Skip to comments.Bless the Beasts (Should conservatives care about animal suffering?)
Posted on 12/16/2011 7:29:56 AM PST by SeekAndFind
click here to read article
The greatness of a nation and its moral progress can be judged by the way its animals are treated.
- Mohandas Gandhi
I personal have felt this problem and know many who are suffering it now.
So when people tell me to care about something else more. Well, you can guess what I think.
OMG.. what a horrible title. I would hope animal suffering did not have a political divide! I would hope all people abhorred any animal suffering....ugh.
Sorry, I don’t buy her premise that Conservatives are “indifferent” to animal abuse. If you’re an animal abuser, you’re scum. End of story. That’s a whole deal different from being a meateater. What has gotten into the National Review lately?
To Whom It May Concern,
I recently learned of the possible separation of the two elephants at Reid Park Zoo in order to complete the transfer of a small herd of African elephants currently residing at the San Diego Safari Park(formerly the San Diego Wild Animal Park) to the Reid Park Zoo to begin a breeding program. I worked at the Wild Animal Park as an elephant trainer/keeper for approximately four and one-half years in the mid-eighties working with both the African and Asian herds. I also received my degree in Psychology from San Diego State University. Separating the elephants at Reid Park after approximately thirty years of companionship is both cruel and at the very least bordering on animal abuse. It also shows the obvious lack of knowledge concerning elephant psychology and social structure and the resulting emotional trauma they will go through. I was able to witness first-hand the result of this standard behavior between zoos. In 2003, the last three African elephants that I worked with in San Diego, were transferred from their home of over twenty-five years to the sometimes bitter cold and cramped quarters of the Lincoln Park Zoo in Chicago in order to provide a home for the newly acquired African herd for which the San Diego Zoological Society paid millions to acquire. In just over approximately one and on-half years all three were dead. It was sad to go there weekly and slowly watch them die. Psychological trauma is just as debilitating as physical trauma and any "expert" who tells you differently is lying or just lacking in knowledge. If the Reid Park Zoo continues to proceed with this transfer, I predict that at least one or both of the elephants will die within a short period of time. I urge you to reconsider. The negative response from the public after what tragically happened at the Lincoln Park Zoo was tremendous, resulting in the Zoo formally announcing that they would never house elephants again. The public is much wiser these days and I trust that you will listen to them.
The San Diego Zoo is equally guilty in this utter abuse of animals.
As I understand it ... animals have no soul, thus no "God conciousness".
So what we interpret with those puppy dog eyes as love is something more associated with feeding and ease rather than an inate love for another kind.
Animals suffer because they know (by learning) to suffer.
Isn't animal suffering more a human problem, i.e. .. a cruel human?
And what are the percentages ?
God gave us animals to eat after the flood, so I think factory chickens and etcetera's are just an efficient way to feed a lot of people ...
Unless that's the hidden agenda ...
Too many people ...get rid of humans.
In any event, Ive not yet noticed that anyone who cares for animals is diminished in his capacity to care for humans. To the contrary, in fact. Surely our compassion is not in such finite supply that we must measure it out in teaspoons lest there be none left.
Exactly. I love animals too and I certainly would not want to see an animal being tormented for the amusement of the person tormenting it. However, if an animal suffers in drug experiments or because we are killing it for food or some other legitimate purpose to help humans, then let it suffer. An animal is not a person. If we take our religion seriously, it does not have a soul. We need to keep our priorities straight.
“As for laboratory animals, Im willing to leave the moral gray area as a gray area and concentrate on the obvious abuses. Only the obtuse would endorse torturing primates, for example, to do research that serves no higher purpose than to put out a paper no one will ever read establishing for the 50th time that primates dont seem to like being tortured. Im more willing to accept sport hunting and medical research on certain animals, under limited circumstances, than I am factory farming. The way the animals are cared for is important, as is the point of the research. That the answers to these questions are difficult, and that our principles come into conflict, does not mean we should shrug at the questions or say that they do not exist.”
Perhaps the best summary I’ve seen on the question. On the whole, an extremely well-reasoned combination of compassion, realism and spiritual component.
Animal protection is not an issue than can be characterized as conservative or liberal. Just like social issues as a whole are not conservative or liberal, although the “progressive” mantra is that all conservatives are hard hearted. There is nothing conservative or liberal about a budget.
The place to start cutting is not with the weakest and most hapless, don’t cut the social programs and unemployment and animal protection. Fund these programs, they are part of providing for the genera welfare.
Cut graft, corruption, waste, corporate and farm subsidies, the post office, which obviously can’t figure out how to run itself and has become obsolete is a perfect example. Business will bounce back and figure it out. This health care “reform” is actually “deformed” and is adding expenses. Look to the true evils.
But it's not about that.
It's about lowering humans to the same level as animals.
That way, if at some point you decide there are too many of them, you can dispose of them.
Cruelity against animals in time leads to cruelity against humans.
I’m a Conservative.
I am pro hunting and fishing and abhor animal cruelty.
A real hunter embraces the concept of “one shot one kill”, which is to say, they try their best to kill their prey immediately.
BTW, it was a portion of the Democrats base that wanted people to get off Mike Vick’s back because “they was just dogs”.
I'm not trying to rebut or refute what you say, but it's my opinion that many people's callousness and lack of sympathy for their fellow man may grow from, or be galvanized by cruelty to animals.
This is certainly an established principle for many serial killers who "graduate" from animal torture to human depravity. I would not expect a person who is perfectly comfortable kicking a non-threatening dog or throwing a cat into traffic to have a lot of sympathy for their fellow human being, so animal and human suffering may not always be as separate as you seem to think they are.
Too many humans? Really? God wants bodies for souls, He has made the earth which can sustain human life. It is not fun here, but necessary for salvation and redemption.
We are to be stewards of the earth, of course we should care about the treatment of animals and the environment.
God gave us animals to use not abuse.
He gave us the earth to use not abuse.
Our primary (after our relationship with God) concern however should be towards each other.
“Let it suffer”? That turns my stomach. We do not need to do animal testing that causes suffering.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.