awful if it came true. However it is not a certainty. I cant say how much more likely this would be in your country though.

 

[JaneGrey]

We were given ALL of creation to USE by God as we see fit—fur included. ‘This day and age’ has nothing whatever to do with truth or lies.

Recently, GE declared lab rats to be more valuable than human embryos, which they will now be using in their research.

Where was the outrage from the animal ‘rights’ groups then?

I would rather see millions of animals destroyed than a single human baby. And that is the point the OP brought up. Some people refuse to see it.

Eating meat and using animals for their fur are different. The former is necessary in some circumstances while the latter never is these days. Your arrogance is blinding you. Are you refusing to accept the existence of fake fur? Sorry if I sound uncharitable but you make no sense. I live in a freezing cold country where it feels like summer never comes. If fake fur or non-fur clothes are good enough for me they are good enough for you.

Catholicism expressly forbids causing God’s creatures unnecessary suffering. It is not ‘‘anythinig goes’’ just because we have dominion over them.

There will never be a situation where a million animals have to be destroyed to save a single baby.

 

[JaneGrey]

You have my full support and understanding. Becomming a vegetarian or vegan “cold turkey” is applaudable, however, there is nothing wrong with a gradual transition, especially when one cooks for or eats with a family. It is easier to go “cold turkey” if you are single. A gradual transition–eliminating one item at a time, or trying new dishes and incorporating one at a time, will often have better long term results and relaspe is not as likely as going “cold turkey.” Vegetarianism, and more so veganism, is counter cultural and requires learning new ways of looking at food, learning new ways of cooking or “uncooking,” learning new recipes and new ingredients. (Its akin to living in a foriegn country and learning to eat AND cook a new cuisine.) The poster who called you a hypocrite for not going “cold turkey” is judgemental and has obviously not explored changing his diet or lifestyle, or he would not be so critical.

For anyone who is considering making this transition, or would like help or advice please come to CAF’s ***Catholic Vegetarian & Vegan Group ***for support, advice, and comradery!!! forums.catholic-questions.org/group.php?groupid=90

Thank you very much for your support. Maybe I will one day share my problems with the transition in the Vegeatarians group.

 

[Marfran]

Animals are here for us to eat if we wish. God gave them to us for that purpose. Or for wearing fur, or using as livestock protection, or pets.

Sailor: I highlighted your words if we wish. This is not good stewardship and we are asked by God to*** take care ***of His Creation, not to do with it what **we **wish, for whatever purpose. We have permission to use the Earth’s resources “gently” and we must do this responsibly. In civilized, industrialized society we have many superior alternatives to meat as food, and NO ONE in civilized, industrialized society needs to wear FUR. **Factory farming **and the abuses inherent in that industry were not present in the times of Christ and present NEW MORAL CHALLENGES for us. We must look at how our actions affect God’s other creation, the health of the planet, the appropriation and misappropriation of resources, and how our individual actions contribute to suffering for animals, degradation of the planet (pollution of soil and water), and how HUMANS suffer for our selfishness.

The Western diet is a heavily meat diet. The average American (and other Westerner) eats 50% more protein (in the form of animal products) than he needs, while people in less affluent countries do not have EVEN ENOUGH TO EAT. We raise crops of food to feed TO ANIMALS that could directly go to feed PEOPLE instead. Do you think God is happy about that? (Should we imagine God saying: Go eat your meat, and in excess too, while people starve and you raise crops to feed to animals to fatten them up so that **you **can eat them. And please do it in an inhumane way. Cause a lot of suffering and pain to the animals that I created, and dole out a lot of pollution on the Earth too while you’re doing it… Don’t worry about the next generation to come…just do whatever pleases you…)

I wish people who call themselves Catholic were one-tenth as concerned with saving souls and the unborn as they were about saving animals.

I wish that people who call themselves Catholic also cared enough about people that do not have enough to eat, to make ***personal changes in their lives ***that can HELP to feed people and END world hunger. Giving up your meat can help to bring about the change that is necessary to END WORLD HUNGER, to manage the resources better, to use the Earth “gently” as intended by God so that we can provide for ALL.

And PETA is indeed a terrorist organization.

