2012-01-30 20:17:41 +0000 #1
I just wanted to point out a few things to animal lovers that they may not have considered, before.
There's a big difference today between animal welfare and animal rights, and a large part of the reason why is the radical interpretation that most animal rights groups are giving to the concept.
Here are the reasons why animal rights is often bad:
1) It often runs contrary to animal welfare. When human rights are given to animals, the needs of those animals may be set aside...because, after all, they aren't human, and don't have human NEEDS. Animals don't want what we want--their have their own list of wants, and when those are met, they are happy.
2) If often runs contrary to the conservation of species and biodiversity. If all animals are treated as 'persons', and their right to 'live free' is protected, then invasive species may not be controlled in areas where they are doing damage, huge overpopulations of animals in areas where predators have been eliminated may decimate their own environment, and of course, domesticated species may go extinct as well.
3) Humans love what they can see and touch. If we separate humans and animals entirely, humans will cease to love animals, and will view them as competitors. Historically, this has been very true. In recent times, the best way to ensure the continued existence of a species is to join its fate to human commerce in the first world countries...a species that has value to humans alive will not go extinct. Whether the value is for food, clothing, pets, or simply eco-tourism, the species that humans can benefit from saving will be saved first. Eliminate that aspect, and many more species will die.
4) It's easy for animal rights groups to fool the public into believing that they are benefactors of animals, and that they help save animals, when in reality, they almost exclusively lobby for bans that restrict pet ownership, animal agriculture, and hunting. (IE, they lobby to end animal use, not just animal abuse). They're also getting mighty rich off of their ill-gotten gains.
5) In its most radical forms, as promoted by groups like HSUS and PETA, animal rights believes that living in the care of humans is so horrible, that animals are better off dead, and that animals would be better off never being born at all, than being raised for food.
So, how is animal welfare different? Well, there are very few animal welfare groups remaining today, alas.
Animal welfare balances the needs of individual animals with the needs of the species, and human needs as well. It's about making sure that animals kept by humans have their needs met--what they actually need to live low-stress, healthy lives--and that methods used to slaughter or euthanize them involve minimal pain. It's about making sure that those who abuse or neglect animals are punished, without punishing those who take good care of their animals.
It's about paying attention to what animals need, not just as individuals, but as species as well. The difference is that, when animal welfare is considered, the animals get to live, and we get to enjoy living with them. They do not need, nor want, our political rights.
The moral of this story--if you want to promote animal welfare, give to your local humane society. They actually take care of animals. Don't give to groups like HSUS or PETA, they take care of few animals (if any), and kill many more than they save.
Those skinny starving dogs in the PETA and HSUS commercials? The ones PETA 'saved' were euthanized immediately. The ones in the HSUS commercials were never in their hands at all--local shelters shouldered the burden of care, rehabilitation, and expense. (In fact, HSUS lobbied to have Michael Vick's dogs put to death, and then used images of them in its commercials).
If you love your pets, advocate animal welfare--NOT animal rights.
There's a big difference today between animal welfare and animal rights, and a large part of the reason why is the radical interpretation that most animal rights groups are giving to the concept.
Here are the reasons why animal rights is often bad:
1) It often runs contrary to animal welfare. When human rights are given to animals, the needs of those animals may be set aside...because, after all, they aren't human, and don't have human NEEDS. Animals don't want what we want--their have their own list of wants, and when those are met, they are happy.
2) If often runs contrary to the conservation of species and biodiversity. If all animals are treated as 'persons', and their right to 'live free' is protected, then invasive species may not be controlled in areas where they are doing damage, huge overpopulations of animals in areas where predators have been eliminated may decimate their own environment, and of course, domesticated species may go extinct as well.
3) Humans love what they can see and touch. If we separate humans and animals entirely, humans will cease to love animals, and will view them as competitors. Historically, this has been very true. In recent times, the best way to ensure the continued existence of a species is to join its fate to human commerce in the first world countries...a species that has value to humans alive will not go extinct. Whether the value is for food, clothing, pets, or simply eco-tourism, the species that humans can benefit from saving will be saved first. Eliminate that aspect, and many more species will die.
4) It's easy for animal rights groups to fool the public into believing that they are benefactors of animals, and that they help save animals, when in reality, they almost exclusively lobby for bans that restrict pet ownership, animal agriculture, and hunting. (IE, they lobby to end animal use, not just animal abuse). They're also getting mighty rich off of their ill-gotten gains.
5) In its most radical forms, as promoted by groups like HSUS and PETA, animal rights believes that living in the care of humans is so horrible, that animals are better off dead, and that animals would be better off never being born at all, than being raised for food.
So, how is animal welfare different? Well, there are very few animal welfare groups remaining today, alas.
Animal welfare balances the needs of individual animals with the needs of the species, and human needs as well. It's about making sure that animals kept by humans have their needs met--what they actually need to live low-stress, healthy lives--and that methods used to slaughter or euthanize them involve minimal pain. It's about making sure that those who abuse or neglect animals are punished, without punishing those who take good care of their animals.
It's about paying attention to what animals need, not just as individuals, but as species as well. The difference is that, when animal welfare is considered, the animals get to live, and we get to enjoy living with them. They do not need, nor want, our political rights.
The moral of this story--if you want to promote animal welfare, give to your local humane society. They actually take care of animals. Don't give to groups like HSUS or PETA, they take care of few animals (if any), and kill many more than they save.
Those skinny starving dogs in the PETA and HSUS commercials? The ones PETA 'saved' were euthanized immediately. The ones in the HSUS commercials were never in their hands at all--local shelters shouldered the burden of care, rehabilitation, and expense. (In fact, HSUS lobbied to have Michael Vick's dogs put to death, and then used images of them in its commercials).
If you love your pets, advocate animal welfare--NOT animal rights.