Why do you keep bringing up PETA? The people that you have engaged in this conversation with are Catholic, many are members of CAF’s ***Catholic Vegetarian & Vegan Group ***and many are also members of *Catholic Concern for Animals.*We espouse the views of Catholic Concern for Animals tiny.cc/F3AGP Maybe you should research this organization to understand how **Catholics **feel on this issue. Are you open-minded enough to do that? And what about the St. Francis Pledge? Might you consider learning what that is all about? Or will you allow nothing to get between you and your cheseburger?

This president has called pro-lifers terrorists. What side are you on?

I think that everyone on this thread has made it clear that we are Pro-Life, Pro-All-of-Life. We are non-violent, we care about the Earth, we care about ALL of God’s creation, we care for human suffering and hunger, and we care for the unborn.

Take the St. Francis Pledge: tinyurl.com/npsnv5
**By caring for our planet, we ensure abundance to feed the human family. **

 

[JaneGrey]

Found this on the NET: Very interesting. Animals helping abused children. The Humane Exchange tinyurl.com/MarieBlog

!!!

It is really good and relevant you posted that cause I just realised something-the very title of this post borders on inane due to the fact that most domestic animals have a natural love for children and vice versa! Babies and children dont feel they are competing or at war with animals because I think sometimes they are able to see things better than we can. I think if most babies could express themselves verbally they d probably say animal rights people are the least of their problems. Adults are barking up the wrong tree if they think the animal rights movement disadvantages children in any way. It is only when young children start to become influenced by their parents and socialised, that fear and dislike of animals (if there is any) comes in.

 

[Marfran]

It is really good and relevant you posted that cause I just realised something-the very title of this post borders on inane due to the fact that most domestic animals have a natural love for children and vice versa! Babies and children dont feel they are competing or at war with animals because I think sometimes they are able to see things better than we can. I think if most babies could express themselves verbally they d probably say animal rights people are the least of their problems. Adults are barking up the wrong tree if they think the animal rights movement disadvantages children in any way. It is only when young children start to become influenced by their parents and socialised, that fear and dislike of animals (if there is any) comes in.

The very title of this thread is inane.

 

[severus68]

It is really good and relevant you posted that cause I just realised something-the very title of this post borders on inane due to the fact that most domestic animals have a natural love for children and vice versa! Babies and children dont feel they are competing or at war with animals because I think sometimes they are able to see things better than we can. I think if most babies could express themselves verbally they d probably say animal rights people are the least of their problems. Adults are barking up the wrong tree if they think the animal rights movement disadvantages children in any way. It is only when young children start to become influenced by their parents and socialised, that fear and dislike of animals (if there is any) comes in.

That is true. When my child was a baby, my then 5 dogs and a rabbit who thought he was a dog would help be with me to babysit her. My animals have never hurt her and I know they never would . I worry more about the evil human beings on the prowl. My daughter has always loved animals and she hurts when they are hurt.

 

[severus68]

We were given ALL of creation to USE by God as we see fit—fur included. ‘This day and age’ has nothing whatever to do with truth or lies.

Recently, GE declared lab rats to be more valuable than human embryos, which they will now be using in their research.

Where was the outrage from the animal ‘rights’ groups then?

I would rather see millions of animals destroyed than a single human baby. And that is the point the OP brought up. Some people refuse to see it.

We do not own this earth. We are supposed to take care of God’s creation, including animals. Anyone who abuses any part of God’s creation must answer to God even if you get away with it in this life. The only real truth is God’s truth. The right to use any which way and abuse animals is only your truth.

I don’t know of this outrage you write of. Could you please give a link to evidence your assertion. Why would they declare such a thing, it does not make sense. Please give facts.

It is clear what your rathers are but why would it come to that? The OP has clarified her position, that is not what she meant.

 

[Newbie2]

1.I was surprised to learn that you are a vet. because the tone of your previous posts to me seemed like those of someone who looked down on ‘‘animal rights folks’’. I do look down on animal rights “extremists”, like the ones that let the mink loose at Michigan State University a while back and they all died from starvation. What confuses me is that you dedicate your life to treating ill animals yet dont understand people who hold animal life in high regard.

“Understand” and “agree with” are two different things. However, no, I do not understand people who will not consider adopting or euthanizing their own dog when it has bitten their own kids multiple times.

1. Fine, but I still think something could be done on the doctors’s side as well. Why are doctors forced to practise ‘‘defensive medicine’’? Is it fear of the lawsuits? Yes. Maybe everyone needs a bit more common sense. I know Im not providing a solution here and there will be problems with suddenly charging vets the same as doctors for malpractice. However that doesnt the situation should remain the same. Your argument might make sense, but it seems more a matter of human folly, ego and practical issues.

Welcome to the folly of the American legal (tort) system. The practical issue is that there are people out there looking for a legal jackpot from their doctors and, if animals get certain “rights”, their veterinarians. It isn’t fair, it isn’t right, but it’s reality.

1. You might understand better if I told you the reasons why I have not become vegetarian overnight, but they involve personal family issues which Id like to keep private-this forum is not my place to rant about the people I live with. You mentioned something about logistics in another post-if it was as simple as logistics I wouldnt be consuming any animal product at all.

Yes, I might understand better.

1. About the trade off-what you described is a prediction which I admit would be awful if it came true. However it is not a certainty. I cant say how much more likely this would be in your country though.

I’ve owned and magaged a veterinary practice for over 20 years and am intimately familiar with veterinary economics. Believe me when I say that if animals are given certain “rights” that allow for pain and suffering awards to their owners as in human situations, insurance costs will skyrocket. Veterinarians will be forced to practice “defensive” medicine, which will drive up the cost, added to the increased cost of malpractice insurance. Welcome to America, what a country!

That is true. When my child was a baby, my then 5 dogs and a rabbit who thought he was a dog would help be with me to babysit her. My animals have never hurt her and I know they never would …

Please tell us that you’ve never left your baby alone with 5 dogs and a rabbit.

 

[Sailor_Kenshin]

Eating meat and using animals for their fur are different. The former is necessary in some circumstances while the latter never is these days. Your arrogance is blinding you. Are you refusing to accept the existence of fake fur? Sorry if I sound uncharitable but you make no sense. I live in a freezing cold country where it feels like summer never comes. If fake fur or non-fur clothes are good enough for me they are good enough for you.

Catholicism expressly forbids causing God’s creatures unnecessary suffering. It is not ‘‘anythinig goes’’ just because we have dominion over them.

There will never be a situation where a million animals have to be destroyed to save a single baby.

The title of this thread: **Babies vs. Animal Rights **

The truth does not change according to whim or day of the week. Fur is here for us to use. It is appalling to see so many Catholics bowing to the PETA lie. PETA is a terrorist organization.

Human life trumps animal life. Period. Animals HAVE no rights.

How many babies do you believe have to die to save a single animal? Where is your outrage over what GE has declared?

That animals have rights is a lie. Human babies have rights endowed by their Creator. It is the animal-‘rights’ activists whose focus is skewed and whose arrogance and ignorance is showing.

 

[severus68]

Please tell us that you’ve never left your baby alone with 5 dogs and a rabbit.

Oh please! I said with me. I must say My dogs have never hurt anyone though I know they would defend me and my daughter.

 

[severus68]

The title of this thread: **Babies vs. Animal Rights **

The truth does not change according to whim or day of the week. Fur is here for us to use. It is appalling to see so many Catholics bowing to the PETA lie. PETA is a terrorist organization.

Human life trumps animal life. Period. Animals HAVE no rights.

How many babies do you believe have to die to save a single animal? Where is your outrage over what GE has declared?

That animals have rights is a lie. Human babies have rights endowed by their Creator. It is the animal-‘rights’ activists whose focus is skewed and whose arrogance and ignorance is showing.

Please reply to the quetions put to you instead of just saying the same things with so much anger.

 

[severus68]

Thank you very much for your support. Maybe I will one day share my problems with the transition in the Vegeatarians group.

You are doing a great thing Jane. I am a vegetarian and want to become a vegan and it is very difficult for various reasons although I believe its right to be one. So I can empathise.

 

[Marfran]

The title of this thread: **Babies vs. Animal Rights **

THAT is correct, but it helps to READ the entire OP and the subsequent posts.

The author of the OP is stating that she has noticed some ads on TV for the ASPCA (this is in the states–are you seeing these ads too??? A dog or cat is at the microphone but because they can not speak we can not hear what they have to say). The author of the OP was troubled that there were ***no similar ***ads on TV for pro-life, anti-abortion–which we pointed out that there are many (in the states) and they’ve been showing them for years.

Subsequently, it was pointed out to BernadetteM that attacking another just cause does not advance the pro-life cause or help the pro-life cause to move forward in any way. Here is the original OP, and the following post is a clarification by BernadetteM, the author of the OP.

For a long time I have been greatly bothered by some advertisements of TV. They have these heart breaking ads on poor neglected animals. The background music is very touching. I have never seen an ad about aborted babies or babies who have been neglected by their parents.

I have a strong feeling that these same people asking for our help to save these animals also think that killing our little human beings is fine and a worthwhile help to save the world of over population.

I just can’t understand how anyone would place the value of an animal over the life of a human being. Of course we should take care of animals and not allow them to be harmed or neglected, but it seems to me that our nation has their priorities very confused.

This has been on my mind for a long time and wondered how others feel about this issue.

Yours in the Hearts of Jesus and Mary, Bernadette

I do live in the US and have not seen pro life ads on TV. Sorry if my post implied that all persons involved in these ads were not for human life, but I know many people who seem to love their animals more than children. In fact one of my friends who has many dogs was asked if one of your dogs was drowning and also a person and you could only save one who would you save and they could not give an answer. Of course many people love both, **I am not saying that you should not love animals and care for them, as I said in my post I have not seen any ads of TV, and I do watch it. I live in a liberal state and maybe that is why. My daughters are big animal lovers so please don’t misunderstand what I meant. I probably used the wrong wording to try to get a point across. We have had several animals and felt a great loss when they passed on. I also wasn’t referring to organizations who help animals, just some individuals.

Forgive me if I sounded judgemental.**
God Bless. Bernadette

The truth does not change according to whim or day of the week. Fur is here for us to use. It is appalling to see so many Catholics bowing to the PETA lie. PETA is a terrorist organization.

Again we are NOT talking about PETA. And your stance on FUR will not receive much support from your fellow Catholics, or the majority of the population either. FUR is a complete LUXURY item. Poor people can not AFFORD fur–the rich ladies on Rodeo Drive can–FUR causes unneccessary suffering and cruelty to animals, and man made alternatives are superior to FUR. FUR is a LUXURY ITEM–it doesn’t even keep one very warm!!! People wear FUR to flaunt their wealth and ellevate their social status–in civillized society fur doesn’t do much in keeping people warm. If you are going to go mountain climbing or go on an Arctic expedition, you are NOT likely to be wearing FUR. You will likely choose a man made material designed to trap your body heat in, keep you warm, and keep you from freezing to death.

Human life trumps animal life. Period. Animals HAVE no rights.

Translation: This poster feels he has the “right” to use and abuse any animal in any way that he sees fit. Period. I believe that that is how most serial killers started out–abusing animals. When one bestows cruelty on animals and treats them as commodities, and has that mentality, it is easier to progress to mistreating and abusing humans as well.

How many babies do you believe have to die to save a single animal? Where is your outrage over what GE has declared?

If this is something that you feel belongs in this discussion then you need to post a link so that we can all know what you are referring to.

That animals have rights is a lie. Human babies have rights endowed by their Creator. It is the animal-‘rights’ activists whose focus is skewed and whose arrogance and ignorance is showing.

I think it is you who are trying to skew things so that you don’t have to defend your “cheeseburger” habit. God created animals, and He loves them, and He calls us to be good stewards to the Earth and treat His animals well. Why do you despise that which God has lovingly created?

The rights that **God gave **to animals: the right to run if they have legs, swim if they have fins, and fly if they have wings.

Why do you ignore the issue that we ***could better use the Earth’s resources ***if we stopped putting all those crops into the mouths of animals (raised to produce our luxury meat) and fed people with that food instead? Why won’t you consider making personal changes to END WORLD HUNGER? Why won’t you consider taking the St. Francis Pledge?

**Take the St. Francis Pledge: **tinyurl.com/npsnv5
**By caring for our planet, we ensure abundance to feed the human family. **